The Ultimate Classic Horror Must Read List

[Jason]

As I said above, I think that Lovecraft was simply a product of his time and upbringing. His parents, and the aunts he lived with in the end, were probably very racist. I think, also, that his family had migrated to Providence from the south, at some point. Though, I'm not sure about that.

The racism of Lovecraft's childhood is very much evident when you learn the name of his cat when he was a child. It's the same name as the cat in his short story, The Rats in the Walls. And it's not the friendlier, censored one you've probably read.

But I still love his work. I can forgive his racism because of his environment and time period. Although, as intelligent as he was, you'd think he'd be able to think for himself. Thankfully, most of the racial crap stays out of his fiction.

[Mike (the Paladin)]

I don't care if a person agrees with my politics or religion or whatever. It's a free country (and I want it to remain so) and if the preaching gets just to heavy or if the beliefs are too objectionable then I put the book down. Terry Goodkind is a good example for me. I liked the first couple of books in his Sword of Truth series but by the end he was mostly on a soap box about his private beliefs. So I stopped buying the books and I'd probably not buy anything else by him now unless, possibly I'd read it from the library first and found I liked it. I've read many books that "spout" beliefs that I completely disagree with but found I could enjoy the story of anyway. It happens. There are books I've read and found repugnant, but wanted to see what the author thought. Forewarned as it were.

I agree with some political writers that others here disagree with, there are things I find objectionable that others here don't. And...there are artists including writers who hold thoroughly repellent and loathsome personal beliefs but contribute value to their area of endeavor (as say Wagner). As I said, it doesn't mean you share their views just because you enjoy their work. I was totally unaware that the man who wrote Gone to Texas (or The Outlaw Josey Wales) Asa Earl Carter (Forest Carter) was a well known racist. When I found out it didn't ruin the book or movie for me. We have our own minds and we are each responsible for what we believe.

[Mohammed]

I dont think every kind of racism should be forgiven, you can read,enjoy someone but still be clear they what they were. HPL for example even the biggest fan know he was far more racist than his contemporaries. He might not shown it in his writing but in his letters,what is known about his life.

There are contemporaies of his,his friends like Robert E Howard who has the usual prejudice of the 20s,30s but didnt think many different peoples should not be let overun,should be delt with.

Having said that i dont care about politics,views of writers who dont show it in their writing. I dont care what Card does in his life outside his writing even though Mormons way of life disgust. Like Mike said its a free country(world). If the writers doesnt try to write racist,political,other views in works i dont care.

[Simon]

Like I said, I haven't read any of Lovecraft's letters, only his fiction, but I can't help thinking that the racisim of classic writers is often over stated, or that what one learns about the authors themselves leads them to read things into their writing that isn't there.

Take the name of the cat in "Rats in the Walls". Indeed, Lovecraft had a cat in real life with the same name. Although deeply politically incorrect nowadays, it is clear that Lovecraft had a deep affection for his cat, as did the character in the aforementioned story. The word back then, unlike now, didn't necessarilly carry negative connotations. It certainly didn't in this context.

As far as Orson Scott Card is concerned, I read "Ender's Game" without knowing anything about his views on homosexuality. I was informed (by someone who hadn't read it), after posting a positive review of it, that this was an anti-homosexual book. I was told that the aliens who humanity fought against weren't nicknamed the "buggers" for nothing.

However, on reaxmination of this story, this view just doesn't hold up. Ender was deeply regretful about what he does by the end. He realises that they were just deeply misunerstood and that they really just wanted to co-exist peacefully. If we are to interpret this book as a vehicle for Card's views on homosexuality, then we should take from it quite a different view than he apparently holds in real life.

Thus I think it is very important to try to understand the context of the times in which books were written and to judge them on their own merits, and not assume that they are really just a vehicle for the author to express their personal views.

[Mohammed]

Simon wrote: "Like I said, I haven't read any of Lovecraft's letters, only his fiction, but I can't help thinking that the racisim of classic writers is often over stated, or that what one learns about the autho..."

HPL views are not much in his writing, check out the thread in Chrons where JD mentions his views outside his writings. It is clear he was worse than his contemporaries.

But we all seem to agree if its not in the writing we dont care as much.

I have seen in literary circles,in my literary classes scholars,critics talking bad about classic writers 200+ years old because they are different from today in woman rights issues for example. You cant rewrite history to fit in our times today. Thats just silly.

[Simon]

Mohammed wrote: "HPL views are not much in his writing, check out the thread in Chrons where JD mentions his views outside his writings. It is clear he was worse than his contemporaries. "

Yes, I am not denying that he held racist views. I'm just cautioning against people letting their awareness of his personal views mislead them to thinking he was necessarilly expressing those views in his writing.

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

Regarding cultural insensitivity, racism, etc in older literature: I agree with a lot that has been said. I understand that literature written during older time periods will have elements that are undesirable as far as racism, classism (HPL was bad about this--he had some racism in his stories, but also seemed very prejudiced against country people. He seemed to think city people were superior. I cite for example, "The Dunwhich Horror" and "Beyond the Wall of Sleep"), sexism, etc. There is also a fair amount of xenophobia in classic literature.

I don't expect modern enlightenment about cultural and diversity issues to be highly present in classical literature. Having said that, it is hurtful if you are a person of color and you read these stories in which people are color as portrayed as being lowly, immoral, beastly, lacking in intelligence, and inferior. Unfortunately, that was the pervasive attitude in those time periods, and I take that into consideration. In the modern era, that's pretty unacceptable for me as a reader.

As far as writers being preachy and presenting their own political, social agendas, I dislike that. It doesn't matter what the agenda is. I could be on either side of the argument. I just find it intrusive and distracting. I don't like being beat over the head with a message. I prefer a subtle, well-integrated underlying theme. I don't expect a writer to divorce their own view of things from a story, because that is part of what makes an artist who he is, and to deny that would be dishonest and make their work unbelievable to me, but I would hope that he wouldn't be so obvious and leading about it.

[Mike (the Paladin)]

That was my point. If I don't like a book or something about a book is just too much for me, then I put the book down. BUT there should not be any organized office, authority, bureaucracy, agency or whatever to decide what may or may not be written. The vilest racist in the world must be allowed to say what he will if only to protect the right of EVERYONE to express their ideas that includes those who argue against said racist. The State, whoever that may be must be kept out. The State today may be kind and open while tomorrow it might be Nazi Germany or Communist China...and the same censoring agencies will still be in place.

It must be US...WE...THE READERS who by Choosing not to buy things objectionable to each of us moves the market in one way or another. There will always be divergent points of view, and that's good. By the same token there will remain to haters. That's not good and we, "by choice" should turn from them.

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

I agree that we should always have a choice what we watch and read, so long as people aren't harmed in the making of it, and no one's rights impose over another's freedom and well-being. There are many books I will never read, and so long as no one makes me read them or forces them on me, I'm good.

[Mike (the Paladin)]

Right. The printing of a book or article no matter how vile never impedes anyone's rights. Taking the actions in said writing might, but expressing the idea does not. If more people had actually read Mein Kampf the world wouldn't have been so "shocked" when the actions taken were finally revealed. The actions taken by Stalin are just now coming to light...yet the rational for those actions has been in print for generations. If we censor or burn books we don't like we lose that choice. So...hate the idea, but defend the rights of all no matter how much we may find what they say repugnant.

By the way Danielle, I finally decided not to read Kushiel's Dart after reading your 5 star review. It's not that I think I wouldn't "like" the book but I just don't want to deal with the subject matter. I've been on the fence for some time because (like you) many people really like the book, and from that I'm relatively sure it is a well written book (I've agreed with you before). But while I'm sure it's well handled and well done it's not a subject (actually "subjects") that I probably won't be objective about and don't care to read about in a novel. So, a book that is liked by many, but one I'm "choosing" not to read.

Thanks, by the way.

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

Mike, I can totally understand if you decide to give Kushiel's Dart a miss, if you know it's not for you. I won't be seeking out books of that subject matter. I was glad I read it, but it's not my taste (despite loving some aspects of the story), and this book has made that clear to me.

[Mike (the Paladin)]

I read your review and saw you liked it but were somewhat, on the fence about it. I've started to read it several times and always put it off.

[Jason]

I read Kushiel's Dart. I did like it, but not enough to continue with the series, either. There's so much more that I'd rather read. It doesn't matter though. My dog, who was a puppy at the time, ate my copy of the second volume. LOL

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

I'll trade your dog for my cat, which I call the Anticat (as in The Antichrist cat).

[Jason]

LOL...You might think the same of my dog. Trust me.

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

I guess it's a grass is greener situation. :)

[Dfordoom]

Don't forget Conan Doyle's horror stories, especially Lot No. 249 and the Ring of Thoth, which formed the basis of the original The Mummy movie.

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

I'll add them to the list, Dfordoom.

[Werner]

I haven't read "Ring of Thoth," but I really liked "Lot No. 249." Doyle is so well-known for his Sherlock Holmes stories, where the emphasis is on rational deduction in the Enlightenment tradition and the explanations for mysteries are always solidly naturalistic, that it's an interesting change of pace to discover that he could write supernatural fiction (and do so with considerable flair).

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

I'm reading The Lost World right now, Werner, and I think ACD is a very good writer all around.

[Werner]

I agree; he's one of my favorites! (I loved The Lost World --read it to my wife, and she liked it, too.)

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

Do you and your wife share similar tastes, Werner?

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

Okay, I think I have entered what members have suggested so far. You can still make suggestions if you don't see an important classic horror volume/work (to you) listed above. This list will continue to be updated as I can do so.

Please try to list the suggestion as a link. Click 'add book/author' and you can do it from there.

Thanks for the suggestions! Us classic horror fans have to stick together.

[Werner]

Danielle, good question! Barb's and my tastes overlap, but aren't identical. We both like clean fiction with good storylines and positive messages, and we're fans of both epic and humorous fantasy (she especially likes dragons), some sci-fi (especially Star Trek and Star Wars spin-offs, and McCaffrey's Pern series, though she likes the latter more than I do), and Jean Auel's work. Unlike me, she's not generally into supernatural fiction (though she liked my Lifeblood), and tends to be put off by most pre-1870 diction, so she doesn't share my interest in older classics. (She can take some late 19th and early 20th century work if, like Doyle's, it's not too flowery. :-) ) On the whole, I don't get into Westerns nor romance books in a big way, but she does (actually, she likes ANY fiction revolving around horses, to a much greater extent than I do), though PNR is an exception to that; it doesn't appeal to her.

You once asked who some of her favorite romance authors were, and she replied (when I passed that question on to her) that she usually doesn't remember author's names. However, a few books I know she especially liked include: Montana Sky by Nora Roberts, Christmas Crime In Colorado by Cassie Miles, and Ruth Langan's O'Neil Saga. Also Lady Deception and All the Tea in China, which she liked and recommended to me --like me, she appreciates heroines who can fight (especially, in her case, if they're cowgirls!)

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

I'm glad you have a spouse that shares your interest in books, even if they aren't always the same books, Werner!

[Werner]

Me too, Danielle!

[[deleted user]]

Lady Danielle "The Book Huntress" wrote: "I'll trade your dog for my cat, which I call the Anticat (as in The Antichrist cat)."

that is so funny! My hubby had a cat he called Lucifer. Right now he has a solid black cat called Lindy.

[Mike (the Paladin)]

"We" (as in my grown daughter who lives at home...I think she's afraid to leave the old man alone) have 5 cats. the only one that is actually "hard to get along with" is so ill we've been expecting her to die for some time now. It's hard to get really mad at her.

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

Mike, my Anticat (who I had to euthanize in February) was a similar scenario. She was sickly, so I just tolerated a lot of her bad behavior.

[Mike (the Paladin)]

For some reason Mary has decided to stop using the litter box, so I have a lot of clean up to do. I don't think it has anything to do with what she's suffering, but I can't come up with a logical reason. Well, unless she just refuses to share with the other cats.

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

She might be going senile. She could also have a metabolic issue. My cat started doing that too.

[Anna-Marie]

Hello everyone. I knew I had to join this group as I have not read any of the first 10 books listed - so I ordered I am Legend (seen the film, and The Omega Man,) from the library and will get cracking! The list of books is mind-blowing and I really cannot wait to start getting through them. Thanks again!

Just a quick thought - Does Mary Shelley's Frankenstein belong on this list,or not? It has been a favourite classic horror of mine since I was a teen.

[MountainAshleah]

I don't think Dracula is on the list either. Maybe because they are both so canonical . . .

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

Hi Anna-Marie. Glad you joined. To both you and Mountainshelby, If Frankenstein and Dracula isn't on there, it's an oversight of mine, or it wasn't suggested. But now it is on the list. Please let me know if you think of more!

[Anna-Marie]

Thank you Lady Danielle, I will certainly let you know if I think of any more :)

[Jason]

That list is HUGE! lol

[Danielle The Book Huntress , Jamesian Enthusiast]

No problem, Anna-Marie.

I hope we can keep adding titles, Jason!

[[deleted user]]

My favorites are Dracula, Frankenstein, and anything by Edgar Allen Poe!

[[deleted user]]

Poe is also my favorite. There is no one who can beat him IMO. I still cannot read Dracula as its too scary for me.

[[deleted user]]

Another Poe lover! Poe is just awesome...I love all of his works. He does creepy so well.

Really? I didn't find Dracula that scary, honestly. I mean, it definitely had that creepy aspect, but I didn't find it "scary". But, that is just me. I like scary, so maybe that's why...

[Mike (the Paladin)]

My wife read horror all her life (she was actually the big horror fan, rather me). She read King, Koontz and others, but she also had to stop reading Dracula. She never finished it, it just freaked her too much. I think it depends on how deeply you get into a book and how much you might identify with he people in it.

[[deleted user]]

I just discovered that Stephenie Meyer is a "wuss" like me and was so surprised. This in Bedazzled. She never watched a vampire movie or read a vampire book! Now I like her even more. I have attempted Dracula twice and own my own copy of it.

I like a little scare but I am finding that I am NOT really a fan of classic horror after all except for Poe.
I thought I was tough but DUH me.....

Thanks Mike as its good not to be alone.



Bedazzled: Stephenie Meyer and the Twilight Phenomenon

[Mike (the Paladin)]

Oddly, as noted, my wife was the horror fan instead of me, but I'm the one who liked (likes still I suppose) Lovecraft, Poe and I'm a huge fan of Dracula. I think it's one of the great novels of all time. To each.

[[deleted user]]

Yes, I did remember that you liked it.
Alice

Mike (the Paladin) wrote: "Oddly, as noted, my wife was the horror fan instead of me, but I'm the one who liked (likes still I suppose) Lovecraft, Poe and I'm a huge fan of Dracula. I think it's one of the great novels of al..."

[[deleted user]]

Wow, this is surprising, but then again, I have a few writing buddies who are also freaked out by Dracula, yet love Poe. It all depends on the reader, and what they like.

[Leah]

I wanted to share that I finished Conjure Wife a couple days ago and liked it a lot, 3.5 stars. What I liked best was the story's many layers. What I liked least was the blatant sexism. I posted my review on Goodreads in case anyone else is trying to decide whether or not to give it a read.

And now I'm off to read Hell House, another "must read" that's been on my to-read list for way too long.

[Mike (the Paladin)]

Well Leah, the story was written in 1943 so you're not going to find contemporary attitudes. It's part of classic books, you get older attitudes some distasteful.

[Martha]

I love Hell House! Talk about a satisfying read, Matheson could really write some good stuff!

If you haven't, make sure you read The Haunting of Hill House for an equally good haunted house book of a more eloquent and psychological nature.

[Leah]

Mike, I realize that, which I note in my review :D

[Leah]

Martha,

I couldn't agree more! In fact, I couldn't put it down and read it straight through. Unfortunately, that meant I was up reading all night, by myself, with my house's darkness peeking under the bedroom door - SCARY! :D (I loved it!) My first two experiences with Matheson were just so-so (Hunted Past Reason and Now You See It), but Hell House lived up to its "classic" status, for sure.

P.S. Shirley Jackson is one of my fave authors so I've read The Haunting of Hill House three times as of 2010 :) As soon as I order/receive this Shirley Jackson collection I'm going to read it again. I could definitely see its influence on Matheson's Hell House.