#cemetery Pulp

[weirdlookindog]

"Marc and Toffee stood petrified as a claw-like hand and wizened head crept into view"

William J. Brady (1905-1978) - Illustration for Charles F. Myers' 'You Can't Scare Me!'

(Fantastic Adventures Vol.9 #2, March 1947)

[lordofnowhere-art]

every once in a while I think about how Celehar is basically like a noir detective

[doomreturn]

The house by the cematery 1981

[k-i-l-l-e-r-b-e-e-6-9]

[kekwcomics]

Art: Jack Davis

[harrowharkwife]

i'm so used to there just being random unidentified bones laying around everywhere in these damn books that it finally occurred to me, just now, to wonder where the bones on new rho came from. y'know, the bones palamedes always tried to teach nona necromancy on.

they're his.

palamedes, who always loved teaching, living on borrowed time in a body that's not his own. palamedes, mentoring, teaching- parenting, by sixth standards, mind you. and that boy is sixth, through and through.

and the entire point of teaching nona necromancy in the first place was to try and determine if nona is, well, nonagesimus, right? so it has to be bones, it can't not be bones. bones are, like, her whole thing.

but they're not in the nine houses, anymore. things are different, on new rho.

they burn bones here. dig up the cemeteries. a society terrified of zombies will evolve to dispose of its dead differently.

the only bones he has access to now are his own. (camilla wouldn't let anyone take them- skull or hand, doesn't matter. they're still him, and she doesn't let go, remember? it's her one thing.)

palamedes woke up every morning wearing someone else's body to then gently place the shrapnel of his own in the cupped palms of a girl who's the closest thing he'll ever have to a daughter and try to teach her- how did the angel put it, again? normal school, as much as possible, for as long as possible.

(but hey, in a roundabout way, at least it's a chance for him to touch camilla again, right? nevermind that she's not there to feel any of it because he's in the driver's seat, that he can only stay for fifteen minutes at a time. it's atoms that belong to camilla touching atoms that used to belong to him, and that's close enough. he'll take what he can get, these days- if she can be their flesh, he can be the end. so what if holding his own bones is a mindfuck? so what if looking at them makes him nauseous? surely he can suck it up and deal with it for fifteen minutes. it's the least he can do— his poor camilla was the one who had to scrape the bloody pulp of them off the floors of canaan house.)

(speaking of, here's a fun fact: we actually only see nona practicing with the bones one time, on-page. camilla's final line in that scene, before palamedes takes over, is none other than: 'keep going. there are some bones left.' ow!)

remember, too, that the only part of dulcinea, the real dulcinea, that palamedes ever physically touched, was her tooth- the one that ianthe gave him, pulled from the ashes cytherea burnt her down to. he only ever touched dulcie once, and it wasn't until after she was already gone, but that doesn't matter- it still happened, and you can't take loved away.

in this same roundabout, bittersweet, by-proxy sort of way, palamedes has been physically touched by nona, too: the atoms she currently occupies, touching atoms that he used to occupy, and never will again.

the main interaction we've seen between palamedes and his mother took place back on the sixth, with her acting as mentor and him as pupil: the two of them studying a set of hand bones, juno encouraging him every step of the way.

we know that harrowhark's "most vivid memory of her mother was of her hands guiding harrow's over an inexpertly rendered portion of skull, her fingers encircling the fat baby bracelets of harrow's wrists, tightening this cuff to indicate correct technique."

they're still small for a nineteen year old, but the wrists are bigger, in this new set of memories nona's making. and it's not an inexpertly rendered portion of skull anymore- it's a hand, now, albeit one crafted from [a piece of skull reassembled (painstakingly—passionately—laboriously reassembled) from fragments, manually, and not by a bone magician, from the skull of someone who, soon after death or symptomatically during, had exploded.] and the identity and origin of these bones is no mystery at all. they belong to palamedes, and he's consented to their use for this purpose, and that matters.

but the details are just set dressing, really. the foundation of the memory is the same.

palamedes and his mother, juno and her son.

harrow and her mother; pelleamena and her daughter.

nona and her father-mother-teacher; palamedes and his daughter.

[ell-es-dee]

☣ hallo !! im nawt the best at making intros so.. here's the best one i could put together... (๑ᵔ⤙ᵔ๑)

⤷ before you read just know that if you are very judgemental you do not belong here

💊 namehoard: toxin, sayori, yakui (main name), cyanide, lithium, radium, cyber, marigold, bonnie, keta/ketamine, hazard, strawb, nyacifier, chlorine, zombeh, bena/benadryl, poptart, kona, hikkie, valentine, biscuit, flandre, cirno, clownpiece, caliber ++ any fictionkin names are fine!!

💊 deminonbinaryflux intersex boygirl, aroaceflux and pomoromantic ++ xenogenders

💊 pronouns: it/xe/lean/bullet/nuke (use any other and i will give 1 warning, and if u continue it will become a block.

💊 all of my aesthetics/subcultures (very passionate about them && will block if disrespectful): larpercore, juggalo, cultcore, doomer, slimepunk, necrotrap, bastardcore, terrorwave, incelcore, grunge, gopnik, slavic, jumpstylecore, oddcore, toxiccore, glowwave, icepunk, breakcore, acidwave, drvgcore, kinderwhore, trashcore, urbling, scemo, shinora, gurokawa, rokku gyaru, hadeko, clowncore, yamanba gyaru, maidcore

💊 i have some disorders,, iwc always ૮ ◞ ﻌ ◟ ა (i swear im nice)

💊 some of my main fandoms: fnaf, yandere simulator, class of 09, ddlc, lucky star, creepypasta, eddsworld, south park, monster high, tyler the creator lore, mlp, strawberry shortcake, homestuck, vocaloid, gorillaz, nijura maids (i dont support the creator 😕), cry of fear, touhou, anything dr suess ++ more

💊 top fictionkins;; ticci toby (crp), yakui-san (nijura maids), billy lenz, nicole (class of 09), kyle broflovski, wendy torrence, carrie white, sayori (ddlc), midori gurin (yansim), karkat vantas, bonnie (fnaf), tord (eddsworld), derpy hooves (mlp), tavros nitram, applejack (mlp), toko fukawa, biscuit tan, natsuki (ddlc), karen (class of 09), meatwad (athf), sayaka maizono, hamtaro, stanley mitchell, shitai-san, cassie (skins) clownpiece (touhou), flandre scarlett, cirno (touhou), takane yamashiro ++ wayy more.. (pfp is probably who im kinshifted as) also im fine with doubles & mediamates!!

💊 some of my favorite music artists;; smashing pumpkins, jazmin bean, sharkdrug, yabujin, korn, icp, limp bizket, kmfdm, nirvana, 2pac, 4lung (i dont support the creator), bloodhound gang, cannibal corpse, foo fighters ☹️, weezer, gorillaz, kendrick lamar, lagoyo, red hot chili peppers, tyler the creator, basement jaxx, pierce the veil, deftones, ayesha erotica, slipknot, msi, hole, sematary, live (band), dmx

💊 fave movies/shows: scream, saw, skins, the united states of leland, ANY tim burton movie, final destination, american psycho, the office, impractical jokers, south park, rick & morty, twilight, pulp fiction, amercian horror story, heathers, carrie, pet cemetery, breaking bad, mlp, edd ed and eddy, the twilight zone, goosebumps, athf, tmnt && others

💊 if you get triggered by drvgs or hospitals my blog is NAWT for you :o(

💊 moodboard account: @noapologiesbynirvana

💊 i have chronic sickness, and use hospitalcore/medcore to cope.

💊 pro dance dance revolution player 💯💯

💊 huuuuge mountain dew, surge & sprite fan

💊 feel free to ask for my discord !!

💊 dni: basic dni, anti fictionkin/otherkin/etc, anti furry, anti therian, transphobes, homophones, people who support trump (YOU'RE HORRIBLE!!!!), nsfw blogs, toxic stans (any community)

💊 gonna leave it at that for now,, might add more later !! ^_______^ 🌀🌀

[a-typical]

At almost any location in any major city on Earth, you are likely standing on thousands of bodies. These bodies represent a history that exists, often unknown, beneath our feet. While a new Crossrail station was being dug in London in 2015, 3,500 bodies were excavated from a sixteenth- and seventeenth-century cemetery under Liverpool Street, including a burial pit from the Great Plague of 1665. To cremate bodies we burn fossil fuel, thus named because it is made of decomposed dead organisms. Plants grow from the decayed matter of former plants. The pages of this book are made from the pulp of raw wood from a tree felled in its prime. All that surrounds us comes from death, every part of every city, and every part of every person.

Death avoidance is not an individual failing; it’s a cultural one. Facing death is not for the faint-hearted. It is far too challenging to expect that each citizen will do so on his or her own. Death acceptance is the responsibility of all death professionals—funeral directors, cemetery managers, hospital workers. It is the responsibility of those who have been tasked with creating physical and emotional environments where safe, open interaction with death and dead bodies is possible.

— From Here to Eternity: Traveling the World to Find the Good Death, Caitlin Doughty

[weirdlookindog]

Virgil Finlay - And Not In Peace

(Famous Fantastic Mysteries - December 1946)

[the-most-humble-blog]

Cooking at Home: The Expensive Way to Pretend You’re Saving Money

The Great Cooking Lie

Remember when everyone told us that cooking at home was the ultimate money-saving hack? A way to avoid takeout guilt, eat healthier, and keep your wallet happy? Turns out, that was a scam. By the time you’ve factored in inflated grocery prices, specialty ingredients, and the emotional toll of doing your own dishes, cooking at home often feels like the expensive way to fool yourself into thinking you’re responsible.

1. Grocery Shopping: The Silent Robbery

The grocery store is where dreams of frugality go to die.

Eggflation: Eggs used to be the poor person’s protein. Now? They cost as much as a latte at Starbucks.

Shrinkflation: Food companies are sneaky. That $5 bag of chips? Mostly air. That $3 orange juice? It’s now 75% pulp water.

Impulse Buys: Let’s not lie. You didn’t just buy what was on your list. Somewhere along the way, a bag of gourmet popcorn, a bottle of wine, and three different cheeses mysteriously ended up in your cart.

The Math That Hurts: According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, grocery prices increased by 13% in 2022 alone—the biggest jump in decades. Your “cheap home-cooked meal” isn’t looking so cheap anymore.

2. Time Is Money—And You’re Losing Both

Cooking at home isn’t just about food costs; it’s also a massive time suck.

Meal Prep Hell: Chopping, slicing, marinating—it’s basically an unpaid part-time job.

Recipe Rabbit Holes: “How do I zest a lemon?” quickly turns into a YouTube deep dive that eats your entire afternoon.

The Cleanup Toll: No one talks about how cooking makes you a hostage to your own sink.

You're Your Own Server, So Get to Work: The average person spends 37 minutes per day preparing food and 13 minutes cleaning up. That’s almost an hour daily you’ll never get back.

3. The False Economy of Food Waste

Here’s the ugly truth: cooking at home often means buying ingredients you’ll never finish.

The Herb Cemetery: How many half-used bunches of cilantro have you thrown out this year? Be honest.

Overzealous Bulk Buys: Sure, the family-size bag of spinach was a “deal”—until it became a science experiment in your fridge.

Shocking Reality: The average American household wastes about $1,500 worth of food per year. That’s a lot of takeout you could’ve guiltlessly enjoyed instead.

4. Cooking vs. Takeout: The Brutal Comparison

Let’s crunch some numbers.

Homemade Pad Thai: $25 for specialty ingredients, 2 hours of your time, and a kitchen disaster.

Takeout Pad Thai: $15, zero effort, and no dishes. You don’t need a degree in economics to see which option is the real winner.

5. The Instagram Myth of Home Cooking

Social media is partly to blame for this mess. Those influencer chefs with their immaculate kitchens and perfectly plated meals? Lies.

They’re not showing you the pile of dirty dishes off-camera.

They’re not factoring in the cost of their professional kitchen setups or $200 cutting boards.

Oh, The Humanity: You’re out here crying over a burnt casserole while @FoodieGuru56 is making soufflés look easy. The system is rigged.

6. The Emotional Toll of Home Cooking

Let’s talk about the mental exhaustion of planning, prepping, and executing meals.

The Pressure: “If I don’t cook, am I failing at adulthood?”

The Guilt: That sad, uneaten bag of kale in the fridge stares at you every time you grab a soda.

The Stress: Cooking is supposed to be relaxing, but when your smoke alarm goes off, it feels more like a horror movie.

7. When Cooking at Home Actually Works

To be fair, cooking at home can save money if you do it right:

Stick to simple recipes with ingredients you already have.

Avoid specialty items you’ll never use again (looking at you, saffron).

Embrace leftovers like they’re a gift, not a punishment.

Pro Tip: One-pot meals are your savior. Fewer ingredients, less cleanup, and more time for Netflix.

Just Order the Damn Takeout For Pete's Sake

Cooking at home was supposed to be a solution, but for many of us, it’s become a self-inflicted punishment disguised as responsibility. By the time you’ve navigated the overpriced grocery store, wasted hours prepping, and battled with your oven, you could’ve enjoyed a hot meal delivered straight to your door.

So, do yourself a favor. Order the takeout. Save your sanity. And while you’re at it, follow The Most Humble Blog for more brutally honest takes and unapologetic truths about the madness of modern life. You deserve it.

[doomreturn]

[k-i-l-l-e-r-b-e-e-6-9]

[hexedwinchester]

Why Being Manipulated into Letting Gadreel in a Huge Deal for Sam?

I know a lot of Dean Girls were very upset (and will be upset after reading this post) with Sam when Dean asked him if the roles were reversed if he would have done the same thing (letting an angel possess him to save his life). Sam simply says no! Some fans have gone to the extent of calling him selfish but no, Sam is not being selfish in that scene. It wasn't that he didn't care about his brother. He really does and that is why him saying no is actually a good thing.

Now see, Dean never had to go through the whole loss of bodily autonomy due to a possession issue (not until after he was possessed by Michael but that's way after the Gadreel plot) like Sam has been and disturbingly a lot more number of times than Dean's single rodeo with Otherworld Michael (or is it AU Michael? whatever!). Just to keep the argument simple, I am purely focusing on the loss of bodily autonomy purely from a possession POV.

When Meg possessed Sam in S2, she used his body to kill other hunters, to assault Jo and to beat Dean. Maybe she did a lot worse than that, we don't know. Who is left with the trauma of that knowledge? Sam!

The Gary-Sam body swap. This one though seems funny on the surface, it's actually kinda disturbing because Gary used Sam's body to have sex and the kid. Kinda gross enough already but that dumb kid could have easily handed over the vessel to Lucifer. Imagine, that's how it played and Sam was back into his body. Now who is trapped with Lucifer, the Devil? Sam!

Speaking of, understandably saying yes to Lucifer was Sam's call to put him back in the box but it didn't go down without blood on his hand. The moment Lucifer took control of Sam's body, he killed the demons from Sam's life that deceived him. I am guessing these were possessed people he killed in the process and not just wisps of black smoke. At Stull cemetery, he exploded Cas to bits, snapped Bobby's neck and beat up Dean to pulp! all by whose hands? Sam's!

Gadreel's possession did help Sam get better but at what cost? Kevin's death? How many nightmares did Sam have seeing his hands burning Kevin hollow? Now let me point out the aftermath of this possession which is somehow even worse than the actual possession: Crowley skewered Sam's brains with needles, hell, he even possessed Sam to wake him as if one possession was not enough. Sam literally had two supernatural beings possessing him at one time! Don't even get me started on the painful, torturous grace extraction process. Sam was willing to die in that moment because he believed his life wasn't worth saving, definitely not at the cost of Kevin's life!

Before this role reversal scene, Dean wasn't possessed by anything, so he doesn't understand how horrible it is to lose autonomy over one's mind and body. I don't expect him to grasp the gravity of it. He sees it as a healing from within. For him, if 'ends justifying the means' that's all that matters.

When every single possession has caused nothing but grave trauma to Sam Winchester, tell me why would he or anyone for that matter, in their sane heads do this on their own brother, especially when they love them so much?

Here's another very real life perspective for all those who feel Sam saying 'no' if the situation was reversed was a horrible betrayal and proof that he doesn't love Dean enough: Ever had someone you love on life support or gone through a situation where you had to put down your beloved pet? Why do we do this? is it because we don't love them? because we don't care? no! Because sometimes, it is better to let them go than to prolong their suffering by putting them through this pain. So next time you feel Sam was being selfish, or disloyal to Dean or that he didn't care enough, think about a loved one suffering through something horrible because you didn't have the guts to let go!

[thethirdromana]

Some Beetle covers, assessed

This book is about a beetle

A good two-thirds of Beetle covers take this approach, including the first edition on the left. And you know what, I can't fault it. This book sure does have a beetle in it. Bonus points for the middle one that draws on the hypnosis theme by making the beetle look like a brain.

Maybe an Egyptian beetle?

This is essentially the same approach, but more Egyptian, which I think looks very stylish. Given late Victorian Egyptomania, I'm surprised there aren't more like this. I could imagine a luxury edition with lots of gold really making this concept work.

Specifically involving a woman with a beetle on her forehead

This is an arresting image that's also sort-of justified by events in the book. It took me forever to realise what it reminded me of, and it's of course the poster for the Silence of the Lambs, which postdates both of these covers by about half a century. These are two quite sulky-looking Marjories, but perhaps that's the effect of hypnosis.

The cover illustrator read the book!

Given these covers minus the title, I think I would still have a solid chance of guessing which book they were for. The blue cover is the fully illustrated version. But actually, I think my favourite on this theme is redhaired Marjorie being menaced by the Beetle while Sydney tiptoes over in evening dress, both looking they could be in the opening credits of a Bond movie.

The cover illustrator didn't read the book

A very small part of the novel takes place in a railway station. None of it takes place in a cemetery, nor does it involve a hermit studying anatomy. With the whole world of royalty-free images of beetles to choose from, how does anyone land on any of these?

The cover illustrator really, really didn't read the book

Here we have the Beetle as represented by some Taiwanese houses, as True Blood, and as a picture that I vaguely recognise but where the image is so fried I can't even google it to check. At least the previous three had semi-appropriate spooky London vibes; these appear to be entirely random.

How about a bonus subtitle?

The first one here is clearly the weakest of the three, since it just features a picture of Richard Marsh's face, but is redeemed by choosing possibly the most metal line in the novel as its subtitle. I love both of the latter two, with a special mention to the illustrator of the middle one for actually depicting the Beetle's human form as described in the Beetle while also minimising the elements of racist caricature. No mean feat.

The cover illustrator understood the assignment

When I wrote something similar to this about Dracula covers, I was quite critical of the illustrators who decided to depict it as pulp horror. But it is so much more fitting for The Beetle. If you're drawn to buy Scantily Clad Woman Is Menaced By Giant Beetle, or Weirdly Green Man is Terrified of Mural, or even Rasputin And His Giant Beetle Spell, I feel like you genuinely might be the right audience for this terrible, terrible book.

[tlbodine]

Overthinking: Welcome to Dead House

Welcome to Dead House (1992) is first in series and proof of concept for what Goosebumps would become. To briefly contextualize the series: R.L. Stine (Bob to his friends) began as a comedy writer. He worked in magazines and television, helping to create the surreal muppet humor kid's show Eureka's Castle.

He started writing the Fear Street series -- a bunch of YA horror novels -- in the late 80s, at a time when horror was at its peak in pop culture and teen slashers were all over the movie theater. But horror for younger kids was a largely untapped market rife for the taking. (Alvin Schwartz's Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark books blazed the way initially, between 1989 and 1991).

And thus, Goosebumps was born. The challenge? Writing books that would intrigue the middle grade set (generally readers between 8-12) and deliver them some proper scares without being too traumatizing. Where the Fear Street books often draw on tropes from 80s slashers, Goosebumps is more likely to emulate the kind 1950s pulp monster movies that Stine would have grown up on. Eventually, a pretty consistent formula would arise, and some favorite recurring elements begin here: siblings, a dog, an unfamiliar location, unhelpful parents. But in other ways, Welcome to Dead House is decidedly un-Goosebumps-like. We'll break that down, but first...

The Story

Welcome to Dead House is about Amanda and Josh, siblings who are rather reluctantly moved to the unnervingly named town of Dark Falls after their father (a writer eager to quit his day job and write full-time) inherits a house from an unknown great-uncle. He's excited for the opportunity to sell the old house and live off that until his career really takes off, and his wife is going along with that plan for....some reason. Hey, it was the 90s, maybe it could have worked!

Along for the ride is Petey, a white terrier who's normally sweet-tempered and obedient but will spend the rest of this book barking and growling at everyone he meets. If they'd just paid attention to Petey's instincts, this book's tragedies could have been avoided. Alas.

After a tour by the charming, handsome, (and utterly unpopular with Petey) realtor Mr. Dawes, the family moves into the big house. It's on a shady street, with tall trees looming over all the buildings, and a cemetery at the end of the block just past the school. Nobody ever seems to turn their lights on. We do eventually meet the neighborhood kids, though. There's a ton of them and they're very friendly but more than a little unnerving. Also, they keep telling Amanda that they used to live in her house. What's up with that?

We eventually figure out, after a few nights at atmospheric creepy haunting events -- figures seemingly appearing and disappearing on the stairs, giggling in the closet, curtains fluttering without a breeze -- that the neighborhood kids are undead ghouls. In fact, everyone in town is dead, courtesy of a toxic gas leak from a nearby factory. And in order to maintain their living dead status, they must annually sacrifice and drink the blood of a family. Which they do by luring them out with an enticing letter about inheriting The Dead House.

What a racket!

We find this out after, tragically, catching up with a now-ghoulified Petey. They had to kill the dog because he was onto them. Those jerks. Also, they're about to start the sacrifice with mom and dad. Luckily, the ghouls are weak to bright light, so the kids are able to free their parents by knocking down a tree (just go with it) and they haven't sold their old house so they pack up and leave right away.

Just in time for...new owners to show up at Dead House? Amanda tells them, "I used to live in your house." before they speed away, and surely that realtor couldn't have been Mr. Dawes...

Overthinking It

I read Welcome to Dead House the first time out of the library. I was already a dyed-in-the-wool Goosebumps fan at this point, so I read it with a kind of reverence, as if it were an ancient tome and not a book that had come out less than five years before I read it.

I have, since, always remembered it as the only Goosebumps book where a character actually dies.

In fact, in my memory, all of the characters die. That's the way I've remembered it for thirty years: the parents are lured to a party with all the neighborhood ghouls. There they are dead and turned. Petey is found dead and turned. And in the end, the kids have joined the rest of the community in perpetuating the cycle.

"I used to live in your house."

I had, apparently, completely forgotten the climax where we rescue the parents. What I had remembered instead was the truly chilling line from Mr. Dawes: "It's time to join your parents. It doesn't hurt to die."

Now, this would not be the first time I have rewritten the ending of a childhood story to be darker than it actually was. We all recall that I spent many years firmly believing that The Velveteen Rabbit ended with the titular stuffed bunny being burned alive in the trash heap. But in this case, if Reddit is any indication at least, I'm not the only one who thinks Stine's ending is at least ambiguous.

I think the ending I remember is certainly a stronger one, even if it's likely too dark for a Goosebumps book. It's already brutal that we kill Petey, and that the kids discover him, smelling like a corpse, with red eyes and a total disinterest in them. It's certainly for the best that they didn't find their parents in a similar state. (So why do I remember so certainly that they did?)

The book is at least purposefully ambiguous about the survival of Mr. Dawes. This is perhaps justified in that Amanda, our narrator, is frequently letting her imagination get away with her. Her natural-born anxiety is the main vector of scares for the first 2/3rds of the book. She's constantly getting herself worked up about things that aren't really there. Or is she? Because she's not really wrong about the ghost kids in her house. Her instincts actually seem pretty spot-on. I hope she lives long enough to learn to trust her own gut feelings.

I have many unanswered questions about the mechanics of the haunting in this book. They seem to be physical beings that can touch you and interact with the physical world well enough to play softball. But they can also seemingly appear and disappear at will inside the house? And the beam of a strong flashlight is enough (in the book's most horrifying sequence) to melt a ghoul's flesh off and render him to dust (not before his eyeballs pop out and roll away) but the dog isn't affected by the flashlight? Is it because he's newly turned? Are the rules different for dogs?

Also like. How does this entire town work. Is it just their neighborhood that's full of ghosts? Are there ghouls working at the grocery store? Who manages the utilities? Aside from Mr. Dawes, we never see any other adults, although presumably they must be there at the end in time to kill(?) them all (?) with sunlight??

At one point, George Romero wrote a screenplay for a film adaptation, and I am deeply saddened that we never got to see it made. I'm 100% Here For This.

If You Liked This One, THESE Will Really Give You Goosebumps

If you enjoy the idea of a young heroine rescuing her clueless parents, may I pointed you toward Neil Gaiman's Coraline (book or movie) or the Miyazaki film Spirited Away?

(I know Gaiman is persona non grata. But Henry Selick's film adaptation is top-notch. Your choice whether you feel comfortable supporting that).

For the specific horror of a beloved pet becoming an aloof, living corpse, there is of course Stephen King's Pet Sematary.

As for stories about haunted houses, there are too many to count. For the vibes of this particular book, though, may I direct you to the OG 13 Ghosts, directed by William Castle in 1960. It has essentially nothing in common with the 2000s film of the same name. Instead, it features a family who get the opportunity to change their socioeconomic status by moving into a home they've seemingly inherited, only to discover it comes with more than a dozen ghosts...and that's the least of their worries. Compare and contrast with Sinister (2012) in which an author's insistence on moving his family to a haunted house is their undoing.

When was the last time YOU read Welcome to Dead House? Do you remember the ending any differently than I do?

[sirenascelestiales]

The Angel's Game, by Carlos Ruiz Zafón

In this powerful, labyrinthian thriller, David Martín is a pulp fiction writer struggling to stay afloat. Holed up in a haunting abandoned mansion in the heart of Barcelona, he furiously taps out story after story, becoming increasingly desperate and frustrated. Thus, when he is approached by a mysterious publisher offering a book deal that seems almost too good to be real, David leaps at the chance. But as he begins the work, and after a visit to the Cemetery of Forgotten Books, he realizes that there is a connection between his book and the shadows that surround his dilapidated home and that the publisher may be hiding a few troubling secrets of his own. Once again, Ruiz Zafón takes us into a dark, gothic Barcelona and creates a breathtaking tale of intrigue, romance, and tragedy.

The Cemetery of Forgotten Books