Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have a question for those of you who have read many or most of Stephen King's works. Have you noticed a difference between his older works like Night Shift, The Shining, The Stand, 'salem's Lot, and his newer novels like Cell, Duma Key, Under The Dome, ect? I've noticed quite a disparity and I think some of his novels like Hearts In Atlantis and Bag Of Bones seem to be the bridge between "old" King and "new" King. I'm not saying the change is negative or that any of his works are lacking, just that they seem different to me. What do you, as King fans, think? Is it just my imagination?
I miss the Old King stuff, I really really really put effort into enjoying anything past Dark Tower, and I couldn't, not even Cell.
Pet sematary, shining, salem's lot , skeleton crew, firestarter, those were the days..
My feeling is that we have a "kinder, gentler" Stephen King these days. It's not necessary good or bad but, yes, definitely different.
I agree completely, different isn't neccessarily bad. I think his writing has improved greatly, his prose is beautiful. Sometimes I do miss a straightforward horror novel like 'salem's Lot or Pet Sematary without all the allusions to the DT, but I adore Hearts In Atlantis and Bag Of Bones. King's writing brings me great joy and actually he is the only famous person I'd like to meet. I'm glad his talent is finally being recognized.
I think earlier on, he wrote more scifi and "horror"...years later he expanded to psychological horror and human nature.
I like his mid-years, The Stand and Tommyknockers are my favorites.
I have loved every one of his books except the Tommyknockers. That's the only one of his books I was not able to complete. Gonna try it again in a couple of weeks, when I've finished The Talisman and Black House and will let you know at that time if I'm able to get through it.
I loved King's early stuff: The Stand, Dead Zone. . . .
I got turned off by CUJO and then Christine. Pet Semetary was the last one I read for another ten years. Then I read HEARTS IN ATLANTIS, GREEN MILE and I loved them. He can tell a great story but at times they are too gruesome. I always wait for other friends to read them and go from their critiques. I save a lot of time that way.
I miss the Old King stuff, I really really really put effort into enjoying anything past Dark Tower, and I couldn't, not even Cell.
Pet sematary, shining, salem's lot , skeleton crew, firestarter, those were the days..
I much prefer King's earlier works, too. I first discovered King when I was in middle school. I went to the library and found a copy of The Stand. It looked like it might be a good read....Wow. I was an instant fan and proceeded to read everything he had written up until that point.
I never really got into Dark Tower and the books since that series have all been o.k. for me (I enjoyed Pet Semetary, Christine, Misery and the Dark Half. Books like Needful Things and Rose Madder aren't my favorites). There is a definite difference between the old King and the new King, IMO.
Last edited by springfieldva; 12-28-2009 at 02:56 PM..
I see I'm not the only one who has noticed a difference. I wonder why his style has changed so much, even the short stories in "Just After Sunset" seem very different from early collections like "Night Shift". What do you find different? Why do you think it's changed? If you had to choose, which style do you perfer?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.