Modern Good Reads discussion

As a writer and reader of horror and lover of horror flicks I have often thought about the one element that defines our genre. I have asked many of my friends over time and none of them gave me the answer I myself have come up with.

To me the true essence of horror is the fear of losing your life. Whether it is a book or a movie, when you imagine yourself there in the thick of the action, that to me is the element that defines what horror is.

What is your opinion on this?

I find madness much scarier than death. Death and I are old pals. To lose my mind or to be attacked by cannibals are the two things I fear most. Though I have an irrational fear and paranoia of biting through my tongue or knocking my teeth out.

I see horror as being something life-threatening, potentially gruesome, and fear inducing. Its the suspense-fear-edge-of-your-seat feeling that always drew me to horror novels.

Because of this intensity of reaction, horror was my first real love in genre fiction. And I found the horrific scenes in books far less "gross" and more enthralling than horror in film. Horror in film is often spook and splatter. Horror novels are so much deeper and more intense.

Its the emotions that horror evokes that make it horror.

Ooooh! Good point Travis. My tolerance for gore in books far outweighs that of my gore tolerance in films...except horror comedy. The emotions make a huge impact and are definitely a driving force.

I think tapping into primordial fear is a really important aspect of horror too. Even ordinary situations can be scary if dressed with the right context.

I think the basis of horror is simply fear. Fear of death, fear of loss, fear of anything. Fear is one of the most primal and compelling emotions that we have, it has a physiological impact on us. That's what draws people to the genre.

Yes I think that is a good summation, C.W. There is nothing that gets the adrenalin going more than fear.

Fear. That's it. And the overwhelming desire of screaming RUN! That'll do it for me. =)

C.W. definitely, and capturing that fear, even if it is not something the reader necessarily fears, is key!

Elisabeth, I do that ALL the time!! Drives my husband nuts!

As a fan of Zombies because of the opportunity to shoot the unwashed and ignorant masses... of the undead (;) ) I recently found a new fear that The Walking Dead has grasped so nicely. The fear of losing your humanity. I'm a little surprised that I didn't grasp it when I read Lord of the Flies as a kid, but I remember back then not really being able to connect. I would never be like that, I thought. As a Young Adult I worked in the service industry and really fell in love with the idea of killing Zombies, but now as a parent I look at that (and The Walking Dead) and realize that the fun (because who can possibly be afraid of things that shamble!) of Zombies was my frustration with society. If I could kill Zombies, how long would my humanity last?! Ooohhhh, creepy question. The Answer, well I'm afraid to know!

There are lots of great things about The Walking Dead. I have to admit I love it. But I have made one observation that bothers me. In the early episodes in Season 1 the zombies were quite fearsome, if you remember when Rick was in Atlanta and the night at the campsite that followed. By the end of Season 3 they only seem to be a danger if they catch any of the group unawares. To me they seem pretty pathetic now. Bring on World War Z.

Lord of the Flies was a scary book to read as a kid! I've found, oddly enough, that I'm almost never scared by books. There are moments from books I read that profoundly disturbed me and stuck with me long afterward, but I've never been spooked or sickened the way I can be by movies.

I think it has to due primarily with the visual factor. Seeing horrific images will shock and bother me in a way that reading doesn't. I think it has to be that when I read, I'm processing everything through my rational brain and it's similar to when I imagine horrific things for my stories. They never bother me.

On the other hand, there are certain movies that I simply cannot bring myself to watch because the description was enough to know that the movie would gross me out. Deformity is one of those weird things: no problem reading about it, but I can't watch movies or even Discovery channel shows about deformity.

However, Phantom by Susan Kay is one of my favorite novels and I love the story of the Phantom of the Opera.

Just hearing the premise of The Human Centipede made me so sick to my stomach that I literally had a hard time eating for almost a week. You couldn't pay me enough money to actually sit and watch that movie. On the other hand, I've read novels with far more graphic acts of violence and torture depicted. I've read non-fiction about Mengele's experiments in Auschwitz and didn't have anywhere near that same reaction.

I think in novels it's ideas that are frightening, but movies are purely visual.

Brian wrote: "Lord of the Flies was a scary book to read as a kid! I've found, oddly enough, that I'm almost never scared by books. There are moments from books I read that profoundly disturbed me and stuck with..."

I adore LoTF and you hit it on the head. I can't do Saw; visual images get indelibly stuck in my mind. Let's not talk about Human Centipede. I agree.

Scare me with psychological thrills, though, and you have a winner.

Demons and ghosts for me, though I can't watch it.

I'm not a huge fan of zombies in literature, because I think they require visuals to truly scare. I loved Lord of the Flies and have found a new love for it re-reading in my adulthood.

Everyone's tastes are subjective, as are their fears. Some people prefer atmospheric horror, gothic and heavy. Others prefer the splash of extreme horror. I like both. The Saw movies aren't my taste though because they disturb me too much.

Anyone who happens to make it to the World Horror Convention in New Orleans this year is welcome to attend the panel on Extreme Horror and where to draw the line, if anywhere. I will be one of the panelists and I think it will be a good panel. We will be discussing some of these things in detail.

C.W, that sounds like a great panel to attend! Sadly, I have no money for a trip to New Orleans.

I find I can't watch a lot of today's horror movies because of the level of gross-out involved in many. Horror literature is much more difficult to pull off well, in my opinion. It's relatively easy to scare with visuals, creepy music, and gory effects, but I really respect an author that can disturb and frighten with ideas.

I think it's the loss of self that truly defines horror. This encompasses both life and sanity.

Another thing that does it for me is isolation and the loss of those held dear. Any book that revolves around that is scarier than a traditional story any day of the week. I think this is why I am drawn to well written zombie books. (Yes, those exist.)

Brian wrote: "Lord of the Flies was a scary book to read as a kid! I've found, oddly enough, that I'm almost never scared by books. There are moments from books I read that profoundly disturbed me and stuck with..."

Again I'm inclined to agree with you. At least then when you read a book where the author does manage to scare you, I guess we're talking serious talent.

Michelle wrote: "Brian wrote: "Lord of the Flies was a scary book to read as a kid! I've found, oddly enough, that I'm almost never scared by books. There are moments from books I read that profoundly disturbed me ..."

I have always felt that psychological terror is far more distressing than visual. A visual image can turn your stomach, but psychological images are much longer lasting.

C.W. wrote: "I'm not a huge fan of zombies in literature, because I think they require visuals to truly scare. I loved Lord of the Flies and have found a new love for it re-reading in my adulthood.

Everyone's ..."

That sounds interesting. How unfortunate for me to be living in western Europe.

Brian wrote: "C.W, that sounds like a great panel to attend! Sadly, I have no money for a trip to New Orleans.

I find I can't watch a lot of today's horror movies because of the level of gross-out involved in ..."

Well as with the comment about psychological and visual, I am far more scared by things I can't see than things that I can. A perfect example of this is Paranormal Activity 3.

Shane wrote: "As a writer and reader of horror and lover of horror flicks I have often thought about the one element that defines our genre. I have asked many of my friends over time and none of them gave me the..."

Real horror must be scary. It must be frightening in the real sense of the word. I must be afraid to turn the light off, drive alone for awhile (though I'll do it, because of course, I'm too proud to admit I'm scared), and be driven to look under the bed. I must be compelled to keep reading to find out what happens. That is real horror. It really doesn't matter what the monster is (except for me, zombies are just not frightening, nor are post-apocalyptic stories - they are overdone), as long as the author understands what fright feels like and how to communicate it to others.

Horror to me is all about how much suspense and fear can be built up in me while I'm experiencing it. Blood and gore isn't scary and silly looking creatures aren't either in my opinion. Sometimes the most horrific things can be the truly ordinary such as the clown in Stephen King's 'It' or a neighbour with deep, dark secrets.
Those things that make you think twice about turning off the light or walking somewhere on your own is what makes good horror.
A lot of the times it's what you don't see or get told that ends up being the scariest, not what you do see.

To me, the beauty and power of horror fiction is that every tale is a reinvention of the struggle between good and evil---and by that I don't mean necessarily the fight between angelic and demon hosts, though God knows that goes on often enough, but also the inner struggle in the heart and mind of everyday people just like you and me.The essence of struggle and the potent mix of innocence and terror is the heart of horror.

Ipsith wrote: "To me, the beauty and power of horror fiction is that every tale is a reinvention of the struggle between good and evil---and by that I don't mean necessarily the fight between angelic and demon ho..."

Nicely said, Ipsith! I like that definition! I'm much more of a fan of personal, psychological horror than just a monster in the closet.

True horror is when the worst of human beings is presented and in a perverse fashion praised because the author is showing the inner workings and thoughts of the horrible and terrible.

Athanasios wrote: "True horror is when the worst of human beings is presented and in a perverse fashion praised because the author is showing the inner workings and thoughts of the horrible and terrible."

That's a great answer, Athanasios, and welcome to the group! Thanks for participating!

Horror examines human flaws and weaknesses under a microscope, while at the same time reminding readers that they are all too human, and that there is no escaping that fact.