Grant Allen’s Folk Horror Mediation of the Science and Spiritualist Debate

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

There is some fascinating material here, but there is a danger that the reader may get bogged down in detail. I would suggest putting in stronger signposting and perhaps cutting down some of the context.

The essay’s investigation of ‘cultural transmission’ has the potential to open up a space for negotiation between material and spiritualist readings in literary texts. This argument could be developed and sustained more clearly. The essay could also develop the theme of ‘culture and collective storytelling by everyday people, like Joyce, as a kind of spiritual force in itself.’ The idea of an ‘academic encounter with rural ghosts’ could also be usefully developed in relation to the later analysis of devolution. It would be helpful throughout to focus on the specific conditions of the fin de siècle in the context of historic representation. The essay could draw out the significance of the discussion of characters not seeing historic or ancient ghosts more fully. Rudolph is finally rescued by ‘a man in sixteenth−century costume’. The warning not to show steel is reversed in this denouement.

 There are some anomalies within paragraphs, as in ‘Despite such attempts at explanation, Wallace’s spiritualism hurt his career as a scientist.’ This doesn’t align with the sense that Wallace ‘provocatively suggests’ the power of spirits to direct events.

The essay would benefit from sharper framing throughout. The Wallace / Romanes rivalry is dealt with at length and threatens to destabilise the main argument. The transition ,‘The next section pursues a close reading of Allen’s “Pallinghurst Barrow” as reflecting on this real-life encounter debate Wallace and Romanes’, could be placed earlier to lead in to this debate and more attention could be paid to its significance for Allen’s fiction.

The Spectator story feels winched in at the end and could either be brought earlier or omitted.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of the English is fine, but does require careful proof reading as there are numerous typos.

Author Response

please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article reads Grant Allen's 1892 story 'Pallinghurst Barrow' as a commentary on fin-de-siecle spiritualist debates (in particular the Wallace-Romanes debate) and Herbert Spencer's sociological explanation of ghosts as a form of collective storytelling. While Allen is generally thought to have been an atheist, the article argues that folk horror afforded him an opportunity to consider contemporaneous spiritualist debates. The article demonstrates how the story pits spiritualist and materialist arguments against one another to suggest that Gothic storytelling might be 'its own form of religion' (p. 3).

Much of the article consists of a discussion of the Wallace-Romanes controversy, followed by an exploration of Spencer's ghost theory. The article argues that Allen's story acts as both a verification and a complication of spiritualist debates and affirms the power of collective storytelling. While I agree that the story allows Allen to entertain diverse viewpoints, this argument also feels rather tentative and uncertain, perhaps because it seems to be trying to  establish Allen's own position in these debates.

Given the focus of the special issue on Gothic spiritualism, I would encourage the author to reframe the argument not around Allen's own beliefs but around the capacity of the Gothic short story to accommodate multiple, conflicting possibilities. Regardless of Allen's own beliefs, the Gothic story allowed him (and indeed other authors of the period) the opportunity to address the tensions inherent in their society without necessarily coming down firmly on any one side as one would in factual writing. I think this argument is already implicit in the article as it is but it could be more firmly developed with reference to genre, and this would also align the article more closely with the focus of the special issue.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The written expression is generally fine but the article needs a really thorough proofreading. There are lots of errors with punctuation, spelling, apostrophes, etc. - nothing that careful proofreading won't fix, though.

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article has been substantially reworked and now provides an exciting way of thinking about the conditions of the late Victorian ghost story, at the interface of gender, colonialism and materialism. I would highly recommend publication at this stage. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of the English is fine, but does require careful proof reading as there are numerous typos.