This is what my copy looks like after finishing:

There was an abundance of information inside that head that I simply desired to remember, or revisit, or perhaps just highlight. I could have accomplished all of that on my nook, and it would have been more convenient. It would have been simpler, with fewer restrictions regarding what I could fit onto the post-it. However, I don't know. This way just felt right to me.

There were numerous references to books that I hadn't read yet. These sections, I attempted to skim in order to gain the idea without getting spoiled. But that wasn't always feasible. I truly despise spoilers, yet I can't hold it against King too much. I was aware of that possibility when I picked this up. One doesn't read an examination of the horror genre without anticipating examples. And I'm just not that widely read to think that I would have read every book he might have mentioned. Not by a long shot.

But the books that I have read, I now have a new and deeper appreciation for. King perceives things in such a distinct way compared to me. Therefore, obtaining his perspective is truly fascinating.

Highly recommend reading this.

PS. Support your local used book stores! :D

My main takeaway from the first time I read this non-fiction work by King was the movie sections where he delved into the horror genre.

Admittedly, the cover of the edition I read showed a drive-through. Also, being in my late teens at that time, I was more familiar with titles like Night of the Living Dead, The Exorcist, and Psycho due to their mainstream popularity.

The radio section was also fascinating, and I happened to have a cassette of Orson Welles' War of the Worlds.

Obviously, a significant portion of the book covered horror novels published during the decades in question. I hadn't read many of them back then, so I had no experience with them at that time - a situation that has since been corrected!

My entry into the world of horror was through Goosebumps, Are You Afraid of the Dark?, and Point Horror before directly diving into King's works. So, this book was a great source of numerous recommendations.

This book is truly nothing more than Stephen King riffing sloppily (as hell) about the "horror genre."

There is no pretense of scholarship here. Instead, it has a folky tone that makes it quite easy to picture what it must have been like in the past when King got a twelve-pack of beer in him, smoked a joint, and did enough lines of coke to go on a never-ending jag about "the deal" with the genre.

To put it bluntly, it's about as tight as "the blob." It's rambling, yet also somewhat amusing. After all, who wouldn't have liked to get stoned with "The King" and talk about horror?

Admittedly, it's fun to hear his take on this stuff. He occasionally makes some really good points and is always opinionated. However, truly, no one but a diehard King fan or perhaps the odd horror fanatic will want to read this.

By no means is it even remotely close to a definitive survey of the genre. This thing is filled with gapingly shocking holes. He doesn't so much as mention Horace Walpole, Ann Radcliff, Charles Robert Maturin, Matthew Lewis, Arthur Machen, Lord Dunsany, M.R. James, Algernon Blackwood, Ambrose Bierce, Oliver Onions, H.G. Wells, J. Sheridan Le Fanu, William Hope Hodgson, and many others - namely, the most important writers in the history of horror.

And let's not forget that the book is now seriously out of date. A lot has happened since the late 70's.

A far superior book, in my opinion, is "Horror 100 Best Books" edited by Stephen Jones and Kim Newman, and its sequel "Horror Another 100 Best Books." It consists of a series of wonderful essays by writers discussing their favorite "horror" books.

Final word - it's fun, not terribly informative but somewhat. It's for King fans only, a guilty pleasure for those who love horror, like getting stoned with King and having him talk at you for about five or six hours - a not unpleasant reading experience.

I'm currently re-reading Stephen King's books in chronological order, and this particular one was next in line. I can precisely recall how old I was when I first read his works because this was the very first book I purchased (or rather, was gifted) brand new from the bookstore. Every July (my birthday) and Christmas, my dad would present me with any new Stephen King books that had been released. So, I was 13 when I received this one. I was truly anticipating this, King's initial foray into non-fiction, as my first reading of it had been extremely enlightening. I desired to get my hands on every book he mentioned and watch every movie he named. However, being in the pre-internet era, that was indeed a very challenging task. Now, thirty years later, as I re-read the book, I find that I have watched a significant number of the mentioned movies and read the major books listed, but not all of them. So, I still have some titles and authors to add to my to-be-read list.

It's an excellent book and highly interesting to read. Parts of the book are biographical,讲述了年轻的史蒂夫小时候与恐怖世界的联系，但大部分内容是他对恐怖故事类型的论述，包括其中的好坏。电影部分很有趣，但我最喜欢的部分当然是最长的关于书籍的部分。史蒂夫有很棒的写作风格，就像和某人在喝几杯啤酒时谈论你们都热爱的话题。唯一令人失望的部分是关于电视的章节。这本书显示出了它的年代感，写于1981年，金是从《莫克与明迪》《哈扎德公爵》和《梦幻岛》等时代来写的。金对电视毫无用处，他觉得所有降低自己水平去从事电视行业的人，包括演员、导演和编剧，都进入了一个无法回头的深渊。他确实设法讲述了一些他认为的精品，比如《迷离境界》和《暗影迷情》。这本书是在相当长的一段时间内写成的，这从他开始写这本书时提到自己的书就可以看出来：《魔女嘉莉》《撒冷镇》《闪灵》（以及相应的电影），再后来提到了《夜班》和《末日逼近》，在书的结尾又提到了《死亡区域》。当然，在这本书上架时，他已经出版了《燃烧的凝视》。

由于他对电视的观点和看法与现在相比已经非常过时，现在恐怖在电视上是一种主流，金自己甚至也参与了一些相关的项目（比如《医院风云》），我真诚地希望能有一本这本书的续集。史蒂夫叔叔，如果你在听的话，我有两个想法：1）继续写另一本书，遵循相同的主题，从80年代到2010年代的恐怖电影、电视和书籍。或者2）写一本关于恐怖和电视的新书，金可以在这本书中详细阐述他在这本书中包含的非常简短的章节，然后继续谈论80年代情景喜剧衰退后恐怖在电视上的发展，直到现在。为什么《吸血鬼猎人巴菲》在90年代大受欢迎？为什么《行尸走肉》今天如此热门？这本书对于该类型的历史来说是一本很棒的书，但确实值得有一个现代的续集，因为当他的观点扎根于80年代时，还有很多可以说的。

Fun but far from exhaustive survey of the horror genre circa 1981, with a specific focus on Things Stephen King Likes.

I have a great admiration for King, and if you do too, this is worth a read. However, the language often gives the impression of a young person who has taken on more than they can handle, fluctuating between academic theory and a working-class distrust of it.

There are also a few factual errors, which was surprising. I didn't keep a running count, but every now and then he would throw out some verifiably incorrect information that made me frown. Additionally, there are some oddly and needlessly mean remarks about fellow genre writers that seem unjustified. For example, hoping William Peter Blatty never published again while elevating James Herbert is a rather extreme position to take, but that's where he stands.

Of course, this is fine. At the time of writing (2020), we are in the midst of the Great Stephen King Renaissance, and Danse Macabre serves best as a historical artifact from The First Age. It is interesting to see how horror and other genre works fit into the broader cultural landscape then compared to now, just as it is interesting to compare King's (and Harlan Ellison's) observations on TV from our current position in the age of streaming media and prestige television. Some of King's off-the-cuff jokes and cultural observations have not aged well, but that is to be expected. He is also a bit too fixated on his Apollonian/Dionysian binary. However, you will almost certainly come away from this with a decent list of books and movies to seek out, and perhaps that was the whole point of the exercise all along.

The master of horror elaborates on horror - what's not to love?

Oh, if you read 'non-fiction' and thought it was a scientific dissertation, well, it's not. It's the master of horror sharing his profound insights and experiences about the world of horror.

He delves into the various elements that make horror so captivating and thrilling. From the psychological aspects that play on our deepest fears and anxieties to the creative use of atmosphere, setting, and character development, the master of horror shows us just how artfully horror can be crafted.

And the movie and books lists in the end are worth it in themselves. They serve as a valuable resource for horror enthusiasts, providing a curated selection of some of the most outstanding works in the genre. Whether you're a die-hard horror fan or just curious about this fascinating world, these lists are sure to offer something that will pique your interest and send shivers down your spine.

We are born into this world from the womb and journey towards the tomb, moving from one state of darkness to another. We remember very little of the beginning and know nothing of the end.

This non-fiction book delves into the world of horror fiction across various mediums such as movies, film, television, and radio. It explores what it is about this genre that has such a captivating hold on so many horror enthusiasts.

The "Master of Horror" himself is discussing the genre of horror? Count me in! Admittedly, this book was better than I had expected. I had anticipated a stuffy essay that might be a chore to read at times. Fortunately, that was not the case at all. I am a huge fan of when King directly addresses his "Constant Reader," whether it's in his introductions, afterwords, or even in "On Writing." He has an amazing ability to draw you in and make it feel as if it's just the two of you, relaxing, sharing a coffee while he reveals all his thoughts and opinions. It's like just me and King sharing a caramel square.

However, the major drawback of "Danse Macabre" is that it is outdated. It was released in 1981, and there have been a plethora of horror movies and books since then! In the edition I read, there were two updated forewords where King talked about some of the more recent horror movies. He has a HUGE love for "The Blair Witch," which I really enjoyed reading about. I would absolutely love it if he decided to release an updated version that covers all the important horror books and movies from the last 30 years or so. It's clear that he still has a passionate love for both, as is evident on his Twitter.

Be forewarned - King is very spoilerific in this book. He is dropping spoilers left and right. But don't worry, if you have a solid background knowledge in horror, you should be okay. However, there were some instances where I had to skip entire chunks because he was discussing books that are still on my to-be-read list, like "Ghost Story" by Peter Straub, "Frankenstein" by Mary Shelley, and "Something Wicked This Way Comes" by Ray Bradbury, among others. But I have made a note of the books he covered that I haven't read yet so that I can come back to the relevant sections in "Danse Macabre" when I do get around to reading them! I loved his in-depth analysis of books like "The Haunting of Hill House" and why it worked. I also loved how he included quotes and excerpts from many of these authors discussing their relevant works and the horror genre itself.

For me, one of the most boring parts of the book was when he talked about radio and television. Over the years, I have caught up on and intend to catch up on a lot of horror books and movies from the past. However, I have pretty much zero knowledge regarding horror on the radio or television from back in the day. But these were only covered in about two chapters or so, so it's not too boring for long.

Scattered throughout the book are a lot of King's own experiences with horror and little anecdotes about his life, which I really enjoyed. He talks about how Lovecraft was the one who first got him into serious fantasy-horror fiction (I approve!), and he has a fun little story about a young Joe Hill that had me laughing out loud. He also made a lot of "Lord of the Rings" references, which I particularly liked...

So, overall, this was a pretty good read. But I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to someone unless they were really a fan of the horror genre. Fingers crossed that King provides an updated version at some point!! I give this one 3 and a half out of 5 stars!

Reread 2024 #kingfromthebeginning 2.5 stars

In "Danse Macabre," Stephen King delves into the world of horror fiction across various mediums, namely film, radio, television, and print, with a particular focus on the period from 1950 to 1980.

The book commences with a couple of introductory chapters that lay the foundation for understanding the basics of horror, followed by an autobiographical chapter. I was truly captivated by the chapter on radio, and found the ones on television and books equally interesting. However, I felt that the chapters dedicated to film were a bit of a drag. They seemed a touch too verbose for my liking.

King introduces some intriguing concepts in the introductory chapters. Instead of attempting a rigid definition of horror, he elucidates how the genre operates on three distinct levels. The finest of these emotions is terror, where the threat remains unseen. Next comes horror, where the threat becomes visible. Finally, there is revulsion, which aims to disgust.

The reasons King provides for the appeal of horror are also quite thought-provoking. He posits that we create horrors to better cope with the real ones in our lives. Through our boundless inventiveness, we take the very elements that are divisive and destructive and attempt to transform them into tools for our own understanding.

In his autobiographical chapter, King offers some valuable insights into the nature of talent. He argues that while talent is indeed important, it is not sufficient on its own. Becoming a successful writer, or any other creative professional for that matter, requires a great deal of hard work and study. It is a continuous process of refinement and honing.

King also provides detailed plot summaries and incisive analysis of the works he discusses. However, due to the numerous spoilers, I chose to skim through the parts related to movies and books that I plan to explore in the future. Overall, I found "Danse Macabre" to be a mostly fascinating overview of the horror genre, although some may find its level of detail overwhelming.

The book concludes with two appendices. Appendix 1 lists approximately one hundred films, while Appendix 2 lists around one hundred books. In the chapter on fiction, King focuses on ten particular works, including "Ghost Story" by Peter Straub, "The House Next Door" by Anne Rivers Siddons, and "The Haunting of Hill House" by Shirley Jackson, among others.

Probably would have loved this had I read it when I was 16.

However, even when it was written, most of this was pretty much received wisdom.

As it is, his relentless use of straw men and folksiness, like ending sentences by addressing the reader as "gang", "folks", etc, reads like someone mortally terrified of being seen as academic, which some of this definitely is.

Just go with it, man.

Kicking at something Pauline Kael said about De Palma when she is more than anyone responsible for people taking De Palma seriously and King is guilty of saying much more pretentious things in this book... it is pretty sad.

Finally, regarding the 2010 foreword of the edition I read, where King lists a bunch of horror films of recent vintage he considers worthy.

I know he has his personal reasons, but I'm sorry... any 10 random frames from Kubrick's film of The Shining have more genuine terror and frisson than the entirety of 1408.

It seems that King's taste in horror films may not always align with what some might consider the true essence of terror.

While his own works have had a significant impact on the horror genre, his assessment of other films can be a subject of debate.

Perhaps it is a matter of personal preference, but the comparison between The Shining and 1408 highlights the different levels of intensity and artistry that can be found in horror cinema.

Overall, this review offers a critical look at King's writing style and his views on horror films.

Okay. It is truly a challenging task to conduct a genuine review of a book that pertains to the state of horror as a genre, especially when that book was initially penned back in 1981. Having said that, my actual concerns regarding the book do not predominantly stem from its outdated nature. My major gripe is that the book seemingly fails to effectively make a point and provide substantial support for it. It is more akin to getting into an inebriated state with one of your favored writers and then simply sitting there and listening to him ramble on.

As I delved into this book, several thoughts crossed my mind. Firstly, it is actually rather cool to hear Stephen King mention books he has already written as ideas that haven't been published yet. For instance, on page 133, he states, “…in the process of researching a forthcoming novel about a father who tries to bring his son back from the dead...” referring to Pet Semetary. Secondly, I am intrigued to know what this writer would have to say about the current state of horror television. Since the original publication of this book, there have been numerous ventures into the realm of horror on the small screen. I wonder if Stephen King would hold the same opinion about shows like Supernatural as he does about The Twilight Zone. Thirdly, I am left wondering why Stephen King has such a strong aversion to John Saul. It has been quite some time since I last read Saul, probably almost twenty years, but I don't recall him being significantly better or worse than anything else that was being published during that era. Fourthly, I would dearly love to hear Mr. King's musings on Clive Barker and Dan Simmons. These two novelists, who are among my favorite writers of the past twenty years, are exceptional purveyors of horror. I would be thrilled to see Stephen King expound on these two writers in the same manner that he does for Harlan Ellison or Ray Bradbury in Danse Macabre. Additionally, this book has also made me realize that I really need to read some Harlan Ellison, The House Next Door by Anne Rivers Siddon, and pretty much everything that Ray Bradbury has ever written. In this case, it would be a rereading for me, but I have a deep affection for Bradbury and had somewhat forgotten about that until King's extensive ruminations jogged my memory. Overall, this was an enjoyable read. King does manage to make some valid points and offers some excellent recommendations. His theory on Dionysian versus Apollonian themes is actually quite fascinating. However, ultimately, it doesn't amount to a great deal. It feels like a discussion that drags on for far too long.

«¿Por qué inventar cosas terribles cuando ya hay tanto horror auténtico en el mundo? La respuesta parece ser que inventamos dolores ficticios para ayudarnos a soportar los reales.»

This book is the atypical one that I usually read, an essay where King talks to us about the history of terror between 1950 and 1980, series, movies and books that promoted what we now know as terror.

It has very interesting parts but others were too long and very detailed that only caused yawning... I feel that King delved too much into some books/movies to the level of spoilers, I had to skip several parts because there are books that I want to read.

Something very cool that the book has is a list of movies and books that King recommends, those \\"unmissable\\" of the era. As a very long-term project, we will be watching those movies and I'm excited because there are many in black and white, obviously it's what I never usually see.

It is an interesting book, the level of research that King did is noticeable, it can be heavy in parts but I really liked it.

Such is my familiarity with King’s style and cadence at this point that whatever I read by the man feels like curling up next to good old, well-lubricated and coked up to the skies uncle Steve as he tells me a bed-time story. It’s truly a unique experience. King’s writing has this magical quality that draws you in and makes you feel completely at ease. His words flow smoothly, like a gentle river, carrying you along on a journey of imagination. Whether it’s a thrilling horror story or a heartwarming tale, King knows how to engage his readers and keep them hooked from beginning to end. What’s not to love about his writing? It’s like a warm embrace on a cold night, or a delicious meal after a long day. It satisfies that craving for good literature and leaves you wanting more. I can’t get enough of King’s work, and I’m sure I’m not alone in this.