Stephen King


Pages: 1 2 3
brilliant writer i've only started reading his books but soo far so good

>>By steve36   (Saturday, 23 Oct 2004 21:42)

i just could never get into king's books. . .

they're boring. . .too many details. . .too drawn out. . .

the whole time i'm reading one of his books "come on now. . .get to the damn point please!" keeps coming to mind. . .

now clive barker and joyce carol oates. . .they keep my attention. . .

>>By drowninginflame   (Monday, 25 Oct 2004 19:19)

I think King's book are so good BECAUSE they take time. They go into so much detail on characters' backstory, and then if the character gets killed later on you feel it more, it has more impact. I read a book by Richard Layman a while ago. It didn't take much time on backstory or characters' thoughts and... well it was crap. The only time Stephen King books are bad is when the climax doesn't justify the build-up. The build-up is always superb, but sometimes like with The Dark Half the ending just isn't very interesting.

>>By Flagg   (Tuesday, 26 Oct 2004 19:51)

I love all of Stephen King!
He his really the terror master and i love all my movies with his stories.
Great books ,great pleasures!

>>By Maria* Henriques   (Friday, 29 Oct 2004 10:51)

i read secreat window thought that was good, love fire starter.

>>By pinkit2   (Wednesday, 17 Nov 2004 00:04)

I drank the King Kool-Aid long ago, when I was barely kicking into adolescence. Unlike my loves of Jimmy Buffett, Skidz pants, or Slim Jims, my love of King's books has persevered.
Simply put, and I will argue this with those who wish to take the high road, I think Stephen King's only current peer in terms of sheer story-telling brilliance is Salman Rushdie. Nobody else that I can think of teases out character development, setting, and plot with such seeming ease or skill as he does. Literary? Hardly. Classic? Maybe, though I somehow doubt anything beyond his boundless imagination will survive the test of time. More than anything, though, the man is a consummate storyteller, and his influence will be felt in the people he has inspired, who number among the very, very many.
That said, I think The Dark Tower series -and particularly the later books- truly marks a new and interesting stage in his development (and possibly the last). His early works -IT, The Stand, The Shining, Pet Semetary, etc...- are the classic semi-psychological semi-mythic horror that most associate with King. His later works -Hearts in Atlantis, Dolores Claiborne, Rose Madder- are far more relationship based, dwell more on the past than the present, and don't use as much outright fantasy as his previous stuff. Of course, these distinctions aren't strict, as Rage and The Long Walk feel just as out of place with the old stuff as they do with the new, and the new Bachman's definitely feel more like the old King.
In the later Dark Tower, from Wizards and Glass onward, King seeems to have taken tentative steps to fuse literary and pop writing. He admitted as much around the time he was nominated for the Lifetime Achievement. There's a lot of postmodern flimflam going on in these later books-heavy referencing of both his own works and other pop culture ephemera; metatextual elements of the story being written and unwritten as the narrative progresses; inclusion of the author into the text. I'm not saying that he's pulling off anything with the firepower of Ulysses, or even Infinite Jest, but there's more going on in these last Tower books than simple, straightforward mass market writing. Tying it all together seems to be King's desire to fuse all, or at least many, of his works together-making the Dark Tower the unifying core to his body of work. Certainly ambitious, and really interesting, as few writers today have either the extensive catalogue or desire to create their epic so late in their careers (you don't see Roth, Updike, or Pynchon trying anything like this, yet King, a pop writer, is attempting something more audacious than anything they've tried in years and still gets shat on for being a shallow bestseller machine). I don't have any big theories, and, since I'm just into the last book, I can't really comment on how successful he is. Still, I think we're just starting to see Stephen King get long-overdue props for being an important and interesting writer.

And, not to be a snob, I do have to echo former complaint's about spelling and such. I'm not a militant grammarian, and I'm prone to error myself, but for christ's sake at least make your posts legible. Is this a generational thing? Has the IM/TextMessage style taken over to such a degree that people don't know when to use a comma, or the difference between their/there/they're, or, for that matter, that they don't have to PUT EVERYTHING IN CAPS TO MAKE THEIR POINT? Man, in my mid-twenties and already an uptight relic. I sound like my mom.

>>By Ortho Stice   (Tuesday, 18 Jan 2005 19:34)

Bravo Ortho, an intelligent post worth my time to read and absorb.

>>By gipsy   (Saturday, 22 Jan 2005 22:48)

I loved fire starter. Also misary was great the book was better than the film but I always say that. Hope my grammer and spelling is ok.

>>By pinkit2   (Sunday, 6 Feb 2005 01:56)

:) stephan king is da best ......... i have only started 2 read his books and have loved what i have red ...... the thought of church still lingers 6 months later ............ along with thoughts of gage . ridding the bullet was good 2 ................ i just got the book "Every things eventual " ......... short storys are the best :)

P.S " who gives a flying fuck about grammer on here.......... just write whatca going to write and be gon .............. try using websters dictonary if you really need to be right on target ....... other than that using short terms like "2" in replace of to is just fine .........

>>By An Evil Girl   (Tuesday, 5 Jul 2005 23:13)

I have only read 2 of Stephen King's books: Pet Semetary and 'Salems Lot, both were really good and extremely interesting! His books are so amazing, most of the time when I'm reading one of his books I'm thinking "Wow, how does he come up with this stuff? Where the hell does he get his ideas for all these books?" I love the movie Storm of the Century but unfortunately I haven't read the book yet (but I will soon, just won one on ebay a few days ago!) Pet Semetary was a pretty good movie too! Anyway, Stephen King is a great writer, I can't believe people have only written three pages about him!

>>By saphira   (Friday, 8 Jul 2005 05:47)

Stephen king is...for my money..THE most over rated writer of the 20th century .His never use 2 or 3 words when a coupla thousand will easily do approach...annoys me greatly.I choked down his stilted,overly complex plot for the stand on a reccomend from a friend...Just awful.On the upside...he did write an EXCELLENT novella..."The ballad of the flexible bullet"...truly a great piece of work!.I also enjoyed tommyknockers...but everything else is just more of the same analy retentive mishmash of literary styles. If you really love horror and excellently written and planned books...Dean koontz is the daddy!

>>By sheeva   (Tuesday, 2 Aug 2005 22:15)

I tried to read The Face by Dean Koontz but couldn't get into it; there seemed to be no mystery in it, I stopped reading half way through it.

>>By saphira   (Friday, 5 Aug 2005 03:36)

I dont find his books scarey no book is the only book i thought was gross was the oman but not scarey he is rich and i dont blame him but his books have gone a tad dry.

>>By pinkit2   (Wednesday, 31 Aug 2005 18:07)

Well, if no book is scary, why criticize King for not writing scary books?

>>By Just Jon   (Thursday, 1 Sep 2005 01:35)

He's just brilliant.

Lisey's Story is not one of his best, but he clearly hasn't lost his touch.

>>By Flagg   (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 16:50)

I agree, Flagg, Lisey's Story may not be his best, overall, but I'll never forget Boo'ya Moon. King took me to a place that I'd never heard of before, but always suspected was there. Cat

>>By suncat   (Sunday, 15 Jul 2007 00:17)

I'm reading Blaze now, it's very good. Seems to be King's take on Of Mice And Men, essentially.

>>By Flagg   (Sunday, 15 Jul 2007 01:01)

Sheeva no offense but you're crazy. Stephen King's style is perfect. If he used 2 or 3 words instead of a couple of thousand the characters would be nowhere near as deep or believable as they are. From what I've read of Koontz (admittedly not much) he is a lesser version of King.

>>By Flagg   (Sunday, 15 Jul 2007 01:18)

Wow, Nothing since 2007.

That's amazing, there are so many things to say about his books (I like IT, The langoliers, The secret window, etc...)

could you please recommend me another good story?

>>By JazzGL   (Sunday, 25 Oct 2009 06:19)

JazzGL, I really liked Bag of Bones.

>>By Mizzi   (Tuesday, 1 Dec 2009 13:59)

The discussion board is currently closed.