Phyllis Cerf Wagner (1916–2006)

My 2011 'review' of this read, in its entirety "This is the single finest collection of tales of the supernatural I have ever encountered. Wall to wall classics of their kind."

I don't violently disagree with this ten years later; however, because I just completed my first complete read of the book, I would like to say a little more.

First: I think it was silly of me to declare this as the 'finest' of its kind when I haven't read that many of its kind. Ahem. It's a wide-ranging anthology that show more contains stuff from roughly the early 19th (Balzac, et al) to the early 20th centuries. It ends with a pair of Lovecraft stories, & he died in 1937.

The editors' split of the material into tales of 'terror' (alarming but explicable, even if you have to stretch) and 'the supernatural' (inexplicable without allowing the existence of realms or powers beyond the known) is *somewhat* artificial. Poe's "The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar" for example, fits better for me under "supernatural." Plus this means if you are a completist reader like me, and you are really far more interested in the "supernatural," you have to wade through the tales of "terror" that come first. This isn't that big a burden, however, since many of them are excellent and exciting.

What else to say? of the major "supernatural" writers, their choices are for the most part solid. The slight exception, I'd say, is Algernon Blackwood. His "Ancient Sorceries," included here, is far better than I remember it being on first reading, but "Confession," while not bad, should have made way for either "The Willows" or "The Wendigo," in my opinion. The editors say neither of these were included because of how often they're anthologized, but that didn't stop them from including "Green Tea" for Le Fanu.

But these are quibbles. This is a great anthology, full of old chestnuts AND neat surprises, and is still a fine introduction to the genre. NB: all the writers are male. I just called this to mind. Hmm. show less

This anthology was my favorite book of all time from the age of 10 until the age of 12. I spent the weekend re-reading it. There are many favorite stories here that almost everyone has heard of and read: The Most Dangerous Game, Leiningen Versus the Ants, Shredni Vashtar, The Open Window, The Monkey's Paw.. Many here are still widely read because they were anthologized here first.

For the most part the stories still thrilled me. Even so I could not get over how many of them used the framing show more device of a bunch of white Englishmen at the club who are just lighting their cigars and settling down to hear one man's hair-raising yarn...or something very close to it. A few are culturally offensive, relying on witch-doctor tropes and colonial points of view that jar, but mostly their frame of reference is stiff-upper-lippish, rather than unreadably inappropriate. I still love them all albeit nostalgically at times rather than for their currency. show less

One hardly expects to be transfixed by an innocent looking Modern Library horror collection--one expects a rather dry "representative historical collection." This one though has an atmosphere about it, though . . . the lines of influence run fairly strongly through the stories of this collection. While the authors, styles and approaches to creating a sense of the uncanny are distinct, there is also something mutually reinforcing in these stories. A really great collection.

If you never read another horror anthology, if you even hate horror, you should read this one anthology just to make sure you round out your literary background. The one essential classic anthology that has NEVER been bettered since it was first published. Cannot really be compared to anything else.

If you are a horror buff, then you owe it to yourself to read this to find out where it all came from and what the best can be.