Great
Ghost Stories
Selected by Joseph Lewis French
CONTENTS
Foreword
The House and the Brain – Lord Edward Bulwer-Lytton
The Roll-Call of the Reef – Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch
The Open Door – Mrs. Margaret Oliphant
The Deserted House – E. T. A. Hoffmann
The Mysterious Sketch – Erckmann-Chatrian
Green Branches – Fiona Macleod
The
Four-Fifteen Express (also known as The Phantom Coach) – Amelia B. Edwards
The
Were-Wolf (also known as The
White Wolf of the Hartz Mountains) – H. B. Marryatt
The Withered Arm – Thomas Hardy
Clarimonde (also known as The Dead Leman)
– Théophile Gautier
The Stalls of Barchester Cathedral – M. R. James
What Was It?
– Fitz-James O’Brien
FOREWORD
Ghost
stories lend themselves well to fiction. They leave the imagination
entirely free. In ordinary fiction, especially of the realistic type, we
expect some concessions to be made to facts but when it comes to a ghost
story we assign no limits to the imagination. This is because the
supernatural world offers us no standards for curbing our fancy. Icarus is
given impunity in that atmosphere and there is no sun to melt his wings.
Whatever our wishes, we do not expect ghosts to be real, and we are fancy
free to intent or distort as we may. But in the twilight of human
knowledge it was not thus. The boundaries of the real and the unreal
were undefined and the belief in the supernatural, while it allowed the
imagination free reins, revealed little difference between its creations
and the ideas men held of the actual world. In this overlapping of the
real and the imaginary, the ghost story arose and has never lost its
interest for men, though the cold judgment of science deprived the real
thing of its terrors.
As knowledge increased and extended its domain ghosts were reduced
to hallucinations, much to the disappointment of lovers of the
marvellous, and cultivated minds could only toy with them as objects
either of literary fancy or of amusement against their less fortunate
neighbours who desired to believe in them. Intellectuals who came into
contact with stories like those in the Phantasms
of the Living, indulgently spoke of them with a mixture of humour and
tolerance which prevented them from either believing or denying them. But
writers of fiction had no responsibilities and were not judged by the
standards of either belief or unbelief, while the general public followed
its tastes and imagination, chafed under the restraints of scepticism,
and chose the easy road to satisfaction.
In the present age, which is saturated with psychic research,
whatever the motive or outcome of that movement, ghost stories have been
revived partly because you can invoke interest under the cloak of science
and partly because of an interest in the unknown and the desire to please
our fancies, and fiction, which is art and not science, can escape the
duty of preaching. The psychologist, however, may detect a concealed
realism in the most audacious feats of the imagination or an interest in
the supernatural when the mind struggles to conceal or to ridicule it.
Hence a collection of ghost stories, whatever their nature, may have
their value for every class of readers. Some will want to invoke age and
general human interest in behalf of certain prejudices, and others will
want to quote them as illustrations of superstition. But all will like a
good story well told and appealing to the imagination which always affords
mankind more satisfaction than facts.
Besides a collection of them may reveal disguises which science may
uncover, however deeply concealed by the respectability that will not
offend science, or by the ignorance which suspects that there is more in
them than is dreamt of in our philosophy. At any rate, we may read them
without demanding that they shall conform to our sense of reality and
without expecting science to restrain the imagination. In other words,
literature and its artistic interests will excuse us for an interest in
them while science will not hold us accountable for any indulgence of that
interest. If the knowing can penetrate the veil and discover any truth in
them far beyond the ken of ordinary mortals, all others may complacently
enjoy the illusion that they are superior to both science and
superstition. With Macaulay literature was more than the consolations of
philosophy. This was because philosophy has only to be true while
literature has only to please. Or is it because literature is nearer the
truth and can please at the same time? Perhaps in this age when we are
beginning to break down the barriers which science has set to the
imagination, and this by an expansion of science itself, which is the
Nemesis of its own prejudices and arbitrarily imposed limits, we may find
the salvation of both the intellect and the will. However this may be,
with apparitions as a proved fact, and on any theory not due to chance in
all instance.,, the fancies of the past may prove to have been founded in
fact, however dressed to suit the purposes of literary art.
JAMES H. HYSLOP.
New York,
September 15, 1917.