Curious Warnings - The Great Ghost Stories Of M.R. James (2 page)

Merfield House

Living Night

Some Remarks on Ghost Stories

Afterword: “The Stony Grin of Unearthly Malice” by Stephen Jones

Special thanks, as always, go to my editor and publisher Jo Fletcher, Val and Les Edwards, Nicola Budd, Lindsay Nash, Peter Gibbs, Colin Murray, Hugh Lamb, Neil Gaiman, Johnny Mains, Robert Lloyd Parry, Reggie Oliver, Jim Bryant, Simon Ball, Nicholas Rhodes James, Richard Dalby, the late Michael Cox and, especially, Rosemary Pardoe, for all their help and support.

“Editor’s Note” copyright © Stephen Jones 2012.

“Ghosts—Treat Them Gently!,” first published in
The Evening News
, April 17, 1931.

“Ghost Stories,” first published in
The Eton Rambler
No. 2, May 18, 1880, and
The Eton Rambler
No. 4, June 21, 1880.

“Canon Alberic’s Scrap-book,” first published under the title “The Scrap-book of Canon Alberic” in
National Review
Vol. XXV, No. 145, March 1895.

“Lost Hearts,” first published in
Pall Mall Magazine
, Vol. VII, No. 32, December 1895.

“The Ash-tree,” first published in
Ghost-Stories of an Antiquary
(1904).

“Count Magnus,” first published in
Ghost-Stories of an Antiquary
(1904).

“The Mezzotint,” first published in
Ghost-Stories of an Antiquary
(1904).

“Number 13,” first published in
Ghost-Stories of an Antiquary
(1904).

“‘Oh, Whistle, and I’ll Come to You, My Lad,’” first published in
Ghost-Stories of an Antiquary
(1904).

“The Treasure of Abbot Thomas,” first published in
Ghost-Stories of an Antiquary
(1904).

“The Stalls of Barchester Cathedral,” first published under the title “The Stalls of Barchester Cathedral: Materials for a Ghost Story” in
Contemporary Review
Vol. XCVII, No. 35, 1910.

“Casting the Runes,” first published in
More Ghost Stories of an Antiquary
(1911).

“Martin’s Close,” first published in
More Ghost Stories of an Antiquary
(1911).

“Mr. Humphreys and His Inheritance,” first published in
More Ghost Stories of an Antiquary
(1911).

“The Rose Garden,” first published in
More Ghost Stories of an Antiquary
(1911).

“A School Story,” first published in
More Ghost Stories of an Antiquary
(1911).

“The Tractate Middoth,” first published in
More Ghost Stories of an Antiquary
(1911).

“The Story of a Disappearance and an Appearance,” first published in
Cambridge Review
, June 4, 1913.

“An Episode of Cathedral History,” first published in
Cambridge Review
, June 10, 1914.

“The Diary of Mr. Poynter,” first published in
A Thin Ghost and Others
(1919).

“The Residence at Whitminster,” first published in
A Thin Ghost and Others
(1919).

“Two Doctors,” first published in
A Thin Ghost and Others
(1919).

“The Uncommon Prayer-book,” first published in
Atlantic Monthly
, Vol. 127, No. 6, June 1921.

“The Five Jars,” first published in 1922.

“The Haunted Dolls’ House,” first published in
Empire Review
, Vol. XXXVIII, No. 265, February 1923.

“A Neighbor’s Landmark,” first published in
The Eton Chronic
, March 17, 1924.

“After Dark in the Playing Fields,” first published in
College Days
, No. 10, June 28, 1924.

“There Was a Man Dwelled by a Churchyard,” first published in
Snapdragon
, December 6, 1924.

“A View from a Hill,” first published in
London Mercury
, Vol. XII, No. 67, May 1925.

“A Warning to the Curious,” first published in
London Mercury
, Vol. XII, No. 70, August 1925.

“An Evening’s Entertainment,” first published in
A Warning to the Curious
(1925).

“Wailing Well,” first published in 1928.

“Rats,” first published in
At Random
, March 23, 1929.

“The Experiment: A New Year’s Eve Ghost Story,” first published in
Morning Post
, December 31, 1931.

“The Malice of Inanimate Objects,” first published in
The Masquerade
, No. 1, June 1933.

“A Vignette,” first published in
The London Mercury and Bookman
, No. 35, November 1936.

“The Bulbul and the Cuckoo: An Indian Folk Tale” (aka “The Story of the
Bulbul”), from a letter dated February 9, 1917, to Gwendolen McBryde. First published in
Letters to a Friend
(1956).

“Stories I Have Tried to Write,” first published in
The Touchstone
, No. 2, November 30, 30 1929.

“A Night in King’s College Chapel” copyright © N.J.R. James 1985. First published in
Ghosts & Scholars
, No. 7, 1985. Reprinted by permission of the copyright owner and his agent, Michelle Kass Associates. Transcription copyright © Rosemary Pardoe 1985.

“The Fenstanton Witch” copyright © N.J.R. James 1990, 1999, 2003. First published in
Ghosts & Scholars
, No. 12, 1990. Reprinted by permission of the copyright owner and his agent, Michelle Kass Associates. Transcription copyright © Rosemary Pardoe 1990, 1999, 2003.

“John Humphreys” copyright © N.J.R. James 1993, 2007. First published in
Ghosts & Scholars
, No. 16, 1993. Reprinted by permission of the copyright owner and his agent, Michelle Kass Associates. Transcription copyright © Rosemary Pardoe 1993, 2007.

“Marcilly-le-Hayer” copyright © N.J.R. James 1996, 1999, 2006. First published in
Ghosts & Scholars
, No. 22, 1996. Reprinted by permission of the copyright owner and his agent, Michelle Kass Associates. Transcription copyright © Rosemary Pardoe 1996, 1999, 2006.

“The Game of Bear” copyright © N.J.R. James 1999, 2007. First published in T
he Fenstanton Witch and Others
. Reprinted by permission of the copyright owner and his agent, Michelle Kass Associates. Transcription copyright © Rosemary Pardoe 1999, 2007.

“Speaker Lenthall’s Tomb” copyright © N.J.R. James 1999, 2005. First published in a severely truncated version in
The Fenstanton Witch and Others
. This almost-complete version first published in
Ghosts & Scholars M.R. James Newsletter
, No. 7, 2005. Reprinted by permission of the copyright owner and his agent, Michelle Kass Associates. Transcription copyright © Rosemary Pardoe 1999, 2005.

“Merfield House” copyright © N.J.R. James 1999, 2007. First published in
The Fenstanton Witch and Others
. Reprinted by permission of the copyright owner and his agent, Michelle Kass Associates. Transcription copyright © Rosemary Pardoe 1999, 2007.

“Living Night” copyright © N.J.R. James 2011. From a letter dated January 17, 1888, to the author’s family. First published in
Ghosts & Scholars M.R. James Newsletter
, No. 20, October 2011. Reprinted by permission of the copyright
owner and his agent, Michelle Kass Associates. Transcription © Jim Bryant 2011.

“Some Remarks on Ghost Stories,” first published in
The Bookman Christmas Issue
, December 1929.

“Afterword: ‘The Stony Grin of Unearthly Malice’” copyright © Stephen Jones 2012.

Some texts have been re-punctuated for publication in this new edition.

Every effort has been made to trace the owners of any copyright material in this book. In the case of any question arising as to the use of such material, the publisher, while expressing regret for any errors, will be pleased to make the necessary corrections in future editions of the book.

For

ROSEMARY PARDOE

DAVID ROWLANDS

STEVE DUFFY

and

NICHOLAS RHODES JAMES

for continuing to promote the works of Montague Rhodes James.

M.R. J
AMES
was a wonderful storyteller, but he was not much of a stylist. Well, he
was
a stylist—but he wrote in a unique style that was very much all his own.

The marvelous thing about language is that it is always changing, and the way in which stories were written in James’ time—in some cases more than 100 years ago now—is very different from how fiction is presented to today’s readers. Not just certain words or phrases which have passed out of popular usage, but with the application of spelling and punctuation as well.

While re-reading the author’s classic supernatural stories in preparation for compiling this present collection of his work, the possibility struck me that he had never really been properly edited before. It is more than likely—especially given James’ stated resistance initially to having his work collected in print form—that the original publications of his work were mostly set from the “rough” manuscripts he had prepared for his annual Christmas readings to a select audience.

As anyone who is used to public speaking knows, a script can be very different from a page of prose—the “beats” and timbre of reading aloud are not always the same as a carefully constructed piece of fiction.

With his run-on paragraphs, multiple viewpoints, sequential dialogue exchanges, narratives within narratives and frankly eccentric use of punctuation and spelling, it became very apparent to me that although these stories were written to be performed aloud, they were not necessarily presented in the best way to be read on the printed page. Yet this is exactly how
they have always been published since the late 19th century onwards.

So, after consulting a number of experts in the field, I have elected, for this new edition of M.R. James’ work, to re-punctuate his fiction for a modern audience. I realize that this might be an extremely controversial decision amongst enthusiasts, but the avowed intent of these books is to bring classic works to the attention of contemporary readers, and by making the tales herein more accessible—without cutting a single word of the author’s original version—I can only hope that these wonderful ghost stories will go on to chill generations of new readers for another century and more.

For those who might accuse me of vandalizing the sacred text, I can only say that I do have some experience of editing horror fiction and, in my opinion, these minor changes bring out the true power of James’ writing and the often remarkable and disturbing images that he created.

No longer are his wit, erudition or pleasing terrors lost amongst pages and pages of unbroken print, complicated sentences and protracted paragraphs. Letters, manuscripts and inscriptions are now clearly delineated within the body of the narrative and are presented here in a manner that simply clarifies the complex structure and manifold narratives employed within many of these stories.

If anything, these modifications have allowed me to appreciate even more what a fine—and truly influential—writer M.R. James was. It is my hope that the same will be true of the reader.

For those who want the original versions—exactly as they were first published (but not necessarily as the author may have intended them, had he given more thought to the process)—then there are plenty of different editions of his work out there that contain exactly that.

But for those who wish to perhaps rediscover what a remarkable and, I’m delighted to say,
still relevant
author M.R. James is to the modern horror genre, then I trust that you will at least give this present volume a chance.

It goes without saying, of course, that any faults are mine and not the author’s.

Stephen Jones

London, England

September, 2011

THEIR MOST FAMOUS CREATOR EXPLAINS

HOW TO GET THE BEST OUT OF THEM

W
HAT FIRST INTERESTED
me in ghosts? This I can tell you quite definitely. In my childhood I chanced to see a toy Punch and Judy set, with figures cut out in cardboard. One of these was The Ghost. It was a tall figure habited in white with an unnaturally long and narrow head, also surrounded with white, and a dismal visage.

Upon this my conceptions of a ghost were based, and for years it permeated my dreams.

Other questions—why I like ghost stories, or what are the best, or why they are the best, or a recipe for writing such things—I have never found it easy to be so positive about. Clearly, however, the public likes them. The recrudescence of ghost stories in recent years is notable: it corresponds, of course, with the vogue of the detective tale.

The ghost story can be supremely excellent in its kind, or it may be deplorable. Like other things, it may err by excess or defect. Bram Stoker’s
Dracula
is a book with very good ideas in it, but—to be vulgar—the butter is spread far too thick. Excess is the fault here: to give an example of erring by defect is difficult, because the stories that err in that way leave no impression on the memory.

I am speaking of the literary ghost story here. The story that claims to be “veridical” (in the language of the Society of Psychical Research) is a very
different affair. It will probably be quite brief, and will conform to some one of several familiar types. This is but reasonable, for, if there be ghosts—as I am quite prepared to believe—the true ghost story need do no more than illustrate their normal habits (if normal is the right word), and may be as mild as milk.

The literary ghost, on the other hand, has to justify his existence by some startling demonstration, or, short of that, must be furnished with a background that will throw him into full relief and make him the central feature.

Since the things which the ghost can effectively do are very limited in number, ranging about death and madness and the discovery of secrets, the setting seems to me all-important, since in it there is the greatest opportunity for variety.

It is upon this and upon the first glimmer of the appearance of the supernatural that pains must be lavished. But we need not, we should not, use all the colors in the box. In the infancy of the art we needed the haunted castle on a beetling rock to put us in the right frame: the tendency is not yet extinct, for I have but just read a story with a mysterious mansion on a desolate height in Cornwall and a gentleman practicing the worst sort of magic. How often, too, have ruinous old houses been described or shown to me as fit scenes for stories!