/lit/ - Literature

Whatdoyoumean?

I do.

This is probably a troll thread but I like Stephen King. I mean he wrote some shitty novels which could have been better edited but a few of his books are really good.

Stephan King is prolific.

He is a great story teller whose well has currently gone dry.

In reading a book he wrote about formulaic writing, at the end he boldly asks readers to send him ideas.

He is a good writer, but not a great one.

>>4225351
>I mean he wrote some shitty novels

You could have just stopped right there.

From a technical point of view, he's great. Wish I could have his writing skills

>>4226616

Thank you.

I am fully aware of where I am and what year it is guys, chill.

Stephen King probably has some raw talent and is generally a good creative mind, he tells a great yarn - why is he always so grossly under or overrated?

He's never just in the middle, or the upper end of middle (where I place him). He's either shit or he's god.

A male protagonist writer in his late 20s to early 30s is in a rut either creative or career wise and then has a supernatural force of some kind threatening him and those he cares about.

Do we need a thread about King everyday...

His writing isn't the best in the world. It's not too deep for you ideas that leave you wanting and craving more. But sometimes he touches on something that makes you wonder. Something that leaves you thinking. Insomnia did this perfectly, as did Hearts in Atlantis. He is a very capable writer, he just isn't ALWAYS the best.

>>4226616
He is a great story teller whose well has currently gone dry

the kennedy book was great, under the dome was some boring stuff with shitty characters. wasn't used to stephen kings characters being flat and boring

>>4226708
wanted to greentext the first sentence

>>4225327
> you are now aware that Stephen King has Alcohol Fetus Syndrome

You WISH you could involve as many levels in your writing as this man does on daily basis. YES, he writes everyday. You don't have that work ethic.
IF you do, disregard the rest of this comment.

ITT People who have never read even one dissertation of his books. Some lady broke down his seminal works and whoa, buddy. He will try to get to the reader (his parlance, not mine "to get the reader" heh) on any level he can think of. Have any of you read his short story N.? 11/22/63 was great. What other pop author tries to tackle 9/11 now? Yes, I said pop. He acknowledges it and uses it to great effect and abandon. His material that gets to your subconscious level is sublime and sometimes, his symbology is superb.

He is our Mark Twain. Deal with it. As an aside, he regularly reads things out of his depth of intelligence, just to challenge himself. I daresay none of you are trying that today. I could be wrong!

>>4227545
>He is our Mark Twain.

o tempora, o mores

>>4227546
Only in his reach to the audience. Even people who don't read books know who Stephen King is because of all the movies his books have spawned. Is he as important as Clemmons? Nope. Clemmons reached maybe more people than King ever will, just from it being taught in the classrooms all over the USA and being widely admired overseas, being lauded so much, etc. Hell, in cultural impact, even. We still have debates over the language in Tom Sawyer. I can see, though, King being read a hundred years from now. The Stand made King firmly in the futurist camp, a la Bradbury, whom King professes to admire a TON. Honestly, even when a writer makes something awful, I can get behind their ideas, at least.
>Tommyknockers, horrible
>Desperation, horrible
I can name more but I love his work. His best outshines his worst by a large margin.

>>4225327
Because /lit/ is comprised of a bunch of pretentious assholes who all think they are the next Pyncon, Orwell, Vonnegut...

I bought Under The Dome years ago as it was highly recommended to me by friends that love King. Based on that book (which I failed to finish), I will never attempt another King novel without a compelling reason to do so. How could he write Under The Dome and believe he wrote something of quality? The characters were so boring, one-dimensional and painfully stereotypical it was a chore to read.

>>4227763
The premise was solid but the execution was horrible. Started off strong, really strong but by halfway through, it became plodding.

11/23/62, IT and The Stand are some of his best stuff. Also, The Shining and The Talisman are pretty good reads. The Talisman was co-wrote with Peter Straub and so was it's sequel, Black House.

My favorite book of his is 'Lisey's story. Poignant and affecting.

>>4227763
Pretty much everything he's published in the past 10 years has been pretty bad. Under the Dome especially so.

What's /lits view on the Dark Tower series?

>>4228696
It's highly uneven to me. Wizard's Glass and Draswing Of The Three stand out to me. I guess when you're a fan, you end up loving them all but some of them were pretty slow. I think he having the NDE cause him to finish the series. It's pretty good, all together, chock full of everything a fan loves about Mr. King's stark worlds. It also attempts to link a lot of his books (even Rose Madder and Dolores Claiborne, both tenously so it makes one think Really?). Knowing that It, The Stand, The Talisman, The Eyes of the Dragon, etc are all linked can be a kind of meta-creepy. What DOES this dude have nightmares about? Supposedly, he might have seen a friend die by train as a child and that traumatized him. He had an obsession with his father's books, a man who abandoned his family. I think his more puerile humor comes out because of abandonment issues. He was very attached to his mother and that is mostly understandable as she was the sole bread-winner.

Was Dr. Sleep good? A Shining sequel with Danny as an alcoholic sounds tempting as fuck.

>>4228716
Should have checked that better before I sent, sorry /lit/.

>>4228717
I think reviews say it's also pretty uneven, with none of the wild careening of The Shining.

If any of you have never seen The Shining, you should. It some ways? It's better than the book, kid you not.

>>4228719
I've both seen and read the book. Kubrick is a fantastic director and Nicholson is great in it too. My only real complaints about the movie that the book was better for were:
>treatment of Danny and Tony
>Wendy was a real character in the book
>Halloran lives

Im almost done with the Stand which is my first book of his. I got the complete version which has dragged on in some parts but overall has been enjoyable.
What should I read next? I have heard the Dark Tower is good but other than that I dont really know any of his books

i'm starting to. i just read it, and i fucking loved it. I ordered a bunch of his stuff, so whenever amazon free shipping gets that crap here i'll get into him more.

>>4225327
Because when reading The Dork Tour, it suddenly became boring.
It's strange, it was one precise moment, after a chapter cut. Immediately the whole prose became soporific.

So I checked the intro, and it turns out it was the point where it switched from young fun alcoholic King to old sober sadsack King.

The man is dead inside.

>>4225327
The only work of his I've ever read was On Writing.

I didn't even read the autobiography in it, just the practical advice on writing.

>>4229423
His Author self insert almost ruined that series for me.

Just Past Sunset was awesome. So was Buick 8. Both were pretty creepy at times.
>Moving Finger
>The Boogeyman
>Duma Key
>Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption
>basically anything from Different Seasons
>Rage
>"They taste like ladyfingers."
>'Salem's Lot
>The Shining
>The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon
>"M-O-O-N spells Nick" ;_;
>Everything's Eventual
>Sundog
>the fucking Library Police
There are so many more. Yes, I am a fan. Full Dark, No Stars will make you more of a fan if you are not. Lots of stories short and to the point, unlike his usual stuff. I think he just does that to show off. The man continually makes new fans (and alienates some old ones, happens to every author of any genre).