Stephen King Crap/Not Crap?

[Bakunin]

I voted 'Excellent' because I've always liked the books he written that I've read. I thought 'The Green Mile' was brilliant and I loved the idea of it being released in six parts instead of being a complete novel as that showed a bit of daring in that the critics could have mauled him endlessly six times instead of once.

 

[DotCommunist]

I can understand people saying that he's a good storyteller, cos that's just kind of personal taste innit, and some great films have come out of his books, but to say he's a good writer? I guess you lot must judge good writing on different factors than me. Like elegant prose, and believeable characters and dialogue. *shrug* clearly in a tiny minority, so there we go.

well I had this very arguement with Wookey (where the fuck did he go to) and he was defending King on the grounds that the man sels books. As I said on the first post I did in this thread, he plays the reader like a fiddle. Aesthetic judgments are a different thing, but on the judgement of how many have bought and enjoyed he is a good writer.

 

[ovaltina]

Excellent page-turners that kept me entertained through my adolesence.

 

[electrogirl]

I got really into him when I was 17. The Shining scared the crap out of me.

I was 17 though.

I probably like him in the same way I like Jackie Collin's books.

 

[Gromit]

Ah intelectual snobbery! If its not written in such a way that only intelectuals can understand what the hell is being said its no good.

When the true skill is in being able to communicate meaning to a wide audience clearly and simply. A task that so called intelectuals are often completely unable to perform as its a really difficult thing to do.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

I think you need to separate his pre-accident writing from his post-accident writing. He's written crap ever since he got clipped by that van. Before that he wasn't writing "literature", but he was writing dependable popular fiction.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Ah intelectual snobbery! If its not written in such a way that only intelectuals can understand what the hell is being said its no good.

When the true skill is in being able to communicate meaning to a wide audience clearly and simply. A task that so called intelectuals are often completely unable to perform as its a really difficult thing to do.

Nothing wrong with a bit of mind candy.

 

[narcodollars]

Gradually, the name Grisham replaces King, in my mind.

 

[bluestreak]

Ah intelectual snobbery! If its not written in such a way that only intelectuals can understand what the hell is being said its no good.

When the true skill is in being able to communicate meaning to a wide audience clearly and simply. A task that so called intelectuals are often completely unable to perform as its a really difficult thing to do.

Ah, intellectual reverse snobbery. Only the lowest common denominator has value;the niche market, the intelligent, the skilled, the abstract, they have no value. Intellectuals are not allowed to have art, literature, anything that they enjoy. How dare they go around being so clever, having all this stuff that you don't understand. It's all bollocks anyway isn't it, it's all meaningless. They secretly love Stephen King and Emmerdale, they just have modern art and poems and fucking ballet just to pretend to be better than you, eh Marius?

 

[bluestreak]

Marius, which jigsaw is more fun, a jigsaw with 2 pieces or a jigsaw with 2000 pieces?

 

[DotCommunist]

Gradually, the name Grisham replaces King, in my mind.

nah, grisham is much shitter than King. He's like Michael Crichton, a writer whose books lose absolutely nothing when transfered to the big screen.

 

[Dillinger4]

nah, grisham is much shitter than King. He's like Michael Crichton, a writer whose books lose absolutely nothing when transfered to the big screen.

They are all in pretty much the same category.

 

[dodgepot]

Ah intelectual snobbery! If its not written in such a way that only intelectuals can understand what the hell is being said its no good.

When the true skill is in being able to communicate meaning to a wide audience clearly and simply. A task that so called intelectuals are often completely unable to perform as its a really difficult thing to do.

that's such a lazy bollocks argument.

anyway - i enjoyed reading his books when i was a yoot. but i can't really remember much about the quality of the writing. i also enjoyed reading james herbert's books. i imagine if i read either one's works now i'd get bored of them.

the shining is one of my fave films, though.

oh, and anyone else notice that any homosexual character in a james herbert book would come to a nasty, sticky, pathetic end?

sorry - this is a stephen king thread.

 

[narcodollars]

nah, grisham is much shitter than King. He's like Michael Crichton, a writer whose books lose absolutely nothing when transfered to the big screen.

I prefer the hard-boiled mystery to softening mind candy.

Nevertheless, as the saying goes, "truth is stranger than fiction".

 

[DotCommunist]

yanqui sf/fantasy has always been pretty dire tbf. Apart from your Vonneghuts and your Silverburgs there just aint much quality from american speculative fiction.


Oh and Peter Straub. Shadowland is a great american fantasy.

 

[mentalchik]

In the end who bloody cares really ? Whatever floats your boat is fine......I love Stephen King....some think he's crap so what?

I like what i like and don't care what anyone else thinks.


Sometimes get fed up with the endless nit picking and arguing about what is a subjective opinion/experience.........


have encountered this all my life for having a passion for sci-fi..............people seem to look down their noses etc etc.....


fuck em !

Sheri S Tepper writes good sci-fi/fantasy cross over imo !

 

[ovaltina]

anyone else notice that any homosexual character in a james herbert book would come to a nasty, sticky, pathetic end?

That goes for pretty much all art IMO. Remember Brokebum Mountain? Do they move to San Francisco, grow handlebar moustaches and have a fabulous time throughout the 70s? No they do not. (Avoiding spoilers).

Off the top of my head I can't think of any gay characters who have happy endings.

 

[Dillinger4]

In the end who bloody cares really ? Whatever floats your boat is fine......I love Stephen King....some think he's crap so what?

I like what i like and don't care what anyone else thinks.


Sometimes get fed up with the endless nit picking and arguing about what is a subjective opinion/experience.........


have encountered this all my life for having a passion for sci-fi..............people seem to look down their noses etc etc.....


fuck em !

Sheri S Tepper writes good sci-fi/fantasy cross over imo !

I don't think anything less of people liking things that I do not. I love to hear why people like/don't like something. It gives perspective.

My problem is with the snobbery that comes with liking/disliking certain things, the assumption that I am some kind of lit-crit-ivory-tower-cretin for having an opinion at all.

 

[DotCommunist]

I don't think anything less of people liking things that I do not. I love to hear why people like/don't like something. It gives perspective.

My problem is with the snobbery that comes with liking/disliking certain things, the assumption that I am some kind of lit-crit-ivory-tower-cretin for having an opinion at all.

sorry you'll have to shout louder, I can't hear you from the top of your ivory tower.

but seriously when it comes to authors like King King/Grisham/koontz (the list goes on) I think you do have to seperate aesthetic judgement from the equation. These are authors with great technical skills in plotting, and this is reflected by how they can get people who don't read into books. And that is no bad thing. Plus the books often get turned into big screen trash films. again it's a bit debatable over wether thats a good thing

If I can bring it down to a food analogy, nobody thinks McDonalds is the hieght of the culinary arts but a Quarter Pounder meal hits the spot sometimes