Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Books
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-05-2010, 02:43 PM
 
858 posts, read 704,320 times
Reputation: 846

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheryjohns View Post
Here's the major problem with The Dome - it's a huge book that spends time doing multiple character developments for dozens of people - and then just wraps it up in a haphazard fashion to end the book. You are left thinking "WTH?". It is as he looked at the size of it and thought "Oh, I need to finish - let me do so in the next 30 pages". I have read The Stand about three times. I will probably never read The Dome again.

This sums it up perfectly for me. I felt so cheated once I finished Under the Dome. I really did finish in such a weird way. I felt the whole Big Jim storyline finish was a bunch of nothing. I wouldn't recommend Under the Dome to anyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-26-2010, 02:54 PM
 
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
1,914 posts, read 7,127,475 times
Reputation: 1987
This thread has brought back some fond memories of my walking close to 5 miles to the local library to check out King's books. My first book was Firestarter and I was about 11 years old
After that I read every book of his that I could get my hands on. I could not read the ones he wrote under his pseudonym I just couldn't get into them. And it has been years since I have even looked to see what else he's up to. I am looking him up on Amazon right now! Thanks for the discussion
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2010, 06:19 PM
 
32 posts, read 44,083 times
Reputation: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by 60'sGal View Post
It's really very simple. King is an angry man. He is a liberal. He hates all things Christian. He is beyond wealthy and has discovered that people will spend hard earned money to read anything he writes. Therefore, he has grown arrogant, lazy and complacent and thinks he can write 500 pages of his personal rants and raves and then, to top it all off, assumes all of us are as stupid as he already thinks we are and will pay good money for it. And, of course he is right.

I asked for and received "Under the Dome" for my birthday. I have since apologized to my son and his wife for wasting their money and have kicked myself for wasting a birthday gift. It was nothing but an angry, bitter King hating on Conservatives and Christians.

I could not bring myself to throw away a birthday gift, so left it at my work place break room for someone else to waste their time on.
Sorry but this is a shameless rambling against King. King is one of those very rare authors who respects his audience and tries to give his best to satisfy them. He values his Constant Readers and he knows that it is those readers who made what he is. There must be a reason why King is called Uncle Steve all around the world.

As for bashing on Conservatives and Christians; it is his view. And he never does it for the sake of bashing, he gives good reasons and mostly he is right. Under the Dome was right to the point. Just travel outside the USA and see how much people in the world hate Bush and his accomplices.

Finally no one puts a gun at your head or, as a matter of fact, anyone's head, to spend his HARDEARNED money to buy Stephen King book. We ask and he writes. This is as simple as it gets. This is a capitalist world and Stephen King, as expected, plays it to its rules.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2012, 06:10 PM
 
Location: Illinois
1 posts, read 1,441 times
Reputation: 11
I just finished writing my book and there truly aren’t a lot of African Americans who write in Kings genre. My main characters are white and the story is told almost completely in P.O.V. from both killer and cop. I use words that I dare not say in public or at least certain company. However I feel it can be a natural extension of a character's persona. My brother who has been doing a fantastic job editing believes it’s a great story but is not sure how it will be perceived by family or friends. This book is anything but politically correct. I enjoy the freedom to dip into my character's psyche some may not like what they see. I realize saying I am not a homophobe, racist or misogynist but my characters are; may sound like stating I am not gay but my boyfriend is. Nobody wishes to be censored; I use to think King was a racist myself when I was a teenager. I grew-up in the Suburbs , most and at times all my friends were white. So if I heard the ‘N’ word depending on the size of the individual it was fight or flight. However working in Chicago I was called the ‘N’ word friendly fire by more black people in a year than in my previous twenty. The first time I almost hit a brother because I was so shocked. That was 1989 now as a writer I feel watering down words won’t have the impact I desire. In some cases I do self-censor myself mainly when my character is having too much wicked fun. I think a good storyline pushes the limit an alters the reader's state of mind I found it’s their only words and I’ve been black all my life. My book is meant for a mature audience. Whether King is racist nobody can see into his heart but I am sure he realizes his success was due to a rainbow spectrum of fans and I am guessing green is his favorite color.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2012, 12:26 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,175 posts, read 22,146,578 times
Reputation: 23792
In his earlier works, King used hypocrisy as a way to heighten his villains. The main characters in The Stand are two sides of the same coin; both are seen to be saviors by others, but the villain is hypocritical, while the other is pure of heart.
Annie Wilkes in Misery was a hypocrite; she believed she was doing something good while doing something very bad. Carrie's mom was just like Annie. Her confidence in her beliefs allowed no self-examination.
In Christine, a car was a hypocrite; it turned feeling good into something very bad. The villain in Firestarter was a complete hypocrite. The aliens in Windcatcher were hypocrites. Those aliens used our beliefs of right and wrong to their own ends.
Therein lies the tale. Good intentions go bad through hypocrisy, and human suffering ensues, but virtue triumphs in the end.

King often linked hypocrisy with mental derangement. Annie Wilkes comes across as being as crazy as a peach orchard boar to us, but not to her, and her craziness is heightened by her being a nurse, a profession where deep care for other's welfare is a part of the job description.

In his post-accident works, King has often used indifference as a primary theme. The reasons why the dome in Under The Dome appeared, why the people trapped in it were allowed to suffer, why everything attempted to alleviate the suffering failed, and why it disappeared were never fully explained or explored. King only offers us a brief sentence to satisfy our indignation as to why this was permitted to happen, but he explores his character's thoughts, actions, and consequences to an indifferent act for a hundred pages.

In From A Buick V-8, this theme of indifference is carried to the extreme. We are never allowed much of anything as to why and how things happened- they just happened. I think that King came to realize that, as much as all of us think of ourselves as being the center of the Universe, the opposite is true. Sh*t happens, and we don't deal with randomness very well.

King used indifference as his theme before the accident in the book I found to be his most scary. Pet Cemetery. Bringing the innocent or wronged dead back to life- having the chance to indignantly strike back at nature's indifference to us as a species- is a deep human need that has been often explored by writers for thousands of years, and is the foundation of at least one major religion. What would any person do to bring back a loved one, especially an innocent child? Even if that person knew the outcome would be very bad?

King has joined the ranks of many other good writers with this. Kurt Vonnegut used this theme throughout all his books, as have many other esteemed authors. Melville explored the indifference of nature for half of Moby Dick, and Charles Dickens did nothing but explore human indifference to other humans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2012, 07:12 AM
 
Location: Windham County, VT
10,855 posts, read 6,332,250 times
Reputation: 22048
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
In his earlier works, King used hypocrisy as a way to heighten his villains. The main characters in The Stand are two sides of the same coin; both are seen to be saviors by others, but the villain is hypocritical, while the other is pure of heart.
Annie Wilkes in Misery was a hypocrite; she believed she was doing something good while doing something very bad. Carrie's mom was just like Annie. Her confidence in her beliefs allowed no self-examination.
In Christine, a car was a hypocrite; it turned feeling good into something very bad. The villain in Firestarter was a complete hypocrite. The aliens in Windcatcher were hypocrites. Those aliens used our beliefs of right and wrong to their own ends.
Therein lies the tale. Good intentions go bad through hypocrisy, and human suffering ensues, but virtue triumphs in the end.

King often linked hypocrisy with mental derangement. Annie Wilkes comes across as being as crazy as a peach orchard boar to us, but not to her, and her craziness is heightened by her being a nurse, a profession where deep care for other's welfare is a part of the job description.

In his post-accident works, King has often used indifference as a primary theme. The reasons why the dome in Under The Dome appeared, why the people trapped in it were allowed to suffer, why everything attempted to alleviate the suffering failed, and why it disappeared were never fully explained or explored. King only offers us a brief sentence to satisfy our indignation as to why this was permitted to happen, but he explores his character's thoughts, actions, and consequences to an indifferent act for a hundred pages.

In From A Buick V-8, this theme of indifference is carried to the extreme. We are never allowed much of anything as to why and how things happened- they just happened. I think that King came to realize that, as much as all of us think of ourselves as being the center of the Universe, the opposite is true. Sh*t happens, and we don't deal with randomness very well.

King used indifference as his theme before the accident in the book I found to be his most scary. Pet Cemetery. Bringing the innocent or wronged dead back to life- having the chance to indignantly strike back at nature's indifference to us as a species- is a deep human need that has been often explored by writers for thousands of years, and is the foundation of at least one major religion. What would any person do to bring back a loved one, especially an innocent child? Even if that person knew the outcome would be very bad?

King has joined the ranks of many other good writers with this. Kurt Vonnegut used this theme throughout all his books, as have many other esteemed authors. Melville explored the indifference of nature for half of Moby Dick, and Charles Dickens did nothing but explore human indifference to other humans.
Enjoyed the insightful analysis in this post-thanks for listing these points.
Hypocrisy, indifference, random suffering-the pain of real life, packaged in stories that entertain (incl. for those of us who just plain old like King's writing style-to me, it "flows" well/makes sense). Of course there are plenty of folks who don't like his work in the least, as is their right. I wouldn't try to convince anyone they "should" like his stuff & I wouldn't want anyone trying to argue me out of liking it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2012, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,175 posts, read 22,146,578 times
Reputation: 23792
Thanks, cloven!
I like Steven King's writing, too, even though some of his books become a struggle for me to wade through. King's imagination is very deep and vivid; these qualities make many of his books over-long, and especially in the real big ones, can become dull in parts to me. But at the same time, they're like taking a long journey. Even in the dullest parts there are a lot of small treasures to be experienced along the way.

He can write a very taught story, though. Christine moves along as fast as a Plymouth Fury at full throttle, as does Firestarter and many others.

I like his late works better than some of his earlier stuff. While the characters in It were very strong, I thought King really struggled with his monster in It. When he finally had to actually describe it as it was, without it's camouflage as Pennywise the clown, I think words failed him. I could never develop a good mental image of what he described. So, for me, the ending was a let-down.

His late stuff doesn't have these problems. But even now, some of his recent books have relatively weak endings. Zuma Key was one, and that book moved along at a much more leisurely pace than a lot of his other work. Despite all this, I enjoyed the trip King set me on anyway.

And when he nails it, I think King is as good as writing gets. I believe The Shining and some others are real classics of American fiction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2012, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,618 posts, read 86,577,260 times
Reputation: 36637
Writers who write as many books as Stephen King must, of necessity, revisit the same stock material repeatedly. The sheer volume of their work requires that overly-prolific writers keep writing the same thing over and over again with varying setting and plot twists. Which is why I never read any book by an author who has written more than a half a dozen books, or who can churn them out at a rate of more than one every several years.

Mickey Spillane comes to mind. He wrote the biggest selling books in the history of modern American friction, and none of them took him more than three weeks to write. I want to read a book I can savor, and if the writer didn't savor writing it, I won't savor reading it.

Trying to find a new book to read can be a real challenge, since such an overwhelming preponderance of all recent titles are just rehashed "stock" by the same few dozen writers. As for King, I've read exactly one book by him ("Cujo", which happened to be sitting around when I was a house guest once.) I thought one was enough. Children are being taught to blot up the same kind of flatulent writing, from Nancy Drew right up to Harry Potter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Books
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top