Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

Of course, I am not saying that boundaries don't make sense. My problem with the theory that there has to be a supernatural element in a given piece of literature for it to be considered as horror is that this allows no fluidity at all. This implies for instance that you can't say that Psycho is a successful marriage of horror and thriller, because (as far as I remember) there are no supernatural elements in Bloch's novel.

If someone proposes such theory I think he should take into account that there can be exceptions to this rule.

(I have to stress that I mention Bloch's novel because it is just an example which is always considered as problematic when it comes to classification. I don't like that book that much, so I don't actually care for it myself ;))

Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

Oh, I'm sorry - another of my rants which ran away from it's author.

I didn't mean to imply that you (or anyone else for that matter) said that boundaries didn't make sense - sorry if I gave you that impression. The words ran in a different direction than my head wanted them to run to.

Basically, I agree completely with your post above (also the part about Psycho).

I think one must distinguish between supernatural horror and non-supernatural horror. However, this distinction is mainly important when one is dealing with a story which is on the borderline of the two cases , when the supernatural phenomena is somehow blurred in the story.

When it's either this-or-that, that distinction becomes of less importance.

Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

I do not believe that the supernatural is a necessary element of a horror story. As you mentioned, Psycho is a perfect example. I remember listening to Ramsey Campbell make the distinction between weird fiction and horror fiction. He cited Dunsany as someone who wrote weird fiction but not horror fiction, and Thomas Harris, at the other extreme, who writes horror fiction with no weird or supernatural elements.

The two passages below are from two separate Ligotti interviews where he weighs in on the subject. I like his "sense of the supernatural" idea. Perhaps depicting certain incidents, in a nightmarish way, that are so horrific that they are outside of our range of comprehension, so much so that they would distort our perception of reality, thus creating a sense of unreality or the uncanny, could still be classified as weird fiction despite no "true" supernatural elements.


"Joseph Conrad said that he shunned the supernatural because it wasn’t necessary to depict the horror of existence. I wish he hadn’t. Because the supernatural is the metaphysical counterpart of insanity—the best possible vehicle for conveying the uncanny nightmare of a conscious mind marooned for a brief while in this haunted house of a world and being slowly driven mad by the ghastliness of it all. Not the man’s-inhumanity-to-man sort of thing, but a necessary derangement, a high order of weirdness and of desolation built in to the system in which we all function. Its emblem is the empty and inexplicable malignity that some of us see in the faces of dolls, manikins, puppets, and the like. The faces of so many effigies of our own shape, made by our own hands and minds, seem to be our way of telling ourselves that we know a secret that is too terrible to tell. The horror writer has the best chance of expressing something of that secret. It’s really a lost opportunity, or perhaps a blessing, that so few take advantage of this potential that lies in horror fiction."
-Thomas Ligotti



"To me, reading a horror story should be very much like dreaming and the more dreamlike a story is, the more it affects me. I’m not the first to say that the nightmare, not the morning newspaper is the ideal model for horror fiction. Even the supernatural element of a story is expendable. Nonetheless, what remains crucial is the sense of the supernatural, the feeling of something dreadful and marvelous beyond all analysis, a feeling that may very well be inspired by something usually considered to be "natural" such as insanity or death. (Poe does this with incredible effect, especially in " The Tell-Tale Heart", where a merely gruesome vignette is used to evoke all the potential strangeness, mystery, and spiritual horror of death and madness). And the sense of the supernatural is something that arises from the confrontation of a reader with a story, not something that is dependent upon a division within the story between the real and the unreal. Of course, levels of fictional reality are fine and useful, but they are not necessarily a source of horror."
-Thomas Ligotti

Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

I just thought of another horror tale that is not supernatural, though it seethes with the numinous: Poe's "A Descent into the Maelstrom".

And they can't say it's merely a thriller, or adventure. If they do, they

a) obviously haven't read it

or

b) have no real sense of what is or isn't horror.

-Jimmy

Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

Ben, thank you for these examples. I think you might be referring to this interview (still haven't checked whether it's true):

http://www.trashotron.com/agony/inde...view_index.htm

(Ramsey Campbell Part 1 & 2)

And here is an article on that subject:
http://www.trashotron.com/agony/colu...3/01-27-03.htm

EDIT:
looks like it's not that interview. Well worth listening to anyway.

Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

Certainly, but it may require varying views of "horror." For example, one can find the idea that life isn't horrific horrific and thus be frightened by works like Conrad's (mentioned earlier) or even Hardy's Jude the Obscure. Sometimes, even a work that may be considered supernatural may offer the same view. For example, what one may find frightening in a work like Kafka's Metamorphosis isn't the fear of turning into an insect but the fear that it will never happen.

Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

Travesty by John Hawkes is a novella-length exposition of this theme—a very exciting read in a very odd way.

Intriguing. Could you elaborate on this?

Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

Many thanks for the quotes.

In spite of me possibly sounding like I've been inspired by formalism, I would like to add that there should be made a distinction between supernatural horror fiction and supernatural fiction.

Little boxes...chop, chop, chop...

Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

Gregor's initial reaction after the metamorphosis is notable, as well as questions raised by his family about the insect's identity, Gregor's double about his own identity as he eats rotten food coupled with his fear of no longer being able to support his family financially, his adventures around his room, and the intriguing ending of the story.

It's a fantastic parable because it's meant to provoke readers who exist in the same bureaucratic milieu. They sometimes wish they could run away from such a milieu but can't. Thus, one can argue that if there's anything more frightening than turning into an insect, it's the fact that one can't.

Re: Can horror in literature be nonsupernatural?
 

paeng, a fine illustration of the frustration of being damned if you do and damned if you don't... ;) and :eek: