Ghosts are commonly associated with a negative connotation. We have all heard of haunting ghost stories where poor bystanders are frightened or intimidated by alleged "ghost activity." However, "The Lawyer and the Ghost" by Charles Dickens and "20th Century Ghost" by Joe Hill shed a more optimistic light on ghost activity in their short stories. While the stories differ, they both include fiction accounts of ghost encounters where the protagonist either finds their own identity or help a ghost find their identity through interaction. The two stories have contrasting themes; in "The Lawyer and the Ghost" the ghost is dwelling and lingering in a place that represents a depressing pass. On the contrary, the ghost in "20th Century Ghost," Imogene Gilchrist, chooses to spend her afterlife in a theater watching movies, an integral part of her identity. Despite a contrasting theme, both stories are similar in the way that they both involve a relationship where either the narrator or the ghosts benefit from one another.

"The Lawyer and the Ghost" features a lawyer who is a new tenant to an apartment in London, England. Soon after the lawyer moves in all of his furniture and gets settled in, a ghost confronts him. After a brief introduction the ghost describes how he was once the tenant of his apartment. He goes on to criticize the apartment, '"In this room,' replied the apparition, 'my world ruin was worked, and I and my children beggared. In this press, papers in a long, long suit, which accumulated for years, were deposited'" (Dickens 308). Moments after barging his way onto a property that is no longer his, he immediately bashes the apartment that was once his. He goes on to say, "In this room, when I had died of grief, and long-deferred hope, two wily harpers divided the wealth for which I had contested during a wretched existence" (Dickens 308). It becomes obvious right away that this ghost was a cynical man with a poor and regretful life. One can make an inference that he is either warning the current tenant to help him avoid taking a similar life path, or to deter him away from the residence. Shortly after, he explains his reasoning, "The only period at which I can re-visit the earth-about the scenes of my long-protracted misery. This apartment is mine: leave it to me!" (Dickens 308). Despite having a negative view of this apartment where he spent a good part of his life in, he chooses to dwell in this apartment. This presents a confusing concept and theme to an audience, open for interpretation. Perhaps the most reasonable explanation is that the ghost wants to torment and frighten current residents. Since he had a regretful and unfortunate life, he believes that current tenants should have to go through the same pain and fortune that the ghost himself endured. In a previous passage, "Bartleby, The Scrivener: A Story of Wall Street," Bartleby acts in a similar way. Bartleby's office is a place that brings him no joy, and just like the ghost, he dreads this place. Despite this, he still decides to stay in his office, and lives there. A stranger tells the protagonist of the story that; "You are responsible for the man you left here. He refuses to do any copying; he refuses to do any thing; he says he prefers not to, and he refuses to quit the premises" (Melville 288). Although he hates his job and office, Bartleby chooses to stick around anyways. Both Bartleby and "The Lawyer and the Ghost" have similar themes, leaving reasoning for both these men's actions up in the air.

Rather than spending her afterlife living in her own pity, the ghost of Imogene Gilchrist chooses to spend her time where she enjoys herself the most. Imogene's life was cut short, but before her death she was an aspiring actor, known for her skill, sense of humor, and laugh. Her drama professor says, "I always thought she'd be a movie star, she had those looks and that laugh. All she needed was someone to point a camera at her and she would have been famous" (Hill 319). Imogene had potential as an actor, having all the right parts necessary to make it in Hollywood. In addition, she was a huge movie buff, attending shows at her favorite theatre, the Rosebud, regularly. Even though her life was cut short at age 19, her love for movies and acting lived on. When the soon-to-be owner of the theater, Alec, meets Imogene's ghost for the first time, she says, "' I could sit in this theater forever,' whispered someone beside him. It was a girl's voice. 'Just sit here and watch and never leave'" (Hill 316). Unlike the ghost in "The Lawyer and the Ghost," Imogene decides to spend her afterlife in a place that brings her the most joy. While both places make up each ghost's identity, Imogene uses the theater to extend her life that was cut short. By staying in the movie theater throughout her death, she continues her life of acting and watching movies whilst dead. Cinephilia, a story of movie-fanatics in the 20th century, describes them as, "'Cinephile' describes a state of mind and an emotion that, one the whole, has been seductive to a happy few while proving beneficial to film culture in general" (Valck 27). Imogene fits this description due to her obsession with the film industry, while benefiting the film culture as a whole by giving it her gift of acting. Due to both her love of movies and main identity of being a potentially great actor, it seems fit that she spends her afterlife where she spent the most time alive-the movie theater.

Although the two stories have their differences, both are similar in the way that in both stories there is a beneficial relationship between the ghost and protagonist. In "The Lawyer and the Ghost," the protagonist offers the ghost advice that changes the course of his afterlife. In "20th Century Ghost," Imogene makes the owner of the Rosebud, Alec, realize how he would like to spend his afterlife. At the end of "The Lawyer and the Ghost," the Lawyer asks the ghost a question. He asks the ghost, "That when you have an opportunity of visiting the fairest spots of earth... you should always return exactly to the very places where you have been most miserable" (Dickens 309). This is eye opening for the ghost, who responds, "'You are very right, sir' said the ghost politely, 'it never struck me till now; I'll try a change of air directly'" (Dickens 309). The Lawyer benefits the ghost by opening his eyes, and making him realize that there is no reason for the ghost to dwell in a place that resembles a troubled and depressing past. In an instant the ghost takes this advice and decides to roam different parts of the world, perhaps a part that will bring him joy. The lawyer greatly benefits the ghost by giving him this simple advice. Similarly in "20th Century Ghost," there is a beneficial relationship but this time it is the living character taking advice from the ghost. Imogene has always had an impact on Alec's life, since he met her ghost at a young age. He admired how she chose to spend her afterlife in his theater, spending her time enjoying films. As Alec starts to get older and older, his theater starts to get more and more run down. Knowing that he will likely die very soon, Alec decides to follow the example of Imogene and die in the theater. Imogene died decades before in the same theater while watching the Wizard of Oz. Alec attempts to replicate this, "The Wizard of Oz is ending... the house lights are up, and there is a crowd of people gathered around Alec's body, slumped heavily in his seat. Steven Greenberg is in the aisle, yelping hysterically for someone to bring a doctor" (Hill 325). Alec could have gone out in a variety of ways, but chose to die like Imogene because not only did he admire her, but the way that this ghost spent her entire afterlife experiencing something that she loves-movies. Alec and Imogene share the same love of movies, so it makes sense as to why he would want to do this.

Both of these ghost stories contrast as well as relate to each other. In both stories, there is a beneficial relationship between the ghost and protagonist. However, the two ghosts differ by their decisions as to where they spend their afterlife, and why. Both of the stories leave room for interpretation by the audience, especially when trying to figure out the motivation behind some of their decisions. When going beyond simply the surface of the text of these two stories and looking at their themes and interpretation, both contrasting and similar points start to stand out.
