The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson was first published in 1959 as a novel. This novel was a staple for its time, discussing concepts of grief, trauma, and even queerness– all things that already had a limited amount of publicly accepted works in the 50’s– through the lens of horror. In the novel, there is a very distinct ambiguity in whether the supernatural aspects are real or just a product of an unstable mental state. However, throughout the decades, the story re-tellers of this piece have manipulated this ambiguity to fit the period in which the story is being told. This is reflected in the public reviews of these adaptations.
In a 1959 review of this novel, Edmund Fuller praises the mind of Shirley Jackson, detailing the intricate ways that Jackson writes with ambiguity. At one point, Fuller questions whether the main character, Eleanor is even at Hill House or not. He states, “If this perplexes you, it is by intent. The story must not be told here” (Fuller 4). With the context of the rest of the review, it is clear the perception that Fuller frames about this novel aims to tell readers that it is an ongoing ghost story. It is not limited to what is written in the novel. This review foreshadows the future adaptations of The Haunting of Hill House. This story’s themes are ever-changing because society’s perception of these themes is ever-changing.
This is proven in 1963, when The Haunting of Hill House was adapted into a film called The Haunting directed by Robert Wise. This film followed the same storyline as the novel, undergoing minor changes in the plot. However, these changes are significant because they were made to accommodate a visual audience and also a more experimental audience. These changes were applied to different themes of the original book. This adaptation chose to expand its theme of queerness rather than expanding the themes of grief and trauma.
This adaptation was critiqued by the New York Times’ Bosley Crowther as focusing more on scaring an audience than it did on the plot and original themes of grief and trauma (Crowther 4). This review was limited by the period it was released in. In the 60’s, there was much less public knowledge and even open-mindedness about symptoms of grief and trauma, which takes away from the symbolism that was implanted into the horror scenes.
What is different about the 2018 adaptation is that the storyline completely changed. The series followed a family – with the same names and themes as the original characters, but a different story nonetheless. Flanagan’s choice of using a family to tell the story notes the period’s current issues that reflect familial grief and trauma. The New York Times review of this series by Jason Zinoman praises it’s ability to show the house as alive with the same ambiguity as before, yet a clearer focus on the family’s trauma individually and collectively, while still allowing ambiguity for the supernatural (Zinoman). This review reflects how the stigma around grief and trauma has shifted extensively since the 1959 release of the original story. The ambiguity of supernatural vs psyche is reflective of this shift, allowing the public perception to navigate this ambiguity better with more knowledge on grief and trauma.
I think that a big part of it is that the ambiguity of whether the horror is real or just a reflection of the character’s psyche is a universal question that is present in real life. In a way, it also kind of reflects spirituality and the concept of belief systems of things you cannot physically see or feel, yet you can feel the presence with you. The question of whether the lingering presence is a ghost or a religious being or the darkness of your depression looming over, preparing for an episode, like Nellie Crain (2018).
Zinoman, Jason. “‘The Haunting of Hill House,’ on Netflix, Is a Family Drama With Scares.” The New York Times, 11 Oct. 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/11/arts/television/netflix-the-haunting-of-hill-house-review.html
Crowther, Bosley. “The Screen: An Old-Fashioned Chiller: Julie Harris and Claire Bloom in ‘Haunting’.” The New York Times, 19 Sept. 1963. https://www.nytimes.com/1959/10/18/archives/terror-lived-there-too-the-haunting-of-hill-house-by-shirley.html
Fuller, Edmund. “Terror Lived There, Too.” The New York Times, 18 Oct. 1959, p. 153. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1959/10/18/91425298.html?pageNumber=153
I never knew that about The Haunting of Hill House. I’ve never actually read it but I knew of all of the themes. Do you think the changes in the new adaptation help to keep the book in the mainstream or do you think it has obscured the story so much that it has become an entirely different entity? Also, your description of how there is the ambiguity with the haunting aspects really remind me of Anne Radcliff and other gothic novels of that nature where for the most of the novel, the readers are lead to believe that the hauntings are real until the end when a logical explanation is provided. Do you think it would have been better if the readers knew whether or not the events in the novel were actually occurring?
One thing I love about Hill House that you captured here is how many interpretations can be drawn from it, and how they can all be true at once precisely because of Eleanor’s complicated relationship with reality. I think that’s why it can also be spun into so many adaptations, because it asks the same question that Yellowjackets does around the same question of what it means to be haunted. Ultimately, the proceeding and resulting trauma means it doesn’t really matter- the trauma haunts all the same, even if not from an actual supernatural ghost.
It’s so interesting to see how representations of grief and trauma are highly dependent upon the culture in which they are produced. After I watched the most recent Hill House adaptation, I was surprised by how different it seemed from the original novel, though its core themes remained the same. I agree with you that the ambiguity of the story is what makes its horror elements so effectively haunting, and it’s interesting to see how that is used in different ways in the book’s adaptations.