stephen king c/d?

This 29 year old would be pretty into 50s music and cars. Nothing to do with nostalgia, they were awesome cars and doo-wop is also awesome.

I'm totally not going to read that 900 book about time-travel Kennedy assassination prevention though. I bet it doesn't even bring up stuff like George H.W. Bush being on the grassy knoll or LHO being a Manchurian Candidate prgrammed by the CIA.

yeah sadly devoid of the good conspiracies I'm afraid, lol

Dang, now I'm thinking about "1922," the novella I mentioned from Full Dark, No Stars. Again, I thought it was one of the best pieces of writing SK has ever produced--but I don't recall hearing much enthusiasm about it from others. Am I alone here?

I still haven't read FDNS, I need to.

Yeah i don't have FDNS in my holdings either.

FDNS is terrific. All four of those stories are real page turners, and definitely had the feel of King in his prime. That last one, which was clearly inspired by the BTK killer? Could not stop reading.

I have always liked his novellas and short stories better than his long form work, and FDNS is no exception. 1922 was great, but I liked all of the novellas in that collection.

xpost Actually, if you read the afterword, King does construct a conspiracy describing his 2% or whatever suspicion that Oswald wasn't acting alone. But I skimmed it. ;) King's alternate reality does end (briefly) with Hillary Clinton as president, though.

This 38 year old loves doo wop and the stuff that 37 year old listens to in the past. Prolly wouldn't move to Texas and mack on a schoolteacher while I waited to save Kennedy, though. So many other cool places to be!

Another invented thing to make fun of "11/22/63" for (though it also had something I liked): Jake recognizes Vic Morrow in "Combat!" as the guy who is killed 20 years later during the making of "Twilight Zone: The Movie," which seemed to me a little too esoteric for this guy to know/recognize. However! In his segment Vic Morrow plays a racist time traveler sent back to (among other places) Vietnam, which ties into many themes of the book and this thread, which King would call a harmonic convergence.

Hey, serious (spoiler again!) question re: the book: the guys with the cards in the hats? King never explains who they are and what they do, really, and what they tell Jake isn't terribly illuminating or even necessary. So what purpose do they serve in the book? (Which I didn't dislike, just mostly found about 200-300 words too long).

Read 11/22/63 a long time ago (well before it came out) so I can't remember any guys with cards in their hats. I do remember the dystopic ending felt rushed and shoddily conceived next to the long, loving details given to everything in the 60s.

The significance to me seemed to be the colors of the card, and that that character was the only other character that was seemingly aware of the timetravel portal thingy -- the 'different guys' was the same guy at different spots on the timeline, marked by the changing color of the tag in his hatband. Though I think the Green guy was maybe a different version of him? The one who was like the guardian or whatever. But he was just kind of a signpost guy to reinforce the dangers of timetravel to Al.
The colors acted like radiation signifiers I think? - green safe/yellow mild/orange bad/black chernobyl

Yeah, I guess that's why I found him/them unnecessary. (And it is a them, I believe). When Jake went back to dystopian future 2011, he would have immediately seen how badly he screwed things up and gone back to "reset" everything. So really I think the man existed strictly as a convenience to explain why Jake couldn't just go back over and over again. But it never says who out him there or why, if his job was to protect the portal, why he did such a shitty job explaining its dangers. Not that any of that matters, or the source of the portal for that matter, either. But since none of it matters, the man's presence jumps out at me as a distraction, another lazy contrivance. Had he not been in the story at all it likely would have (or could have) played out the exact same way.

Another question I had was why he needed to stay in 1958 one last time, write out his (this?) story, and then bury it to be maybe discovered in the future. Why couldn't he have just travelled back to his present like the card man wanted and scribbled out his story when he got home? I actually read the end a couple of times and can't figure it out.

All the times in the past he was playing hide the poundcake or whatever I was convinced he was going to get her pregnant with his own parallel universe grandpa or something.

who out him there, that should read - the green card man does admit he is human, with a name and everything, which is even more confusing.

While I'm complaining - and this actually jumped out at me as I was reading, well before I had finished the book, as a contrivance that added nothing but confusion and word count: the narrative paradox of having a guy recount in lucid detail his serious brain damage and memory loss. It was disorienting, like breaking the 180 degree rule in film, and it really added nothing to the story save several pages of phony suspense.

What I'm really trying to say is, Steve - Sai - if you're reading this, and I think you probably are, you've had the best editors, and maybe a couple of bad ones, too. You've made your millions many times over. I think it's time to give me a shot reading a draft. You can use whatever words you want, I promise I won't say anything. Just give me a chance to trim the fat a little. Ok? Thanks.

Answering my own question: yes, the 1963 novel is still 3.99 on Nook. Buying it!

I think teh cardman is like a timecop from the future sent to make sure ppl dont kill kennedies

etc

$3.99 on Kindle too.

Def. worth that, and I mean that without sarcasm.

I may have just received an advance copy of a certain SK book coming out in June. Will report back.

!!

Sweet.

I'm still plugging away on my chronological King (re)readthrough. 2/3 of the way through Cujo presently. The Long Walk (always a favorite back in the day) might be the best thing I've read so far. So pure, so effective. I never got very far into Roadwork as a kid, but I'm glad I read it as an adult. It has a very 'small '70s film' vibe. Like something you'd see on a double bill with Five Easy Pieces.

Have finished the Hard Case Crime coming out in June. It's short and sweet and nostalgic, reads like a memoir, and is one of his gentlest books. It is probably the very definition of a minor work, but certainly not without charm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDS28r2qnAw

i thought that was enrico colantoni in the still but i guess it isn't

Under the Dome aka MRI footage of Michael Chiklis's brain

I know we've (I've) gone into this already, but I've never read "The Stand" and started reading it today, and already, just 45 or so out of, what, 1100 pages, I think three or four different characters have casually used the N-word. What the fuck, Stephen King? And I haven't even come close to gettung to the character for whom being a big racist is actually a character trait!

I'm reading the long version, I believe. It's interesting that King changed the setting from 1980 to 1990, and altered a few other things to suit the new timeline.

SK always used to have (still has?) lotsa irredeemable racists in his books to use as monster-fodder.

It's funny, that updated timeline: It was changed to 1985 for an early '80s printing, with very little else changed, so it was kinda funny to read Larry Underwood's mom make a disco-disparaging remark. (I see it was changed to an anti-rap comment in '90, nice touch.)

I didn't like Under The Dome but the mini-series is worse.

These racist characters aren't the bad guy sort, though, at least not all, not yet. Like Larry's mom, who drops an n bomb in her first scene. Is she evil? Just casually racist it seems, for no good reason.

Yeah I forgot about her, I guess King just figures "hm,older-generation working class New Yorker? Racist. Small-town Texans? Racist" I'm pretty sure this was discussed upthread - King being the kind of boomer leftie who sees racist everywhere y/n?

if you look upthread pretty much the same discussion happened when you read 11/22/63, Josh :)

not that it's not valid conversation, just needed to address the general deja-vu

in the Stand, is it related to 2/3 being written in the 70s and the rest in the late 80s?

I totally conceded we went over this before. When I said we went over this before. ;)

It's just so weird to me. I wish he were better, when needed, at depicting racism and writing about racism rather than just taking this shortcut.

For the record, I've read exactly one King book in the past 25+ years, the aforementioned. Reading "The Stand" is an impulsive move propelled by curiosity and a like of apocalypse fiction.

I dunno how they stack up casual-racism-wise but you should try his short story collections.

I personally think that's where he shines. His flaw with this novels, at least in my opinion is creating a whole set of characters/locations that are written vividly enough that you at least buy into them and their world... and then not knowing how to end anything ever.

That being said I have enjoyed a good portion of his novels

But Skeleton Crew, Night Shift, even Four Past Midnight --- pretty badass imo

the big problem I had with the stand was a best selling musician named Larry Underwood

*was named

Hey it was the 70s.

I read all his short story collections when I was a kid and loved them. Very economical, ironically, given how long and rambling his books often are.

yeah, exactly

I was given the Everything's Eventual collection for my birthday last year and sucked it down like Coca-Cola, tempted to get involved with the other short stories now too.

I know it's super trashy but I'm *really* enjoying Under the Dome.

The show that is.

Baby, can you dig your man? He's a righteous man.

I like the weird time era inconsistency in the extended version of the Stand. It's basically a distilled version of the entire 1980s. Kind of adds to the eerieness of the first few hundred pages.

I recently re-read The Stand, and realized I really dislike the updating of the book's timeframe. It tends to make a lot of the characters speak REALLY anachronistically and sound like senior-citizen hippies instead of young or middle-aged people. Like George Carlin still doing the Hippy Dippy Weatherman at age 75 or something. (The most record-scratchiest moments for me are changing all the Nixon references to George H.W. Bush. They just don't make sense.)

All of this books characters and concerns are clearly products of the late 1970s and should have stayed that way.

I agree. Reading this for the first time ever, it's totally weird. Dates and references, even changed, just don't add up. And (sorry) when the old mom drops the n-word and then a few graphs down expresses a distaste for rap music (instead of the original disco) it just amplifies the casual racism.

His flaw with this novels

I think the problem with his novels can be summed up thus: "The Stand" was originally published minus 400 pages/150,000 words, and no one noticed. Or, for that matter, thought it was too short. Was there a single review of this bestseller in its prime, say the first 15 years or so of its popular existence, that said "hmm, it's like it's missing 400 pages ..." ?

I really like the longer version. It works for the precise reasons it shouldn't work at all. It's singular in part because of the flaws, not in spite of them. Like Tusk! I'm not even a King fanboy, I just really loved The Stand.

Yeah, the book's not bad yet.

And "Tusk" has no flaws, you hooligan.

Folks, I have bad news about Doctor Sleep. I can't really say much more than that for a while. But yeah.