Nick Roberts is a native West Virginian and a doctoral graduate of Marshall University. He is an active member of the Horror Writers Association and the Horror Authors Guild. His works include Anathema, The Exorcist's House, Mean-Spirited and others. He currently resides in South Carolina with his family and is an advocate for people in recovery from substance use disorder.
K.L.: Hi Nick, thank you for doing this. My first question is: How would you describe your particular brand of horror and what kind of experience do you hope your reader to have?
N.R.: Hey! I would describe my brand of horror as horror with heart…a heart that sometimes gets ripped out and stomped on before the book’s end. I say that because I am always trying to scare the reader. I’ve heard others advise against this, but that’s bullshit. No one strategy works for all writers. I try to create interesting characters and a dramatic situation that engages the reader. If I can do that, ninety percent of the job is done before I even introduce the scares.
When I begin a new novel, I have the mindset of writing a terrifying opening scene to a horror film. That’s the process I did with Mean Spirited. I had the idea of opening with a tonal blend of The Strangers and Stolen Tongues because I knew it would start with a woman alone in her bedroom at night, and she hears something downstairs. That’s all I had to go on–a creepy home invasion premise. I kept coming up with different ways of freaking myself out by sensing what the character did. I focused heavily on sound with that one, and whenever the hairs on my arms would stand on end, I knew I was onto something. The prologue became what it became, but it was never meant to be about a dog.
If I’m doing my job correctly, I’m scaring the reader but leaving them with a lasting impression. I don’t want my books to be horror popcorn stories that are creepy in the moment, but then you forget about them once you move on to something else. So, I guess the most appropriate answer would be, I want them to be haunted in some way. My favorite horror novels do that, and that’s what I try to replicate. Books like The Exorcist, House of Leaves, Penpal, A Head Full of Ghosts, Stolen Tongues, American Psycho, The Wasp Factory, Pet Sematary, and The Collector are all prime examples of this. Having said that, reader response is subjective, so I’m never going to “haunt” everyone.
I definitely agree that the battle of Good and Evil, whatever you want to call it, is prevalent in all my works, some more than others. In looking at the physics of the universe, it’s the oldest story there is: Light vs Darkness. I love the quote from True Detective where the two cops are looking at the night sky and Marty remarks on how much darkness is in the universe. His partner, Rust, says that he’s looking at it wrong because “Once there was only dark. You ask me, the light’s winning.” I’m also fascinated by the concepts of absolutes existing for the sake of existence. True evil has no motive. Chaos has no motive other than to inflict chaos.
These are heavy themes, but they resonate with readers because they are, quite literally, universal. This isn’t to say that there’s no room for morally gray characters. I’m inspired when reading something like Game of Thrones because Martin can make you love a character, have them do something so reprehensible that you hate them the next chapter, and then they redeem themselves and become a fan favorite again. It’s amazing. So I like to have characters with flaws, people who are susceptible to the influence of absolutes. That’s when it gets interesting, to see how characters you think you know react to conflict and possibly subvert expectations.
We all have good and bad in us, even if they are just random, reactive, intrusive thoughts. If someone cuts you off in traffic and almost causes an accident with your kids in the car, you turn homicidal for a few seconds. We revert back to our primal selves. Putting relatively ordinary characters in extraordinary situations in my stories and watching what happens is a joy for me as a writer. This is why I don’t outline novels. I don’t know the characters well enough to know how they’re going to react when this thing happens to them at this point in the story. I like to keep things fresh and chaotic. It keeps it exciting for me.
K.L. Zaldrīzes buzdari iksos daor! Sorry, couldn’t resist it, as I am a major geek when it comes to Game of Thrones and, of course, True Detective (season one, naturally). No one does morally gray/complex like GRMM and it’s unfortunate that many people dismiss his work because it falls under the rubric of “fantasy.” I agree that the struggle between Good and Evil is universal, but what are your thoughts on presenting it through the Judeo-Christian or Biblical lens? I am thinking, for example, of Swan Song by Robert McCammon where this struggle is rooted more in evil versus life, nature, and the world, drawing on pagan and explicitly tarot-esque imagery. Another example is Tell Me I’m Worthless by Alyson Rumfitt, where evil is seen from the Marxist perspective, in the sense that it is produced and distributed by the concrete material conditions.
Would you say that horror is generally apolitical and if so, what are your thoughts on that? It is, of course, true that most of us need a space to escape, yet the present seems to be posing so much moral urgency for us that the idea of escape becomes dangerously close to quietism.
N.R: How the struggle between good and evil is presented can be explicit or understated, surface-level or subtextual, and this is what makes it compelling. Whichever lens the storyteller chooses to present it through (religious/spiritual/metaphysical/biological/existential/etc.), should be chosen to serve the narrative. If the central conflict is compelling and treats readers like they have functioning minds, then the framework is contextual and shouldn’t be viewed as a reflection of the author.
I can write a possession novel in the exorcism subgenre without believing that the “power of Christ compels” demons. I look at religious horror as just another subgenre. I got flack over The Exorcist’s House from both sides of the aisle. Some readers said it was too religious, and others said it wasn’t religious enough. I saw a review or a TikTok video the other day where the person was running through a list of trigger warnings, and religion was one of them. To say that people take that shit seriously would be the biggest understatement in the history of mankind.
Regarding horror as apolitical is naive. The genre itself is the most effective vehicle for metaphor because we can create these evil and scary things as stand-ins for the horrors of real life. But, again, the author doesn’t have to believe in the message to employ it. Politics run on fear. That might sound cynical, but it’s true. Fear is the most efficient motivator for action in the world today, and the ability to play off those fears gives one control, power. Whether you’re an effective horror novelist or a politician, you’re manipulating a desired outcome by understanding what scares people.
People need escapism, but sometimes their escape can be a trap. On the other hand, if you don’t take a mental reprieve every now and then, you could drive yourself crazy screaming into the void. It’s ultimately about balance and media literacy. You can’t transmit what you don’t have, so if you want to take a stand in this world, make sure you’re well-rested and battle-ready.
K.L.: What is your theory on why some of us are drawn to horror (and true crime isn’t too far off)? Why is it often the case that some of us who are most traumatized (I, for one, have C-PTSD) look for the darkest, maddest thing to read and watch?
N.R.: Horror is a safety net. It’s a zoo where we can go look at creatures that could kill us in the wild, but are confined to their cages/pages. For some of us, the darker the better. When we choose to enter the darkness, it gives us a sense of power over the content. It provides the illusion that we’re conquering our fears.
This especially applies to true crime. In reading about Charles Manson or watching a Jeffrey Dahmer miniseries, we’re slowing down to look at the carnage of a car accident. It’s as much morbid curiosity as it is a relief that it didn’t happen to us. Even people who don’t read horror often find themselves glued to the latest salacious news story.
I think it all boils down to the reality that we are all going to die, but our conscious brains refuse to accept this fact. Horror lets us get close to death on our own terms.
K.L.: The darker the better, indeed. It is interesting what you said about death. I am forever struck by Tarkovsky’s quote in Solaris, something like, “We’re basically immortal because we don’t know the hour of our death.”
Now for my next question. Who is your favorite character in Game of Thrones/A Song of Ice and Fire? You have already alluded to the complex moral gayness of George Martin's characters, and I couldn't agree more. For example, I think Jamie is the only one who understands that the form of the vow (to always obey and protect the king) isn't always the same as the context of the vow (killing half a million civilians). It's also really interesting to me that the characters we hate, we really, really do, like Cersei Lannister, get their time of humiliation and pain. They appear to pay for has been done. Yet Cersei's walk of atonement never feels like justice. It just doesn't. It's the perverted justice, done for the wrong reasons by the wrong people.
N.R.: Oh, wow. That’s a tough, tough question. A Song of Ice and Fire is packed with so many memorable characters, some just for a few episodes, others for the span of the series. I’ll give you my top five (and this is a hybrid of the show and the books):
5.) Daenerys Targaryen (more so in the books because we know her plan from her first appearance)
4.) The Hound, Sandor Clegane (I love a good curmudgeon with a soft spot.)
3.) Tyrion Lannister (The mind, the dialogue, the heart, the will to live; amazing)
2). Jamie Lannister (Arguably the most loathed then loved, then loathed again character throughout the series, he’s as complex as they come, and I would argue, based on the books, the polar opposite of Daenerys.)
1.) Tie between Bronn and Jon Snow (I know this is a cheat, but they both deserve the number one spot because of their earnestness. Jon is a man who lives by a code and has to overcompensate for growing up a bastard. His ascension in bravery and leadership is truly heroic. Bronn, on the other hand, is arguably the most deadly human in the show. He’s a lethal hitman who’s loyal to the highest bidder, and we love how good he is at his job. He’s funny, charismatic, and a total “man’s man.” But, just like Jon, there’s a drive to do the right thing in the end, no matter what the cost.)
What are the three books and movies that have had the most impact on you? I am not limiting this to horror.
Books:
American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis
Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy
The Exorcist by William Peter Blatty
Movies:
Pulp Fiction
The Dark Knight
Scream
K.L.: Most of us horror aficionados have a favorite obscure (a book or a movie) that we really want others to discover. Movie-wise, for me, it is probably Ganja & Hess. How about you?
Book: Dopefiend by Donald Goines
Movie: Session 9
K.L.: What’s the strangest or most unsettling compliment you’ve ever received about your writing?
I can’t think of a specific strange compliment, but there is a scenario that unsettles me. Whenever readers point out something that I didn’t mean to do and say how brilliant it was that I did this or that and connected this to that or alluded to this classic work or literature…I just nod my head and die a little inside.
K.L.: If you had to design a horror story that could only be told through scent — no words, no images — what would it smell like?
Smoke. There are so many flavors and varieties of smoke. I feel like the options are limitless. I used rolling sulfuric smoke in The Exorcist’s House that smelled like rotten eggs, but I also used pipe tobacco smoke as a comfort smell because you know the character with the pipe is coming to save the day.
K.L.: Is there a horror trope or image that still genuinely unsettles you no matter how many times you encounter it? Something that slips past the intellectual part of you straight into your spinal cord?
Being lost in a forest is a big fear of mine. That’s a rational fear and one I have because I lack a sense of direction, but you can mostly credit that one to The Blair Witch Project and one episode of Are You Afraid of the Dark? called “The Watcher’s Woods.” Even though I don’t believe in the supernatural, I still won’t fuck around with saying Candyman in a mirror or using a Ouija board. Like, what’s the upside?
K.L.: When you look at the horror landscape today — extreme cinema, true crime obsession, elevated horror’s grief-core — what do you think audiences are really asking for? Catharsis? Punishment? Permission?
I think the pandemic gave many people an existential crisis and took away the illusory security blanket we had. Seeing mass shootings on the news every week, war, and climate changing in real time has made our society confront its own mortality in an unprecedented way. This information age in which we currently live amplifies it. So, I think people are turning to these sub-genres to cope with the horrors of the real world, to feel not alone in death and try to rationalize it.
K.L.: Does horror have — or need — an internal ethics? Unlike ancient Greek tragedy, which traditionally insists upon it (and where violence was almost never shown directly, taking place off-stage): that suffering must lead to recognition, to consequence, to some unbearable clarity — even if it destroys everyone involved.
N.R.: My only ethos is narrative authenticity, not content. If it serves the story, it stays. And even that, I somewhat struggle with. How do you put restrictions on art? How do you regulate an abstract, subjective concept? Yes, I’m aware there are some horrendous subgenres in horror that push the boundaries of social norms, and there are certain taboo subjects I don’t enjoy reading, but I will never say any genre needs a filter. People need education and media literacy. I had to be taught how to learn.
K.L.: What needs to change — not just in horror’s characters, but in horror’s very architecture — for there to be real room for a disabled protagonist? Not a metaphor, not a victim, not a symbol — but a center of gravity.
A great story. It’s simple, but not easy. Paradigm shifts happen when people are made to feel something that alters their outlook. And I think those stories need to be written by people in that community for it to really stick. Don’t get me wrong, I believe that artists can write any character they want and from any perspective they want to explore. That’s a fundamental right one has as a creator. But the voices that are most likely to resonate and effect change come from those demographics. See Robin Williams’ monologue in Good Will Hunting about being able to talk about the SIstine Chapel versus standing inside of it.
K.L.: Can you envision them? Not just what haunts them — but what they haunt in return. What are they like? How do they move through horror’s machinery? What part of horror’s traditional structure breaks — or has to break — to make space for them?
N.R.: There has to be empathy with the characters. The audience has to see themselves in them. That’s true of any great character, though. Horror has always been about fear of the “other,” and that can be interpreted in different ways. I might be naive, but that’s truly what I believe. The story will move the audience and recalibrate the machine.
K.L.: Thank you so much for your time! It’s been a pleasure.
Nick’s books (check them out, peeps!): click here.