1 Star – Visually appealing but skewed towards sensationalism
Thank you to NetGalley and Wellfleet Press for providing me with an ARC of “Freaky Folklore: Terrifying Tales of the World’s Most Elusive Monsters and Enigmatic Cryptids” by Darkness Prevails in exchange for an honest review.
Folklore has been one of my down-the-rabbit-hole obsessions since I was a kid, and Japanese folklore in particular ended up being a big part of my postgraduate research. So, I have a near unhealthy compulsion to check out any book that makes claims of being about or inspired by folklore. What that means is that I’m also (inadvertently) more critical when it comes to these books.
“Freaky Folklore” feels like your average coffee table book in everything from the trim size and layout to the content selection and depth. Which isn’t to say that’s a bad thing; but, for me, it was at best unsatisfying and at worst annoyingly skewed towards sensationalism.
From the introduction alone I became a little skeptical about the framing of the book. The word ‘monster’ is explained as originating from the Latin ‘monstrum’—which is true enough. However, I take issue with the choice to present the etymology as “godlike premonition, unbelievable phenomenon,” while entirely ignoring the older roots in “admonishment.”
Cryptids aside, folklore has never been just about the dread of the unexplained. I think a large part of my dissatisfaction is rooted in this conflation of cryptids, monsters, and folklore, while emphasizing a “whether they’re real or not” campy atmosphere.
What irked me the most though is the way the introduction led me to believe there was going to be some substance in the representation of “culture, values, and beliefs” from the regions the “creatures” originate; when in reality, the stories and informational blurbs are all positionally removed from those cultures and beliefs. Not to mention, they are at times so generalized as to be inaccurate. When you spread your net so wide, and try to do so much, there will inevitably be details sacrificed and areas overlooked. Still, there are literally Wikipedia pages that contain more substance and nuance than some of these monster bios—and those you can read for free.
The writing was also rather bland and the stories formulaic. I expected more than the kind of late 90s I-heard-from-a-friend-of-a-friend-of-mine type of encounters.
But the illustrations are nice. So, there’s that, I guess.
“Freaky Folklore” would likely appeal to fans of the podcast it’s derived from, urban legend type storytelling, and B-movie horror.
But if you want culturally resonant explorations of folklore figures from around the world, you’re not going to find that here—I severely doubt I'm the target audience anyway.