Sunday, April 17, 2016

looking at the latter-day Stephen King bibliography



I am a Constant Reader. I have been since that fateful day in fifth grade when I descended into the dark basement of the town library where all the fiction was shelved and selected a hardback book from the dusty shelves, the jacket of which with its bold letters and screaming, open-mouthed skull simply looked to me like the greatest thing ever. The novel was Christine, and that afternoon I took it home and read it in one sitting (actually one lying down) on my grandparents couch. From that day onward Stephen King was one of my favorite writers, and any other writers who hold that title have been in my life a shorter period. From that first reading of Christine to finishing a re-read of Everything’s Eventual last night, King has been a constant (heh) presence in my literary life. I read every new book as it comes out, re-read at least one novel a year, and re-read some of his short stories several times a year. Yeah, I’m a Constant Reader.

For some completely random reason, while driving to work this morning I started thinking about King’s latter-day output. If you like King, your favorite works (most likely encountered in your youth) were probably written in the 70s or 80s. Maybe you stopped following him in the 90s (I honestly did for a while, though I continued to re-read the older works.) Maybe you came back to him in the 00s, or maybe you didn’t. His books are still everywhere, but certainly not as ubiquitous as they were in the 80s. While the last ten years have seen King acknowledged as one of the greats (regardless of genre) and his books quite often get favorable reviews now, I have a feeling that, in some ways, the actual works are flying a bit under the radar. Or put another way: what is a King book in 2016? A tale well told, certainly, but do you compare everything with the towering achievements earlier in his career? Do you come to it as comfort food, so familiar with his tics that you don’t even notice if he experiments, pushes himself as a writer? Is he too prolific?

I’m not going to pretend to answer these questions, most of which are subjective and don’t have a real answer anyway. What I want to do is look at the last 11 years of his work and shoot the shit about it. See, you can do all kind of rigorous academic analysis on King if you want but that just seems so at odds with what his work is and what it represents to me as a reader. Fortunately, I’m incapable of that kind of writing. (This will become obvious.) This post is just going to be me rambling on about the works covering 2005-2015. I’d guess I’d have a lot to say about some of ‘em and not a lot about others. I chose 11 years as a cutoff because The Dark Tower series “ended” (The Wind through the Keyhole aside) in 2004 with the publication of the seventh book and it seemed to me that, with that millstone finally off from around his neck, King felt free to once again just write whatever he wanted. Also, I didn’t want to have to discuss The Dark Tower series. As a Constant Reader, I certainly have opinions, but any discussion of said monolith would be as long as the series itself and not as fun. This is supposed to be fun—we are just having a couple of beers, there’s some background noise in the bar, and neither the fate of the world nor our academic careers hang in balance. Anyway, here we go.

The Colorado Kid (2005)
What an odd title to start with! This book is a slight (184 pages) crime novel published exclusively in paperback by Hard Case Crime, a great little publisher that specializes in hardboiled noir crime fiction by overlooked/forgotten pulp writers as well as a smattering of newer authors. It probably reads less like King than almost any other novel of his I’ve read. This must be one of the great things about being successful on the level he is: you can do a project like this without worrying about any repercussions, financial or critical. And you can use your name to bring attention to a worthy, less mainstream publisher.

But does the book work? Slight is the word I keep coming back to. King is generally incapable of poor characterization and that is what carries the book. The plot is thin and secondary. I can’t say that the pace is brisk despite the novel’s brevity. I think it is really for hardcore Constant Readers only, or for those curious to see King write in a different genre. It is the polar opposite of The Dark Tower and if anything proves that King is capable of going outside the box and leveraging new tools.


Cell (2006)
Ah, Cell. Cell, Cell, Cell. I like to call this the “Luddite novel” as it works in the classic sci-fi tradition of “technology is gonna destroy us all!” Which, truthfully, I believe on some days. And not on others. In Cell it appears that a signal has turned most cell phone users into zombies. Yeah, it hurts to type that. In classic Stand tradition, some folks wander through a post-apocalypse America and a good vs. evil battle ensues, with many of the good ‘uns fleeing to Canada at the end because that’s what all smart Americans always end up doing. Main hero Clay (a graphic artist instead of a writer, gee there’s a novel twist) tries to find if his son was turned into a zombie, and this tension—a parent terrified of what might have happened to their child but unable to find out—is the most effective thing in the book and, combined with King’s deft characterization, raises the story above its silly plot.

Then we have the end of the book, which I won’t spoil for anyone who hasn’t read it, but I can say that it caused a fair stir at the time because it didn’t tie everything up in a neat bow. There are definitely those who found this approach lazy, and I can see where they are coming from, but I appreciated it and thought it ended the novel on a moment of suspense that allowed the book to linger in the mind, which I don’t think it really would have otherwise.

I don’t really have a problem with the ludicrous plot; it’s part of the fun. The book knows it’s painting with broad strokes, and in horror that can be quite effective. I think the biggest problem is that at times Cell reads more like a movie script than a novel. The pacing is good, though, and at 350 pages it’s relatively trim for a King book. It’s King writing Get Offa My Lawn pulp, and it’s enjoyable like a conversation with a cantankerous coot after three whiskeys (but before that crucial fourth when they become obnoxious.)   

Lisey’s Story (2006)
This is my favorite latter-day King book. I will be the first to admit that there is a major, non-book contributing factor for this: the only time I’ve seen King in person was at a reading for this novel. That day was very special for me, one of the only times in my life I’ve done something entirely for myself. I took the day off from work and started writing my second (and to date last) novel. I clocked in 10,000 words which is still a record for me and everything seemed possible. Then I went downtown alone at a time in my life where I rarely got time to myself and listened to King read excerpts from Lisey’s Story and talk in general for two hours (among other things, I remember him offering sympathy for us long-suffering Mariners fans.) I cannot tell you how happy this evening made me; if I could relive this day over and over again I would. The darkness that so often pulls at me was, for one day, completely gone and replaced by joy.

Yeah, ok, but how about the book? There were a number of articles published when Lisey’s Story came out about how King worked with an editor of romance novels and that this was, in some sense, his romance novel. It’s not, but it does explore the interiors of marriage in a way that is far more affective and, well, real than most portraits of the married life found in books of any genre. This is King writing in a deeply personal voice and it feels like this book mattered to him—that he really wanted to get across the mysteries and beauty of marriage, the interior worlds that marriage creates that can only be visited by those two people. Lisey’s characterization is one of the greatest in his pantheon. Deeply moving and beautiful, this is a book that only someone who has been married a long time could have written.

Look, it’s not perfect—no book is. Yet another major character is a novelist (I am so, so tired of this, regardless of author.) The stalker subplot, while necessary to move the book along, cheapens the book a little and I wish he could have found another way to bring in the outside drama/tension. But these and other minor annoyances don’t take away from the beauty of the writing, some of the finest of his career. If there are people who actually still think King is nothing more than a hack writer, well, those people are stupid. And they should read Lisey’s Story. But they probably wouldn’t get it. Their loss.

Blaze (2007)
First, I really don’t know why King occasionally publishes as Richard Bachman when everyone knows that Bachman is him. But whatever, Blaze is a novel that was initially written at the start of his career—before Carrie, in fact. For whatever reason, he pulled it out, rewrote it and published it.

It’s not a bad book; I actually think this would have been a better choice for Hard Case Crime than The Colorado Kid (which sure sounds like a western by its title, huh?) King may have rewritten it, but this book still feels of the late sixties/early seventies. Actually, I can see the Bachman connection—it shares the vibe of Roadwork in some weird way, though Roadwork is one of the least of all King novels. Blaze is more of a true pulp novel and the characterization of mentally handicapped Blaze is well-drawn.

I guess the issue for me is that it’s an utterly forgettable novel. There is nothing wrong with it, and if you need a beach read you can blaze through (heh) in a couple of hours, you could do much worse. King is always readable, after all. I almost completely forgot about this book the moment I was done reading it, and in fact just had to go to Wikipedia to remember what the plot was. That does not happen to me with King novels very often. If you are looking for evidence to support the argument that King publishes too much and can get anything published just because he is Stephen King, this one probably works. But even though it seems like I just trashed it, I didn’t dislike it…there are just a lot of other books you should read first.

Duma Key (2008)
Oh man, Duma Key. Let me put it right out there: the first half of this large (611 pages) novel find King writing as strong as at any point in his career, and in a brand new voice. It’s still King, but it’s King dropping all his tropes and writing a new kind of novel for him, one that builds on the strengths of Lisey’s Story but takes the emotional impact in a completely different way. At times I forgot I was reading a King novel—and I loved that.

The second half of this novel descends into cliché and the ending is the worst ending of any King novel. It’s horseshit.

Seriously, it’s inexplicable. Allow me to armchair theorize (because we’re just having beers, remember, none of this really matters.) King started writing this book and a whole new voice came out. He was excited by this because the voice was working. After all the years and gazillion books sold, here was proof that he wasn’t done as an author, that he wasn’t reliving past glories. Each day he wrote he became excited by the strength of this voice and the possibilities it presented. And then…he simply got stuck. It happens to all writers, great and poor. He simply didn’t know where to go next and the muse wasn’t helping. So he does what all writers do: they fall back on what they know. Hey, King thinks, I’m a horror writer, and ghost are always useful, and I’ll just throw these ghosts in here and then I’ll completely change the character’s motivation and personality and because I’m King it doesn’t matter if it works or not, or if it robs the story of its integrity. It’ll still sell. Hell, does anyone really want to hear me write in a new voice anyway? They’ll just accuse me of losing my folksy charm and getting all pretentious.

Ok, that was a cynical paragraph and in case it’s not obvious from this long love letter of a post, I think King is truly a great writer and has handled his career with amazing dignity and integrity given his massive success. So I don’t believe, perhaps, the intent of the paragraph above, but I do think something happened in the writing of this book and for whatever reason he couldn’t get around it. Better, I think, had the book been abandoned. It’s such a crushing disappointment.

And that’s why I can’t recommend this book to any King fan…except if, and this is a big exception, you want to read a different King voice and dream of what might have been. Because as of today, he’s never returned to anything resembling the voice in the first half of Duma Key. Which makes me sad and disappointed. Perhaps it is important that our favorite artists disappoint us on occasion: it holds a mirror up to our own role in the dance and the expectations we bring to the table. On a technical and even a readability level, King has written worse books. He’s just never written one that disappointed me like Duma Key did.

Just After Sunset (2008)
The thing that strikes me about latter-day Stephen King short story collections—say, from Everything’s Eventual on—is that they lack that one gut-punch, mind-blowing great story. There is no Children of the Corn, Mist or Dolan’s Cadillac in any of these collections. And that is fine. Because I would argue that SK short stories of this vintage are more intimate. They feel more like a cabinet of curiosity discovery. Just After Sunset is a solid collection, a trunkful of interesting curiosities worth spending an afternoon poking around in. Not every story works, but most of them do.

I think any discussion of this book has to start with N., the most explicitly Lovecraftian story King has ever written. (For the record, King claims its main influence was not Lovecraft but Machen.) It’s a great story that successfully evokes the cosmic awe and terror of Lovecraft at his best. This isn’t territory King generally plays in, and it’s fun to see him riff on it. It’s also a reminder that King’s unmistakable style is actually more varied than usually assumed. N. still reads like a King story, not a pastiche. This story comes the closest to the peaks of earlier short work.

Other highlights: Willa is an enjoyable if minor ghost story. Graduation Day is so cliché that it somehow transcends its limitations to be awesome (I can’t explain this, it’s just true. How does he do this?) Stationary Bike is an odd tale that will have you thinking twice about exercise bikes. And my second-favorite story in the collection, The Gingerbread Girl, is a tight tale of suspense that reads as the spiritual predecessor of Big Driver, one of my favorite late King tales which we’ll get to when we talk about Full Dark, No Stars. Most of the other stories are fine, only The Cat from Hell is a failure—it is an early story, clearly not of a piece with the others in this book, and offers an alternate universe where Night Shift was a terrible book instead of one of the greatest, if not the greatest, short story collections of all time. That’s not a world I want to live in.

King has admitted that it is harder to write short stories than it used to be for him, but I’m glad he makes the effort. Too often when we think of King we think of bloat, all of those 600-1200 page monsters. His short fiction is a reminder that he can rein that in and work successfully in the short fiction field.

Under the Dome (2009)
I don’t know why, but I get the sense this book isn’t highly thought of by a lot of King fans. I can understand that as it does have a few problems: an absurd idea that is arguably too thin to carry a book this size and an ending that probably infuriated a lot of folks. Let me put it right out there: if you need everything explained in the end, this book isn’t for you. There is an argument to be had as to whether the ending is a failed attempt at ambiguity or just laziness. But I don’t want to hash that out here.

The reason I don’t is because I think the characterization in this book is so skillfully done that it far outweighs any of the issues above. King’s greatest gift as a writer is his ability to create characters that are fully fleshed-out, recognizably human, and with backstories that draw you in. At his best, no one writes better characters than King, and I think Under the Dome has some of his finest. It’s not a book you read for plot. You read it because you want to spend time with these folks, the good ones and the bad ones. In that sense it reminds me of The Stand (though The Stand was far better on the plot front, of course.)

Look, he’s not breaking new ground here: this is King in his safety zone, occasionally recycling themes he’s more successfully explored elsewhere. But as a Constant Reader there’s a certain comfort and joy in that and reading Under the Dome was like hanging out with a friend that you really wish you saw more of. It’s not a perfect book but it’s extremely enjoyable if you are willing to meet it on its own terms.

Full Dark, No Stars (2010)
I often find King’s novella collections to contain some of his most interesting work. Different Seasons is a classic, and Four Past Midnight is, for various personal reasons, one of my favorite King collections. Full Dark, No Stars fits into this pattern, reminding me a lot of Different Seasons in feel. Three of the four stories succeed for me, and the one that doesn’t is still a breezy enough read.

1922 opens the collection and is the longest story. A lengthy chunk of the story takes place in 1922, and King’s ability to evoke the feel of people scraping out a living on the edge is at its strongest here, which was honestly the first thing I noticed. This factor is one of the key reasons his early work resonated with so many and it has often been lacking in his post-80s work. Usually I’m not a big fan of King’s work when it is set in any other era other than the 1950s or present day (for reasons more due to my personal taste than his ability to evoke these eras), but 1922 is an effecting yarn that dispenses with the good vs. evil setup and explores the complexity of the decisions we make and whether the past comes back to haunt us. Classic stuff, but it’s there if you want it, not forced on you—you can also just read it as a great campfire tale.

Big Driver, as mentioned above, is one of my favorite latter-day King tales, even though the protagonist is once again a writer (seriously King, stop it. It’s the one note that is really off in this tale—you settled for a double instead of a home run.) Big Driver is a non-supernatural thriller that treads on what I believe to be very uncomfortable ground for King involving kidnapping, rape and revenge and lacks the comfort so much of his writing provides. Like many, I’ve enjoyed King’s musings on horror over the years, but one of the points he and I differ on is the value of exploitation and slasher movies, particularly those of the rape/revenge variety (he dismisses them as exploitative garbage, I find value in many of them and think they are extremely important. It’s a topic too big to dive into here.) And that’s why I was so surprised at this story, because it reads like one of those seventies grindhouse movies, there’s even a quick reference to the movie Last House on the Left (though it’s not made clear whether it’s the original, which King hated, or the remake, which he liked.) Big Driver is ultimately a tale of female empowerment, but I can see where it may not be interpreted that way and it’s always dangerous for a male to write this type of story. Beyond the fact that it’s a tale well told, I’m impressed that King would push himself into such uncomfortable waters at this stage of his career and life. Big Driver deserves more discussion than this longish paragraph—it’s impossible to adequately convey my thoughts about this story in a short forum. I’ll leave it with this: Big Driver has stuck in my mind more than any other book/story discussed in this post.

Fair Extension is a slight tale that reads well enough but didn’t do much for me. A Good Marriage works largely due to the characterization, that ol’ King standby. I find it to be an echo of the earlier King tale Strawberry Spring, while also briefly exploring the dark corners of long-time married life (material explored much more in-depth and with a surer touch in Lisey’s Story.) Overall, Full Dark, No Stars is solid King offering notable for its ability to surprise. It also feels darker than a lot of his recent work.

11/22/63 (2011)
I rolled my eyes when I first read of this book’s plot. Gee, another boomer artist exploring the JFK assassination (conspiracy, if that’s your thing.) I mean, really, the world most emphatically does not need another goddamn book/movie/whatever about this topic. Add to this that the one time King explored the 1960s in any significant degree with Hearts in Atlantis he ended up with one his slightest tales, a book that was actually boring. I’m pretty much never bored reading King, but Hearts in Atlantis was an exception. So, yeah, not good. Funny thing, though: this book is absolutely excellent.

While the JFK conspiracy is a major plot element, the book is driven by its (surprise!) excellent characterization, stunning period detail and pacing that had me flying through this book despite its 849 page length. It never felt long, it never dragged, and I was completely enthralled. This is what it feels like to be in the hands of a master storyteller, and I absolutely love it when I’m proven wrong. I remember saying before this book came out that this could be the book where King finally jumped the shark. I was worried that at the end I would be thinking maybe it was time for him to retire. Instead I was rewarded with a book that I simply did not want to put down.

Oh, you can find quibbles if you want to: like most major King books, there are points in the narrative where credibility (in terms of coincidence within the story) are stretched and the overall ending is odd and might not work for some readers (I’m sensing a theme here in writing this post--King struggles with endings more than I realized.) But honestly, even these quibbles are charming somehow in a book that absolutely should not work and instead succeeds brilliantly. I read a lot in any given year, but it’s not often I read a book with a smile on my face all the way through, so happy in the world it creates I don’t want to go back to the “real” world. Honestly, 11/22/63 is my third-favorite novel discussed in this post and absolutely holds up next to his earlier work. Just writing this makes me want to go read it again.

The Dark Tower: The Wind through the Keyhole (2012)
This is the only book in this era I have not yet read, so I’ve got no thoughts on it. It’s pretty low on my King to-read list, if only because I’ve never been as enamored of The Dark Tower saga as most of the other Constant Readers I know are. It was fine enough for what it was, but I don’t have a burning need to return there. I’ll get to it one of these days. Probably.

Joyland (2013)
And here is my second-favorite novel of this era, behind Lisey’s Story and ahead of 11/22/63. This is one of the great hidden gems of King’s bibliography.

Do you like books that make you tear up? Because I absolutely teared up at points reading Joyland. There is a deeply human warmth to this story, and here again King’s characterization shines. Characters who should be cloyingly sentimental clichés instead feel like real people, and the book has a few things to say about youth, loss of innocence, and regret that play to King’s strengths as a storyteller.

The book itself, like The Colorado Kid, was published by Hard Case Crime but couldn’t be more different than that novel. Whereas The Colorado Kid is slight, Joyland is a full story. It’s nominally a crime story and even more nominally a ghost story, but neither of these aspects are all that important to the story. Joyland is complex in the psychological portrayal of its characters, and as such you really live with these people and find that they linger in the memory once the tale is complete.

So yeah, it takes a lot for me to care enough about the characters to tear up and off the top of my head I can only think of a handful of novels that have done so. Sophie’s Choice and the climax of The Amber Spyglass leap to mind and while I wouldn’t put Joyland on their level of artistic achievement, the melancholy of the book stays with you long after you’ve finished the last page. Why is King such a beloved writer? Because of books like this. He cares, and you care.

Doctor Sleep (2013)
Accompanied by greater publicity than any King project of recent vintage, Doctor Sleep is ostensibly a sequel to The Shining. Talk about treading dangerous waters! The Shining is one of the most loved and respected of King’s novels, the favorite of many (myself, it’s a toss-up between The Shining and ‘Salem’s Lot depending on my mood any given day, and if we count novellas, The Long Walk. I’ve read all three somewhere between 20-40 times and they are still magical each time.) I think it is safe to say that the view of sequels divides pretty cleanly between those who love them and those who don’t. If you are indifferent, you likely didn’t care about the original story in the first place. By and large, I fall into the latter camp.

Here’s the thing: Doctor Sleep is not really a sequel. In fact, I think The Shining connection is both thin and a hindrance. It has little to do with the story, and even though one of the major characters is Danny Torrance, he bears little resemblance to the character in The Shining (which makes sense; he’s an adult now.) The only times I ever thought of The Shining while reading is when the book shoved it down my throat, which is mostly in the opening pages. How many people did this book bring around because of this connection who maybe hadn’t read King in years, and what kind of book did they get?

I think they got a largely successful one, albeit with a few standard King flaws (a bit of bloat, an anti-climactic ending, and more unusually for King, some questionable character motivations.) I found the story engrossing, most of the characterization well-drawn, and I rather liked the concept of The True Knot. Psychic vampires offer far more interesting possibilities than your old-fashioned bloodsucker, and while I wish the book would have perhaps done more with this concept, I think it worked. I mean, RV people are pretty strange, it’s not that much of a leap! RVs are creepier than the woods at night.

Doctor Sleep wouldn’t be my first choice for former readers who’ve fallen away, but hopefully it piqued their interest enough to check some of the other books in this post out. And I hope they enjoyed the book; I did. I’m less likely to go back to it than, say, 11/22/63, but that doesn’t take away from the pleasure I had reading it. I found that once I was past the opening pages I was able to forget it was supposed to be connected to The Shining and just enjoy Doctor Sleep for what it was. I do think that if you don’t or aren’t able to enact that disconnect, it’s probably a disappointing novel. Now Mr. King: please don’t ever write a sequel to ‘Salem’s Lot (I still haven’t forgiven you for writing Father Callahan into The Dark Tower series. Ugh.)

Mr. Mercedes (2014)
King clearly enjoys the crime/mystery genre and Mr. Mercedes is his attempt at not only a full-on, non-supernatural crime novel, but at creating a set of reoccurring characters for future novels (unless you count The Dark Tower, I suppose.) Mr. Mercedes is the first of three books with this set of characters. And it leads to what I think is one of the great unanswerable questions when considering late-period King: why on earth these three characters?

There’s nothing wrong with them, mind you, except that…they aren’t really that interesting. King claims to deeply love them, proof that beauty really does lie in the eye of the beholder (wait, isn’t that the name of the Metallica song playing at the moment? Why, so it is…) I found them to be considerably less engaging than his characters normally are, and as a result Mr. Mercedes ranks pretty low on my list of King’s books. It’s an easy enough read, and I don’t hate it, but perhaps it would be better if I did. Indifference is the worst reaction to any work of art, I think.

That said, there is one deeply powerful scene that is worth reading. Fortunately, it’s the opening 12 pages of the book. This scene, in which a car plows through a group of jobless people standing in line for a jobs fair and kills eight of them and severely wounds many others, is a masterful demonstration of tension and heartbreak. In these 12 pages, we’ve gotten to know the desperation and pain of these folks well and King writes with a deeply empathetic feel for their struggles and crushed dreams. Which makes that Mercedes tearing into the crowd truly devastating. I was angry and heartbroken at the end of the scene. It says more in its 12 pages about the state of the American dream today than all the bloviating essays and speeches we are endlessly subjected to by our sham media and soulless “leaders.”

My recommendation? Read those first 12 pages and then write your own story. I think King really struggles at times with the mechanics of a crime story, and that comes across in the writing here. There are moments of suspense, and the book is not terrible, but if you aren’t a hardcore Constant Reader, you are probably safe skipping it. Or maybe you’ll find Hodges and his pals far more interesting than I did.

Revival (2014)
You want a good, solid King novel? Revival’s your boy. There might be nothing new under the sun, but Revival is full of the things that make King novels so pleasurable: strong characterization, readability, vague metaphysical ideas that are never really explained. That last may sound like a criticism, but it’s not. I think when the metaphysical intrudes on our lives it is vague, strange and something we of course don’t understand. That’s what makes King’s best stories so believable—you identify with the characters and their reactions/questions. Life doesn’t wrap its stories up in a neat bow, and I don’t need my novels to either.

Organized religion has floated through a good share of King novels, and his portrayals of it reflect an ambiguity that allows for a multi-level exploration of the subject. There are plenty of bad preachers, sure, but there are a lot of good (if occasionally misguided) folks in the congregation. It’s a nuanced portrayal that creates the backdrop for Revival. The novel is not about religion per se, but it does raise some questions that it doesn’t pretend to answer. I grew up in a deeply religious household and primarily identify as an atheist these days, but I appreciate writers who don’t take a hard line on one side or the other.

Revival is a riff on the Frankenstein story to a large degree (and according to King, also Machen’s The Great God Pan—man, he does love that story. Understandably—it’s a brilliant story—I just find it funny how often he mentions it as being connected to his work, because I rarely see the parallels.) We also get King again flirting with cosmic horror, and I enjoy his using this as a coloring agent rather than the focus of the story. Really, only Ligotti can get away with story after story about cosmic dread, and Ligotti can’t write an actual character to save his life (which is fine, it’s not necessary for his work which I believe to be some of the most brilliant the genre has ever produced.) If anything, it demonstrates how flexible the horror genre really is. Revival is not a horrific novel, not at all, but it sits more comfortably in the genre than many of his recent works. And the characterization is great. I know, I say that about seemingly every one of his stories, but dammit, it is true! More than anything, it’s what makes him such a memorable writer. Tightly wound and featuring almost restrained prose, I liked Revival a great deal.

Finders Keepers (2015)
Book number two of the “Hodges trilogy” (following Mr. Mercedes) is marginally better than Mr. Mercedes because the Hodges and his pals are far more in the background. It lacks a scene with anywhere near the power of the opening pages of Mr. Mercedes, and—for god’s sake, the plot! It is completely loony!

We get a loser criminal who was so upset with how his favorite writer ended a book series—and we are explicitly told these ain’t pulp novels, mind you, this is some Updike-type shit—that he decides to kill the writer and steal his notebooks that he is sure must have a much better novel in them that shows the series did not sell out. Oooookay. And so he accomplishes this but hides the trunk with the notebooks (and a bunch of cash) before reading them and then ends up arrested for a different crime. Ooooookay. And somehow years later a kid accidentally discovers the trunk and becomes obsessed with the notebooks as well as using the cash secretly to help his struggling family. Ooooookay. And then Mr. Criminal, now all old and shit, gets paroled and the threads begin to intertwine…

Christ, I can’t do this with a straight face. I mean, I laughed all the way through this book and I don’t think I was supposed to. Wily ol’ King, he still made it somehow readable but if you can suspend your disbelief you are made of stronger stuff than I. Lord. It was fun enough, if maybe not in the way intended, but I suspect if there is a poor reader out there for whom this was their first King novel, they will never read another. Seriously, I know King really wants us to believe an unpublished novel of a largely forgotten writer to somehow be a treasure people would obsessively fight and kill for, but…no. The saving grace, as such, is the fairly well-drawn boy who discovers the trunk, Peter, and your empathy for his desire to help his family. I found the criminal, Morris, both pathetic and hilarious. I *think* I was supposed to be frightened of him, but I’m more scared of a limp noodle. I honestly don’t know if King was making a huge joke that only he got or if this was just a misfire.

One more Hodges novel to go, out in June of this year. And then hopefully these poor sods are put out to pasture.

The Bazaar of Bad Dreams (2015)
And we come to his most recent published book, some 6300 words later. I’m a little tired—I didn’t realize what this would turn into!—so I’m going to cheat and steal from my own 2015 books read post where I talked a bit about this collection:

I am as thrilled as any Stephen King devotee can be that he still cranks out several books a year. This year wasn’t one of his better ones, though. Finders Keepers features some of the same characters as Mr. Mercedes (itself no great shakes) and the most absurd plot I’ve read for some time. King’s readability makes it a breezy enough read but there’s nothing special here (and I’m not the only fan who is mystified as to why King enjoys these characters enough to give them more than one book; they are, frankly, pretty dull.) The Bazaar of Bad Dreams was a difficult read for me: 1)The best story by far, “Morality,” was previously published in Blockade Billy, which was also included in this collection and seems like a ploy to pad out the book; 2)Stephen King read a bunch of Raymond Carver and then wrote a story like Raymond Carver, and despite the fact these are 2 of my 3 favorite authors of all time, it didn’t work; 3)the stories more often than not felt…incomplete, somehow. Like they were closer to sketches than complete works. That said, there was one element to this collection I found fascinating and compelling: King was upfront about wrestling with his own mortality. Honestly, his intros were often better than the stories themselves. Look, I realize it sounds like I just trashed this book, but if you are a fan, you should read it. King’s worst is still better than most writer’s best, and the comforting familiarity of his voice can’t be denied. I am proud to be a Constant Reader…

I think the key there is that most of these stories really do feel incomplete. They needed more time to germinate, perhaps, or they were simply too thin on inspiration. Sometimes King’s magic touch is absent: plot incongruities, for example, often annoy instead of not affecting the tale as in past works. It could be because there are very few well-drawn characters in this book. Yet I really did find his intros to the stories absorbing and fascinating, as they really drove home a point:

We are not that far away from living in a world without Stephen King.

He is very aware of his own mortality (I’m sure getting hit with a van does that to a person) but there’s something about Bazaar where it seems like he is really, truly thinking about the end of his life. And it’s in that same folksy, non-hysterical and non-pretentious voice that has always informed his writing. It cast a strange hue over this book that made it seem something more than simply a collection of tales. I don’t think I’ve unlocked exactly what that is, but it’s the reason that I will be going back soon and re-reading this book.

I find it near impossible to picture a world without King, as inevitable as it is. He’s been in my life since that fateful day I picked up Christine, and when the day comes where there will be no new tales, my heart will break. Artists are mortal like the rest of us, even if their work is not. We are so, so lucky to have King. His inescapable presence makes it far too easy to take that for granted. My friends, be you Constant Readers or casual readers, take a moment and be thankful for all the tales he’s spun for us and hopefully has yet to spin for us. Then pick up one of his books, those books that make life just a bit more bearable, and enjoy. Thank you for reading.


No comments:

Post a Comment