Why would anyone want to live in a haunted house? In this authorized sequel to Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House, Elizabeth Hand has an up-to-date answer: real estate! The COVID era migration to remote work in the countryside has driven housing costs up, so even Hill House looks worth renting.

This is a bad idea for playwright Holly Sherwin, who rents Hill House for two weeks in late Fall to workshop her play, about a witch with a demon dog. Fading diva Amanda will be the witch, Holly's girlfriend Nisa will be a one-person chorus singing rewritten murder ballads, and their friend Stevie will do sound design and play the demon. Omens pile up fast, often related to dark episodes in Holly's and the others' pasts. But the rental money has been spent! And the house seems perfect in many ways...

It's not necessary to read The Haunting of Hill House to appreciate this book. There are a few allusions to earlier occupants of the house in the 1950s and 1980s, and an old tree stump where the fatal tree stood in Jackson's book. Hand is good at this, and the ending delivers all of the uncanny I could ask for. ( )

I mean….meh.
There never should be sequels to such iconic books, in my opinion. Specially if it is not the original author writing them.
Anyway, a group of not so famous theatre folk, gather at Hill House to practise a play that the screenwriter has basically plagiarised. Being Hill House, it gets really weird and spooky. Whatever.
None of the characters are likeable at all. Actually, they are quite awful people, even when they were not in Hill House.
Hill House, instead of inspiring dread and fear, and the atmosphere being ominous, just gives the feeling of it being dirty and badly decorated.
A tremendous fail, in my view.
I would skip it, so as not to ruin your palate after The Haunting of Hill House. ( )

Bear with me, folks, this is going to be a tough one to write.

I very likely had the same reaction as virtually anyone else who saw there was an "authorized" follow-up (let's not call this a sequel—I'll get into that later) to possibly one of the top two haunted house novels of all time—the other being King's THE SHINING, which saw its own disappointing sequel come out a few years back. My reaction was both incredible excitement, for a chance to read something that goes back to my favourite haunted house, but also a crossed-arm, narrow-eyed admonishment that it better not get screwed up.

I also went back and did a re-read of Jackson's original before this, and I'm glad I did. So, let's get into it, shall we?

To start, I should say, I actually considered Elizabeth Hand a brilliant selection, having read—and truly loved—WYLDING HALL, about a band going to a haunted house to try and write and record their next album.

Good fit, right?

I thought so. I'd hoped so.

Unfortunately, Hand sort of gave us a similar scenario, only this time it was a playwright and assorted stage personnel finessing a play about a witch. Similar feel to the band thing, just with a stage play instead of an album.

And, this is where the first problems cropped up. In Jackson's HAUNTING OF HILL HOUSE, she presented us with wholly unlikable characters. Mr and Mrs Dudley, the caretakers. Mrs. Montague. And, if we're honest, none of the main four characters, Theodora, Eleanor, Luke, and Dr. Montague, are especially likable either. Yet Jackson just gives us very quick hints of their background, enough to intrigue, but never enough to bore. And the thorougly unlikable Dudleys and Mrs Montague are also made fun of to the readers' delight.

And, while it literally takes about half the original novel to dig into the horror, Jackson never bores, while filling the reader in with what they need to know prior to the not sane Hill House starts its manipulations.

In THE HAUNTING ON THE HILL, Hand also chooses to make everyone unlikable, yet doesn't seem to offer up any true redeeming features. Holly is desperate for success. Nisa is overbearingly all about her songs. Amanda wants one last shot at a meaty role. And so on.

Unfortunately, they're all so deadly serious that there's no fun left in them. It's all been wrung out, leaving only desperation in its wake.

So, the characters tend to fail in this so-called sequel, but what about the story?

In the original, the four that come because one is also desperate to write a paper on a definitive house haunting, and the other three, due to their pasts or their affliations with the house, are invited.

In this new one, the house is stumbled upon, and first it's Holly that wants the place, but it's Nisa that is captured by the place and pushes the deal.

But the main thrust of the second story is everyone getting behind the "Witching Night" stage play, whether it's the writing, the songs, the sound design, or the acting. Unfortunately, much like the characters, the story within the story is only mildly compelling and doesn't feel strong enough to draw the people there, nor keep them there when things inevitably go south. Especially when the only message they hear throughout the entire novel is, "leave the house."

And, it should be mentioned, however that if I ever experience dialogue again where one character explains they aren't pagan, but more "neo-pagan adjacent" and they aren't trying to be wry or funny in any way?

Yeah, if that happens, I'll kill the book with fire and be done with it. That sentence moved up to the number one slot of most hated sentences in a novel I've read, and that's something, considering up to now, it was Lee Child with his shockingly bad, "It was as distinctive as the most distinctive thing you could think of."

But surely Jackson's greatest creation, Hill House—such a looming and menacing presence in the first one is equally terrifying here, right?

Well, only sort of. Hand relies on weirdly external sources, such as hares (and, oh my god, Hand, just let them pick one term and run with it...every time a character refers to a rabbit, they immediately correct themselves), and the woman who lives down the road, and a snow storm...

But she does touch on certain aspects of the original, the cold spot, previous dialogue is pulled in, the room at the top of the stairs that almost claimed Eleanor.

But here's the thing that kind of bugged me about this whole affair: Hand pay passing attention to the original with some details, which I fully appreciated. But then she creates a full ongoing history of events that occurred after the events of the first novel, not as though this book was the sequel, but as though this was about the fifth in the series, seemingly paying attention more to events from the 80s than what happened in the late 50s.

So, there's a familiar underlying odour, but overall the entire thing smells wrong.

The closest I can come to a comparison is the experience I had doing a re-read of TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD by Harper Lee, then reading GO SET A WATCHMAN, the novel that should never have seen the light of day.

Because while it made a lot of mention of things we were familiar with in the well-loved and much-read original, it also seemed to not have as much respect as it should, and did not quite fit in with the original as it should.

This is very much the same feeling. Hand's a great author, and she didn't embarrass herself here, but it feels more like the estate of Jackson decided it was time to do something with this property they have, and Hand happened to have this haunted house story she'd been working on and shoehorned in some Hill House mentions to make it work. I've read a few reviews now that all seem to love the book and deem it a worthy successor, but for me, I guess I was hoping for something that, while not a carbon copy of the original, would at least make the house the star of the show again with its not sane presence, rather than the author bringing in completely new and, quite frankly, questionable choices as to how the house now operates. For all those glowing reviews, I know that I'll revisit Hill House at least a few more times. But it will be the Jackson Hill House I visit. I fully expect this sequel to be forgotten in a couple of years, much like GO SET A WATCHMAN has already slipped out of everyone's mind, except when they come across it in the cheap book sales.

This IS a decent haunted house novel, as far as it goes, but it's not a good haunted Hill House novel by any means. ( )

Sequel (or inspiration) of The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson.

This was at its best when Hand was not attempting to imitate Jackson's but rather doing her own thing and echoing Jackson instead. Some falters, especially toward the beginning, but overall a "haunting" read (heh heh). ( )

After stalled success as a playwright, Holly Sherwin has received a grant to develop her play, Witching Night. With the help of her girlfriend, Nisa, who is contributing haunting, original vocals, her friend, Stevie, playing the Devil dog Tomasin and lending sound design as well as renowned actress Amanda Greer as her leading lady, Holly believes she had a hit. When Holly stumbles across a gothic estate called Hill House in the remote Hillsdale, Holly believes it will be the perfect place to rehearse without interruption. With the rental secure, Holly, Nisa, Stevie and Amanda excitedly begin rehearsals; however, no one seems to be getting along and everyone is experiencing strange and different things at Hill House.
A Haunting on the Hill is a gothic horror that returns to the world of Shirley Jackson's Hill House. A Haunting on the Hill offers a slower and gradual buildup of horror elements that creates a deep sense of foreboding as soon as Hill House is within view. The characters and the play help create the tension that Hill House feeds off of. There are many parallels between the characters in Witching Night and the characters staying at Hill House, women who have been burdened with the blame of misfortune and are paying the price publicly. Hill House doesn't create a haunting in a typical way with ghosts and scary sounds or strange movements, but seems to play up the character's flaws and subconscious worries. Holly's intense need for success creates a sense of necessity for Hill House and it's ambiance, Nisa's covetous nature creates a need for her to explore every nook and cranny of Hill House, Stevie's addiction issues cause him to become obsessed with parts of the house and Amanda's need for a positive comeback makes her ignore all of the warning signs of danger. The horror aspects ramped up in the end for a satisfying ending.

This book was received for free in return for an honest review. ( )