/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11868929]

How come pretty much everyone of his books has some weird kinky sex scene? Often times for no reason?

Like the Stand, what was the purpose of having that bitch with the white hair becoming a sex slave? What did it add to anything?

Was he raped as a kid or something?

[Anonymous No.11868942]

>>11868929
nah he’s just a retard

[Anonymous No.11869067]

>>11868929
>Was he raped as a kid or something?

[Anonymous No.11869378]

>>11868929
He's said before that he writes because he enjoys it. He gets lost in his work and never draws up an outline for the plot, so that's why most of his books run out of steam before the climax. If you can put the world he creates first and the plot second, you'll like his books. For him, writing is a mix of discovering a new world within the pages and finding ways to express ideas that move him. All the characters have lives beyond the plot and he wants to know them, which makes it easy for him to get sidetracked.

In IT, there's a scene where Henry's gang is lighting farts on fire. Shit gets gay and then Patrick gets killed by It once he's alone. None of this is really crucial to the plot since we already know Henry is homophobic and It can take different forms to kill, but the scene allows us to see how King fits really cool ideas into his novels. Lighting farts on fire does nothing but put a character in the right place at the right time for something cool to happen. The idea of having a kid torture, kill, and store animals in a junkyard fridge is so fucked up, King had to find a way to write about it. Alone, it makes your skin crawl. The flying leeches were another crazy idea and somehow both work together in this context. Scenes like this get cut from his movie adaptations because they don't add to the plot. In a novel, he has time to deviate from the plot to write some really powerful stuff, like the fire at the black spot with Mike's whole backstory or the ironworks explosion. These sidetracks are written to "evoke an emotion" like he says in 11/22/63. If he can fit something in that's fucked up, he'll do it even if it doesn't work towards the plot. When you mix that with him taking out time to flesh out his characters on the fly and a halfway decent plot, you get a pretty good book. When everything clicks, you get scenes like Roland vs the town in The Gunslinger or Paul getting hobbled in Misery. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but I think he has a good time writing either way. If you read his books, you've got to be prepared for a trip off the rails where he might just surprise you.

[Anonymous No.11870045]

>>11869378
t. Stephen King
Your books suck, man. Write about something that will actually shock your middle-class, brainwashed audience instead of just recycling 50's horror tropes.