What in the actual hell?
I DEMAND to know which editor thought it would be a smart idea to take this beautiful work from 1974 and bastardize (I mean, "update") it with randomly-placed 21st century references.
A few years ago, I found the original copy of Down a Dark Hall at an airbnb and read it in one night. Recently, I started thinking about and bought a Kindle copy.
Imagine my surprise and displeasure upon coming across passionless add-ons like these:
1. "But I can't find an Ethernet cord in my room, and there's no Wi-Fi signal. I need to hook up my computer."
2. "You're saying we don't have Internet?" Ruth regarded him incredulously. "If we can't get online, then how are going to do research?"
3. "You can still use your computers to write with, but think of them as word processors. You don't need canned quotes from unreliable sources to cut and paste onto your papers."
The person who made these additions struck me as someone to whom technology was completely alien. Reading what they wrote brought to mind an image of someone who hadn't interacted with humans in many decades, whose thought process was like, "Ah...kids. Kids like computers. Mention computers."
Imagine an alien writing a story about humans, using only what it thinks it knows about us, not from actually interacting with and assimilating with us (in the name of learning).
The publisher naively thought that adding 21st century references might draw in young readers, when all they did was ruin a novel that was beautiful precisely because of it seventies-ness. When readers--young or old--pick it up, they want a completely immersive experience, to experience another time and place. Instead, this was more like watching a funny 30-second clip of a '70s movie that someone today has randomly dubbed over random parts of the characters' speeches with modern words.
Young readers don't need what they read to mirror their lives; they want coherence.
If you want to update a novel, you must do an overhaul (which is terrible, but you get my point); otherwise there'd be no cohesion.
Imagine a character speaking normally about going to the post office to mail a letter--perfectly in their seventies-ness, and suddenly a crisp and clear voice throws in "internet" and "email" to replace "post office" and "mail," respectively.
Down a Dark Hall is a classic for a reason. It transports you to...:
an isolated, dark, and suffocating boarding school in an all but abandoned forest.
With a sinister headmistress.
New friends who are slowly losing their minds, as you begin to lose yours.
You are completely cut off from the outside world.
Your new stepdad sees you as a thorn on his side, someone who stands in his way of a new life with your mother.
You are utterly alone.
You can't go home.
1970s pacing.
1970s vibes.
1970s social culture.
... And, suddenly, BAM--you're rudely slapped awake by randomly placed 21st century additions.
Like, ew.
There was no need to "update" this because the teenage isolation, loneliness, feeling unwanted and the loss of agency are relatable to young (and young-at-heart) readers, regardless of when in time they are reading the novel.
For example, who here doesn't have a jerky step-family, or know at least one person who does? Just that one example alone is enough to make Down a Dark Hall relatable to many readers. Add in the feelings of abandonment, not being heard or believed, etc., etc., and you have a novel that's 100% relatable on its own. There was no need to "update" anything for relatability.
This version: Three stars.
Original version: Five stars.
Do I still recommend the new version? Yes. Other than the randomly-placed additions, the text remains the same as the original. However, a pre-2011 copy will provide you with a more seamless reading experience.