Usually for every post that's....posted there's half a dozen drafts which never see the metaphorical light of metaphorical day. The end result of this is that I waste several hours a week typing rants and reviews and finish with nothing to show for it. What does get unleashed to the internet is not the peak of my creative abilities however, but rather whatever has the good fortune to be typed when my standards are lower than usual (or I'm feeling vindictive).
So here's an attempt to revive a draft from incomplete to mediocrity.
Why bother pad out the post with the above paragraph? It is after all rather unnecessary and not particularly interesting.
It is however very appropriate as this post is a summary of my opinions about Stephen King, master of horror and padding the hell out of stories.
I find it hard to find new authors I like but when I do I generally tear through all their works like a rabid dog. With nothing to read for several months I figured King would be a good idea as he was fairly popular and had written a considerable amount of stories.
I started with King's magnum opus, the Dark Tower series. Right off the bat I was interested as in the introduction King admits he was inspired by Tolkien and wanted to make something epic. This struck a major chord with me as I've frequently wanted to write an epic saga that encompasses many genres and ties together years of lore.
The Dark Tower series tries to do this and it has a lot to play with: parallel universes, post apocalyptic lands, the fate of all existence and references to past King novels. Unfortunately like all series with surreal/meta elements it becomes a mess and ends unsatisfactory (which is one of the reasons I stopped caring about Lost).
After finishing the 7 book marathon I had found enough things that I didn't care for to stop reading King's books, but I couldn't tell what was King's style and what was just part of the Dark Tower series.
Next came The Stand, King's magnum opus according to everyone who don't like the Dark Tower. Let's see; virus kills almost everyone, cool; psychic dreams for the survivors, 'kay; rebuilding of society sidetracked by Antichrist,......hmmm; unsatisfying end, dammit.
Currently I'm reading It and I had had plans to also read Carrie but at this point I can see that most of the things in the Dark Tower I didn't like were not unique but part of King's style.
First and foremost there's the recurring element of destiny, that there's some force that drives both the protagonists and antagonists together. Fate is much like Superman: they are both far too powerful for most settings and if not used correctly tend to make stories dull and tensionless. And King does not do destiny particularly well in my opinion.
In all the books I've read so far destiny has been used as a weak justification for basically anything that needs justifying. If characters need to bond, they'll intuitively feel a connection. If a confrontation needs to happen, everyone involved will feel themselves being lead there.
Although I'm never fond of fate in fiction (as I feel it takes away from the characters' achievements) I can tolerate it if done well. Too bad King uses it for corner cutting at best and deus ex machinas at worst.
As mentioned before King loves his padding. I like to think that if he and Hideo Kojima ever worked together on something, it would be so long that it would take more than the human lifespan to finish. In small doses (if that's even possible) it is rather neat, as it can flesh out a tertiary character into more than just a plot device and it allows the planting of really subtle Chekhov's Guns.
The amount of padding actually used far accedes this though. The tertiary character goes past fleshed out straight into bloated. I like some depth to people who show up in one scene but I don't need their life story.
The final point I'd like to touch on is genre. King writes predominately horror, I read predominately speculative fiction. The end result is that although the two genre's events and characters tend to overlap, but the view and style vary greatly. This isn't a criticism, just a sad by product. I want books about humanity rebuilding after a virus or a shapeshifting cosmic horror but not the way King does it.
In closing I think I should point out that although I dislike much of what King does (including other things I haven't mentioned) he is still a talented writer. i just don't like what he does.
So here's an attempt to revive a draft from incomplete to mediocrity.
Why bother pad out the post with the above paragraph? It is after all rather unnecessary and not particularly interesting.
It is however very appropriate as this post is a summary of my opinions about Stephen King, master of horror and padding the hell out of stories.
I find it hard to find new authors I like but when I do I generally tear through all their works like a rabid dog. With nothing to read for several months I figured King would be a good idea as he was fairly popular and had written a considerable amount of stories.
I started with King's magnum opus, the Dark Tower series. Right off the bat I was interested as in the introduction King admits he was inspired by Tolkien and wanted to make something epic. This struck a major chord with me as I've frequently wanted to write an epic saga that encompasses many genres and ties together years of lore.
The Dark Tower series tries to do this and it has a lot to play with: parallel universes, post apocalyptic lands, the fate of all existence and references to past King novels. Unfortunately like all series with surreal/meta elements it becomes a mess and ends unsatisfactory (which is one of the reasons I stopped caring about Lost).
After finishing the 7 book marathon I had found enough things that I didn't care for to stop reading King's books, but I couldn't tell what was King's style and what was just part of the Dark Tower series.
Next came The Stand, King's magnum opus according to everyone who don't like the Dark Tower. Let's see; virus kills almost everyone, cool; psychic dreams for the survivors, 'kay; rebuilding of society sidetracked by Antichrist,......hmmm; unsatisfying end, dammit.
Currently I'm reading It and I had had plans to also read Carrie but at this point I can see that most of the things in the Dark Tower I didn't like were not unique but part of King's style.
First and foremost there's the recurring element of destiny, that there's some force that drives both the protagonists and antagonists together. Fate is much like Superman: they are both far too powerful for most settings and if not used correctly tend to make stories dull and tensionless. And King does not do destiny particularly well in my opinion.
In all the books I've read so far destiny has been used as a weak justification for basically anything that needs justifying. If characters need to bond, they'll intuitively feel a connection. If a confrontation needs to happen, everyone involved will feel themselves being lead there.
Although I'm never fond of fate in fiction (as I feel it takes away from the characters' achievements) I can tolerate it if done well. Too bad King uses it for corner cutting at best and deus ex machinas at worst.
As mentioned before King loves his padding. I like to think that if he and Hideo Kojima ever worked together on something, it would be so long that it would take more than the human lifespan to finish. In small doses (if that's even possible) it is rather neat, as it can flesh out a tertiary character into more than just a plot device and it allows the planting of really subtle Chekhov's Guns.
The amount of padding actually used far accedes this though. The tertiary character goes past fleshed out straight into bloated. I like some depth to people who show up in one scene but I don't need their life story.
The final point I'd like to touch on is genre. King writes predominately horror, I read predominately speculative fiction. The end result is that although the two genre's events and characters tend to overlap, but the view and style vary greatly. This isn't a criticism, just a sad by product. I want books about humanity rebuilding after a virus or a shapeshifting cosmic horror but not the way King does it.
In closing I think I should point out that although I dislike much of what King does (including other things I haven't mentioned) he is still a talented writer. i just don't like what he does.
No comments:
Post a Comment