HDC Top 100 Horror Books

[FreddyMyers]

Steven King: The Shining, Salems Lot
Richard Matheson: I Am Legend, Hell House, A Stir of Echeos
Shirley James: Haunting of Hill House, The Lottery
H.P. Lovecraft: The Call of Cthulhu, The Dunwich Horror, At the Mountains of Madness, The Shadow Over Innsmouth
Algernon Blackwood: The Wilows, The Wendigo, The Empty House
Henry James: Turn of the Screw
Peter Straub: Ghost Story
Joe Hill: Heart-Shaped Box

[Doc Faustus]

100 books is a lot easier to come up with than a hundred writers, and the list might therefore include some writers whose entire bodies of work are underdeveloped, not always possessing horror elements or insignificant save one piece. While I feel comfortable saying Heart of Darkness is very significant to the horror canon, I do not think I would be just as comfortable saying Joseph Conrad is one of the 100 greatest horror writers. While Bleak House might be of great joy to a horror fan, I would not recommend the entire Dickens catalog, lest some poor unfortunate pick up Great Expectations and miss out on the good stuff. For a varied and useful list, I think it might be simpler if we stick to books instead of writers.

[TheWickerFan]

I see what you mean. I still think picking a collection of stories is a questionable practice. It's equivalent to saying The Rolling Stones greatest album was their greatest hits collection.

[neverending]

Originally Posted by Doc Faustus

100 books is a lot easier to come up with than a hundred writers, and the list might therefore include some writers whose entire bodies of work are underdeveloped, not always possessing horror elements or insignificant save one piece. While I feel comfortable saying Heart of Darkness is very significant to the horror canon, I do not think I would be just as comfortable saying Joseph Conrad is one of the 100 greatest horror writers. While Bleak House might be of great joy to a horror fan, I would not recommend the entire Dickens catalog, lest some poor unfortunate pick up Great Expectations and miss out on the good stuff. For a varied and useful list, I think it might be simpler if we stick to books instead of writers.

On the other hand, Poe never wrote a single "book." He's certainly one of the greatest horror writers, but how do you choose which anthology is the "best?" Same with Blackwood, Lovecraft and others.

I feel confidant there are 100 authors deserving of being on a list of writing great horror fiction, and whether they get on the list for writing one thing or 500, I think that could all be covered in the blurbs that go along with each author.

I think it's workable, but I'm not married to the idea.

[swiss tony]

Originally Posted by neverending

Joshi's biography is essential for a Lovecraft fan. The work is exhaustive. In the end, he offers a portrait of a man significantly different than the somewhat pathetic creature Derleth presents in his bio. Though there's no denying Lovecraft felt out of place in the time he lived, socially, he was well liked, had a wide circle of friends who respected and adored him, and he was well traveled.

Sounds like the Joshi bio is the one to go for. Neither is particularly cheap (for a mint used copy) but I'll keep searching for both at the right price.

On the format for the top 100, I think sticking to books is the way to go. It'll make for a better catalogue for those looking for some recommended reading. And it's a very valid point, that 'top 100 authors' will exclude some great works of horror.

[neverending]

Top 100 authors would, de facto, include far more than 100 books.

[Doc Faustus]

Originally Posted by neverending

On the other hand, Poe never wrote a single "book." He's certainly one of the greatest horror writers, but how do you choose which anthology is the "best?" Same with Blackwood, Lovecraft and others.

I feel confidant there are 100 authors deserving of being on a list of writing great horror fiction, and whether they get on the list for writing one thing or 500, I think that could all be covered in the blurbs that go along with each author.

I think it's workable, but I'm not married to the idea.

I can see your point here and might like to make the author list eventually, though it seems kind of similar to the icons list. I think we can treat novellas and some collected works as books. Technically, Poe did have a collection and a novel published. Tales of the Grotesque and Arabesque and The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket.

[Doc Faustus]

Originally Posted by TheWickerFan

I see what you mean. I still think picking a collection of stories is a questionable practice. It's equivalent to saying The Rolling Stones greatest album was their greatest hits collection.

This could also be judged on a case by case basis, biased in favor of novelettes, novellas and longer stories. At The Mountains of Madness and Shadow Over Innsmouth are both well over 10,000 words so are at the very least, novelettes, so could have their own entries.

[TheWickerFan]

I think I've misunderstood.:o If something like Poe's Tales Of The Grotesque was how the stories were originally published, then that's fair enough. It's just when someone picks something like The Complete Unannotated Works of someone and calling that one of the greatest books of all time that seems wrong.

[neverending]

Why?



................