PROLOGUE

New York City 2:32 A.M.
Everyone has a Cordova story, whether they like it or not.


Maybe your next-door neighbor found one of his movies in an old box in her attic and never entered a dark room alone again. Or your boyfriend bragged he'd discovered a contraband copy of At Night All Birds Are Black on the Internet and after watching refused to speak of it, as if it were a horrific ordeal he'd barely survived.

Whatever your opinion of Cordova, however obsessed with his work or indifferent—he's there to react against. He's a crevice, a black hole, an unspecified danger, a relentless outbreak of the unknown in our overexposed world. He's underground, looming unseen in the corners of the dark. He's down under the railway bridge in the river with all the missing evidence, and the answers that will never see the light of day.

He's a myth, a monster, a mortal man.

And yet I can't help but believe when you need him the most, ...

Please be aware that this discussion guide will contain spoilers!

1. Professor Wolfgang Beckman accuses Scott of having "no respect for the murk. For the blackly unexplained. The un-nail downable." How does Scott's perspective on mystery and the "blackly unexplained" change over the course of the novel?
2. Nora asks Scott, "How much evidence do you need before you wonder if it just might be real?" Do you think Scott's skepticism is a mark of pride, as well as rationality, as Nora suggests? Why does he wish to believe in the curse after his conversation with Inez Gallo? How ready were you to believe in the curse?
3. Scott is relentless in his pursuit of the truth about Cordova. How far would you have gone, in his situation? Is there a point at which you would ...