3 ms·

I haven’t read all of these by those that I have I never found that scary. Most horror isn’t that scary, especially anything supernatural. There’s enough real e

by nkrisc 4y ago

I haven’t read all of these by those that I have I never found that scary. Most horror isn’t that scary, especially anything supernatural. There’s enough real evil in the world to send shivers down my spine. A ghost is positively tame in comparison to the things actual people have done. Ghosts don’t scare me, people do.

anyfoo 4y ago
Yeah, same. As soon as the story involves anything supernatural, I'm not scared anymore, since it can't happen anyway. Does not mean there cannot be a good story involving supernatural things (far from it, magic can be fantastic--pun not intended--in stories), just that any semblance of "this could happen to me" or "this could be a real story" is gone.
- api 4y ago
  Read Blindsight by Peter Watts. It's a horror story where the monster revealed is a thesis about future human evolution, and it's actually scary.
- andybak 4y ago
  Weird. I'm the opposite. Reality-based horror makes me sad, creates a sense of revulsion or just does nothing. But anything that threatens my sense of reality and I start to get goosebumps. > since it can't happen anyway Yes but that's the point. Imagine experiencing something that you know isn't possible. And the more solid your grip on rationality, the harder it would hit you. The harder it would be to accept what your senses were telling you.
  - anyfoo 4y ago
    I don't know. If "suddenly there are ghosts", then either there's a completely natural explanation for why they aren't actually ghosts but just some sort of smoke-show, at which point it's not supernatural but you're back to "realistic violence"... ... or everything you thought about the world is wrong, including physics. Sure, that would make for a good story, and there are stories like that, but that's not what supernatural stories are usually about. The protagonists in those don't usually break down in an existential crisis consuming the rest of the narrative, they accept the supernatural and "deal with the problem at hand". The story is still about the ghost.
- mumblemumble 4y ago
  For me, the scariest stories are the ones where you don't actually know if anything supernatural is happening. The Haunting of Hill House, for example.
Maursault 4y ago
> Most horror isn’t that scary, especially anything supernatural. I believe it all depends on whether one was raised with religion. The original creeypasta is, of course, the New Testament (and I suppose we can be more specific: Mark 16, as the very original). There is nothing creepier than the Resurrection, thus the need for the internal instruction, "do not be alarmed." Any decent production of Godspell or Jesus Christ Superstar will exploit this creepiness in their respective Resurrection scenes. Go on, tell me you would not totally freak out if you saw a dead body come back to life.
- ffhhj 4y ago
  Well, Jesus revived a person before himself, and just asked him to wake up. The real and first mass terror story is The Great Flood.
- nkrisc 4y ago
  > Go on, tell me you would not totally freak out if you saw a dead body come back to life. Sure, if I actually saw it. But I don’t think that I ever will, nor is there any evidence anyone else ever has. So not really something I’m scared about.
  - Maursault 4y ago
    > nor is there any evidence Not counting all those that were not entirely dead, just in some kind of state with reduced breathing and lowered heart rate, where others thought they were dead, but they ultimately revived... testimony, in fact, is a kind of evidence, and very often in a legal court and elsewhere, it is the only kind of evidence that is considered. Indeed, "gospel" itself derives from an Angelo-Saxon word meaning "good telling" or good testimony. Further, testimony is essential in science and cannot be reduced to other sources of justification. Testimony is a essential element of the scientific method, though we usually call it observation. But I think we must count those that were in fact medically and clinically dead (not breathing with no heartbeat, no life signs), yet were subsequently revived by warming, CPR, defibrillator[1], or through the spontaneous return of normal cardiac rhythm[2], as truly having died and been brought back to life, because, indeed, that is what has occurred countless times. Your assertion that there is not any evidence of reincarnation is not only unsupportable, it is clearly false on its face, regardless of whether anyone has ever been reincarnated or not. If it is one's belief that it is the case no one has ever been brought back from the dead, one must ignore a mountain of witness testimony and scientific evidence to the contrary. The very fact that life itself exists in any form is undeniable evidence that, at least once, life was induced from lifelessness, but I suppose that could not be reincarnation, but instead, incarnation (from the Latin incarnare: to make flesh). [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50681489 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50681489 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazarus_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazarus_syndrome
P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
That's why Stephen King is so highly regarded. He has a short story about a kid's first day at college, he goes up to his room with a sniper rifle and starts shooting people.
- fsckboy 4y ago
  But Stephen King is not highly regarded, and in fact he's somewhat bitter about it. I don't have a quote at the ready but he wants to be taken seriously and the elites of literature do not take him seriously. He achieves popularity by writing page turners at an 8th grade reading level because there's a large population who can read them None of his works have been considered for anything like a Pulitzer Prize, National Book Award, Man Booker Prize, PEN award or Nobel Prize for Literature. He has gotten some "lifetime achievement" recognitions, but that's more to use his celebrity to get attention for the organizations that gave them than vice versa. the late Harold Bloom (died recently) is a notable literary scholar, here's what he had to say https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEPDLFSUPe0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEPDLFSUPe0 (listening to Harold Bloom on many other serious topics is quite a treat, this for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2HpDhTIIxs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2HpDhTIIxs )
  - astura 4y ago
    This is 100% true. Stephen King's writing is extremely popular, but definitely not "highly regarded." His novels are widely considered to be low quality pop fiction by literary critics. This isn't meant dis, selling massive amounts of books makes more money then pleasing literary critics.
  - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
    I think Orson Scott Card summed it up pretty well. > Let me assure you that King's work most definitely is literature, because it was written to be published and is read with admiration. What Snyder really means is that it is not the literature preferred by the academic-literary elite. Your post drips of some odd dislike for Stephen King. I can't speak to that, but just like many of us don't understand paying millions for a white canvas with 3 lines on it, we also don't understand calling someone who is as obviously talented as Stephen King a hack, or spending the time trying to denigrate him (his awards are purely political, but the awards he hasn't gotten somehow aren't?). Either way I'm out. I think I'll go read The Long Walk again.
fsckboy 4y ago
"why read dystopian fiction when you can just pay attention?"
whyenot 4y ago
I've been reading the original 1897 Dracula via Dracula Daily, where each chapter is emailed to you on the day of the year that the events happen in the book. I think the format helps, but it's pretty scary.
GuB-42 4y ago
Not just people, nature is pretty scary too. For example, Kurzgesagt made videos about the Lyssa virus (rabies) and the brain-eating amoeba, two among many.
toastercat 4y ago
"Most <fiction> isn't <emotional> ... There's enough real <character> in the world to <induce some kind of emotion>."
Bakary 4y ago
If you want real horror, I can't recommend this short story enough. https://qntm.org/mmacevedo https://qntm.org/mmacevedo
- FumblingBear 4y ago
  Wow! Thanks for sharing that. I've read some of qntm's works before (There Is No Antimemetics Division) but that short story was truly terrifying. The descriptions of how to most effectively lie to the image in order to make it more cooperative is truly chilling.
BeFlatXIII 4y ago
Or outdoor survival stories with bad endings. Those are top-notch in the horrifying department.

by nkrisc 4y ago

anyfoo 4y ago

Yeah, same. As soon as the story involves anything supernatural, I'm not scared anymore, since it can't happen anyway. Does not mean there cannot be a good story involving supernatural things (far from it, magic can be fantastic--pun not intended--in stories), just that any semblance of "this could happen to me" or "this could be a real story" is gone.

api 4y ago
Read Blindsight by Peter Watts. It's a horror story where the monster revealed is a thesis about future human evolution, and it's actually scary.
andybak 4y ago
Weird. I'm the opposite. Reality-based horror makes me sad, creates a sense of revulsion or just does nothing. But anything that threatens my sense of reality and I start to get goosebumps. > since it can't happen anyway Yes but that's the point. Imagine experiencing something that you know isn't possible. And the more solid your grip on rationality, the harder it would hit you. The harder it would be to accept what your senses were telling you.
- anyfoo 4y ago
  I don't know. If "suddenly there are ghosts", then either there's a completely natural explanation for why they aren't actually ghosts but just some sort of smoke-show, at which point it's not supernatural but you're back to "realistic violence"... ... or everything you thought about the world is wrong, including physics. Sure, that would make for a good story, and there are stories like that, but that's not what supernatural stories are usually about. The protagonists in those don't usually break down in an existential crisis consuming the rest of the narrative, they accept the supernatural and "deal with the problem at hand". The story is still about the ghost.
mumblemumble 4y ago
For me, the scariest stories are the ones where you don't actually know if anything supernatural is happening. The Haunting of Hill House, for example.

Maursault 4y ago

> Most horror isn’t that scary, especially anything supernatural. I believe it all depends on whether one was raised with religion. The original creeypasta is, of course, the New Testament (and I suppose we can be more specific: Mark 16, as the very original). There is nothing creepier than the Resurrection, thus the need for the internal instruction, "do not be alarmed." Any decent production of Godspell or Jesus Christ Superstar will exploit this creepiness in their respective Resurrection scenes. Go on, tell me you would not totally freak out if you saw a dead body come back to life.

ffhhj 4y ago
Well, Jesus revived a person before himself, and just asked him to wake up. The real and first mass terror story is The Great Flood.
nkrisc 4y ago
> Go on, tell me you would not totally freak out if you saw a dead body come back to life. Sure, if I actually saw it. But I don’t think that I ever will, nor is there any evidence anyone else ever has. So not really something I’m scared about.
- Maursault 4y ago
  > nor is there any evidence Not counting all those that were not entirely dead, just in some kind of state with reduced breathing and lowered heart rate, where others thought they were dead, but they ultimately revived... testimony, in fact, is a kind of evidence, and very often in a legal court and elsewhere, it is the only kind of evidence that is considered. Indeed, "gospel" itself derives from an Angelo-Saxon word meaning "good telling" or good testimony. Further, testimony is essential in science and cannot be reduced to other sources of justification. Testimony is a essential element of the scientific method, though we usually call it observation. But I think we must count those that were in fact medically and clinically dead (not breathing with no heartbeat, no life signs), yet were subsequently revived by warming, CPR, defibrillator[1], or through the spontaneous return of normal cardiac rhythm[2], as truly having died and been brought back to life, because, indeed, that is what has occurred countless times. Your assertion that there is not any evidence of reincarnation is not only unsupportable, it is clearly false on its face, regardless of whether anyone has ever been reincarnated or not. If it is one's belief that it is the case no one has ever been brought back from the dead, one must ignore a mountain of witness testimony and scientific evidence to the contrary. The very fact that life itself exists in any form is undeniable evidence that, at least once, life was induced from lifelessness, but I suppose that could not be reincarnation, but instead, incarnation (from the Latin incarnare: to make flesh). [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50681489 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50681489 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazarus_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazarus_syndrome

P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago

That's why Stephen King is so highly regarded. He has a short story about a kid's first day at college, he goes up to his room with a sniper rifle and starts shooting people.

fsckboy 4y ago
But Stephen King is not highly regarded, and in fact he's somewhat bitter about it. I don't have a quote at the ready but he wants to be taken seriously and the elites of literature do not take him seriously. He achieves popularity by writing page turners at an 8th grade reading level because there's a large population who can read them None of his works have been considered for anything like a Pulitzer Prize, National Book Award, Man Booker Prize, PEN award or Nobel Prize for Literature. He has gotten some "lifetime achievement" recognitions, but that's more to use his celebrity to get attention for the organizations that gave them than vice versa. the late Harold Bloom (died recently) is a notable literary scholar, here's what he had to say https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEPDLFSUPe0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEPDLFSUPe0 (listening to Harold Bloom on many other serious topics is quite a treat, this for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2HpDhTIIxs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2HpDhTIIxs )
- astura 4y ago
  This is 100% true. Stephen King's writing is extremely popular, but definitely not "highly regarded." His novels are widely considered to be low quality pop fiction by literary critics. This isn't meant dis, selling massive amounts of books makes more money then pleasing literary critics.
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  I think Orson Scott Card summed it up pretty well. > Let me assure you that King's work most definitely is literature, because it was written to be published and is read with admiration. What Snyder really means is that it is not the literature preferred by the academic-literary elite. Your post drips of some odd dislike for Stephen King. I can't speak to that, but just like many of us don't understand paying millions for a white canvas with 3 lines on it, we also don't understand calling someone who is as obviously talented as Stephen King a hack, or spending the time trying to denigrate him (his awards are purely political, but the awards he hasn't gotten somehow aren't?). Either way I'm out. I think I'll go read The Long Walk again.

fsckboy 4y ago

"why read dystopian fiction when you can just pay attention?"

whyenot 4y ago

I've been reading the original 1897 Dracula via Dracula Daily, where each chapter is emailed to you on the day of the year that the events happen in the book. I think the format helps, but it's pretty scary.

GuB-42 4y ago

Not just people, nature is pretty scary too. For example, Kurzgesagt made videos about the Lyssa virus (rabies) and the brain-eating amoeba, two among many.

toastercat 4y ago

"Most <fiction> isn't <emotional> ... There's enough real <character> in the world to <induce some kind of emotion>."

Bakary 4y ago

If you want real horror, I can't recommend this short story enough. https://qntm.org/mmacevedo https://qntm.org/mmacevedo

FumblingBear 4y ago
Wow! Thanks for sharing that. I've read some of qntm's works before (There Is No Antimemetics Division) but that short story was truly terrifying. The descriptions of how to most effectively lie to the image in order to make it more cooperative is truly chilling.

BeFlatXIII 4y ago

Or outdoor survival stories with bad endings. Those are top-notch in the horrifying department.