/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21652217]

>Writes over 40 books
>Wrote the book Shawshank Redemption (#1 on IMDB; Oscar nominated) is based on
>Wrote the book Green Mile is based on (#27 on IMDB; Oscar nominated) is based on
>Effortlessly makes /lit/ seethe ("REEEEE genre shit!")
>BTFO stuffy old Harold Bloom (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/28/stephen-king-this-is-how-i-deal-with-painful-criticism.html))
>Earned respect from Stanley "200 IQ" Kubrick
>Has made hundreds of millions from his work
>Is considered by millions to be a great writer, possibly one of the living greats
Being this based should be criminal. But go on anons, tell me again how he's such an awful writer and how you're so much better than him for self publishing Steinbeck Pastiches.

[Anonymous No.21652223]

>Steinbeck Pastiches
I instantly regret having not said David Foster Wallace pastiches

[Anonymous No.21652224]

>>21652217
I have no business in comparing myself to others because that is where insecurity lies, and why would I ever want to make myself insecure?

[Anonymous No.21652227]

>>21652217
> Earned respect from Stanley "200 IQ" Kubrick
So much respect that Kubrick absolutely RAPED King’s creation and birthed a better work and King still seethes to this day.

[Anonymous No.21652262]

>>21652224
This post was not for you anon. It was made for those who see genre writers as lesser and feed their insecurity but putting down successful people. They think they don't have to try, they are just better on principle.
>>21652227
And yet by simply adapting the Shining, Kubrick was admitting he saw something of value to pull from the work. If I recall, he changed the ending and make Jack less sympathetic, which is what bothered King because he saw his story as a tragedy. I believe Kubrick liked King, but King was annoyed because Kubrick would call him up at 3 AM to ask about the weather outside and if he believed in God and shit like that.

[Anonymous No.21652353]

I've liked what I've read from him but the problem I've always had is when he goes on autopilot and relies on shitty cliches to get through less important parts of a story. Pet Semetary could have been a masterpiece had he reworked the dialogue and removed the fluff.

[Anonymous No.21652442]

>>21652217
Overrated pedophile with some alright ideas and mediocre execution. Where King really shines are in the broader implications of the elements of his stories. Hes alright with prose too. Take for example the "Dark Man", which exists in nearly all of his popular works. This is a feeling had by millions of people that he articulated in an O.K. fashion. People read it, and they relate to feelings of the "Dark Man", perceptions of the "Dark Man", and even real life encounters with the "Dark Man" (think meeting cold people, Hat Man sightings, the dreadful feeling you have when your awake alone at 2 in the morning) and such. Then they thank him for articulating their thoughts and feelings, and recognize him as being able to do that and so they enjoy his work. Hes also relatively entertaining and palatable enough for the layman to enjoy, which makes him popular with normgroids.

Maybe Im not articulating what I think very well, but you can sort of see what I mean.

[Anonymous No.21652455]

>>21652442
I like his short stories more than his novels. He has two pretty good collections and one compilation of novellas that is also good. But I couldn’t stand to read him for like 700-800 pages, that’s just crazy.

[Anonymous No.21652461]

>>21652455
Ive been trying to read the Stand for a year. Its just too long towards the middle and becomes a slog. It makes you want to put it down. He should have combined the spy training chapters.

Rage is the best and only other thing Ive read by him because he wasnt afraid to be strange with the dialogue.

[Anonymous No.21652553]

Coming to a literature board to praise Stephen King is like joining a film discussion group to insist on praising Marvel movies. Even funnier that King is one of the only authors whose books are almost always worse than the films adapting them
You should at least keep this shit to /sffg/.

[Anonymous No.21652558]

>>21652553
Your proving my point.

[Anonymous No.21652647]

>>21652217
>>Earned respect from Stanley "200 IQ" Kubrick
He hated Kubrick's The Shining which improved on the original story in basically every way, mostly by abandoning it and making an entirely new and superior story from the ashes.

[Anonymous No.21652737]

He's not an awful writer, he's just more of a genre writer. He's obviously a great story-teller but he's sneered at for being a literature giant. It is funny when Bloom roasts people but it also sucks when it actually hurts the person, I felt bad for King at that part where the playwright insults him.
There's room for both gripping storytelling and for high brow literature.

[Anonymous No.21652750]

>>21652737
>There's room for both gripping storytelling and for high brow literature
Based take.
>Bloom
Like every other critic on the planet -- failed to create so he critiques; gives negative reviews to what offends him (DFW "can't think" because he called Bloom turgid); probably read ¼ of the books he included in the Western Canon, which I believe he regretted writing.

[Anonymous No.21654097]

The best ghost writers in the biz

[Anonymous No.21654105]

>>21652558
You're* a retard

[Anonymous No.21654108]

>>21652558
>Your

[Anonymous No.21654110]

>>21652442
>Hat Man sightings
I've never heard of this

[Anonymous No.21654122]

>>21654110

[Anonymous No.21654126]

>>21652217
>he must be good because he’s so popular
He’s ok. A lot of his stuff is schlocky but it’s entertaining enough. I read pretty his whole catalog when I was a kid and enjoyed much of it.

[Anonymous No.21654250]

>>21652217
he is king of goyslop. He is also an insufferable lefty faggot like all the rest of those retards in Hollywood. Luckily his shit will be forgotten soon after he is dead, while niggas like Hitler will be remembered ironically for a thousand years because retards won't shut up about him

[Anonymous No.21655151]

>>21654250
>goyslop.
This word needs to become the new "onions/desu" and spawn an entirely different word.

[Anonymous No.21655157]

>>21655151
It's a perfectly good word to describe, Rabbi

[Anonymous No.21655213]

>>21652553
The Shining isn't equivalent to Marvel.

[Anonymous No.21655219]

>>21655157
For jews, yes. King is a goyim. I've seen goyslop used to describe just about every story ever told.
Like everything else on 4chan, it's a meme word used to replace actual thought and criticism.

[Anonymous No.21655244]

>>21655213
Not even the Shining, but the fact this retard >>21652553 is comparing Misery, The Green Mile, and Gerald's Game to fucking Iron Man shows the level of idiocy the people on this board possess.
King won the national book award but yeah dude totally sucks because 20 people on a Korean comic book forum said so.

[Anonymous No.21655349]

>>21655244
>King won the national book award
Are you telling me hacks can't win that award? Marvels Black Panther was nominated for best picture. Didn't Kendrick Lamar win a Pulitzer? Bob Dylan won Nobel Prize in Literature. It's all retarded.

[Anonymous No.21655357]

>>21655349
Dylan deserved it. Louise Glück on the other hand…

[Anonymous No.21655363]

>>21652217
all of his books end like a movie for 5th graders. Shawshank and Green Mile are both about basically the same bullshit. Kubrick did not respect him becasue he knows a hack when he sees one and openly mocked him in the movie (there are plenty of explanations of this find them yourself). Kubrick improved the shit story that was The Shining. All of the movies based on his books are corny or flat out bad except the one Kubrick rewrote and made his own. no none except for you and retarded people consider him a great writer. I had to read salems lot for middle school and i remeber the first description of the vampire kid trying to fuck the non vampire girl was quite spooky but the feeling quickly evaporated when the plot turned into L4D2

[Anonymous No.21655385]

>>21655219
This post?
Goyslop

[Anonymous No.21655393]

>>21655357
Bob Dylan deserves death. What awful music.

[Anonymous No.21655396]

>>21655385
Yawn

[Anonymous No.21655397]

>>21655385
This post?
Based

[Anonymous No.21655403]

>>21655393
He’s pretty good. I can rec you some songs if you want.

[Anonymous No.21655425]

>>21655349
>Kendrick Lamar win a Pulitzer?

[Anonymous No.21655432]

>>21655385
>If I say it enough, I certainly won't come across like a retard. Tee-hee.

[Anonymous No.21655436]

>>21652217
>popular mean good
>rich mean good
>being poor or unpopular means you're wrong

[Anonymous No.21655464]

>>21652217
LOL

[Anonymous No.21655470]

>>21655436
>My opinion means bad

[Anonymous No.21655479]

>>21655425
It's bogus shit either way, everything is activism now and the bougie retards that staff price commities are too far up their own ass for anything else. You can go through the winners in the music category for the last few years, almost all of them are related to some sort of "raising awarness of social ill" or worker fetishization, in their understanding activism equals artistic quality, so lyrical hoodrat#56 is the profoundest shit possible

[Anonymous No.21655500]

>>21655479
Why is "activism" so evil?

[Anonymous No.21655516]

>>21655464

[Anonymous No.21655521]

>>21652217
and now Stephen King cries on twitter about how bad other people are like hasn't written several novels with scenes involving baby rape.

[Anonymous No.21655539]

>>21655470
Didn't say that.

[Anonymous No.21655543]

>>21655425
For album of the year or some shit, not literature.

[Anonymous No.21655557]

>>21655500
Even when it's not pure left-hand-path shit, it's just vapid and empty, just look at the Pulitzer Price winners of the last three years
>2020: "The Central Park Five"
You can figure this one out yourself
>2021: Stride
It's a "celebration" of the 19th amendment and how great it is that some bitch is a head composer at some big artsy fag institution
>2022: Voiceless Mass
Created by this guy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven_Chacon, and it was notable for being the first time a native-american has won the pulitzer price for music!
By comparison, lamar was a pretty tame choice.
This incestous art clique that gives each other these prices is just a bunch of faggots huffing each others descending colons and feeling important because their work is so meaningful and raises such critical awarness about things like indians now writting music for pipe organs, or that women can actually vote! Or how some black teens where innocent of raping 8 women because it was really some hispanic guy, but actually it was Donald Trumps fault! It's all so amazing and important, and it's so good that these people are in charge of distributing cultural grants

[Anonymous No.21655564]

>>21655500
>People cried over a larping fag
You realize these degenerate queers like Lil Nas X do this shit for the same reason they turned out to be fags: no father figure coupled with a desire for attention

[Anonymous No.21655579]

>>21655464
>>21655516
>King shouldn't play the game. The 75 year old should express a contrary opinion like Rowling and deal with unhinged retards. He should be contrarian on his personal social media just like I am on an anonymous forum.
You faggots spend too much time on 4chan. NGMI
https://www.vox.com/culture/2020/1/14/21065850/stephen-king-diversity-art-tweets-oscars

[Anonymous No.21655824]

>>21655579
he has fuck you money like Rowling. There is no reason he should be such a fag but he is

[Anonymous No.21655829]

>>21655516
Kek remember the “this is my lesbian aunt” tweet?

[Anonymous No.21655832]

>>21655516
>>21655829

[Anonymous No.21655849]

>>21655832
Kek.
Also, putting the colors vertical makes me think of Vivec.

[Anonymous No.21655888]

>>21655824
The man is 75. He wants to live the last few years in his life being adored instead of hating, which means pandering to the market.

[Anonymous No.21655942]

>>21655888
If what you say is true that makes him fake and unlikeable. If what you say is false it's evidence he's a retard. Either way, I doubt even the best examples of his work will be reprinted 50 years after he's dead (maybe even 25--he won't survive past living memory).

[Anonymous No.21656051]

>>21652217
I read a fair bit of King in high school, even some of the stuff he wrote under the name Richard Bachman, as well as a book by his son Joe Hill (Horns). He’s fine, I guess, out of all those authors you see in every bookstore (Hoover, Grisham, Patterson, Koontz, etc.) he’s second only to Tom Clancy in terms of quality, but then again that stuff’s not the kind of thing I read anymore. Main issue with him is that he’s got an ego and he’s not afraid to show it, unbefitting of a former druggie whose main claim to fame outside of his books is getting run over and nearly overdosing.

[Anonymous No.21656085]

>>21655942
>50 years after he's dead
Are you the one guy who made this argument or have multiple people made it? You could be right, but how would you know that? Why does that even matter if awards and popularity don't, according to some of the people ITT.

[Anonymous No.21656110]

Boomer liberals are my favorite types of racists because they get away with everything. They either user racial slurs throughout their books and are able to pass it off as "showing how bad racism is", or they write magical negro characters who exist solely to serve white people, which pisses off other liberals and has the minorities crying.

[Anonymous No.21656117]

>>21656110
> which pisses off other liberals and has the minorities crying.
Literally only blacks cry.

[Anonymous No.21656125]

>>21656117
No, these young whites bow to BBC. Bill Maher types don't give a shit.

[Anonymous No.21656351]

>>21656110
liberals are also my favorite when it comes to their "secret" love of rape

[Anonymous No.21656508]

>>21656085
The point is he's a genre fiction writer who didn't ever rise above it. He's massively popular and I never said that means nothing. King is great at basic writer's craft stuff like set ups and plot mechanics. He's not the best when it comes to characterization, he pretty much recycles the same basic characters over and over, but I'll admit he's good at writing kids. However, even his most memorable efforts there are clunky and still carried by plot instead of theme (e.g. It or The Long Walk). King's writing isn't bigger than his celebrity. Simple as. His books are disposable best sellers, the vast majority of which are entirely unmemorable, and it's much more likely his work won't outlive his name brand.

[Anonymous No.21656530]

>>21652353
I haven't read many of his books but I've noticed he reuses what I'd call stock imagery a lot too. I've seen an abandoned well covered with blackberry creepers in at least 3 stories, all described with essentially identical phrasing. There's other examples too but that one just happened to stick in my head for some reason.

[Anonymous No.21656547]

>>21652217
>Boomer Vaxxed hands typed this.
I routinely read pulp of several different genres. King is the worst in all of them. He has a good frame idea, and then the rest of the novels are talking about soup cans and roads. He thinks he's doing something for Americana, like Hawthorne did for the House of the Seven's Gable's by describing the history of the house as a character, instead of the person, but he's not and he always fails at it. He doesn't know how to build up meaning, and just projects anger and self loathing that someone with a basic English major would do, if their brain was fried on drugs for years to be able to see deeper meaning. His books have no editor after Carrie, they are too much of a mess in between the beginning concept and the end resolution. They just let him rant for 950 pages of a 1000 page book, with nothing that other genre writers make endearing with world building. The only world building that exists in Stephen King novels is that he connects the books with different plots together, but the story telling is just him self loathing and a man screaming about Americana for 1000 pages. The only good thing about Stephen King books is they are a prime A grade example of what a narcissistic drug addict thinks is reality. Any screen writer could butcher Stephen King's plots into a two hour movie, even if the book is a thousand pages long, and it would always come out better than his work, because his ideas are just the frame tail surrounded by less than trash writing, but amateur rantings without meaning.

Dean Koontz is a significantly better writer, because every chapter of a Dean Koontz novel has structure with a beginning and resolution, which build ups actual tension if one can identify with the character or not. In a Stephen King novel, it's just rants, and he hopes you identify with the character because every character is Stephen King being angry at the world. A Dean Koontz novel will not have every character as a projection of the author and his psychosis, but there will be characters that the character doesn't understand. When there is a character that isn't Stephen King, it's a character that is a religious Christian because he has a pathological hate of Christianity, but no other religion. He's a spiritual Jew of the worst type, without possibly actually being a Jew. His world view is simple and Talmudic. He keeps on writing the same angry novel over and over again, because he's a hack. Not because he actually enjoys Horror, but Horror is his vehicle to hide behind his hate of this world and being born in it, without understanding anything out of shitty Boomer consumerism that he thinks is Hawthornesque.

[Anonymous No.21656550]

>>21655888
He could just not use Twitter and focus on writing books. It'd have the same effect.

[Anonymous No.21656572]

>>21656547
OP here. I kneel.

[Anonymous No.21656582]

>>21652553
>King is one of the only authors whose books are almost always worse than the films adapting them
Honestly this is probably the best evidence of King’s mediocrity. He has overwhelming creative abilities but can’t write a masterful novel. He has mogged time and time again by adaptations of his work (The Shining, Christine, Shawshank Redemption, The Mist)

[Anonymous No.21656586]

>>21656547
> He doesn't know how to build up meaning
Interesting. Would you mind elaborating on that?

[Anonymous No.21656608]

>>21656586
(part 1.)

I haven't really read Stephen King since I was a kid and teenager. I've tried to as an adult, as an act of meditation, but I no longer can get past a few pages of his work without groaning. What I remember the best is when I was a kid. I read Carrie as his first novel. Which I finished, and was a good novel, on an R.L. Stine level. It had a beginning and end, it was marketed to the write group that the novel was about. And it probably had an editor, since it's concise. After that, everything seems to be a mess, that either he refuses editors to cut up, or the editors are filtered out by the rambling rants. I tried to read others of his books, like The Shinning and The Stand, but only got halfway through. Perhaps the unabridged rework of the Stand, which only really seems to have minor changes with dates and times (forgive me, I read it as a teenager, and am now 38, it's been awhile, it could of had a couple of hundred more pages thrown in, but it would of been meaningless.)

So, let's look at the Stand. There is a disease killing off people. The novel is in two parts it seems. The beginning act is just 500 pages of people dying from the disease, and the other 500 pages I didn't get far into, seems to just be those people meeting up to get blown up (I saw the first TV adaptation,) I couldn't take anymore, after the first 500 pages. There was no world building. It was just random projections of Stephen King ranting at the world. He thinks he's the proletariat, and projects himself as it, but he's almost always been a rich protected Yankee from Maine, who hasn't seen the world outside of liberal cities he visits for book signings. He wants to be poor and weak, because he bought in completely to the FDR narrative that Greatest Gen Yankees living in the most protected place in the world sold retarded boomers as a child. We just went through a "pandemic" whether it was real or simulated, and there were characters from all over the world, from China, to Iran, to how African American Blacks reacted to it, to shady government politicians and capitalists like Bill Gates or Klaus Schwab exploiting the disease for whatever purpose, and even getting up on podiums to tell the masses they are exploiting them. None of those characters in real life, who are all complex and dynamic, are in the Stand. .... NOT EVEN CHARACTERS THAT ARE NOT LIKE THAT. No, there are only characters that are examples of Stephen King's "Every Man." And almost every character is the Every Man. ...... Same with IT, every kid in the movie versions (I didn't read IT at all,) but every kid is psychologically the same, even if Stephen King tries to make them different, they are all him as a child.

(continued.)

[Anonymous No.21656610]

>>21656547
>he has a pathological hate of Christianity, but no other religion. He's a spiritual Jew of the worst type, without possibly actually being a Jew. His world view is simple and Talmudic. He keeps on writing the same angry novel over and over again, because he's a hack. Not because he actually enjoys Horror, but Horror is his vehicle to hide behind his hate of this world and being born in it
Holy based nailed it

[Anonymous No.21656618]

>>21656547
Ok, that was based.

[Anonymous No.21656624]

>>21656586
>>21656608

Other than Dean Koontz, who’s another write who is able to build up meaning in a satisfactory way?

[Anonymous No.21656627]

>>21656624
writer*

[Anonymous No.21656628]

>>21656586
The Shinning is even worse. It's supposed to be a haunted hotel novel. .... And interesting concept, that could be explored. There are many haunted house novels, but few haunted hotel novels. You could learn a lot about the different ghosts, their hates, and how they are stuck in there with all the other ghosts, and why they want to harm the family. None of it makes sense, and the novel is not about that, as far as I got, which must of been 200 pages. It was all just ranting about alcoholism and abuse of children. ..... Seemingly from the perspective of Stephen King. At no time could I relate to the characters, except in the Kubrick adaptation. And at no point I did I think he was not writing about himself. It's like someone writing a confession that they threw a small 5 year old child across the room. I was a teenager when I read it, and didn't have multiple degrees like I do now to understand red flags where I should call social services on someone's writings. Because the novel sucks and is unrealistic and doesn't connect at all, except the one very obvious thing, Stephen King is ranting about having abused his child at some point, and how he got caught, and dragged into family counseling against his will. His therapists in real life must be really good at keeping their oath of confidentiality, because the novel doesn't seem like it's written by someone that genuinely want to scare his readers with a spooky ghost story, but a crazy man confessing out of guilt behind his shitty writing.

One of my degrees is in psychology, and I sort of want to meditate on Stephen King's writings as artifacts of a sick culture and the human soul, but I'm no longer Buddhist, but converted to Christianity recently, and I am now cynical and see the world through Christian Sin and corruption, and I don't have to torture myself by reading Stephen King by studying books by people in lower states and frequencies. I am toying with writing myself, and have some minor things written under pseudonyms that no one reads yet, except my erotica. I might read Stephen King to teach myself what NOT to do as a writer, but he's not really even good for that, since he seems to less try at anything, and just writes drug fueled psychosis filler thousands of pages. It's not him writing, it's the drugs and his psychosis on and off of them.

There is nothing in his novels to point at world building, other than he says "oh, these exist in the same universe." He's not like Dashiell Hammett that builds up a great detective novel by having every character have a questionable motive that makes you question everything, he doesn't have hobbies outside of his writing, like JRR Tolkien that made his LOTRs so beautiful on various levels. He's just insane, and it's hard to point out how there is no world building, because he's so empty as his novels are. He's achieves a Zen like level of being bad. He's worse than just a bad writer. He's awful on all levels.

[Anonymous No.21656641]

>>21656628

I like your thoughts anon. do you have a blog or twitter?

[Anonymous No.21656649]

>>21656628
Let's not get started on IT

[Anonymous No.21656650]

>>21656547
>>21656608
>>21656628
Good posts

[Anonymous No.21656652]

>>21656649
What do you guys think of the sewer orgy? What the fuck was he thinking?

[Anonymous No.21656655]

>>21656652

look here buddy. that's no orgy those ten year olds are getting up to. technically speaking, that's a train.

[Anonymous No.21656660]

>>21656624
Outside the horror genre??? A lot. I'm reading Dashiell Hammett's "The Red Harvest" right now. And it's amazing in it's build up and confusion. I can see why people say that Akira Kurosawa took the plot and turned it into Yojimbo, because it's so filled with intrigue.

I mean, any writer is better than Stephen King. And I mean almost any. I'm reading the Dexter novels right now. They are simple and dumb. Because they are supposed to be. I'm on the third one. They are not meant to be high artistic works merit. But each chapter has a resolution, or a cliff hanger. Which is what simple pulp like genres should have, as their base, and if they do better than that, ... than fine.

Stephen King is not even that. He's like a guy flashing a light in the eyes of a deer, and you think he's going somewhere, because his book is long and he talks a lot. But when you reflect on his works years later (I was a teen when I read him,) there is nothing of value in his chapters. He's a perfect study in what not to do when writing a chapter for a novel. He's stream of conscious rants pretending to be a story. And not in an artistic way. But in a totally unaware way.

A teacher sat him down at some point in college, and told him to write for a grade. And he never stopped writing for a grade, but this time it was exchanged for money. All authors want to make money. But I just don't see Stephen King having a second thought about what he is writing.

There is an interview where George R.R. Martin is asking I'm about his writing process. Martin relents that he suffers in research, and thinking of characters, and their motivations. He will think of the currency and some kind of ideology, like feminism or how chivalry is bullshit. Whether you agree with Martin's politics and view of the world or not, or if his works are good or not, you can clearly see he thinks deeply about his projects. I don't like Martin's writing, but I respect them, because there is an effort.

King says to Martin, that he just sits down and types, without any research or thought. And that's true. Stephen King is an living Boomer AI robot that just spews projections of his rants into a frame story. Oh, ... there is a scary alien clown? ... every kid in the novel is Stephen King ranting, nothing else.

[Anonymous No.21656661]

>>21656628
>I should call social services on someone's writings.
I haven't read anything by Joe Hill, but I watched the Black Phone and was struck by how the Dad looked like a young Stephen King

[Anonymous No.21656666]

>>21656655
Even the niglet gets his share lol truly Talmudic

[Anonymous No.21656668]

>>21656660
Have you ever read Dan Simmons horror books like Carrion Comfort or Summer of Night?

[Anonymous No.21656671]

>>21656660
Thanks for answering, pal. It’s been a pleasure reading your thoughts. Kingfags will never recover after this.

[Anonymous No.21656674]

>>21656652
Ive only ever read The Stand and Rage and from what I can tell Stephen King has an extremely fucked up view on sex and is himself sort of hypersexual. He did great imagery with Rage but the way the main character used discussions of sex as a tool not to "torture" or purposefully make the other students uncomfortable but to legitimately relate to them seems like some sort of middle-age adolescent fantasy King had while writing the book, and comes off as wrong. Especially when the students are so comfortable telling the school shooter about their sexual experiences. If you read it from the perspective that it wasnt written by Stephen King its actually mediocre, but if you read it from the perspective that it was its plain as day that "Rage" is just Stephen Kings highschool fantasy. He shoots his teacher, humiliates his bully, and gets to come clean in confession to the entire class about how he is a fuck up in bed, and at the end they end up cheering him on like hes some kind of misfit anti-hero, which I guess he is, but still.

The book only works because Stephen King fits the archetype of someone who would shoot up a school. Not one of the "big ones" either where they get 10, 30, or 50 kills, but one of the lame ones where they dress up in their dads old trench-coat and knock off the janitor before getting caught. Which is pretty much exactly what happened in the book.

Also he thinks you are supposed to cum onto your stomach when you masturbate and let it dry. Source: The Stand circa page 700ish.

[Anonymous No.21656679]

>>21656674

actually iirc in the stand he got masturbated onto by his captor and wakes up discovering that

[Anonymous No.21656684]

>>21656674
Have you read the dark tower? I’ve heard every book is worse than the previous one

[Anonymous No.21656691]

>>21656641
I have a twitter, I don't post things on it. I have a private journal online that only two people know about, where I rant about my personal life, but it's private, and only my female stalker reads it and one of her lovers reads it. It's a coping diary to deal with a suicide I was falsely blame for as a murder by her.

Because my trauma happened 14 years ago, I will just post about movies, TV, and books I read and liked, and my stalker reads them. I should create a separate private blog, and separate those thoughts. But I'm too lazy. And I want to troll her along, but have nothing else to say on my coping journal about the death she blames me for.

........ You'll know who I am in the future, if I stop being lazy and write my own horror novel I'm planning. Just looks for an author that is obsessed with Egyptian mummies and hates Stephen King in the next decade. I don't shut up, and if I actually stop being lazy, and publish more than erotica, you will know who I am in the future.

[Anonymous No.21656692]

>>21656684
According to normgroids the Dark Tower is pretty much the best thing Stephen King has ever written and goes relatively strong up into book 3 or 5 or whatnot (this is when Stephen King got hit by a van IRL). After that they went downhill so hard that nobody could actually tell what was going on and apparently he WROTE HIMSELF INTO THE STORY. Im not talking about a self insert either, I mean he literally wrote himself as a character ala Spiderman and the gang meet Stan Lee.

Never actually read them myself though.

[Anonymous No.21656701]

>>21656691
Not him but I’ll remember you. Good luck, mate!

[Anonymous No.21656706]

>>21656652
That’s a famous part but there are other disgusting paarts in his books than are seldom discussed.

[Anonymous No.21656707]

>>21656582
That's King. Lots of good ideas, incredible workrate, but a middling craftsman badly in need of pushback, refinement, and strong-handed editors.

[Anonymous No.21656709]

>>21656691
Love the conviction friend, I too will remember you.

[Anonymous No.21656717]

>>21656668
No. I haven't. I will look him up.

I'm reading a lot of 19th century Gothic fiction for my horror research. I write down every word I don't know, or think I might not know the exact definition, and will build my vocabulary up. Different genres are important to me, but for horror, I'm kind of stuck in the 19th century for the books I read, which I will run out of eventually.

I need to read more modern horror writers. I just know King is not good. I need to read more Koontz, because he's pop and sells, but he actually puts in the effort. I will put Dan Simmons on my reading list for research.

[Anonymous No.21656718]

>>21652217
Sutter Cane sold more copies.