Scan barcode
A review by _groovyginger_
The Woman in Black: A Ghost Story by Susan Hill
3.0
The Woman in Black is a chilling ghost story set in a small, rural English town on the coast. The time period isn’t specifically mentioned, but I gather it’s the early 1900s. I wish we could have had a solid date; it makes me feel more centered when I'm reading hist fic.
Our protagonist Arthur Kipps works for a lawyer in London and is sent on a trip to attend to the affairs of the recently deceased Alice Drablow in rural Crythin Gifford. It should be a simple business trip: attend the funeral and settle Mrs. Drablow’s affairs. When Arthur notices a ghostly woman in black, he asks the townspeople about her. They all avoid his questions; some are visibly afraid. Arthur is sent to Mrs. Drablow’s estate on the marshes, Eel Marsh House, and it’s there he experiences a series of hauntings. Can he survive and get to the bottom of the Woman in Black’s mystery?
So, this book starts off strong. It sets a spooky, Gothic tone, so I was surprised to discover it takes place much later in history than I thought. I think this book would be better suited if it took place in Victorian England. It just seems more Gothic, so I was slightly jarred at the mention of motor cars and telephones.
This is a short, fast paced read, which I liked. However, for as short as it is, I was surprised how little action there is. Arthur doesn’t spend too much of this novel actually in the haunted house. There’s a lot of exposition and mundane stuff. Simply put, this book could have been scarier. Like I said, it starts off spooky and doesn’t really maintain that theme.
Also, I’m just not sure I liked how it was written. It’s presented as Arthur writing about his experiences years after they happened, and there’s too many flourishes. Too many commas. In journalism school I was taught that commas should be used sparingly because they represent a pause. To that degree, there’s like five commas, or pauses, in each sentence. It really breaks up the narrative for me. The wording was superfluous and almost came off as pretentious at times. I just wanted Arthur to tell the story, and not pretend he was writing a Jane Austen novel. This is probably just a reflection of me and my tastes, however.
I don't want to be too hard on this book; I wanted to enjoy it more than I did. It was a solid read and semi-fit what I was looking for this spooky season.
Our protagonist Arthur Kipps works for a lawyer in London and is sent on a trip to attend to the affairs of the recently deceased Alice Drablow in rural Crythin Gifford. It should be a simple business trip: attend the funeral and settle Mrs. Drablow’s affairs. When Arthur notices a ghostly woman in black, he asks the townspeople about her. They all avoid his questions; some are visibly afraid. Arthur is sent to Mrs. Drablow’s estate on the marshes, Eel Marsh House, and it’s there he experiences a series of hauntings. Can he survive and get to the bottom of the Woman in Black’s mystery?
So, this book starts off strong. It sets a spooky, Gothic tone, so I was surprised to discover it takes place much later in history than I thought. I think this book would be better suited if it took place in Victorian England. It just seems more Gothic, so I was slightly jarred at the mention of motor cars and telephones.
This is a short, fast paced read, which I liked. However, for as short as it is, I was surprised how little action there is. Arthur doesn’t spend too much of this novel actually in the haunted house. There’s a lot of exposition and mundane stuff. Simply put, this book could have been scarier. Like I said, it starts off spooky and doesn’t really maintain that theme.
Also, I’m just not sure I liked how it was written. It’s presented as Arthur writing about his experiences years after they happened, and there’s too many flourishes. Too many commas. In journalism school I was taught that commas should be used sparingly because they represent a pause. To that degree, there’s like five commas, or pauses, in each sentence. It really breaks up the narrative for me. The wording was superfluous and almost came off as pretentious at times. I just wanted Arthur to tell the story, and not pretend he was writing a Jane Austen novel. This is probably just a reflection of me and my tastes, however.
I don't want to be too hard on this book; I wanted to enjoy it more than I did. It was a solid read and semi-fit what I was looking for this spooky season.