A Dissenting View - Ghost Story
Before starting my blog on Peter Straub’s Ghost Story, I went to several of my classmate’s blogs to see what they had to say. As I was afraid I would, I think I may be the lone curmudgeon at a Ghost Story love fest. In other words, while everyone else is glowing over the story, I am glowering. I REALLY do not like this book.
This is my second time having to read this book (ironically, the first time I had to read it was also for this program, eight years ago when I was getting the M.A.), and although I didn’t care for it the first time around, I went into the reading hoping I would like it more this time. The first time I read it, I felt duped. I loved the opening bit with Don Wanderly and the little girl, but then felt like a victim of a horrid bait-and-switch scam for most of the rest of the book. I thought maybe this time, since I knew that it would all “come together” at the end, that I would like it better.
I didn’t.
Honestly, I think the book is overly plotted, overly complex and overly full of itself. Although Straub does an admiral job of weaving all the subplots together in the end, I think it feels contrived. However, because everyone else seems to love it so, I went to someone I really trust to see if I was missing something… I went to Stephen King. Okay, so I didn’t REALLY go to him. I wish!! But, I did the next best thing. I went to his writing. In an article called “Horror Fiction” from his non-fiction work, Danse Macabre, King writes extensively on Straub’s Ghost Story. It was in there that I found the answer to my dislike of the story. King refers to Ghost Story as a gothic novel and admits that “most gothics are overplotted novels whose success or failure hinges on the author’s ability to make you believe in the characters and partake of the mood.” He goes on to say that he feels that Straub is able to do this, and after skimming many of your blogs, I’d have to say I think most of you agree.
I don’t.
It is not the mood of the book that I don’t buy into. I actually think Straub does a fantastic job with the mood. It feels close and suffocating, even before the storm. It’s one of those small towns where everyone knows your business, but no one is quite what they seem. Perfect atmosphere for a good, old fashioned ghost story. My problem is with the characters. No matter how hard I try, I just can’t get interested in four stodgy, rich old white guys with their privilege and their secret societies and their trophy wives and their affairs and their maids who are good enough to fuck but not good enough to marry. Granted, the story becomes a bit more interesting when Don Wanderly and Peter Barnes are added, but by then we’re already 200+ pages in. A wise man recently told me on my own writing, it doesn’t matter how good the rest of the book is if you lose your audience at the beginning. That’s what happens to me with this book. I get so bored from pages 30 to 200 that I just want to burn the freaking thing. By the time I get to the good stuff, my nose is so out of joint, I am reading perfunctorily. I’m only finishing it because I have to.
With that said, though, I decided I wanted to find SOMETHING to like about this book. Again, my inspiration came from Stephen King’s article. In it, he compares Ghost Story to Straub’s earlier book Julia and remarks at the similarities in theme that arise, particularly in the idea of the ghost story being about an internal horror. “What is the ghost, after all, that it should frighten us so, but our own face?” King asks. He illustrates this by mentioning two places in which the ghost (once as Angie and once as Alma) speaks to Don Wanderly in a way that indicates that she and he are interchangeable. When Wanderley, at the beginning of the book, asks Angie what she is, her eventual answer is “I am you.” Later, when he asks Alma what is wrong when she is looking out the window, there is confusion about her answer. Did she say, “I saw a ghost,” “I am a ghost” or “YOU are a ghost”? The ambiguity leaves us to realize that the ghost may very well be within us. As I thought about this, I realized that there are several other places where this happens.
Although I am sure there are more examples, the ones I remember best happen to Lewis, both on the day John Jaffery dies and on the day Lewis himself dies. On the day Jaffery dies, Lewis is disappointed about not seeing someone in the woods. As he is wandering about his house thinking about this, he thinks, “Whom did you want to meet? Yourself?” This, again, reinforces the idea of the ghost being within. In that same section, just a few pages later when he goes out on his drive, he has another thought of meeting up with himself “… suppose you went out for a walk and saw yourself running toward you, your hair flying, your face distorted with fear…” Considering that he does meet up with the ghost on that same drive, it seems the connection between this thought and her appearance further advances this theme. Later in the book, just before Lewis dies, in the flashback when he is talking to his father, there is further evidence that the ghost is within when Lewis’s father says to him, “…mark me, son, it will come back to haunt you. You were seduced by yourself, Lewis. Nothing sadder can be said of any man.”
Although I cannot remember many specific instances where the other members of The Chowder Society were specifically mentioned in this vein, I am sure they exist. I do remember at least once when The Chowder Society as a whole is mentioned. Again, this happens shortly after Jaffery’s death when Milly says that The Chowder Society killed him. However, I think this theme does run through the plot as well. It was their own culpability in earlier transgressions that brought this evil upon them. They are haunted as much by their pasts as by any outside phantasm.
This is one aspect that I will say I do admire about the book. I think the subtlety with which Straub weaves this through his story is quite effective. At the same time, however, I think that my dislike for the characters may have been partly fueled by this, which may have led, at least in part, to my dislike of the book overall.
This is my second time having to read this book (ironically, the first time I had to read it was also for this program, eight years ago when I was getting the M.A.), and although I didn’t care for it the first time around, I went into the reading hoping I would like it more this time. The first time I read it, I felt duped. I loved the opening bit with Don Wanderly and the little girl, but then felt like a victim of a horrid bait-and-switch scam for most of the rest of the book. I thought maybe this time, since I knew that it would all “come together” at the end, that I would like it better.
I didn’t.
Honestly, I think the book is overly plotted, overly complex and overly full of itself. Although Straub does an admiral job of weaving all the subplots together in the end, I think it feels contrived. However, because everyone else seems to love it so, I went to someone I really trust to see if I was missing something… I went to Stephen King. Okay, so I didn’t REALLY go to him. I wish!! But, I did the next best thing. I went to his writing. In an article called “Horror Fiction” from his non-fiction work, Danse Macabre, King writes extensively on Straub’s Ghost Story. It was in there that I found the answer to my dislike of the story. King refers to Ghost Story as a gothic novel and admits that “most gothics are overplotted novels whose success or failure hinges on the author’s ability to make you believe in the characters and partake of the mood.” He goes on to say that he feels that Straub is able to do this, and after skimming many of your blogs, I’d have to say I think most of you agree.
I don’t.
It is not the mood of the book that I don’t buy into. I actually think Straub does a fantastic job with the mood. It feels close and suffocating, even before the storm. It’s one of those small towns where everyone knows your business, but no one is quite what they seem. Perfect atmosphere for a good, old fashioned ghost story. My problem is with the characters. No matter how hard I try, I just can’t get interested in four stodgy, rich old white guys with their privilege and their secret societies and their trophy wives and their affairs and their maids who are good enough to fuck but not good enough to marry. Granted, the story becomes a bit more interesting when Don Wanderly and Peter Barnes are added, but by then we’re already 200+ pages in. A wise man recently told me on my own writing, it doesn’t matter how good the rest of the book is if you lose your audience at the beginning. That’s what happens to me with this book. I get so bored from pages 30 to 200 that I just want to burn the freaking thing. By the time I get to the good stuff, my nose is so out of joint, I am reading perfunctorily. I’m only finishing it because I have to.
With that said, though, I decided I wanted to find SOMETHING to like about this book. Again, my inspiration came from Stephen King’s article. In it, he compares Ghost Story to Straub’s earlier book Julia and remarks at the similarities in theme that arise, particularly in the idea of the ghost story being about an internal horror. “What is the ghost, after all, that it should frighten us so, but our own face?” King asks. He illustrates this by mentioning two places in which the ghost (once as Angie and once as Alma) speaks to Don Wanderly in a way that indicates that she and he are interchangeable. When Wanderley, at the beginning of the book, asks Angie what she is, her eventual answer is “I am you.” Later, when he asks Alma what is wrong when she is looking out the window, there is confusion about her answer. Did she say, “I saw a ghost,” “I am a ghost” or “YOU are a ghost”? The ambiguity leaves us to realize that the ghost may very well be within us. As I thought about this, I realized that there are several other places where this happens.
Although I am sure there are more examples, the ones I remember best happen to Lewis, both on the day John Jaffery dies and on the day Lewis himself dies. On the day Jaffery dies, Lewis is disappointed about not seeing someone in the woods. As he is wandering about his house thinking about this, he thinks, “Whom did you want to meet? Yourself?” This, again, reinforces the idea of the ghost being within. In that same section, just a few pages later when he goes out on his drive, he has another thought of meeting up with himself “… suppose you went out for a walk and saw yourself running toward you, your hair flying, your face distorted with fear…” Considering that he does meet up with the ghost on that same drive, it seems the connection between this thought and her appearance further advances this theme. Later in the book, just before Lewis dies, in the flashback when he is talking to his father, there is further evidence that the ghost is within when Lewis’s father says to him, “…mark me, son, it will come back to haunt you. You were seduced by yourself, Lewis. Nothing sadder can be said of any man.”
Although I cannot remember many specific instances where the other members of The Chowder Society were specifically mentioned in this vein, I am sure they exist. I do remember at least once when The Chowder Society as a whole is mentioned. Again, this happens shortly after Jaffery’s death when Milly says that The Chowder Society killed him. However, I think this theme does run through the plot as well. It was their own culpability in earlier transgressions that brought this evil upon them. They are haunted as much by their pasts as by any outside phantasm.
This is one aspect that I will say I do admire about the book. I think the subtlety with which Straub weaves this through his story is quite effective. At the same time, however, I think that my dislike for the characters may have been partly fueled by this, which may have led, at least in part, to my dislike of the book overall.
I actually agree with a lot of what you said here. While I love Straub's writing and the structure of the book, and I even like the men of the Chowder Society (well, Sears and Ricky, anyway), the plot is overcomplicated, and on my first reading I felt duped as well. I just can't buy the shapeshifter thing; had Straub stuck with the "ghost within" theme, this would have been a totally different (and probably better) book.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you mentioned King's writings in Danse Macabre; I think it makes "Ghost Story" sound much richer.
ReplyDeleteI had a hard time getting through this book (it took FOREVER). I didn't like it at first and it wasn't until I put the book down and started looking at it "mythically" that I decided I liked it (thinking about Narcissus and La Belle Dame and all that), but only in that context. But I think you bring up a lot of good points and I am very glad for your dissenting viewpoint.