We all secretly love him, but since we're all insecure pseuds with tiny wieners, we have to pretend to hate him and say we read Dostoevsky and the Greeks instead.
His politics and obsession with constantly talking about them annoy many people, including myself. He's good at what he does, though. He'll be the first to tell you that he's not an exceptionally good writer, since he doesn't try to be, but he does have a good work ethic and decent storytelling ability.
I didn't have a book with me when I was travelling through an airport a couple months ago, so I walked into one of the stores and bought King's latest novel. It wasn't particularly good, but it was entertaining enough to keep my attention throughout the entire flight. Couldn't really ask any more from him
Commercial success obviously doesn't make a good writer, most of the greats never much commercial success in their lives. Stephen King disagrees with that, he's said commercial success is the end all be all of good writing, but he's more than a little biased.
I read Salem's Lot a few months ago and I gotta say, while it's not a perfect novel, it sure is an excellent horror novel. It's occasionally mildly scary and it's very often fricking creepy.
I've had a good sampling of his books. He's more an entertainer than a horror guy in my experience. IT has a few moments, but nothing like Salem's Lot. I thought the 1st 1/3 of 11/22/63 had some of the most adrenaline inducing horror I've ever read in anything. Outside that, it's mostly junk food, though Apt Pupil is so weirdly nihilistic that it hits some good spook-nerves.
But for a pop lit author, I have never gotten the sense he was pulling one over on us. He's just a freak who can apparently vomit out semi-coherent, entertaining and weird perpetually for decades.
Does he get better than Salems Lot? Read that because it’s apparently one of his good ones. Thought it was just terrible. Astonished at how narratively inefficient it was, usually that is the strong suit of pulp writers.
The Shining is fantastic.
But IMO you read King when you want King, which is to say: rambling novels with brilliant characterization, batshit insane ideas, and lackluster endings. Read The Tommyknockers for a real trip.
>brilliant characterization
No. He writes the same character over and over in all of his novels. He is good at writing children (but then he does shit like have them gangbang in a sewer and describes their private parts and orgasms in full detail).
It's wasn't a gangbang. They just ran a train on Beverly. The fat kid had the biggest dick too for some reason.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>ran train
Yeah, you're correct. >The fat kid had the biggest dick too for some reason.
Brilliant foreshadowing that he and Bev are meant to be together, anon. Now laugh about that because you know I'm right.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>I can't tell you if the curtains match the carpet but I can definitely say the balls aren't blue
Carrie was his only good book. Other than that, I think he was the first "pop" writer who just wrote what was cool at the time and what was cool in his mind.
Stanley Kubrick destroying this cuck with his actual masterpiece will never not give me a chuckle.
He is an alright writer. As stated here, he is good at storytelling with decent characters, nothing else though. He is one of those authors you read when you want a decent page turner.
>The most important things are the hardest to say. They are the things you get ashamed of, because words diminish them – words shrink things that seemed limitless when they were in your head to no more than living size when they’re brought out. But it’s more than that, isn’t it? The most important things lie too close to wherever your secret heart is buried, like landmarks to a treasure your enemies would love to steal away. And you may make revelations that cost you dearly only to have people look at you in a funny way, not understanding what you’ve said at all, or why you thought it was so important that you almost cried while you were saying it. That’s the worst, I think. When the secret stays locked within not for want of a teller but for want of an understanding ear.
He needs to be beaten up, bagged and sent to the IRA.
What's with the stephen king hate threads? Literally thousands of writers out there. Why this board obsessed with him
We all secretly love him, but since we're all insecure pseuds with tiny wieners, we have to pretend to hate him and say we read Dostoevsky and the Greeks instead.
Because he writes and IQfy doesn't.
His politics and obsession with constantly talking about them annoy many people, including myself. He's good at what he does, though. He'll be the first to tell you that he's not an exceptionally good writer, since he doesn't try to be, but he does have a good work ethic and decent storytelling ability.
I didn't have a book with me when I was travelling through an airport a couple months ago, so I walked into one of the stores and bought King's latest novel. It wasn't particularly good, but it was entertaining enough to keep my attention throughout the entire flight. Couldn't really ask any more from him
FAS lookin mf
Commercial success obviously doesn't make a good writer, most of the greats never much commercial success in their lives. Stephen King disagrees with that, he's said commercial success is the end all be all of good writing, but he's more than a little biased.
Cant take him seriously, especially after his latest Ukraine tantrum. Makes me think somebody has pedo blackmail on him.
Master.
I read Salem's Lot a few months ago and I gotta say, while it's not a perfect novel, it sure is an excellent horror novel. It's occasionally mildly scary and it's very often fricking creepy.
I've had a good sampling of his books. He's more an entertainer than a horror guy in my experience. IT has a few moments, but nothing like Salem's Lot. I thought the 1st 1/3 of 11/22/63 had some of the most adrenaline inducing horror I've ever read in anything. Outside that, it's mostly junk food, though Apt Pupil is so weirdly nihilistic that it hits some good spook-nerves.
But for a pop lit author, I have never gotten the sense he was pulling one over on us. He's just a freak who can apparently vomit out semi-coherent, entertaining and weird perpetually for decades.
Does he get better than Salems Lot? Read that because it’s apparently one of his good ones. Thought it was just terrible. Astonished at how narratively inefficient it was, usually that is the strong suit of pulp writers.
No.
The Shining is fantastic.
But IMO you read King when you want King, which is to say: rambling novels with brilliant characterization, batshit insane ideas, and lackluster endings. Read The Tommyknockers for a real trip.
>brilliant characterization
Not really.
>brilliant characterization
No. He writes the same character over and over in all of his novels. He is good at writing children (but then he does shit like have them gangbang in a sewer and describes their private parts and orgasms in full detail).
It's wasn't a gangbang. They just ran a train on Beverly. The fat kid had the biggest dick too for some reason.
>ran train
Yeah, you're correct.
>The fat kid had the biggest dick too for some reason.
Brilliant foreshadowing that he and Bev are meant to be together, anon. Now laugh about that because you know I'm right.
>I can't tell you if the curtains match the carpet but I can definitely say the balls aren't blue
Carrie was his only good book. Other than that, I think he was the first "pop" writer who just wrote what was cool at the time and what was cool in his mind.
Stanley Kubrick destroying this cuck with his actual masterpiece will never not give me a chuckle.
My favorite thing about The Shining is that it made King absolutely seethe
What is King's best novel and why is it Carrie?
IT
cocaine
Boomers pissed and shit their pants when they read about a car coming alive.
That passage about writing as time travel is literally the only thing he’s ever written that I’ve enjoyed
Can you link that passage? Sounds interesting.
Cocaine inJester. King's best work was done when he stuffed kleenex up his nose to prevent the blood from dripping on the pages.
Which work?
He is an alright writer. As stated here, he is good at storytelling with decent characters, nothing else though. He is one of those authors you read when you want a decent page turner.
>The most important things are the hardest to say. They are the things you get ashamed of, because words diminish them – words shrink things that seemed limitless when they were in your head to no more than living size when they’re brought out. But it’s more than that, isn’t it? The most important things lie too close to wherever your secret heart is buried, like landmarks to a treasure your enemies would love to steal away. And you may make revelations that cost you dearly only to have people look at you in a funny way, not understanding what you’ve said at all, or why you thought it was so important that you almost cried while you were saying it. That’s the worst, I think. When the secret stays locked within not for want of a teller but for want of an understanding ear.