> there's still a fine line between "sick fantasy" and "Stephen King novel"
Surely the important distinction is not the text itself but which character a reader empathises with — the monster or the victim.
(Personally I don’t understand why violent horror as a genre exists, and literally cannot empathise with people who enjoy it. Nonetheless I recognise that enjoyment of horror does not make one a monster).
Surely the important distinction is not the text itself but which character a reader empathises with — the monster or the victim.
(Personally I don’t understand why violent horror as a genre exists, and literally cannot empathise with people who enjoy it. Nonetheless I recognise that enjoyment of horror does not make one a monster).