A book is more than its ending. If you loved reading 98% of a book but the last 2% sucked would you say you had a bad reading experience? The last 2% doesn’t invalidate the previous 98% especially because you weren’t aware of the 2% at the time
I see what you're saying, but I imagine it would be significantly easier to write an amazing story that ends with the writer figuratively stuck in a corner and then the book just ends than it would be to actually write an ending that ties the book together in an insightful way. What I'm saying is that writing a book that's 99% great and has a terrible 1% ending feels disproportionately easy, since the that last 1% ending usually has a huge influence over the rest of the book.
wtf was up with his book Outsider? who the hell thinks about that kind of stuff and then turns around and has a self insert character get on a high horse about how bad Drumpf is?
Good in an artistic sense? No. Good in an airport or beach read sense? Yes. If you pick up a King book you should know what to expect. The type of books you can just let your eyes glaze over, skim, and slow down when you come to a good part. A good boredom killing writer. Simply put, if you pick up King and are expecting a great book, you are foolish
For the love of god read his novellas and short stories. I’m not a fan of the overwhelming majority of his novels, but his short stories and novellas are top notch.
I know food analogies are overplayed but King really is just like a classic American cheeseburger. I mean that as a compliment. He's good at what he does.
I don’t know if it’s just because he’s written so much compared to most writers but if you read his novels, eventually you’ll notice they blend together. Characters think and talk the same way. Make the same comparisons. Analogies. Descriptions.
Is this a sign of a bad writer? Or simply the reality that there’s only so many times you can write about panic, or a door opening slowly. Only so many archetypes you can pull from
Hence why like 20 of his main characters happen to be writers with an addiction
>Is this a sign of a bad writer? Or simply the reality that there’s only so many times you can write about panic, or a door opening slowly. Only so many archetypes you can pull from
Probably the latter; all artists have their own preferred bag of tricks, & in king's defense, one must ingest a sizeable amount of his work to grasp the full, redundant limits of his creative repertoire
good plots, average execution
>It
>Revival
>The Stand
>Salem's Lot
>The Long Walk
>The Running Man
I enjoyed them. If you didn't that's cool.
>It
>The Stand
Both of those books have lame endings.
A book is more than its ending. If you loved reading 98% of a book but the last 2% sucked would you say you had a bad reading experience? The last 2% doesn’t invalidate the previous 98% especially because you weren’t aware of the 2% at the time
I see what you're saying, but I imagine it would be significantly easier to write an amazing story that ends with the writer figuratively stuck in a corner and then the book just ends than it would be to actually write an ending that ties the book together in an insightful way. What I'm saying is that writing a book that's 99% great and has a terrible 1% ending feels disproportionately easy, since the that last 1% ending usually has a huge influence over the rest of the book.
wtf was up with his book Outsider? who the hell thinks about that kind of stuff and then turns around and has a self insert character get on a high horse about how bad Drumpf is?
You're talking about a guy who tweeted "Ok boomer" alongside a video of a millenial talking about the murder of Laken Riley.
I refuse to believe even he is that fricking cringe worthy
Good in an artistic sense? No. Good in an airport or beach read sense? Yes. If you pick up a King book you should know what to expect. The type of books you can just let your eyes glaze over, skim, and slow down when you come to a good part. A good boredom killing writer. Simply put, if you pick up King and are expecting a great book, you are foolish
I don't personally like the movie but would The Shawshank Redemption not be considered "good in an artistic sense" at all?
Yes, but not that one
For the love of god read his novellas and short stories. I’m not a fan of the overwhelming majority of his novels, but his short stories and novellas are top notch.
Based poste, his short fiction is far & away his best work & his only output i consider to have any true artistic merit tbqdesu
I remember liking The Eye of the Dragon in 8th grade.
It
The Stand
Four Seasons
Duma Key
Best short story collection - Night Shift
Best long novel - IT
Best short novel - Eye of the Dragon
Best overall work - Jerusalem's Lot
Revival
dreamcatcher
I liked The Shining.
I know food analogies are overplayed but King really is just like a classic American cheeseburger. I mean that as a compliment. He's good at what he does.
Stephen King - Between Two Cars
I don’t know if it’s just because he’s written so much compared to most writers but if you read his novels, eventually you’ll notice they blend together. Characters think and talk the same way. Make the same comparisons. Analogies. Descriptions.
Is this a sign of a bad writer? Or simply the reality that there’s only so many times you can write about panic, or a door opening slowly. Only so many archetypes you can pull from
Hence why like 20 of his main characters happen to be writers with an addiction
>Is this a sign of a bad writer? Or simply the reality that there’s only so many times you can write about panic, or a door opening slowly. Only so many archetypes you can pull from
Probably the latter; all artists have their own preferred bag of tricks, & in king's defense, one must ingest a sizeable amount of his work to grasp the full, redundant limits of his creative repertoire