My Theory of Horror

[JamesSavik]

Case: Black is an experiment for me based on two theories of horror and suspense.

 

1. Adults won't believe in monsters unless they are plausible.  That doesn't mean they don't believe in monsters. We've all met them. They are the predators and the pervs, the confidence men and criminals: the every day monsters that populate the world.

 

In Case: Black I've tried to create as believable a "zombie" as possible. The bio-agent that creates them, the constraints on the "zombies" and the progression of the disease are all very, very plausible.

 

Viruses don't work as fast or as completely as they do in 28 Days Later. (If they did, we would all be extinct.) They do work the way that they do in Case:Black and that is by design.

 

What I'm shooting for is a story that you can "buy" without suspending a ton of disbelief.

 

 

2. Build scenes that are fast, short and directly contribute to the plot, builds suspense and raise the stakes as it moves.

 

That's self evident. I don't spend a lot of time with exposition and characterization. I do most characterization through action.

 

What I'm trying to achieve is an adrenalin rush, not enlightenment. Buckle your seat-belt, you are in for a wild ride.

 

 

I'm not trying to do fan fiction or "me too" zombie story.

 

I am trying to start from scratch and create something new that makes something with many tiny cold feet run across your spine. A horror story that doesn't go away when you eject the DVD.

[Graeme]

The less amount of disbelief the reader has to do, the stronger the impact the horror will have. That's how I feel, and it's why I don't usually read horror -- I don't like being horrified and a well written horror story will make my too-active imagination wonder if that could happen to me.

 

As for the pacing, I think you're right. Short well-written scenes build tension faster than longer scenes. However, I think after a certain point that will stop working. The short passages set the scene, but once the action starts going the readers will need longer scenes to get buy-in on the story. Readers typically like to identify with or care for characters, and if the scenes are too short and jump around too much, they won't get that buy-in.

 

Just my opinion, of course

[The Pecman]

What I'm shooting for is a story that you can "buy" without suspending a ton of disbelief.

 

It's hard to do that for me, because when you start examining the whole concept of Zombie stories and concepts, they started falling apart faster than a deteriorating corpse. At some point, the only reason they're walking is magic, and you can either buy into it or not.

 

I gotta say, though, recent shows like The Walking Dead pull it off so well, I just toss disbelief out the window and get into the characters. In truth, Walking Dead is kind of just a soap opera at its core, with horror on the fringes; it's more about how the humans survive and get along (or fight amongst each other) than it is about the zombies per se. They do an extraordinary job at making me believe in the characters and their situations, week after week.

 

I noted that the producers have finally answered a question I had, namely: if the Zombie apocalypse has gone on for at least a year within the Walking Dead framework, why haven't the bodies started deteriorating more? And so now, the bodies are more decrepit than they were. But there's always a supply of new humans who died recently to create new, "fresh" zombies. 

 

If you can put a new spin on this old idea, more power to you, James! 

Edited November 10, 2013 by The Pecman

[Thorn Wilde]

I've personally always preferred the supernatural type of horror. Ghosts and demons and Old Ones and what have you. Because, while I don't particularly believe in these things, you can't really completely disprove their existence. There's always that slight fear of something lurking in the dark, and when that's turned into a story and done well, that's the sort of horror story I really enjoy. I admit that I also like being able to turn the lights back on and know that this shit isn't actually real afterwards...

 

That's not to say that I can't enjoy realistic horror stories as well. I just have a tendency to go for the ones where you first have to accept a set of rules that aren't governed by the real world. Maybe it's just because those stories feel safer... There's enough horrible stuff going on in the real world without inventing more, you know?

[W_L]

I am not a horror writer per se, some people thought my first chapter of Causality was scary and my Zombie story The Promise was scary.

 

I agree with you James that short scenes with human characters in fast pacing is a good way to write and capture human emotions; however, the old school horror stories tend to be built on atmosphere and tension over long periods of time.

 

It depends on what you want the payoff to be in the scene; are you going to kill a character off? Or Are you going to kill the zombie? Or are you going to show a side of humanity in the story?

 

The Ends justify the means or Means justify the ends is not limited to ethics; in writing,, the payoffs are rooted in the culminating events of the prior scene/scenes as well.

 

How best to approach the story is up to you in the end.

[Warrior1]

Fear is in the mind. So the psychological impact is far more important than the appearance of the zombie or monster.