Monster Show: Una historia cultural del horror

by David J. Skal, Manuela Carmona García (Contributor), Óscar Palmer Yáñez (Translator)

Ampliamente considerado desde el momento de su publicación como uno de los mejores estudios jamás escritos sobre el cine y la cultura del horror, "Monster Show" indaga de manera provocadora y reflexiva en la obsesión de nuestra sociedad con lo macabro. Esta edición conmemorativa del 30 aniversario incluye un nuevo prólogo escrito para la ocasión por David J. Skal y decenas de ilustraciones adicionales. Iluminando el lado oscuro de la historia reciente de Estados Unidos, "Monster Show" rastrea los sorprendentes vínculos entre los entretenimientos terroríficos y las grandes crisis sociales de nuestro tiempo, así como la función del horror como contrapartida del surrealismo, el expresionismo y otros movimientos artísticos del siglo XX en el campo de la cultura popular. Armado con una penetrante capacidad de análisis y un sinfín de anécdotas, David J. Skal explora diversos ámbitos de la expresión de la pintura, la fotografía y los cómics a la televisión, el teatro y la música. Centrándose en última instancia en el cine, Skal examina los modos en que el arte popular predominante durante estos últimos cien años ha reflejado los traumas de dos guerras mundiales y una Gran Depresión; las visiones de desmesura atómica, invasión y control mental engendradas por la Guerra Fría; la moda de los efectos especiales capaces de distorsionar el cuerpo que se desarrolló en paralelo con la obsesión por la cirugía plástica; y el vínculo entre la epidemia del SIDA y una renovada fascinación por el vampirismo, entre muchos otros temas.

Genres: Horror, Nonfiction, Film, History, Media Tie In, Pop Culture, Cultural Studies

504 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1993

About the author

David J. Skal became fascinated with monsters at the height of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, when indestructible monsters like Dracula, Frankenstein and the Wolf Man provided a "nuclear security blanket" for a whole generation of youngsters.

Active as an editor and reporter on his high school newspaper, he was granted a journalism scholarship to Ohio University, Athens, where he earned a bachelor's degree in 1974. His work as film critic, arts reporter, arts editor and assistant managing editor of the Ohio University Post, one of the country's leading college papers,led to his three-season appointment as publicity director of the University-operated Monomoy Theatre on Cape Cod. Following his graduation, he served as a public affairs intern in the office of National Endowment for the Arts chairman Nancy Hanks, and went on to the position of Publicity Director at the Hartford Stage Company, where he oversaw all media relations while the regional company fund-raised, built and opened a major new facility in downtown Hartford. In 1978, he was staff writer for the American Conservatory Theatre in San Francisco, with responsibility for the content of all printed materials. From 1979-1982 he was Publications Director of Theatre Communications Group, a national service organization in New York City. From 1982 to 1992 he was president and creative director of David J. Skal Associates, Inc. (later Visual Cortex Ltd.), a Manhattan-based, nationally oriented design and marketing consultancy with clients ranging from the Metroplitan Opera to regional theatre, dance and music organizations.

A published writer of short fiction since his early college years (he was one of the youngest students ever admitted to the celebrated Clarion Writers Workshop in fantasy and science fiction), he authored three well-received science fiction novels: SCAVENGERS (1980), WHEN WE WERE GOOD (1981) and ANTIBODIES (1987). His long-standing interest in Dracula and his extensive contacts in the theatre world led to his first nonfiction book, HOLLYWOOD GOTHIC: THE TANGLED WEB OF DRACULA FROM NOVEL TO STAGE TO SCREEN (1990), followed by THE MONSTER SHOW: A CULTURAL HISTORY OF HORROR (1993). Many other books followed, including V IS FOR VAMPIRE (1995); DARK CARNIVAL: THE SECRET WORLD OF TOD BROWNING (1995,with Elias Savada); the Norton Critical Edition of Bram Stoker's DRACULA (1996, co-edited with Nina Auerbach); SCREAMS OF REASON: MAD SCIENCE AND MODERN CULTURE(1997); and the monumental anthology VAMPIRES: ENCOUNTERS WITH THE UNDEAD (2001, the largest such illustrated/annotated compendium ever published.

Skal began his work as a documentary filmmaker writing and co-producing segments for the A&E Network's award-winning series "Biography," and contributed scripts chronicling the lives and careers of Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff, Lon Chaney, Jr. and Angela Lansbury (with whom he had worked during his theatre career). In 1999, he wrote, co-produced and co-directed a behind-the-scenes chronicle of the Academy Award-winning film GODS AND MONSTERS. The same year, he was tapped by Universal Studios Home Video for a series of twelve original DVD documentaries exploring the legacies of the studio's classic horror and science fiction films. His DVD work has continued with Disney Home Video's "Jules Verne and Walt Disney: Explorers of the Imagination" (2003) and the feature commentary for Warner Home Video's special-edition release of Tod Browning's FREAKS (2004).

His current projects include CITIZEN CLONE: THE MORPHING OF AMERICA (Faber and Faber, 2005)and CLAUDE RAINS: AN ACTOR'S VOICE, a biography based on the acclaimed character actor's never-published reminiscences, written in collaboration with the actor's daughter, Jessica Rains.

David Skal is a member of the Authors Guild. He lives and writes in Glendale, California.

Reviews

[Duke Haney]

Wow. I just noticed another review of this book somewhere below: "Reads a lot like a history book. Couldn't get interested in it." Yes, I imagine a work subtitled A Cultural History... would read a lot like a history book, wouldn't it?

Horror fans, in my experience, too often write like perennial adolescents, and it's certainly rare to encounter one who can authoritatively call upon Freud, Fiedler, Fussell, Sontag, and Pound, among others, as does David J. Skal. Some of the detours in The Monster Show seem irrelevant—why, for instance, do we get an account of Clara Bow's affair with Bela Lugosi ("America's queen and king of eros and thanatos") or of James Dean's friendship with TV horror-hostess Vampira?—yet, even so, we’re rewarded with wonderful passages like this: “Death and sensuality had always had a deep affinity, but never before had they been so pointedly merged in a popular icon. Vampira’s body was a landscape of cultural contradictions: simultaneously buxom and gaunt, well-fed yet skeletal, a paradoxical evocation of insatiable consumerism. She was especially well-suited to low-resolution television—no amount of fiddling with the contrast button could mitigate the stark planes and shadows that composed her. Her eyebrows were streamlined, jet-propelled parabolas—Gothic arches in orbit. Drawing energy from the quintessentially fifties nexus of automotive styling and the female form, Vampire was a souped-up hearse…with headlights. Breast-like projections on American cars had been introduced in 1953; their juxtaposition with aggressively toothy grillwork already in fashion yielded a technological update on vampire-related images of ravenous womanhood. Vampira’s daring décolletage effortlessly evoked vampirism as a kind of monstrous suckling…and the public, it appeared, was ready to feed.”

[Carla Remy · Rating 5 out of 5]

07/2016

Going through the 20th century, looking at horror movies as important folkloric symbols. Connecting this mythology to world events and shifting culture. Things we can't face, we create monsters to personify.

I think everyone knows that Godzilla represents post nuclear anxiety in Japan. But a lot of this stuff I hadn't thought much about before I read this the first time (less than a decade ago, but never mind that). Of course the modern iteration of vampires is about AIDS.

Of course 1970s horror was responding to the pill, the women's movement and Roe v. Wade. As Skall writes:

"After Rosemary had her baby, virtually all births in the popular media would be monstrous or demonic."

[L.J. Zapico · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tenéis un club de lectura sobre este ensayo (y otros temas) en https://www.youtube.com/live/XyKOhFMh...

Pierde fuelle, pie e interés según se acerca a los 80 y 90s (los últimos 3 o 4 capítulos) pero el resto es una cosa maravillosa.

[Alberto · Rating 5 out of 5]

Estupendo tratado enciclopédico sobre el cine de terror, principalmente clásico, y su evolución a lo largo del siglo pasado estableciendo un paralelismo con los acontecimientos sociales en los Estados Unidos. Destaca el capítulo sobre 1931 y las cuatro películas que comenzaron la época moderna del cine de terror sonoro a saber: Drácula, Frankenstein, El hombre y el monstruo (Jeckyll and Mr Hyde) y la parada de los monstruos (Freaks).
También tenemos antecedentes como El gabinete del doctor Caligari, Nosferatu y las pelis mudas de Tod Browning. Aparece mucha información sobre Bela Lugosi, Lon Chaney, Boris Karlof, Vampira (que tuvo una relación sentimental con James Dean) Famous Monsters of Filmand de Forrest J Ackerman y más actuales como Stephen King o Anne Rice. Se tocan muchísimos temas como la talidomida o Peter Pan, el estreno teatral de Carrie etc todo un compendio de información magníficamente ensamblada. La pena es que el libro está descatalogado y es prácticamente imposible de obtener (ni de segunda mano) a no ser que se recurra a la biblioteca como ha sido mi caso. Después de leer su biografía de Bram Stocker ya solo me queda por devorar el recientemente adquirido en la feria del libro “Hollywood gótico: la enmarañada historia de Drácula”.

[Ignacio · Rating 4 out of 5]

Durante parte de su extensión, Monster Show brilla como repaso a las películas de monstruos de la primera mitad del siglo XX. A veces con mucho detalle, centrándose en cuestiones de preproducción, rodaje, anécdotas personales, lo que aleja temporalmente el tiro de la historia cultural del horror y lo lleva más hacia la historiográfico. Pero es después de su ecuador donde Skal saca la artillería pesada para trazar con decisión cómo lo monstruoso ha continuado siendo un símbolo de los cambios vividos en EE.UU durante el siglo XX, conectando su significados con los conflictos en los que se ha macerado el país. Curiosamente, el capítulo que más he disfrutado es en el que Skal se acerca al terror escrito de Stephen King y American Psycho para tocar los traumas del Reaganismo. Un giro que emana de Psicosis, cuya escena de la ducha convierte no solo en origen sino en emblema de multitud de facetas, incluyendo la explotación que ha vampirizado la creación del horror y lo ha vaciado de parte de su potencial subversivo.

[Marc Pastor · Rating 5 out of 5]

Vaig arribar tard a la xerrada que Skal va fer al 42. No recordo per què. Tenia algun compromís o havia d'anar a buscar el nen al cole o ves a saber què.
El cas és que quan m'hi vaig presentar, ja s'havia acabat. Vaig preguntar si en faria cap altra i em van dir que no, que era l'única. Volia escoltar-lo i que em signés el llibre. El proper cop, vaig pensar.
David J. Skal va morir al cap de poques setmanes.
La lectura de Monster Show ha estat una delícia. El terror és el meu gènere favorit, i en fa un repàs exhaustiu des de principis de segle XX fins l'any de la publicació, el 1993. A la meva edició hi ha un epíleg (molt necessari) que l'amplia fins a finals de segle, quan el gènere va tornar a evolucionar.
En tot moment tens la sensació que podria aturar-se i desenvolupar el capítol que estàs llegint fins a convertir-lo en un altre assaig amb entitat pròpia.
Aquesta ha estat, per pes i volum, la meva lectura de la tauleta de nit dels darrers mesos, i no podia ser més gratificant.
Buscaré més obres de Skal.

[Baal Of · Rating 4 out of 5]

I occasionally question why I love horror movies so much, and books like this help clarify, and maybe even justify that love. Skal favors early horror and much of the book is focused on the a few of the foundational movies such as The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari, Frankenstein, Nosferatu, and Dracula. He seems to have a particular affinity for Tod Browning's Freaks and spends a lot of time on the history of that film and director. There is much less emphasis on the films that most deeply affected me personally, but then that does make some amount of sense given it is difficult to tell what will become historically important when one is too close in time. In some cases Skal spends too much time on what I would consider irrelevant details around some of the films, for example James Dean's involvement with Elvira (Maila Nurni). He barely even mentions The Shining which for me is one the pivotal horror movies, and gives both Night Of The Living Dead and Alien very little credit. Despite those minor complaints, I enjoyed this book tremendously, and I liked learning about the history of horror film. I found the information about conflicts with censorship especially illuminating.

One major complaint I have about this edition of the book is the incredible poor quality of the pictures, many of which were so dark as to be be barely discernible.

Addendum: Something I forgot to write about in my original review, is Skal's very peculiar, ill-informed, and backward stance that sex reassignment therapy is in his words "vivisection", he rejects the reality that transsexual people experience a gender identity that is inconsistent with their assigned sex, and he claims that there is no biological basis for transgender realities. He buys into the stunningly hate-filled position outlined by Janice G. Raymond in her book The Transsexual Empire. I am seriously considering dropping the rating on this book another point for this alone. The dozens of transgender people that have crossed my path, and touched my life in such positive ways, don't deserve propagation of this kind of bullshit attitude.

[Peter Landau · Rating 4 out of 5]

Friends have been telling me to read this book for years. It’s an insightful cultural history of the genre and how it dialogs with the greater world, each influencing and reflecting the other. But it’s also inspirational. My sketchbook is now thick with the famous and not so famous monsters of filmdom that ushered me into adulthood.

[Jim Teggelaar · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a very readable, information packed study of the culture behind horror in film and print from the 20's to the 90's. Fans of horror films, especially the Universal Monsters, will enjoy this. Highlights for me were coverage of Lugosi, Karlof, Chaney and Stephan King. My only negatives were the inexplicable omission of any mention of John Carpenter's Halloween, and occasional over-reaching analysis.

[Verico · Rating 3 out of 5]

Este libro hace un recorrido por la historia de las películas de miedo en Estados Unidos principalmente. Al hilo, lo va relacionando con la propia historia. Es interesante ver cómo el horror responde a un contexto social e histórico.
Con toques de humor y un estilo muy desenfadado, hacen la lectura bastante agradable. Cómo contrapartida, le falta ser un poco más sistemático. Muy recomendable para cinéfilos y amantes de la subcultura del horror.

[Jason · Rating 3 out of 5]

No one can deny that horror movies played a significant role in 20th century popular culture. It was a century plagued by wars, genocide, cultural upheavals, drug addiction and so on. It was also the century when the movie camera became a central part of our lives. It was an age of anxiety and the masses coped with their fears by confronting them in the form of monsters flickering on a movie or a television screen. In The Monster Show: A Cultural History of Horror, David J. Skal argues that monsters symbolize fears that people can not face directly. His concept mostly succeeds but it falls apart in the latter sections of this book.

Without saying as much, Skal takes a semiotic approach to the concepts of “monsters” and “horror”. These concepts are fields with fluid boundaries and shifting definitions that encode symbolic representations of collective cultural fears. These signs are displayed to the general public in films, books, and other media like comics or Halloween costumes for the purpose of containing and controlling anxiety. Such participation in “horror” is a ritualistic act that summons demonic signs, confronts them, contains them, and controls them. This systematic action of processing horror signs is largely done unconsciously but by consciously analyzing the characteristics of monsters, we can gain a deeper understanding of what was collectively bothering people at any given time and place. Therefore, understanding the psycho-social framework in which horror culture is consumed is important. In our time it may be a mystery to some why the hokey monster movies of the 1930s were so terrifying to audiences; they do not terrify us now because the social conditions of our society have gone through transformations and our cultural reference points have shifted.

David J. Skal writes from a Freudian psychoanalytic perspective. He uses the underlying theme of sexual anxiety as an explanation for horror. He also claims that war is the beginning of all horror. So, for example, the sight of soldiers returning from World War I with bodily injuries and mutilated faces evoked the feeling of being sexually undesirable in the viewer. Therefore, movies depicting monsters with physical and facial deformities became popular, particularly in the 1920s and 1930s. Skal also identifies four horror archetypes that he uses as a framework for interpreting manifestations of horror culture that came later. He starts off with circus freaks as portrayed by Tod Browning in his landmark film Freaks. The predatory vampire , the sleek and elegant symbol of sexual domination and fear of death gets introduced and paired with the polar opposite of Frankenstein’s monster, the composite man made by technology, the plodding symbol of the working-class proletariat unable to comprehend his relationship to his creator. The dark and light sides of the human psyche are signified in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. All the monsters that came after these were variations on those themes. But Sigmund Freud believed he was teaching the world about the functioning of the human mind but really he was mistakenly explaining his own mind instead and the same can be said for David Skal. Some of his claims about the symbolism of monsters are not easy to swallow but there are times when he is genuinely insightful. To be fair, movie directors after World War I were familiar with Freud and psychoanalytic themes were deliberately incorporated into their art so there is some merit in understanding horror from that point of view.

This psychoanalytic method of interpretation in The Monster Show works well, or at least it does for the parts of the book most distant from the lifetime of the author. Horror as a reaction to the fear induced by the two world wars, changing gender roles, the Cold War, the atomic bomb, and advances in medical science gets a thorough and lucid treatment. Along the way we learn about controversies involving censorship as regulated by the Hays Production Code as the Catholic church and women’s activists groups did what they could to prevent film makers from having freedom of speech. Personal details about industry figures like Bela Lugosi, Tod Browning, and Vampira, all unique characters in their own rights, add a human face to the narrative. The most insightful part of the book comes with the chapter on horror films dealing with anxiety over pregnancy, birth, and child rearing and also a section on how the Goth counter culture has embraced the vampire as a signifier of a rebellious social identity.

Then The Monster Show crashes and burns. Vampires drink blood and AIDS can be transmitted through blood therefore vampires signify a fear of AIDS. Stephen King wrote horror novels during the 1980s and that was a time when people felt economic anxiety so Stephen King’s books express fears about economic instability. Towards the end, Skal’s argument becomes less coherent and he arbitrarily makes connections between things that do not appear to be connected. He may have been on to something but he does not give enough details to make his conclusions sound. Just because two things occur at the same time that does not mean they caused each other to happen. Instead of insight into the collective fears of the 1980s and 1990s, Skal gives us some angry tirades about Reagan-era economics, the politics of the medical industry during the AIDS crisis, and the increasing problem of anorexia. He even makes the bizarre claim that plastic surgeons are no different than the Nazi doctor Joseph Mengele without acknowledging that plastic surgery is done on voluntary subjects who, nonetheless, are not put to death after the surgery is over. You can argue about the stupidity of nose jobs and breast implamnts all you want but there is no way you can honestly say that a plastic surgeon’s operating room is the same as Auschwitz. Like Freud, Skal ends up revealing more about himself than he does the culture of horror.

Overall thought, The Monster Show is an interesting history. The majority of the book is historical narrative and the analysis part is there to provide context. Even when disagreeing with these ideas, a lot can be learned about the horror industry and the fascinating people who have kept it alive. It also makes you think about what kind of monsters we will be remembered for in our time. We are faced with the existential threat of global warming, Donald Trump and the possible end of American democracy, the forced politicization of every aspect of our lives, the worst era for music ever, and the hordes of cell phone users who resemble lobotomized zombies; if this is not a great time for the creation of new monsters, then I can not conceive of when it would be better.

https://grimhistory.blogspot.com/

[Gwen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very well written. I enjoyed the sections on Dracula and Frankenstein the most, however, it's a very comprehensive look at the origins of horror up to the 90s (as it was written in the 90s). Much of the information was new to me and I enjoyed the author's insights and analysis. I definitely recommend to anyone who loves the horror genre.

[Fraser Sherman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Skal starts out with the archetypes of horror in the 19th century (Frankenstein, Dracula, and to a lesser extent Jekyll/Hyde), follows them through Universal's 1930s Dark Universe and then on to the present (1993, for this book). Unfortunately the book gets weaker as it goes along. There's almost nothing on slasher films which repellent though they were a major 1980s subgenre. And I'm not sure I buy that AIDS became the template for 1980s horror — if it did, then I'd like Skal to discuss the role of say the Spanish flu or polio (absolutely terrifying in the 1940s and 1950s) or why they didn't have the same impact.
Good, but not as good as it could have been.

[Marla Hectic · Rating 4 out of 5]

A pesar de tener algunos momentos en los que se nota demasiado que fue escrito en los 90 y que, para mí gusto, se centra demasiado en el Hollywood más clásico, es una lectura fascinante, amena a pesar de lo imponente del libro por tamaño y del que es imposible no salir sin algún dato y reflexión nuevos

[Edward Taylor · Rating 4 out of 5]

To me Hollywood Gothic: The Tangled Web of Dracula from Novel to Stage to Screen definitely was an eye-opener in regard to how hard it was to adapt let alone sell the idea of Dracula on the silver screen. In The Monster Show, David Skal digs deep into the recesses of the archives to give us a view into the history of horror movies, stories, and tales. A majority is dedicated to the 1900s to 1950s movie scene with some time spent with the slasher genre and the phenomenon that was (is) the early days of Stephen King's book collection.

Tod Browning, James Whale, George Romero, and others are given their rightful due but some, such as Argento, Fulci, and Carpenter (mentioned, but not as much as the first two above) This also shows the main issue I found with the stories of yesteryear: this is primarily a book about US movies and directors. Gone are many of the great directors of Europe, Asia, and such. We also see almost none of the Hammer Horror movies that revitalized the industry and put names like Cushing, Lee, and Reed (small mention for Oliver) - Jess Franco, Dario Argento, Lucio Fulci, Mario Bavia deserve something, even in passing.

[Elizabeth Addison · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was such a perfect book for me to read right now, as I finish up my first Hooptober watch challenge which exposed me to genres and decades I never would have chosen for myself. It was also exactly the sort of media commentary I want: why we fear what we fear and how that comes across in the horror movies and monsters we love. This is such an incredible deep dive through the decades of horror and felt very compassionate while still being unbiased (except for a little bad TERF-y science in the chapter "Scar Wars", for which I blame the era).

I hate that I have such a bad head for history because I want to be able to quote this book all the time. It's full of fascinating anecdotes and thoughtful connections, and truly ties together the cultural history of horror in a fantastic way. I would highly recommend to anyone who loves horror movies.

[Pam Simones · Rating 4 out of 5]

Any book which starts by mentioning Diane Arbus will have my immediate attention. The first part of this cultural analysis was heavy on early Hollywood and film as a whole which is one of my particular interests; and I had an enjoyable time reading it. However, the closer he got to present time--in this edition 1990-- the less I enjoyed myself. My opinion is that he bit off too much. If he had stayed with film or just covered cultural horror tendencies by decade, he would have made it easier for this reader. Be prepared to have your opinion of horror challenged and maybe changed. In any way, Dracula will never be the same.

[Rich Rosell · Rating 5 out of 5]

This in-depth and detailed exploration of the history of horror and the related cultural touchstones, beginning with Tod Browning and ending in the early 1990s (when this book was published). Skal is true horror historian - smart, clever, intelligent - and the level of info and discussion here is off the charts good (if horror films are your thing, that is).

Highly recommended, especially if you coveted Famous Monsters of Filmland magazine.

[Moon Captain · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredible. This book gave me exactly what I hoped for. I have a much better perspective and understanding of the history of horror. I was turned on to this subject by Grady Hendrix, famous for his paperbacks from hell thing. I randomly saw him give a PowerPoint presentation about the history of the horror paperback. That was 8 years ago and I'm finally learning more! House of psychotic women by Kier-La Janisse is another excellent horror history book I recommend.

[CHILTONM · Rating 5 out of 5]

Impressively clear and thorough

[Kathryn Grace Loves Horror · Rating 5 out of 5]

Review to come.

[Amberly · Rating 3 out of 5]

Started and finished date - 27.02.25 to 02.03.25.
My rating - Three Stars.
this book was okay and as someone who love to read and watched horror I found is book interesting but I mix feeling about the cover of book and what I didn't like how small the text was. The book did dragged.

[Leonardo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Monster Show es una excelente y amena crónica del devenir del horror en la cultura popular estadounidense del siglo XX, con un énfasis particular en el cine, las historietas y las novelas populares. El panorama que nos presenta es exhaustivo, desde el cine mudo, hasta el splatterpunk de fines del siglo XX, con temas y personajes recurrentes (Todd Browning y los freaks, Drácula y la criatura de Frankenstein, los grupos censores, el terror como metáfora del lado oscuro de una sociedad "perfecta"). Las anécdotas son deliciosas y logran un frágil, pero fascinante equilibrio, revelando que lo que podría ser un chisme trivial, también es un momento importante de la cultura popular (las muertes de Bela Lugosi y James Dean, por ejemplo). El libro hace énfasis en las conexiones entre el arte popular (las películas de Browning) y el arte culto (las fotografías de Diane Arbus - quizás la gran excluida entre las diversas muestras visuales que salpican las páginas del libro) y también tiene momentos de gran claridad, como la mención recurrente de la carrera paralela del Drácula y el mosntruo de Frakenstein hollywoodenses, incluso en sus manifestaciones menos obvias (Peter Pan y Terminator). Sin embargo, el libro dista mucho de ser un estudio crítico del género e incluso el autor se muestra incapaz de ser contundente en su crítica al estilo literario de Stephen King (sus méritos como "canalizador" del imaginario de la cultura pop no están a discusión).

[Spencer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Rating: 3/5 ☆

As an avid horror movie fan, I was excited to dive into this book as part of my current film class. It was an overall interesting and enjoyable read, with the genre information presented chronicling a (largely) comprehensive path through the twentieth century's horror offerings. More often than not, this vast amount of horror knowledge was organized in a logical fashion and presented outside of a boring listless drawl. However, although the first half of this book was incredibly well-constructed, the later chapters fall apart in content and form while endlessly repeating points made earlier on. Alongside some of the dated language on the author's behalf (understandable given its release date, but a bit cringe-worthy at parts now), these drawbacks kept the book from being anything more than a fun read.

[Dylan Toropov · Rating 2 out of 5]

The first third of the book focusing on early cinema, Universal Monsters, and horror as social processing of war trauma from WWI & WWII is interesting and informative.

Once discussions on birth control, gender, and feminism begin, primarily for films 1965 to 2000, the analysis provided for the last two-thirds of the book is brittle, dated, and in-over-its-head.

I would have enjoyed this much more if it was focused entirely on Universal Horror cinema from 1920-1960.

As it is, by trying to be comprehensive, much of the book misses many important opportunities for intersectional readings of counterculture cinema and lingers in a basic patriarchal lens that wants to be on the right side of history but fails to challenge its prejudices and presumptions.

[Lewis Manalo · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have tempered enthusiasm for this critical text on horror films. Simply due to how extensive it is, this book is essential reading for the horror film enthusiast; however, Skal relies too heavily on the research of his predecessors. and he never voices any disagreement with what they've said. The result is a hodge-podge of theoretical paradigms that are often contradictory, and in the case of the Freudian readings, arguably outmoded.

If Skal had updated the theoretical basis for his analysis and included some of his own insights, his criticism would have done justice to his excellent, expansive research.

[Galen Wilson · Rating 3 out of 5]

The pre-1940 portion of the book is very good, and it is pretty good from 1940-1960. After that you can tell Skal is a bit out of his element. He avoids exploitation and independent horror cinema too much (though he touches on it briefly) to make the broad cultural claims he wants to make. Even the early years should really touch more on Poverty Row than it does.

Some of his cultural analysis has aged poorly too. The sections concerning his thoughts on transgendered folks are best skipped entirely.

[D · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Monster Show draws some interesting parallels between the on-screen horrors of Dracula and Frankenstein and the realities of American life, referring to 1931 as America's worst year of the century, but its best year for monsters. Or as the American writer Gilbert Seldes said of that time period, "The rich could still go to the South Sea Islands, but the poor went to the movies."

[Lauren Scheier · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book had a lot of great historical information, but it was a bit of a slog to get through. The writing style felt very much like a textbook. Also, this was originally published in 1993, so there was some outdated terminology used in regards to certain minority groups.

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Spanning from Tod Browning's Freaks to M. Night Shyamalan's The Sixth Sense, David Skal's The Monster Show pulls back the curtain on almost a hundred years of American horror cinema, offering a behind the scenes look at the cultural and historical phenomena that shaped nearly a century's worth of scares.

Skal's spotlight shines brightest on two of the Holy Trinity of Universal Horror, Dracula and Frankenstein, the twin archetypes of which he traces from page to stage to screen, with plenty of time lavished on the men behind the masks. (And, occasionally, the women who loved them; I'm still getting over the idea of Bela Lugosi keeping a naked portrait of Clara Bow in his living room.) But there's plenty of room in this Show for discussions of WWI's influence on body horror, the impact of drive-in theaters in the '50s, and the ghoulish work of Tom Savini.

Skal strikes just the right tone - somewhere between stuffy academic and studio gossip - to draw readers in. His research is impeccable and his knowledge of the genre truly impressive, and I can't help wishing he'd guest host my next movie night. If there's a flaw in his work, it's that Show, originally published in 1993 with an afterward in this edition from 2001, suffers from diminishing critical returns the closer it gets to discussing horror created near its publication date. Obviously temporal and emotional distance is necessary for analysis, but it may also be Skal's focus on Dracula as a throughline which leads him to the somewhat perplexing conclusion that '80s horror was a response to the AIDS epidemic. (Um, slasher movies much?)

Despite its somewhat weak closing chapters, The Monster Show provides fascinating and important context for the things that scare us cinematically. It's a bloody good read, and a must for any horror fan.