King says the following about defining horror, terror and the gross-out:
The closest I want to come to definition or rationalization is to suggest that the genre exists on three more or less
separate levels, each one a little less fine than the one before it. The finest emotion is terror, that emotion which is
called up in the tale of The Hook and also in that hoary old classic, The Monkey s Paw. We actually see nothing
outright nasty in either story; in one we have the hook and in the other there is the paw, which, dried and mummified,
can surely be no worse than those plastic dogturds on sale at any novelty shop. It s what the mind sees that makes
these stories quintessential tales of terror. It is the unpleasant speculation called to mind when the knocking on the
door begins in the latter story and the grief-stricken old woman rushes to answer it. Nothing is there but what, the mind
wonders, might have been there if her husband had been a little slower on the draw with that third wish? . . .
. . . Those horror comics of the fifties still sum up for me the epitome of horror, that emotion of fear that underlies
terror, an emotion which is slightly less fine, because it is not entirely of the mind. Horror invites a physical reaction by
showing us something which is physically wrong. . . .
. . . But there is a third level that of revulsion. This seems to be where the chest-burster from Alien fits. . . .
. . . I recognize terror as the finest emotion, . . . and so I will try to terrorize the reader. But if I find I cannot terrify
him/her, I will try to horrify; and if I find I cannot horrify, I ll go for the gross-out. I m not proud. (King 21-25)
King also comments on the nature of evil:
All tales of horror can be divided into two groups: those in which the horror results from an act of free and conscious
will a conscious decision to do evil and those in which the horror is predestinate, coming from outside like a stroke
of lightning. The most classic horror tale of this latter type is the Old Testament story of Job, who becomes the human
Astro-Turf in a kind of spiritual Superbowl between God and Satan.
The stories of horror which are psychological those which explore the terrain of the human heart
revolve we have no right laying off on God the Father. . . .
almost always
Novels and stories of horror which deal with outside evil are often harder to take seriously; they are apt to be no
more than boys adventure yarns in disguise, and in the end the nasty invaders from outer space are repelled; or at the
last possible instant the Handsome Young Scientist comes up with the gimmick solution . . . as when in Beginning of the
End, Peter Graves creates a sonic gun which draws all the giant grasshoppers into Lake Michigan.
And yet it is the concept of outside evil that is larger, more awesome. Lovecraft grasped this, and it is what makes his
stories of stupendous, Cyclopean evil so effective when they are good. . . . The best of them make us feel the size of
the universe we hang suspended in, and suggest shadowy forces that could destroy us all if they so much as grunted
in their sleep. . . .
Bram Stoker s Dracula seems a remarkable achievement to me because it humanizes the outside evil concept; we
grasp it in a familiar way Lovecraft never allowed, and we can feel its texture. (King 62-63)
Works Cited in this handout
Cardin, Matt. Mindful of Horror. 2003. 24 Jan. 2004.
<http://www.fidnet.com/~mgcardin/Mindful%20of%20Horror.pdf>
King, Stephen. Danse Macabre. New York: Berkley, 1981.