Hill House or Hell House: Which House Haunts the Hardest?

Dark greetings, my friends. Before we begin… BEYOND HERE BE SPOILERS. If you have not read “The Haunting of Hill House” by Shirley Jackson or “Hell House” by Richard Matheson, stop right now, embrace your shame, and then go read these horror classics. My elder nerd blathering will only diminish their greatness - READ THEM. But if you really can’t be bothered, ring that shame bell three times, and a haunting we will go!

I’ve been reading “On Writing Horror: A Handbook by The Horror Writers Association” edited by Mort Castle — and that’s one hellishly long title. But one suggestion from the unholy horror handbook struck home — if you write horror, you should know what you’re writing about. You should know the genre’s history, its classic works, and you should be a fan - that means being a ‘constant reader’ to borrow a phrase from The King. Fair enough. I’ve read heaps of horror stories throughout my life but a refresher course can only do me good.

To remedy the gaps in my personal horror history, I drew up a list of core works unread and started working my way through them. There were too many letters flying around for me to truly enjoy “Dracula” but I managed to drive a stake through its heart. “Frankenstein” was much more up my darkened alley though Victor’s whimpering martyrdom made me want to throttle him and shout, “This whole damn thing is your fault! Would it have killed you to show the tiniest bit of empathy to your hideous creation?” I adored “The Invisible Man” and think it’s long overdue for a proper, time-period-correct, film version — don’t update the setting — turn Griffin loose again in the English countryside of the 1890s. Respect the work and the madness of its main character. I’ve also listened to hundreds of horror stories and feel obligated to give a special shoutout to Ellen Datlow for her curated “Best Horror of the Year” series. Ellen has great taste in bloody nightmares — if it says “Edited by Ellen Datlow” on the cover, it's worthy of your time.

But today, I’m holding the flickering candelabra up to two important novels from my ancient youth: Shirley Jackson’s “The Haunting of Hill House” and Richard Matheson’s “Hell House”. I read these two as a wee lad, but didn’t remember much about either one of them, except that they scared the wee out of me and made me believe that every house I ever entered was haunted and out to get me. I’ll try to talk about my love for these two novels without giving away too much so that the uninitiated can still enjoy them.

“The Haunting of Hill House” and “Hell House” are classics of the genre. You can prove that by adding up how many times they’ve been copied, re-imagined, and straight-up ripped off. If you want to know how to tell a haunted house story, you can learn a lot from these two books. Both of them centre on a scientific expedition into a haunted house, and in both cases, that investigation was a bad idea.

The setup is almost identical in both books, which is a bit weird (give first blood credit here to Ms. Jackson who wrote hers a decade earlier than Mr. Matheson). Both novels follow a team of paranormal experts who take up residence in a creepy old mansion known for its history of spectral shenanigans. The respective team leaders are Dr. John Montague (Hill House), an anthropologist with a passion for parapsychology, and Dr. Lionel Barrett (Hell House), a physicist with a passion for parapsychology. Such ardent men of science who both have a passion for parapsychology!

Each learned doctor sets out to prove that the supernatural exists, though Dr. Barrett wants to prove that ghostly doings are based in science where Dr. Montague just wants to bust some ghosts ’cause bustin’ makes him feel good! Each doctor brings along some spiritual ringers — individuals who are sensitive to the supernatural — in hopes of gathering information through them or provoking the house into action by their mere presence. Spiritual bait for creeps in the shadows. Groovy. Both novels also include a pair of creepy old caretakers who supply them with food but won’t stay a moment in the house after the sun goes down. Hill House and Hell House are isolated and shunned by their surrounding communities, because apparently, nobody likes a haunted house that kills people. Though the setups are nearly identical, the narratives and tone of these two novels are so different that Matheson’s psychotic Hell House has little in common with Jackson’s creepy old Hill House.

Hill House and Hell House are only a Decade Apart but Worlds Away

Shirley Jackson published “The Haunting of Hill House” in 1959, while Richard Matheson published “Hell House” in 1971, but there was this little thing called “the 1960s” between them, and it affected the narrative of each story.

Shirley Jackson was always aware that certain topics weren’t going to get published yet she was smart enough to aim her pen at those topics and skip around the gatekeepers of morality. Jackson’s novel captures the anxieties of the post-World War II era, the questioning of traditional gender roles, and specifically of young women trying to establish their own identities outside of being a man’s daughter, sister, girlfriend, or wife. All this is played out in the guise of a haunted house story.

One of the things I love about speculative fiction is how many of its practitioners use the genre to pick at the scabs of hypocrisy and societal ills. As an author of her time, Shirley Jackson is working under the restrictive codes of the 1950s publishing industry, but even so, she manages to slide an underlying theme of ‘forbidden love’ into Hill House. Modern readers might totally miss the gay subtext, but for its time, it was quite progressive if just a half-step out of the closet.

Jackson’s prose is literary and lyrical in its exploration of fear and psychological horror. The book is beautifully written and becomes more dreamlike and disoriented as the plot gathers steam - the story itself actually become haunted. And Ms. Jackson pens one of the all-time great openers — so good that she riffs on it again to close the book. I would too if I could write something this freakin’ awesome.

“No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream. Hill House, not sane, stood by itself against the hills, holding darkness within; it had stood so for eighty years and might stand for eighty more. Within, walls continued upright, bricks met neatly, floors were firm, and doors were sensibly shut; silence lay steadily against the wood and stone of Hill House, and whatever walked there, walked alone.”

I never get tired of reading that. Hill House, not sane. Shirley Jackson is the G.O.A.T.!

Now, let’s rocket past the turbulent 1960’s to when Richard Matheson publishes his “Hell House” in 1970. America had just experienced its most divisive decade since the Civil War. The USA has undergone vast cultural upheavals: the Civil Rights movement and the violence opposing it, the ongoing carnage of the Vietnam War, a bloody succession of political assassinations, and a growing skepticism among the youth towards all established institutions. Those prudish codes of propriety from the 1950s are dead and buried. Richard Matheson, a G.O.A.T. himself, takes full advantage of the new literary freedom by taking a far more explicit and visceral approach to his haunted house story. “Hell House” gets down and dir-tay.

Where Jackson was lyrical and foreboding in her prose, Matheson carves up the story with a bloody razor and shoves the dripping pages in your face. Sexual violence and human depravity are the cornerstones on which Hell House is laid — and I do mean ‘laid’ — and nothing here walks alone — it rips, maims, rapes, and rampages the hell out of everything. Hill House may have had a dark history of religious mania and untimely deaths, but Hell House was founded by a depraved sexual sadist who abused and slaughtered dozens of his houseguests, a man so e-vil that his malignant spirit lives on to torture and abuse all who dare enter his unholy domain. It’s as if Matheson read “The Haunting of Hill House”, drank a bottle or two of rotgut whiskey, then sat down at his typewriter to do the devil’s business. “Hill House” is a modern gothic and “Hell House” is a proto-slasher. Good times.

There Is No Right or Wrong Way to Haunt a House

I love Shirley Jackson’s writing style, her psychological depth and her meticulous attention to atmosphere. Her narrative technique relies on the power of suggestion, employing unreliable narration to achieve its goal, and she does this at the highest level. Jackson leaves the nature of the supernatural open to the reader’s interpretation. There’s a case to be made that Hill House might not even be haunted, and the fact that you’re pondering that question at the end of the book makes the whole story feel even more disorienting and impressive. Shirley’s prose is hypnotic and it’s designed to leave the reader feeling as disturbed as her main character. When I finished “The Haunting of Hill House,” I felt like I had read a haunted novel, one whose pages were alive and forever wrong and tragic. If you haven’t guessed it yet, Shirley Jackson wrote my favourite horror novel.

Conversely, Richard Matheson’s “Hell House” is not ambiguous at all — his haunted mansion is alive and deadly, ready and waiting in the shadows for anyone stupid enough to enter. To willingly go and stay in Hell House is an act of foolishness, madness, or profound hubris, and hubris always has its comeuppance in the horror genre. The only answer to the question, “Would you like to join my expedition into Hell House?” should be an immediate “Hell no!”.

The evil spirit haunting Hell House is drenched in corruption and needs to destroy you in the worst possible way. Matheson’s visceral approach is illustrated through explicit depictions of violence, torture, and sexual sadism; his haunted mansion becomes the physical manifestation of each character’s deepest fears and darkest desires. Matheson pushes the envelope of what was acceptable in the horror genre of the 1970s, which means that there’s no way in hell that “Hell House” could have been published in the 1950s. It goes for the throat and never lets go. Think of “Hell House” as the ultimate B&B for horror fans who demand the Platinum Level Haunted House experience. Payment in advance. No refunds. You’ll be dead anyway.

Despite their stylistic and narrative differences, both Shirley Jackson and Richard Matheson excel in creating a sense of dread and danger in their haunted house stories. Jackson’s psychological approach to horror and Matheson’s hardcore terror stand as pillars in the pantheon of horror fiction. For me, Shirley Jackson wrote the best Haunted House story of all time, but Richard Matheson wrote one of the scariest ones. I love them both. 

The only question left to ask is where I’d rather take my next country vacation — Hill House or Hell House? 

And will I walk alone? 

©Anthony Roberts, 2025.

fffff