Posted on 07/22/2004 10:08:57 PM PDT by .cnI redruM
I usually enjoy Stephen King's writing enough to take his political leftism with a grain of salt. This is because he truly understands how to construct a first-rate story. He crafts his books exquisitely and builds tension until they are impossible to put down.
It's like listening to Howard Dean passing the baseball bat. I know full well the man is a whacked-out lefty fruit bat, but he sure puts on one heck of a show. At least he did until he wrote this one.
Song of Susannah tells the story of a heroic female character, Susannah Dean, who is impregnated by a demon, is possessed by a woman spirit, is married to a recovering heroin addict and has recently finished fighting a major gun battle while more than 8 months pregnant. On top of that, her legs are amputated, which totally screws her career as a triathelete. Other than that, she's having a pretty swell week.
Then Susannah discovers planar travel and gets to visit New York with her evil crystal ball, Black 13. Susannah herself is African American in much the same way that John Kerry is a Vietnem Vet. It's the only reason King put her in the story. It's his way to be different from all those other white people.
The wheelchair was introduced back in Book II of King's Leninist Song of Roland; The Drawing Of Three. It's a sure-fire literary device to prevent a character from ever being a walking cliche. Now that Howard Dean has melted into obscurity like a glacier from the ice age, Stephen King has stepped to the fore to educate all us Southern Whiteys on the topic of race.
He even has poor ol' Susannah end up whelping at The Dixie Pig BBQ Restaurant and Klavern, I mean Tavern. Imagine giving birth around all those working class Anglo-Saxons. The place reeks of the undead. I never quite pictured a joint full of vampires who favored both NASCAR and Beechnut Chewin' Tobacco.
Why would the saintly Susannah The Oppressed whelp in The Dixie Pig? The Devil made her do it; Randall Flagg. You can nuke him in The Stand, but you'd stand a better chance of killing Freddy Krueger.
Flagg is Stephen King's archetypical suburban American. I keep waiting for him show up at a GOP convention to introduce the nominee. King just hates the guy too much to put him in a dirt coma.
Of course while Susannah is being demonically possessed and forced against her noble will to frequent a redneck dive from hell, Roland of Gilead, Jake and Eddie Dean are all doing what any heroic leftist would do as second nature. Fighting for Susannah's right to abort this multicultural Rosemary's Baby.
One of the demonic pale people wants to name the cute little "chap" Mordred. Imagine an evil character named Mordred who is destined to ghost some dude named Roland. That way he go down in history as the Multi-culti Mixed Metaphor.
Suffice it to say, I'd rather go camping in Salem's Lot than read this book ever again. Once I got past page two, I figured out approximately how the plot would ossify. The novel stretched interminably towards a predictable end. I'm quite sure Lancelot, and his by-blow Mordred, could both inseminate Queen Guinevere in less time then it took Stephen King to finish preaching and finish this mediocre novel.
I honestly didn't view this book in the same light as this writer.
Me, either. I don't like Stephen King's books, but I enjoyed this review!
A little late to the party--just finished the book--but I agree that this review is a bunch of hogwash. Any mention of abortion was in the previous book, and it was quickly shot down. Roland was the only one who suggested it, and nobody agreed to it. I'm hard core pro-life--no exceptions--but even I'm not sure where I stand on aborting a half-demon baby (which is not exactly what it is anyway).
I do admit that I cringe reading every page of current King. I keep expecting the Bush bashing to begin. So far, it hasn't.
You have to read DT VII for Bush-bashing, but it is mild and tolerable.
This series was clearly a spiderweb of ideas that never really fit together and he ends up with this conglomeration of the "Many worlds, put myself in the story, wash away the myriad of continuity errors with 'the world has moved on,' get DT freaks to read the other books, and 'why the hell did I ever even start this project."
It is a free-association story. Like free association, the story is frequently interesting and has some fabulous imagery, but the majority of it makes little sense. If the psych said "apple" and King responded "paper clip", then wrote about the transcendent connection that exists where apple and paper clip are tools in a cosmic battle of good and evil with the entire universe at stake, this is what you end up with.
In the end, you have to enjoy the often riveting scenes and chuck the rest like a sweet melon with a 7 inch thick rind.
At least that woman who helped Roland and Jake was a Gore-hating Republican, and she was written very sympathetically. I did wonder if King having her cheat on her husband was some little comment on conservative hypocrisy (ie, the left's idea of what Clinton/Lewinsky was about), but I think that falls under "reading too much into it." Also, it was interesting when Susannah mused that she might be turning into a Republican for feeling good about being tired from a long day of hard work.
The little bit about Gary Hart was kind of stupid (being vague for those who haven't read the book), but the series was mostly free of politics.
The hero was a black, female, Reagan-voting Republican
And Flagg was a hippie '60s militant, btw.
I don't think King likes Bush.
He escaped before the Apocalypse, just like in The Eyes Of The Dragon.
Sorry for the necro-bump, but this is the first DT-related thread that I've come across in the past two years.
Just found it.
^__^
-good times, G.J.P. (Jr.)
P.S. I agree with the idea that King is on the downward arc of his literary career. The sole exception being the final volumes of the DT series, which I think have served as the capstone of his life as a novelist.
Don't know if you've made it through Part VI yet, but I thought this was an interesting thread, if you have.
Declining?
Declined. I stopped reading his predictable, formulaic crap over a decade ago. If you've read 3 Stephen King novels, you've read them all. And I did read them all for a while, every one - even the Richard Bachman stuff - and thought it was good. Until about 13 years ago when I realized, in fact, it all sucked. Either my tastes changed or Stephen King was never that good in the first place. I vote for the latter.
Not about the fact that King's talent-or at least, his ability to harness it-has decreased markedly in recent years, but with the assertion that his writing is predictable/formulaic.
Even novels that appear to be rehashes of old concepts, e.g. "From A Buick 8," are actually quite innovative and unique once you start to delve into them.
The quality of his work has declined perceptibly-I trace it back to his recovery from alcoholism and substance abuse problems, while others cite his nearly fatal accident on that nearly deserted Maine road-but that doesn't mean that he can't still produce an enthralling work, as the final three volumes of "The Dark Tower" demonstrate.
I personally prefer the early part of his career, especially the original Bachman Books, as well as some of his early short story collections and novellas, which stand up as his finest work to this day.
Unfortunately, he seems to have lost his edge, the bite that you saw in novels that dared to ask viscerally disturbing questions, such as Pet Sematary.
Go back and look at some of the plots for his early work, e.g. ritualistically abused adolescents turning their frustrations onto their classmates, individuals using passenger jets as cruise missiles, habitual smokers being targeted for sadistic persecution, eminent domain abuses escalating to the point where they engender unspeakable carnage, viral pandemics wiping out vast swaths of humanity, etc...
I'm not saying that these issues had never been broached-even in literary terms-before Stephen King, but he gave them a broader context within the horror genre, which had never occurred before.
Critics like Harold Bloom, among others, dismiss his work as mindless dreck because they see it as banal pulp fiction, when I think the truth is that his genre has allowed him to explore some of the most pivotal cultural and philosophical issues that other writers address in a more opaque manner.
That being said, I still think he's no longer in top form, but I will defend the DT to the death.
:-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.