Literary Horror discussion

Hill House is a masterpiece! The opening paragraph is one of the best ever, Imo.
I listened to We Have Always Lived in the Castle last winter, and enjoyed that one too.

Penguin are soon to bring some of her other works back in print; including "The Sundial" which I am very keen to read...

Yes, I'm looking forward to the Penguin issues a lot. She's a sublime writer.

i love Hill House and we have always lived in the castle. i got them from audible and have listened to them more than once.

Shirley Jackson is one of the main characters in the new movie:

https://letterboxd.com/film/shirley-2...

I really enjoyed it. Not a horror movie, but tense and dark. Many reviews compare it to Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, but it's more than that. It's also not a conventional biopic, more like one of Jackson's fictions. For example, her kids don't appear in the movie at all; it's not supposed to be an overview of what actually happened.

Bill wrote: "Shirley Jackson is one of the main characters in the new movie:

https://letterboxd.com/film/shirley-2...

I really enjoyed it. Not a horror movie, but tense and dark. Many reviews compare it to Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, but it's more than that. It's also not a conventional biopic, more like one of Jackson's fictions. For example, her kids don't appear in the movie at all; it's not supposed to be an overview of what actually happened. "

I read the recent New York Times review and thought it sounded really interesting but I have some reservations about the relationship between the two women.

Based on the NYT synopsis, it seems like Jackson and her husband are portrayed as being infertile and the pregnancy of the young female character living in their house becomes a kind of focal point, pointing up a lack or something missing in Shirley. Is this the case? If so, that would really piss me off as it would just misrepresent Jackson's fundamental weirdness in the worst, most misogynist way (and female filmmakers can be just as misogynist and assy as men when it comes to this kind of reductiveness).

Marie-Therese wrote: "Based on the NYT synopsis, it seems like Jackson and her husband are portrayed as being infertile and the pregnancy of the young female character living in their house becomes a kind of focal point, pointing up a lack or something missing in Shirley."

Hmm, that's not how I read the conflict between Jackson and her husband in the movie. (Now this could be because I know the real couple had kids in real life, even though there's no reference to this in the movie.) The Jackson character seemed mostly driven by her struggles with the new novel, her drinking, and being trapped with her philandering husband.

One of the more consistent themes in the movie (to me) was how women are often made to deprioritize their creative work and goals in favor of their spouses'. I cringed every time Jackson's smarmy husband mentions taking a look at her manuscript, as if she should need his critique and approval. And the younger woman Rose was obviously having to reorganize her life around her (also philandering) husband's needs, down to becoming essentially the housekeeper for the older couple.

In any case, if you do end up watching it, I'm curious to hear your thoughts. The trailer gives a good sense for what to expect.

Bill wrote: "Shirley Jackson is one of the main characters in the new movie:"

Thanks for the heads up Bill, this looks great.