Horror List Book Review: The Cipher

Technically, this should have been done last Friday, but I chose to take the full week off, so from here on out, the every other week review post will be every two weeks from this post.

I'm reading through three lists of best horror with two friends, posting reviews as we go. (For more information, including a list of the books, see this post.) So far, I've reviewed Poppy Z. Brite's Drawing Blood, Robert McCammon's The Wolf's Hour, Laird Barron's The Imago Sequence, Neil Gaiman's Coraline, and Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale. This week, I'm reviewing Kathe Koja's The Cipher.

I'm a little mixed in my opinion of this book, which is funny, because there's a foreword that says people either love it or hate it. I don't feel passionately enough about it to love or hate it. 

In The Cipher, a couple (using that term loosely) discovers a black hole in a storage room. They name it the Funhole, and begin to experiment with it by dropping things in (a jar of bugs, a rat). When Nick, the POV character, stumbles, his hand goes into the Funhole and something begins to happen to him. A creeping malady that develops bit by bit. Not only a widening miniature Funhole in his own flesh, but a mental change.

First, the pros. I found the story intriguing enough to want to know what this thing was and what would happen to Nick in the end. It became a tale where the main character is trapped in a situation he has created. The narrative style was such that one felt his increasing desperation as the issue unfolded. As he is trapped, so are we. His voice was very stream of consciousness during desperate or confusing times, conversational in the calmer times. It felt like I was sitting across from him in some smoky diner, leaning in to hear what he had to say. I think the writing was good, solid, in that way.

But as I sit here trying to figure out the pros and cons, I find that I have more cons. I didn't find the characters likable, even Nick, really. He was too weak for me to identify with him or really care. If you aren't going to solve a problem, or work to do so, what do I care what happens to you? My interest in how it would turn out for him, as I mentioned above, was not about being invested in him so much as a scientific detachment that made me want to observe what was next. However, Nick is the most likable character other than two secondary characters, Vanese and Randy. Whenever Vanese was there, I felt an odd sort of relief that there was someone with an iota of common sense hanging around. And Randy meant well.

A big issue I had was that the story felt drawn out beyond where it should have ended. It felt like a short story that got stretched out too long, with unnecessary bullying characters thrown in to draw it out. At about 23% (Kindle ebook), I looked at that percentage and wondered what in the world could possibly go on to fill the last 77% of the book. It could have been shrunk down, still covered the important parts, and been an excellent short story.

The other primary character is Nakota. I couldn't stand her. She was strung out, vindictive, an awful person. She, more than anyone else, perpetuated the issues in this book. She was instrumental in trapping Nicholas in the situation. She tormented him then brought in more people to torment him. I was rooting for him to throw her in the Funhole. Please just kill her and be done with this.

As I write it out, I realize it sounds like I didn't like it. But I don't regret having read it. It was a worthwhile story to read, just flawed. The story was basically a slow, queasy, confusing spiral into insanity, and that part was well done. It's not technically insanity, as there is an outside force more than internal, but that's what it feels like. I wanted it to stop. It was like being in a junkie's mind. There was an awful self-destructive force occurring that simply couldn't be escaped. A compelling obsession that couldn't be erased. Certainly, that will stick with me.

And, for the record, the book won a Bram Stoker Award. There's a reason it's on the list, and I do feel it was horror, mostly psychological. At least, it was the psychological aspects that drew me in and interested me. I didn't find the Funhole all that interesting, though it was the cause of everything, the beginning and the end of it all.

What it comes down to is this book was gritty, it was compelling, it sucked me in, but it was flawed in terms of there being characters I could care about and contrived plot points meant to draw the story out.

A warning: the ebook had a ton of typos in it. There were times I questioned whether certain flaws were on purpose, an attempt at something poetic or a halting thought process, or whether they were typos. I still couldn't tell you. The physical book is out of print, but would be an interesting find at a secondhand store. 

I think I'll be reading and reviewing Those Who Hunt the Night by Barbara Hambly next.

Have you read Kathe Koja? The Cipher? What did you think? What book of hers do you like best? What type of horror do you enjoy most?

May you find your Muse.

Where's the Horror?

Anyone remember "Where's the beef?" It was a Wendy's ad campaign. Well, the question recently has been "Where's the Horror?" It isn't dead in the movies, but is it dead in books?

Answers to that question vary widely. I've had people tell me Horror is a dying genre, while other people say it is thriving. Still others say that it just melded with Fantasy. What's the truth? I've been inclined to think it is still around, but that quite a bit has blurred into Urban Fantasy and similar genres. Looking at the Horror Writers Association (HWA) website, I found a list of new releases by HWA members that clearly indicates Horror is still alive and well. Dean R. Koontz and Stephen King are still in the fray. Koontz finally got more of his "Frankenstein" series out (or I just heard about it--could be either way). Unfortunately, I had decided it wasn't going to happen, so I got rid of the first one. I guess I'll have to start fresh!

Sure, a lot of the HWA releases appear to be anthologies, which means the Horror short story crowd is still going strong. There were also several stand alone novels on the list, though, which I found reassuring. Before I actively started looking into it, I was starting to fear that my insistence that Horror will always be around was unfounded, and that I might be wrong. But I'm feeling a bit better, so I'm willing to stick to my guns.

Why would I say there will always be a need for Horror? Let's look at why people might like a good scare in the first place:

1. Escapism. I once read that more people flock to Horror films during war or other times of high stress. Whether this is true or not, I can't tell you for sure. It makes sense in a way, because it provides a means to escape real life horrors that have no guaranteed happy ending. Most scary films have some type of happy ending, usually including the bad guy getting theirs in the end, and all ending well (though not for all the poor suckers who died before the main character killed the Boogie Man). We can't guarantee the happy ending anywhere else in life, but we can view a Horror film, especially one with unrealistic bad guys, and know it will probably be okay. We also get to see the everyman beating whatever force there is in the film/book, meaning we could possibly do the same thing and overcome outrageous odds. What better way to escape the real life fears one possesses? Plus, a giant man-eating horny toad isn't something we actually have to worry about, so why not dive into this Horror story and forget about our daily stresses?

2. Adrenaline/thrill seeking. Ever noticed that the largest part of the audience in a Horror film or browser in the Horror section of the bookstore tends to be on the younger side? When I worked at various theaters, we had far more teens and twenty-somethings clamoring to get in than those older than that, and the over fifty audience was fairly limited. Why? Adrenaline junkies tend to be younger, too, and who doesn't get a rush of adrenaline from the fight or flight response experienced in a moment of terror? It's far safer to experience that terror via screen or page than it is to jump off a cliff or out of an airplane.

3. Endorphins. I recently read that people crave spicy foods because the tongue reads the sensation as pain and releases those lovely feel good endorphins. If you get a shot of endorphins each time, you crave that experience over and over. I have to wonder if there isn't an element of this in pursuing a scare.

4. Catharsis. You can hate the bad guy as much as you want and root for torture and murder. In fact, it's encouraged. Where else in life can you get to experience that release of pent-up negative emotions without paying some sort of price (like jail time)?

5. Revenge/closure. This works in several ways in the Horror world. It's satisfying when that character you just can't stand gets their face eaten off. Same goes for that stereotype that reminds you of the Superboobs Cheerleader that gave you a hard time in high school, or the Steroids-for-Brains Jock that pulled your underwear up over your head. Beyond that, it's satisfying to see someone who went through something horrific win in the end. Look at "The Last House on the Left." It is fantabulous to see the parents taking revenge when they find out the truth about what happened to their daughter, and who did it. Child molester? Burn him alive. Rapist? Cut off his member and put it in the blender so he can't sew it back on a la Bobbitt. Sociopath? Off with their head! Of course, they have to commit atrocities that we have to sit through first, but that's just the buildup to the ultimate payoff.

6. Coming of age. The ability to get into a horror movie without your parents going with you is a sign that you're all grown up. It's the ritual of adulthood you can't miss. Less painful than putting bones through your pectoral muscles and then pulling on them, right?

7. To get some. What better way to get physically close with your date than to take them to a horror movie? Guys will act less afraid than they are and gals will act more afraid. You didn't actually think the ladies didn't want those snuggles in the dark theater as much as you, did ya' fella's?

I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons people want to see horror movies. Each person is different and has their own reasoning, though we may not know what that is. Whatever the reason(s), it's not going to go away anytime soon. Maybe when we've all been cloned and genetically altered in such a way as to remove those "dangerous" urges within us. Pretty sure the housewives in Stepford wouldn't enjoy a lovely evening of blood and terror.

So while the Horror genre may have been going through some growing pains as we experiment with all the different ways it can be done (true crime, torture porn, psychological, Urban Fantasy, etc.), it certainly won't be disappearing entirely any time in the near future. There will always be an audience for it in one form or another. I feel people have just been trying out new things within Horror and related genres, including the audience, so it has seemed like it fell by the wayside. Not so. There's no need to worry that you won't be able to go enjoy a few scares, a few thrills and a few screams if that's something you want to do.

What are your thoughts on the Horror genre, in any medium? If you're a fan, what is your reason for enjoying a bit of Horror? What are your favorites?