Stephen King Book Club

The book is somewhat polarizing with King fans, but I actually kind of like it. The premise is great, and George Stark is an excellent villain. I just love the way he talks and the phrases he uses. The things he says to Liz in the second half of the book sound both cheerful and reasonable while simultaneously being hideous, deadly threats.

I very much appreciate the ambiguous ending, and the reader perhaps being led to think unpleasant things about the main character Thad Beaumont. Alan Pangborn tells himself that his anger at the end is unreasonable and it isn't actually Thad's fault. But even if he didn't think back to how much Thad enjoyed working with Stark, and how they had both laughed together, I think Thad is responsible for Stark simply because I believe somebody has to be. The book ends suddenly, so we aren't made aware of exactly HOW Pangborn explains to the police at large what happened at the cabin, or how he convinced them Thad didn't kill those cops But really, Thad is as guilty in my mind as Stark. And I was thinking that the entire time.

I tried to read this book as a teenager and couldn't get past the first chapter. One of King's most revolting gross-outs ever. Over the years I've been conditioned to a LOT in my reading (the operation scene is about a tenth as upsetting as an average George R.R. Martin scene, for the record) but yeah, I tossed the book aside before I tossed my cookies back in the day.

I love that Liz hates that the twins love Stark, and that Pangborn recognizes that she is potentially dangerous to him. It's such as interesting notion I am beyond disappointed it wasn't followed up on.

King Connections Of Note:

Some of the events of The Dead Zone and Cujo as recalled, as they are in every Castle Rock story.

More interestingly, we meet some characters and set up some things for the upcoming novel Needful Things.

It's hinted Thad is in for a hard time after the book is over, and we learn in Needful Things Liz has taken the twins and left him, and he tends to cold-call Alan in the middle of the night drunk. Even more disturbing, in Bag Of Bones the narrator Mike Noonan off-handedly informs us Thad has committed suicide at some point. George Stark is not a very nice guy, and Thad Beaumont is not due a very nice end.

Some of the secondary characters in the book are fun. I like Rawlie and think the fact that he's sort of secretly on-the-ball is kind of cool. I hope Thad kept his promise to tell him the full story after everything shook out. Similarly, I hope Alan Pangborn gives Dr. Pritchard the same weird details he wanted after the fact. Pritchard is a cool character because Alan thinks he's arrogant deep down and he seems to enjoy Alan's horrified reactions to the ghastly facts he's relating.

If there is something I don't like about the book it's Pangborn's steadfast refusal to believe in the obvious until Stark has a gun in his side at the cabin. I don't like contemplating the idea that weird stuff could be real, and upset the natural order of my thinking. But Occam's Razor's, dude. It goes against both the scientific method and rationality to ignore all easily verifiable evidence because the conclusion frightens you. Pangborn isn't a reasonable man. He's what Stark would refer to as a Partisan. And his refusal to accept the evidence in front of him is super annoying.

Not bad though. Not bad at all. ***1/2.

King's second collection of "Four Novellas" after "Different Seasons", one of my favorite formats of his.

Unlike "Different Seasons" it could be argued ALL of the stories here are horror, and most of then are longer than the novellas from that book. The book is nearly a thousand pages and hella long. It's a good thing I liked three of the stories. Collection Overall: 4 stars.

One Past Midnight: The Langoliers

That is a ripping good yarn. That's the best way to describe it. King does not get enough credit for it. The excellent miniseries was also far too underpraised. This is all great stuff.

I think Craig Toomy is one of King's best villains so far. Because I feel SO much sympathy for him. As big of a jerk as he is, he doesn't WANT to hurt anyone, and he's simply crazy. The empathy the blind girl Dinah (who he stabbed) has for him is something I feel too. And I find her dire warning to Nick not to kill him because they "need him" absolutely chilling in its implications. When Brian believes Dinah used him to save their lives, as ugly as it sounds, I think Brian thinking Toomy probably wouldn't have minded being used in that way in his right mind was probably correct.

King as Narrator describing the fish in the trench to set the scene for the pressure this madman is under is great storytelling. I repeat: A good yarn. Toomy's use of the words "Scampering" and "monkey-business" in his head also give off a sense of deliberate mischief to his actions in his former life. The sci-fi crisis hits him bad because he was about to destroy everything he ever worked for out of spite, and it wouldn't let him. No wonder that fish exploded with the pressure being lessened so dramatically. And it's interesting the thing he notes about the vision of Dinah is that she showed him a look he's never gotten before: Compassion. And their connection and her being able to see from his eyes before she died is incredibly bittersweet knowing the horrible things they have done and ARE doing to each other. It's really interesting.

As far as sci-fi mysteries go, I have to say unlike "The Tommyknockers", and later "Dreamcatcher", this one holds up. It's a mystery that makes little sense as it is happening (and they are very fortunate to have a mystery writer aboard) that actually makes a weird kind of sense as it goes along. To be clear: Bob Jenkins and his teenage sidekick Albert could have been wrong in every deduction of what happened. But they operated under the assumption that they weren't and everyone was okay at the end. It's likelier than not they had the thing down to a science after all.

And you can call it unrealistic that Bob would guess the thing about the matches beforehand because it doesn't actually conform to any known time displacement theories. I prefer to think of it as impressive instead. In practice, it's shoddy as hell writing and an unlikely solve. As it is, I like Bob Jenkins for being there and for being so damn useful.

Speaking of which, one of the characters bemoaned the fact that the situation is already so bad, it's not fair they are stuck with a murderous nut like Toomy. I think it's more than fair. Not just because Dinah is right that they NEED him for Langolier bait, but because the amount of useful people on that plane who just HAPPENED to be asleep when they fell through the time loop is insane. Because Dinah's precognition, Nick's special forces skills, Bob Jenkins' deductive reasoning, and the fact that Brian is a freaking Pilot means they were lucky they were only stuck with ONE Toomy. Karma dictates they should have had four. Or maybe six, because I don't think either Albert or Laurel is entirely useless in a crisis either.

I love that one of the passengers basically sleeps through the entire thing, and the brief times he awakes he sees what's happening and chooses to go back to sleep. The one thing the other passengers have in common every time they look at him is that they envy him. What a great subversive plot-thread for King to weave throughout the story.

As main characters go, I don't much like Brian, simply because he once hit his wife. I understand that Nick Hopewell feels he has a lot to make up for for the 3 kids he accidentally killed on a mission, but I actually think Brian does too knowing that.

King connections of note: Not a ton, but The Shop from "Firestarter" is mentioned.

"The New People" at the end is about as good a description for the survivors as any. King is a cool horror writer because he doesn't usually do the "hand popping out of the grave in the last shot" moment in his stories. He usually allows his survivors actual happy endings. And that might be why his stuff is so popular while the rest of the horror genre is a bit polarizing with much of the public, I don't personally like horror that much myself usually. But I like Stephen King, his optimism, and he characters. The fact that most of his books are supposed to be scary is one of the least appealing things about to them me in general. That fact certainly isn't why I read him. King is just an innately good storyteller.

And yes, I love the ending, because it's a perfect capper and resolution to the mystery and the doubt and dread turning into joy feels completely earned. The Langoliers is one of King better, unsung stories. I'm betting some people who will read this review will never have even heard of it before. And the miniseries was great too. I think Bronson Pinchot was a VERY odd choice for Toomy, but I'm guessing that's why they chose him. Dean Stockwell was absolutely perfect as Bob Jenkins, as long as we are keeping track of that sort of thing.

The dark period in King's career is coming to a close. He still has some disappointments coming up before he fully gets out of the slump, but he's gonna get clean soon, and that's gonna help things immeasurably. In the meantime, this story is solid all the way through. 5 stars.

Two Part Midnight: Secret Window, Secret Garden

When I first read this I did not predict the twist ending. But it's like Leland on Twin Peaks, when you reread it there can be no other answer. You feel dumb for having been surprised the first time. Really, I don't know how and why "Who killed Laura Palmer?" became SUCH a national sensation and burning mystery. Because it's super obvious in hindsight. Just like Mort Rainey essentially being Norman Bates.

And the reason I'm satisfied with this is because I can't stand Mort. He blames everybody else for his own problems and refuses take any responsibility for any bad things that have happened in his life. Ironically Shooter was created by his mind to figure out a way to let him do that and suffer for how much his personality actually sucks, but really, most people don't need to go crazy and murder their cat and two people to have a revelation about themselves. Mort Rainey is unlikable and I find him one of King's famous "bad husbands" on par with Burt from "Children Of The Corn", Jack Torrance from "The Shining", and Louis Creed from "Pet Sematary". And he would have been as crappy a husband as those guys even if he never killed anybody.

King delivers a bummer ending for a change, but since it's for a character he's gotten us to dislike, the reader doesn't object. I certainly don't.

One writing insight I liked was Mort thinking his old writing teacher's books were well-received by the critics and didn't sell for the same reason: They were incomprehensible. This rings true to me about a lot of critically loved stuff that audiences don't give two craps about. Critics love stuff that doesn't make sense because they can pretend they actually understand it and us plebes are simply too dim to. Very insightful observation there about both bad fiction and bad fiction reviewers.

It's an interesting story although far from the best one in the collection. 3 1/2 stars.

Three Past Midnight: The Library Policeman

I think this one gets a bad rap. Yes, it's a mess, and I get the sneaking suspicion King had no idea what he was doing when he wrote it (he admits as much in the forward) but King claims the story scares him, and it does me too. And I don't find too many of his stories legit scary. He compares it to Christine in starting out as a comical idea and turning into a horrifying nightmare. A couple of thoughts from me there. Nothing in Christine is as horrifying as this. The main trauma of the story is Sam remembering back when he was raped by a stranger as a little kid. There is nothing approaching that level of horror in Christine. And considering how silly the premise is, maybe some fans found that idea out of place.

But it's a mess and an interesting mess at that.

One of the oddest and most unique things about it is that the scariest sequence doesn't actually have any real tension to it. Dave telling Sam and Naomi his history with Ardelia literally has no stakes and is essentially just a conversation. But it's riveting and horrifying anyways. Similarly, King really makes you understand about the good in Dave by Stan relating the actual story of the baseballs. Cool touches like that are a King mainstay, and why he's a cut above any other horror writer you can think of. He allows the good moments to not just happen, but either be appreciated or enjoyed by the heroes. And for a guy telling creepy stories that specific touch really makes all the difference.

Not a ton of Kingverse references here, but King references himself as a writer (which sort of messes with some of the themes he later developed about Keystone Earth in the final three Dark Tower books). Also should note Sam and Naomi's happy ending is briefly confirmed at the end of the upcoming novel "Needful Things". The town the story takes place in (Junction City) however is due more much more unpleasant times ahead.

Put this down for a widely panned King book I actually liked. Other members of this club include "Insomnia" and "Rose Madder". And while we are stating unpopular opinions, I think all three of those polarizing books are better than "The Body", "Cujo", "IT", and "Pet Sematary". I tend to agree with most King fans about what his GREAT books are ("The Stand", "'Salem's Lot", "The Dark Tower", "Rita Hayworth And The Shawshank Redemption") but when it comes to both other fans, and frankly Uncle Stevie himself, I tend to have very different opinions about which books are his GOOD ones. This is a good one and the second best story in the collection. 4 stars.

Four Past Midnight: The Sun Dog

My least favorite story in the collection. King warns us in the Foreword people looking for explanations will be disappointed. And while I'm not disappointed we didn't get explanations, I dislike King's unexplainable fiction more than stuff he puts in the work to make credible. And it's no contest. The Langoliers is precisely as ludicrous a premise as The Sun Dog. But King put in the legwork to make it believable. The "unexplained horror" in both this story and much of Night Shift and Skeleton Crew feels shoddy as hell.

The story is hardly worthless. That bears admitting because there ARE a few King stinkers I would claim that about. But I think Pop Merrill is an interesting character, and like Kevin, I like the way he talks, and how it's explained he uses "I mean to say," the same way other people use, "like" or "you know", and as a way to pause the conversation to gather his thoughts. My favorite part of the novella (hands down) is the extended chapter where Merrill goes from place to place trying to sell the camera to the "Mad Hatters". The last (Chaffee), I think got to the root of the matter best, at least as far a purchase of a supernatural object goes: As far as they could see, it's a rare example of an unexplained and singularly unique supernatural occurrence that is actually quite boring. I love that chapter, and I love how steamed the Hatters were making Pops for not being stupid enough to want to either buy or believe in a dangerous and worthless object. I enjoyed Pop's misery at the reality check that the people who he routinely "rooked" were actually smarter than him.

Kevin's an all right protagonist but he's a little square. And the fact that he actually believes he IS better than "the summer people" shows he's not really growing up right. Castle Rock is kinda of a sucky town. It's probably why Leland Gaunt sees potential in it later on.

King Connections: Kevin has a weird vision about the time Jack Sawyer visited the town of Oatley in The Talisman, and encountered an incomprehensible wino with a shopper cart accusing him of being a "Fushing Feef". Pops Merrill is the uncle of Ace Merrill from "The Body". Shawshank Prison is mentioned. Polly Chalmers from "Needful Things" is briefly seen, and the Narrator even mysteriously notes that she is a person they will need to discuss at a later date. Cujo's story is mentioned. Sheriff Alan Pangborn from "The Dark Half" appears and it's revealed his wife and son have died in a car crash.

The unresolved ending hinting at a bad end for Kevin and his father is another reason to dislike the story. I have said it before and I will say it again: A good ending can makes a reader / viewer forgive A LOT. So when I'm already not digging this story, it underwhelming me on the last page really hurts it.

My least favorite story in the collection. It is not without its good points, however. 2 1/2 stars.

Stephen King envisioned this as a "Black Comedy". I don't think it's entirely successful. I am not sure how the book was received at the time, but I know the movie was widely hated for being so damn mean. And it's a mean as hell book.

Luckily, King has a couple of likable protagonists in Alan Pangborn and Polly Chalmers that you root for and care about. But how can you actually laugh at a "black comedy" where poor Nettie is wailing over the body of her dead dog or young Brian Rusk commits suicide via shotgun in front of his little brother? A Black Comedy usually means things are gruesome but actually subversive enough to be humorous too. There are some funny things in the book, like Gaunt's instructions to Ace on the cocaine reading "Snort me", or Gaunt telling the woman to gobble his crank, but on the whole, it's King taking his usual shots at small-town America and how dumb the rubes actually are. He doesn't actually destroy Castle Rock as promised. But it's still a sour as hell place to leave the town and many of those characters on.

Let me also say something about the main protagonist: Alan Pangborn is a woefully unskilled law enforcement officer. He didn't impress me in "The Dark Half". If anything, him not being able to put together the obvious until it is far too late here is far more shoddy policework than him not believing an imaginary man like George Stark could actually exist. That last bit is understandable, as frustrating as it was during "The Dark Half". Because there doesn't have to be a supernatural explanation attached to Leland Gaunt for a halfway competent cop to look in his direction and call "Shenanigans!". I think what annoys me most is that Gaunt is not some perfect master planner. He's outright careless at many points, and sloppy as hell. He could have been found out several times if things had worked against him in several different ways, and if Pangborn had been more alert. And a lot of good supervillaining is done through pure luck on the end of the supervillain. But it doesn't make me love or appreciate the dopey hero the villain spends the first three quarters of the book running rings around. But as far as Pangborn wising up goes, it's more like the first 9/10ths of the book.

I'll tell you what disappoints me a little. That Gaunt's wares are glamours and fakes. I think it would raise an interesting moral dilemma if the demanded items Gaunt sold were genuine. You can't raise the controversy of what the town's soul is worth if you are handing them junk. I think King got it into his head that the Devil is the father of all lies, and went from there. But that sure as hell is far less interesting than if Gaunt's promises were so dangerous because they were true.

King connections of note: There are a LOT of them and arguably more in this book than any before or since.

-A few references to the events of "The Dead Zone". Johnny Smith is mentioned by name as is Frank Dodd.

-The events of "Cujo" are mentioned. Joe Camber, George Bannerman, Donna Trenton, and her son are ALL mentioned.

-The events of "The Dark Half" are brought up, and we learn Thad Beaumont's wife has taken the twins and left him after the events of that book, and he drunk-dialed Alan late at night for awhile during his depression over that fact. Also some references to George Stark in a nightmare for Alan and his getting "sparrows to fly" against Gaunt in the climax.

-Alan feeling "The Coming Of The White" seems to be a direct reference to "The Dark Tower". It's amazing this book is not considered Dark Tower-related despite that. It has more to do with that story than "Bag Of Bones" or "The Regulators" at any rate just for that.

-The end mentions Sam Peebles and Naomi Higgins, the protagonists of "The Library Policeman", and informs us they've left town together happy and in love. Which is a good thing too because we see Junction City is the next stop for the thing that called itself Gaunt's malevolence.

-Roland DeBray's vulgar claim of the only thing that smells better than new car from "Christine" is brought up here. That line is too gross, memorable, and weird to be anything BUT a direct callback.

-The events of "The Sun Dog" are referenced, as is Pop Merrill's catchphrase "What I mean to say," (several times for that one).

-Ace Merrill's history with the boys from "The Body" as a kid is referenced and we learn Gordie LaChance is a rich and famous novelist upstate. If you ask me an undeserved one. I always thought LaChance was a crappy writer. I think Ace finding that situation unfair is him probably having the right of it.

-Ace did time in Shawshank. Because of course he did.

The Narrator describing the fact that Ace is the kind of Alpha who immediately is submissive to a bigger Pack Dog is great writing on King's end. As is noting the poor woman who died at the Church who never bought anything from Gaunt's shop or participated in his sick games. King getting clean was the best thing to ever happen to his prose.

Gaunt hates the word "But". And while I will concede that it's been misused over the years and a way for people to walk back horrible crap they are about to say, the reason Gaunt hates it is because it has power against everything he's trying to do. When the characters stop saying "Mr. Gaunt knows best," and say "But..." instead, Gaunt is losing. Gaunt hates the word so much because it has legitimate power against him.

I am wavering over whether I think this is a successful book or not. As a horror novel and King continuity-feast it works well. As a black comedy? It's too damn horrible to be funny. Story of King's life. ***1 removed link

Both good and bad. But the good is VERY good, and the bad is VERY bad.

I don't want to dwell on the bad too much, so we'll talk about it first. Susannah Dean remains perhaps the most problematic character King ever created. He takes a lot of Detta Walker's Ebonics for granted, and acts as if since he's an upstanding white liberal, he should be afforded the privilege of creating black characters who both say the ugly, offensive things she does, and suffer the humiliations she routinely does. Her rape in the speaking ring says that people gave King a LOT more slack for his horrible ideas and the way he treated women and people of color back then than he ever deserved. For years. To be honest, for the longest while, I was actually dumb enough to believe Ralph Bakshi's explanation that his racial caricatures in his work were not designed to offend people of color, and are done by someone who actually loves black culture. But like Bakshi, King's work itself at this stage of his career says otherwise. He can claim he's an ally and means no offense. The stuff he's written isn't just offensive. It strikes me as DELIBERATELY offensive, done by a white liberal who believes the fact that he votes for Democrats gives him a free pass. That's not how it actually work, Uncle Stevie. If you truly don't want to offend people of color and women with your writing, stop writing utterly offensive things because you believe you have this weird license to be deliberately offensive. It doesn't fly.

I also have a TON of problems with Gasher. I don't like the pedophile vibe he seems to be throwing at Jake. And if King truly wanted the Tick-Tock Man to be a memorable villain and make his first appearance impressive, maybe don't bring him back for a single scene in the next book and have him killed off so easily.

I mentioned there's good. Jake's stuff in New York is Aces. Take note, Dark Tower fans. This is literally the only time in the entire saga Calvin Tower is likable. King went in an entirely different direction for this loser in subsequent books, but I liked seeing him unfiltered before he actually became so damn damaging. I also love the Charlie The Choo-Choo book (I will be reviewing the picture book in an upcoming review) and all of the clues, Easter Eggs, and tie-ins to Mid-World in it. Jake's essay was hysterical, especially him getting an A+ for that disturbed lunacy. And Blaine the Mono is awesome. One of King's best villains EVER. And riddling is an attractive concept to ANY reader, and to have this insane robot obsessed with it is just great. I love the ending, although in fairness, I got into the series late (I wisely waited until it was done to start it), and I might have just been pissed if I had been left with that specific "I gotta see where this goes" cliffhanger for a few years between books.

What appears to be Randall Flagg showing up at the end must have been a HUGE moment for Stephen King fans back in the day, and King hinting him and Walter / The Man In Black are the exact same dude is a masterstroke. I would have been thrilled if I had first read that when the book was released.

Couple of interesting King connections. The Turtle Maturin is a concept created in his overrated long novel "IT". Inside View from both "The Dead Zone" and "The Night Flier" is mentioned, which is problematic, since Jake's stuff apparently takes place on Keystone Earth. Shh! Let's pretend I didn't just notice that bit.

I feel like there are a lot of good concepts and scenes and villains in the book. But King has been playing it SO fast and loose with Susannah Dean for decades, and I'm just not willing to put up with it anymore. Yes, it does wreck a great deal of enjoyment of the book for me, Uncle Stevie. It's weird that you believed writing something that offensive and ugly would NOT do that. ***1/2.

The 1990's is an odd period for Stephen King. He did an uncommon number of books dealing with women being hurt by men and navigating that trauma successfully. And I think the reasons he did those books were probably well-intentioned. But it's something he did so often during this period that it sort of makes me wonder what specific part of his liberal guilt latched onto that idea. Is there perhaps shame for some exploitative scenes involving women that King is ashamed of? Maybe. But that doesn't feel right either. I feel like King has always been more racially insensitive than he has been sexist. Out of problematic things King might feel the need to do penance over, this seems a little odd to me.

Gerald's Game is a very scary book. The crap with the reality of the Space Cowboy is King at his most in your face in purely terrifying the reader. The scares and jumps are not remotely subtle and that makes them all the scarier.

I mentioned King dealing with empowering abused women, and I have to say to say that if he actually researched how women themselves felt as something like that happened when they were little girls and tried to repress that memory, I'd be surprised. Young Jessie's reactions to her father could either be believable or utter b.s. invented entirely by King. I'm not sure.

What DOES feel authentic to me, is the manipulations of her father before and after the abuse. I have never wanted to abuse somebody in that manner. And if I had it never would have occurred to me to insist to the kid I hurt that we had to tell, even if it would destroy the family, and put that burden on the kid because I'd know the kid would NEVER speak up in that scenario. That idea sounds so twisted and outside of the thinking of a decent, rational human being, that it sounds totally credible. The fact that I would never ever even THINK of using that as a manipulation tactic to keep somebody's silence shows that King really is channeling an aspect of abusers most of us simply don't understand or have any context for. For that specific thing? I'm betting King himself had heard a woman describing this scenario to him and thought it would horrible enough that it would make a good anchor for the trauma of the book. And Tom Mahout making this horrible thing he did his daughter's entire responsibility is so twisted and outside of any idea I could ever ponder that it simply has to credible. This HAS to be a tactic many abusers use. It's too perfect and perfectly horrible for King to have invented it himself.

I like the fact that King, a Democrat, understands that this type of abuse, is not actually a partisan problem. Yeah, you hear a lot about Republicans politicians being charged with these crimes these days. But think of all the kids who stay silent. You realize the reason Jessie's a Republican as an adult is because her father read "Profiles In Courage" in his spare time. King, even back in the 1990's believed Republicans sucked. He's suggesting Tom's liberal leanings drove her into a lousy political philosophy as an adult simply to be as far away from him as possible.

And yes, I do find it believable that he's a Democrat. The tactics he uses are falsely empowering to Jessie and a way for him to pretend to take responsibility without actually doing so. His shtick would not be outside of something Brian Griffin would say upon mistreating a woman. And Brian Griffin is TV's famous liberal cautionary tale and punchline. And I'm impressed that King understands that this sort of thing, like racism, is not down to a single political party and movement. It's a rot that effects everyone. That's what's so insidious about it.

And it's not just Jessie coming to grips with the fact that this happened which impresses me. It's her coming to realize how tightly her father controlled and manipulated every aspect of the situation. The trauma is less shameful in hindsight and more of a disgusting con job. I like Jessie getting there.

The voices in Jessie's head are not exactly great writing, but a book with basically one character in it needs people to bounce ideas off of. Netflix made a movie out of this a few years ago and I wonder if and how the voices were dealt with. If you had asked me before the movie came out I would have suggested the book was unfilmable.

King Connections of Note: The woman in Jessie's vision in during the day of the eclipse is Dolores Claiborne. It's mentioned Norris Ridgewick is Castle Rock's new sheriff. Juniper Hill is referenced.

Gerald's Game is not a great book. But it's a GOOD book. It's a book with genuine scares and a book that deals with child abuse in a frank and intelligent way. Not bad. ***1 removed link

Dolores Claiborne is an interesting novel in the fact that even though I've never seen the movie, what I've seen of the trailers and reviews tell me it's something entirely different. The movie is a Gothic horror revenge story about the awful truth of the spooky Dolores played by noted scary person Kathy Bates. The book? Is NOT that.

First of all, I can't picture Kathy Bates as Dolores as portrayed here. Not just because Dolores is skinny, but because Dolores isn't frightening, she's charming, and funny, and lovable. She's a larger than life personality. Not a mysterious woman who gives you the creeps. The last sentence of her story is "Dust bunnies? Frig ya!" Does that remotely sound like the trailers for that movie?

And there is no mystery attached to what she did. The entire book (annoyingly told without any chapter stops or breaks) is essentially her recorded confession and statement to the police given because she's on the hook for a murder she did NOT do, and needs to come clean about killing her husband to prove it. And Dolores doesn't simply get away with murder at the end. The police simply decide not to charge her, and to keep her secret. Because they ultimately agree with the reasons she did it. And so does the reader. Dolores isn't scary for that murder. She's a protective mother.

Also the bits with her recalling Vera crapping on the sheets is such fine lowbrow comedy, especially the way Dolores tells it. A book with that scene of gutbusting laughter is simply not a horror book.

It's a character study about a woman who forced her husband to stop abusing her, and when he started sexually molesting their daughter she decided to kill him. And it tackles tough and horrific themes sure enough. But in a raw and realistic way. King doesn't scare me with this book. He moves me.

I mentioned in the review for Gerald's Game that this was the period of King's writing where he stuck up an unusual amount for abused women. It's probably the best of the novels from this period of him doing that.

King Connections Of Note: The young girl Dolores sees in a vision on the day of the eclipse is young Jessie Mahout from the book Gerald's Game, of which this book is considered its companion / second half. Derry is mentioned, as is Shawshank. Little Tall Island is later the setting of the King-written miniseries Storm Of The Century (I will be reviewing the printed screenplay soon).

I see the trailers for Dolores Claiborne and it's like for an entirely different story. The book is really cool although I would have preferred chapters so it would be easier to read. ****.

Stephen King's fifth short story collection is definitely his most off-beat. It contains a great nonfiction essay ("Head Down"), a screenplay, a poem, and a freely adapted fable at the end to boot. There are some great stories here like "The Ten O'Clock People", "The House On Maple Street", "Dolan's Cadillac", and "The Doctor's Case", as well as some clunkers ("You Know They Got A Hell Of A Band"). And put me down for somebody who considers the degrading story "Dedication" one of the most appalling things King has ever written. Collection Overall: 3 stars.

Dolan's Cadillac

This is like the perfect revenge story.

Robinson is MURDERER and I don't feel bad about his actions at all. There's a very hard-boiled edge to the story, which is a storytelling style King has always used to mixed results.

Here? He uses it to spin QUITE a yarn. 4 1/2 stars.

The End Of The Whole Mess

It's not a horror story but it IS a total bummer and I don't really like those. 1 1/2 stars.

Suffer The Little Children

This is a horrible story, but it IS scary, which is what it is going for.

King Connection: Miss Sidley is sent to Juniper Hill from "IT".

King describes it as containing zero social merit and that he likes that in a story. I don't agree with him about the second thing, but it's good to see he understands the first thing about it. 1 1/2 stars.

The Night Flier

Spooky story.

Richard Dees is a great character and it's easy to see why King brought him back from "The Dead Zone". The idea that he needs to practice smiling hints that he's a sociopath, which sounds about right. The guy is a pure slimeball.

That ending of the vampire's urine hitting the toilet as Dees watched it in the mirror just kills me. The story is just disturbing (and fun) on every level. 4 stars.

Popsy

It's sort of a funny horror story, simply because the "protagonist" Sheridan is SUCH a bad guy so you think the bad things that happen to him serve him right.

I love that the vampire kid loves the Ninja Turtles. As Popsy says, like all kids do.

King Connections: Inside View is mentioned. King says in the notes accompanying the story that he believes Popsy and the Night Flier are one and the same.

Twisted. 3 1/2 stars.

It Grows On You

This Castle Rock epilogue is super boring.

King Connections: Andy Clutterbuck appears. 1 1/2 stars.

Chattery Teeth

It's a fun story. Not exactly unpredictable. But fun. It's also one where the supernatural element helps the protagonist instead of trying to kill him, and that's refreshing too.

Cool. 3 1/2 stars.

Dedication

More like "Degradation".

Easily in the bottom five things King has ever written, and it's one of those things like "Rage" that as I'm reading it I'm saying, "How DARE he?" to myself. It is repellent and example of King humiliating and degrading a woman of color simply because he can. It's technically not the worst thing he's ever written. But of his short fiction? The stuff he puts in collections? The very worst.

It's so bad I can't believe King put it in a collection at ALL. If I were him, I'd be embarrassed of it, and it would be one of those MANY crappy short stories he's written that went uncollected and never saw the light of day ever again. It is vile on every level. 0 stars.

The Moving Finger

I don't much like Stephen King's inexplicable horror stories from earlier in his career. But this one is not terrible. This is a morbid sense of humor to it, for one thing. Maybe King has stopped making the inexplicable seem like bad, lazy writing, and simply made it thought-provoking instead. Funnily enough, this probably also describes "Chattery Teeth".

I like the story. 3 1/2 stars.

Sneakers

I like this story too. I think it leaves the protagonist Tell off on a good place, even if the reader might think he's still denying a deeper part of his sexuality. Nevertheless, this ghost story works because Tell winds up taking a moral stand about it at the end, and ends his friendship with Jannings over it. Doing the right thing is never easy, especially for a guy feeling as many conflicted, confused feelings as Tell is. But I celebrate whenever a fictional character does it, and that's why I like this story. 4 stars.

You Know They Got A Hell Of A Band

The story annoys me, not just because the ending is a downer, but because the couple never would have gotten into that fix if Clark had just put a pin in his pride and listened to his wife's fears. He's not as cruel or outright nasty as Burt from "Children Of The Corn". But his more reasonable-seeming facade cannot mask the fact that his stupidity and stubbornness are exactly as damaging.

And King may think the scenario is humorous but it really creeps and bums me out instead. I really dislike this story. 1 star.

Home Delivery

Good zombie yarn, if you ask me.

King connections: The story takes place on Little Tall Island, the setting of both "Dolores Claiborne" and "Storm Of The Century". Because there are no zombies in the epilogue of "Storm Of The Century" set in 1999, it's safe to say this version of Little Tall exists on a different level of the Dark Tower than it or "Dolores Claiborne" does. Nonetheless, Dolores' daughter Selena St. George is mentioned by name, and unhappily it's suggested her Thanksgiving visit as told at the end of "Dolores Claiborne" wound up her only visit back to the island, but I choose to believe that's only so on this level of the Tower. Also Inside View is mentioned.

I like when the Narrator describes there can only be one of two religions on Little Tall: Methodist, or Lapsed Methodist. King seems to understand Maine Island life in a way I never will.

I didn't much care for the main character of Maddie (she's a doormat), but everything else was riveting, and a really cool take on the zombie apocalypse. 3 1/2 stars.

Rainy Season

This is another Twilight Zone story about the hellish small town that isn't what is appears, but unlike "Children Of The Corn", and "You Know They Got A Hell Of A Band", I like it. Partly because Henry and Laura are sympathetic, framing-story characters, and partly because none of the mess is actually the young couple's fault. The idea that the toads melt in the sunlight and the worry is that without the ritual they might not is a pretty great freaking hook, as are the fact that the raining toads are carnivorous with needle-shaped teeth.

King also wrote a phrase I liked when describing the dog. He said is was "a yellow dog of no particular make or model". I love that. That's downhome writing right there. King knows ALL the best Yankee sayings that I've never heard of, and part of the fun of reading him is hearing him show them off. 4 stars.

My Pretty Pony

I tend to like King stories where there is no horror in it whatsoever, but this one is kind of boring.

First of all, it was conceived as an excerpt from a Richard Bachman book that was canned once the pseudonym was burned. And it doesn't feel much like Bachman prose, although there is a chance King might have substantially altered it once he realized it would just be its own thing.

I think the thing I dislike most about the story is that Clive doesn't seem to understand his sister is sexually molesting him. And it's such a minor part of the story that it almost feels like King thinks it's no big deal. Whatever the Bachman novel was gonna be, I doubt I would have liked it.

Fast and slow time is a thing, and the Grandfather is right that when you're older, time only goes slower during bad times. After experiencing 2016-2021, a period of time that went by for me at a snail's pace, I feel much older and wearier than I actually am. The idea that time slows down only when you are miserable is an idea that entirely holds up to scrutiny.

But I'm still not a huge fan of this story. 2 stars.

Sorry, Right Number

I hate this screenplay. No wonder Amazing Stories rejected it. The ending doesn't feel preordained, it feels cruel, and makes the entire thing feels pointless. It's like "What if the movie 12 Monkeys was actually worthless and totally boring?" The time loop you can't fix simply is not interesting in any sort of network TV domestic family situation.

King Connection: The script refers to Kate's "Pretty Pony" almost certainly an addition for its inclusion in this collection. Pretty sneaky, sis. 1 star.

The Ten O'Clock People

Easily the best story in the collection. It seems to be loosely based on the movie "They Live!" which was based on a short story by Ray Nelson called "Eight O'Clock In The Morning". Normally I hate me some unresolved endings, but this one is delicious in not only the questions it raises, but the possibilities too.

King made the Vice-President a batman but I think he refused to say it was Al Gore in this Universe (who was Vice-President when the story was written) because he likes Al Gore. King isn't explicit, but the talking points the Vice-President in the story uses are strictly Republican. Which disappoints me a little as a fan of Al Gore. I would have loved to have seen him portrayed as an evil bat-creature secretly wanting to suck out souls. Give the South Park jerks something to actually complain about, Uncle Stevie.

The ideas and rules for the batmen are just Aces. It's speculated that America is the only country where more than a handful people can see them because America is the only country obsessed with quitting smoking. Just the ideas the story raises makes me want to see a sequel. But knowing Pearson got the Resistance in Vegas started on a high note might be enough for me.

There's a movie of this in development. It would make a great picture, but it's probably too late to have the same impact it would have 20 years ago. Simply put, there are not enough smokers or people trying to quit smoking left in society to be relatable to general audience anymore. The younger generations gravitate towards vape pens these days for the explicit reason that they probably won't even HAVE to quit them. It's a great premise that society has moved on from a bit.

I like that Pearson is the one guy who senses a rat at the meeting. And I especially like that he instantly dislikes Delray. Delray's all "We never had a chance!" The 30 batmen bankers in Vegas Pearson, Cam, and Moira smoked a year later beg to differ. And love the story ending by saying that killing batmen was like quitting smoking: you had to start somewhere.

Let me be blunt. Stephen King's decades long tobacco habit has rarely improved his writing. I find the fact that he normalizing quitters cheating and going back to the habit a bad message, which is made worse because it happened with ALL of his characters that used to smoke. And I think as King actually stopped being one of the Ten O'Clock people, he either made his main characters nonsmokers to begin with, or more admirably like with Holly Gibney, made their struggles to quit real and permanent. But really, I think the only really great story we can owe to King's butt habit is this one. People will swear by "Quitters Inc.", and while that IS a funny story, it's told by a man who believed people telling him to quit smoking had sinister motives. "The Ten O'Clock People" is just great sci-fi, and makes quitting and slipping a random coicidence, and the one thing that might slip up these ugly mothers once and for all.

It's an amazing story. If King were smart, he's write a sequel / update. If he were smarter, he wouldn't, and simply let the story's awesomeness stand. I would prefer King were a little LESS smart here to be completely honest. 5 stars.

Crouch End

A Stephen King set in the Cthulhu Mythos. Not a huge Lovecraft fan, just due to how personally repellent a person he was, but Uncle Stevie seems game to play in his sandbox.

I guess my question is if his novel "Revival" also exists on this level of the Dark Tower. We'll see. 2 1/2 stars.

The House On Maple Street

This is sort of Stephen King's version of a Narnia story by way of The Twilight Zone. The children's last name being Bradbury also hints at another strong influence. And it was really based on a painting!

The story is a real crowd-pleaser, and one of the few King stories (like "Eyes Of The Dragon" and MAYBE "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon") that I think it would be safe for kids to read. They'd get a kick out of the Bradburys sending their wicked stepfather into outer space at the end at any rate.

King's prose here is deliberately understated, and could be confused for that of a British children's author. Which is what I think he's actually channeling.

Brian screaming "My toys!" as the house took off was a pleasurably realistic reaction.

Delightful story. 4 1/2 stars.

The Fifth Quarter

Very good.

King says in the notes this story came from Bachman but I don't see it. Bachman's stories tend to have an additional repulsive element to then and this is pure good old fashioned pulp. If Bachman only wrote like this, I'd never say boo about the persona. Since he NEVER wrote stuff like this, I have license to gripe.

I love that Jagger calls the Narrator by the moniker "Beautiful." He has no idea who is out there in the dark, but knows it will rattle him. And it does.

King connections: "The Shank" is mentioned.

King as his pulpiest. 4 stars.

The Doctor's Case

A gem.

Leave it to Stephen King, when tasked with writing a Sherlock Holmes story, to have Watson recall the single case he solved before Sherlock! If that isn't a grand enough idea, a nearly centennial Watson suggests the story has never been told before because he, Holmes, and Lestrade decided that the dead victim deserved it, and covered it up, all three becoming accessories to murder after the fact!

King is great with the characters because he suggests the reason Watson solves the case first is that because of his cat allergy, Holmes was working at an unusual diminished capacity. King cares about the franchise and tropes enough to actually give a REASON why Watson solves it first. Better yet, Holmes is supportive of his friend's first great discovery.

I like King having Watson say this adventure was truly the only time he heard Holmes say those much attributed, (but mostly apocryphal) words, "Quick, Watson! The game is afoot!"

I mention in the review for "The House On Maple Street" how unusual it is for King to write a story kids could read. This isn't actually a kids story, but if it were rated, it would get a PG at worst. King actually blanks out the one curse word uttered by Watson, just like they did back in the day.

Still King describing "Mrs. Hemphill's Home For Abandoned Pussies" shows when King DOES do Sherlock Holmes, there is still an edge to it. The "Pussy Will" joke is great because Watson can't tell if Holmes is joking, or even if he truly has a sense of humor or not.

I love this story. An absolute treat. 5 stars.

Umney's Last Case

The premise is clever as hell, but I strongly dislike the story so much because I find Clyde Umney's personality so utterly repulsive and despicable. Just him insisting the blind kid couldn't get the operation because he was supposed to be blind forever makes me hate him. He's delusional. And we learned the kid's name is Francis and he hates the name Peoria. Just like her secretary Arlene is fed up with being called Candy and his unwanted advances on her. I'd feel worse about the spot the writer Sam Landry puts the guy in if he exhibited anything remotely resembling human emotions towards other people. Him having to toilet-train himself at the end of the story sounds humiliating. And like something that turd deserves.

Just based on the ending there is an open question in my mind if the entire story is really just the diary of Sam Landry detailing his descent into madness and disassociation. It's possible that Umney dictating the last chapter of the story is simply Landry who has gone completely insane. I like that it's up for debate. But that's definitely my interpretation.

But I can't actually like the story because Clyde Umney is such a turd. 2 stars.

Head Down

This sports article about Stephen King following his son Owen's Little League team as they try for the championship is the first nonfiction essay King has put in one of these collections. King insists it fits. I don't exactly agree. What I will say is I get why King included it and is proud of it. I have previously noted that as of this point in time, Stephen King is an utterly crappy nonfiction writer. Danse Macabre was so self-indulgent I think the proper way to absorb it would be to listen to Hank Azaria read it as a book on tape in his Comic Book Guy voice. King's stabs at introductions, forewords, and nonfiction books at this point make him seem exceptionally snide and elitist. This essay is the first nonfiction thing King has written that is not only good, but that I don't actually turn up my nose at in disgust. I don't give it full credit. The bit with the boys on the bus searching for the People magazine with the breast cancer exam photo is King as his most crass, but other than that, King tries very hard to actually be an objective reporter here, even if the team he's following is his son's.

I think King is way more objective than he needs to be which is something I admire him for. When his son Owen is beaned by a pitcher who seems cocky and thoughtless, King is objective enough to worry less about the mental state of his son, and more about the pitcher who beaned three kids and had the crowd turned against him. And it's repeated over and over again: They're only twelve. King deciding the pain of the kid who dinged his son is the interesting thing worth focusing on is why this is a damn good essay.

And Dave Mansfield and Neil Waterhouse are damn good Little League coaches. I don't believe every hoary cliche they tell the the boys. But I believe THEY believe them, which means the boys do too. Even a cynical King is able to come around there by the end.

King's expertise as a baseball reporter here is I think certainly the thing that led him to coauthor "Faithful" with Stewart O'Nan. Somehow that chronicle of the Red Sox season of breaking The Curse is even more electrifying than this. But I don't think it would have ever existed without this. King would not have had the chops to do it, much less do it right.

King says in the afterward he used to be a sports reporter in college, so maybe I am not giving him enough credit here. But he also says this IS the best piece of nonfiction he's done at this point, so I guess not.

It doesn't fit into this fiction collection very well. But this is the first, not just great nonfiction piece King ever wrote, it's his first decent one too. I get the logic of giving it the exposure of a collection. And Nightmares And Dreamscapes also contains a screenplay (also unique among collections), a poem (we've had a few of these already), and relates an ancient fable he loves that he didn't write himself (also only found in the collection). Out of all of King's short story collections, it's the most eclectic. I will argue Head Down doesn't fit it. But it fits it far better than it would any other collection. 4 1/2 stars.

Brooklyn August

I don't understand much about poetry but I do understand how much Stephen King loves Baseball. 3 stars.

The Beggar And The Diamond

The thing I love about this fable (and I suspect it's the thing King loves too) is that is ends on a punchline. I love listening to riveting stories and finding out at the end they are set-ups to funny jokes. 4 1/2 stars.

I'm giving this a lukewarm review, but in fairness, I want to point out that this specific novel is something I tend to go back and forth about the quality of it each time I reread it. Sometimes I love it. Sometimes I don't. I believe one of the times I read it I actually cried at the ending (which is high praise from me). My ultimate opinion of the book tends to vary based upon the mood I was in when I read it. I wasn't in a bad mood this time at all. But I was in a bit of a no-nonsense mood, which happens a lot during a creative period of mine, and yeah, I kind of noticed the flaws in the dialogue this time out. And this happened to be the time I decided to put a review to paper so keep in mind this review is of The Random, rather than The Purpose.

One of the things I notice immediately after not having read it in a few years is that in the 1990's King had a different viewpoint and plan for the fictional town of Derry back then. The idea here seems to be that it's slowly healing from the horrors of Pennywise from "IT", but there is still a dangerous undercurrent to it. Books like "11/22/63" and "Gwendy's Final Task" take the stance that Derry is irredeemably rotten and nothing will ever truly change. In Gwendy's level of the Tower it seems like Pennywise was never defeated either. I have a hard time accepting King's later decision, just knowing there ARE good people in Derry like Ralph Roberts, Lois Chasse, Joe Wyzer, John Leydecker, and Dorrance Marstaller. A town with a bunch of people like this mingled in it, is simply put, NOT evil incarnate. And I accepted the judgment of the Jake Epping of "11/22/63" BECAUSE it was before Pennywise was defeated for good. But really, I'm having a hard time accepting Derry as King's version Hell In Maine. "Dreamcatcher" makes it hard too, although in fairness, that is a far worse book. But I'll review that later on.

Some of the sites I post reviews on don't allow political talk but for this review, I must offer some insights about the ideas the book is talking about. There isn't any choice. To anyone reading this review whose sensibilities I offend with the following observations, instead of telling me how wrong I am. and starting a flame war that will get us both in trouble, just know that I accept the idea that I could be wrong. The following paragraphs are wholly dedicated to the phrase "Your Mileage May Vary".

This is a book clearly from the period of King's career where he felt the need to stand up for abused and mistreated women. And as far as Helen Deepneau's arc goes, he does fine. But King's politics from this era are a work in progress. I don't think King in 2023 would remotely reach the same conclusion about Susan Day's visit to the convention center that John Leydecker does. You get the feeling King uses Leydecker as his surrogate in his disdain for somebody coming to town and "stirring the pot". Not only are abortion rights no longer as safe as they were in the early 1990's when the book was written (which admittedly King had no way of predicting) I find Leydecker's hatred of Day "stirring up trouble" lazy bothsiderism, that effected many liberals of the era. I sure as hell suffered from it and I was not alone. Bill Clinton's entire Presidency and success was built upon an idea called "triangulation" that meant accepting conservative frames and working within them so to not alienate moderate voters.

And as far as the scenario in the book as shown is concerned, that's wrong. A woman has every right to give a speech to a town without fear of there being a terrorist mass bombing. It is not incumbent on the feminist group to stay silent so as not to provoke antiabortion terrorists. In a just and free society, they should be allowed to gather and say what they want. There would be no false equivalence in reality in Helen's pained determination that if they cancel the rally the bad guys win. King is trying to get the reader to believe that winning boils down to nothing but a team sport. But when you add terrorism and murder to the mix, not only is winning a necessity, but Helen's team winning is the outcome the moral person would want. And for the record, prolifers reading this, the same would hold true if Susan Day's followers were the violent terrorists intent on murdering the Friends to Life. King tries to say "This can't happen because Derry isn't like any other town." You know what, Uncle Stevie? It is. I am also willing to bet that as horrible as you portray the people in later books, Derry is probably a HELL of a lot nicer and more civilized that MANY real-world towns in the Keystone Earth version of the United States. King conceived that Greg Stillson was the worst politician you could ever imagine. And that's why 2016 stunned him so much. When it comes to horrible things in the imagination, King knows what buttons to push. When it comes to horrible things in reality, it always turns out King thought WAY too small in hindsight.

I don't like Bill McGovern. Which is good, because I don't think King does either. The sense I get from his relationship to Ralph is that he is VERY unhealthy for him. Which leads to their final fight before McGovern croaks, and also Ralph realizing Bill was full of crap about Lois' gossipy vapidity.

King Connections Of Note: I do this for every book that has them, and most of them do. But I'll list off the couple of other King books the story references before talking about The Dark Tower connections in earnest. This is considered a Dark Tower-related book, but considering how The Dark Tower ended, it probably shouldn't be. Robin Furth is of the opinion The Eyes Of The Dragon doesn't fit into Mid-World, and must exist on a different level of the Tower. I believe the same of Insomnia.

The biggest references of course go back to "IT". Not just about mentioning that Derry is not like other towns, and that there is a darkness under the surface, but many of the characters and premises are mentioned. Mike Hanlon appears a few times, Ben Hanscomb, Adrian Mellon, and Butch Bowers are mentioned, and in my favorite bit, during Ralph's fight with the Crimson King the word "Deadlights" flashes in his mind with him having no idea (and never finding out) what it means. The Crimson King also tells Ralph there is a rich history of shapeshifters in Derry. Many of the locations from "IT" are revisited as well.

The most interesting King connection to me however is seeing Gage Creed's sneaker in Atropos' lair. It means the events of "Pet Sematary" were never supposed to happen, and as far as causing random death and destruction goes, Atropos certainly got his money's worth there.

Time to talk about the Dark Tower stuff. Roland Deschain actually has a cameo at the end and a version of the Crimson King (utterly unlike his interpretation in both the final novel and the comic books) confronts Ralph at the end. But the reason the novel refuses to fit into the canon is because King utterly changed gears and his mind about what to do with Patrick Danville. According to this book, in 18 years Patrick Danville will die saving the lives of two men, one of whom is going to be crucial to saving the Tower and the Beams. Now this might have happened later ON, but those two men are NOT Roland Deschain and Eddie Dean, as Insomnia readers might have guessed. Eddie is already dead by the time Patrick meets Roland and Susannah, and the Tower has already ostensibly been saved. If there is an additional threat Roland has missed and Patrick has to take care of later on, we don't see it. King refuses to tell us Patrick's ultimate fate in the last book, but the last time we see him he is actually alive. And I don't believe he ever saved Roland's life either. If anything, he was a hindrance to Roland's remaining Tet, and got Oy killed.

King sort of cleverly pointed out this discrepancy himself in the final Dark Tower book when Roland goes to Keystone Earth to meet the Tet Corporation for the final time. Mose Carver's granddaughter hands Roland a copy of "Insomnia" and claims out of all the books Stephen King has written, this one will probably be the key to Roland saving the Tower once and for all. And Roland, God bless his simple heart, dumps the book in the trash the second he leaves Keystone Earth. Why? Because it "feels tricksy". Isn't that the best and most infuriating way King could possibly have disowned Insomnia's connection to The Dark Tower? It's like Discordia was messing with him for that one book, and Roland knew it. But If I want to be perfectly frank, it doesn't actually impress me. What would have impressed me more is if King hadn't written himself into that corner with Patrick to begin with. He wrote himself a pretty audacious out there, no question. But it's annoying he wasn't competent enough to write "Insomnia" so it would fit in the first place.

This go-round, I see the flaws clearly. The love story between Ralph and Lois seems particularly painful to me, and I feel like a LOT of his love stories from the 1990's and early 2000's are kind of sappy, and poorly written. By the way, this includes "Lisey's Story", King's personal favorite book. What he considers empowering moments, I find kind of cringe. It's also something you can sometimes forgive. It's present in "The Library Policeman" for example, but it's such a minor part, I didn't even need to bring it up. I love that King is an optimist, and it is refreshing that a writer of scary books enjoys giving readers nice moments. I just wish the nice stuff was better written at this stage of the game. He does get better at it later on. The romance in "11/22/63" is pure perfection, and kills me dead every time. This lovey-dovey stuff here just makes me want to point my finger in my mouth and make sarcastic gagging noises. I wish I could put it kinder than that, but I cannot.

Another reason I have a hard time accepting "Insomnia" as Dark Tower canon is because even though I BELIEVE The Random and The Purpose come up again (although I could be wrong) Atropos, Clotho, and Lachesis never show up in any other King story. I might be misremembering it, but I think they MIGHT have been mentioned in either "Rose Madder" or "Desperation" as an Easter Egg for the reader (and we'll find that out soon enough) but the mention of them was I believe done in the form of the Greek sisters instead of The Little Bald Doctors. But if "Insomnia" kept the Beams up, they'd be recurring characters like Maturin the Turtle, or even Randall Flagg. The "physicians of last resort" (which is a fabulous job description for them) should not ONLY appear in JUST this book if it IS supposed to be central to the mythology of "The Dark Tower".

I'll give that a passing grade, but little more. I like it more than Stephen King does, solely because I see value in Helen's independence and getting away from the abusive Ed. I will talk a LITTLE bit more in Rose Madder's review about why King should not be dismissing the real-life women books like this and that one help just because they left him a bit creatively unfulfilled. It's actually all right. ***.

"Rose Madder" is one of the least-favorite books of Stephen King he has ever written, but I've always liked it a lot. And part of me thinks he's being unfair not only on himself by dragging on it so much, but to its fans as well. It's been a few years since I read it last, but this time, as someone who has matured in their level of writing, I see aspects of it now that make me understand why King dislikes it. I still like it myself. But I understand why King doesn't.

Honestly, for years his disdain for the book pissed me off a little. Not because the book is great, or because I actually love it. But Stephen King has mentioned that women have come up to him and told him "Rose Madder" spoke to them so much, it was the thing to get them to finally leave their abusive husbands. And I don't care how disappointed King is in the story structure, or the fantasy mythology, as long as that is so, I'd take the friggin' compliment and consider writing the book entirely worthwhile. King not actually appreciating how important that is is why King is an imperfect ally to women at best.

I also need to point out that the book is a page-turner. With the exception of the boring 80 page chapter of Rosie inside the painting for the first time, the book is addictive to read. That is true of some of King's fiction but not his heavier stuff. This book is nearly 650 pages and it's still something to be devoured. I would not be ashamed of the book purely for that reason.

But this rereading I noticed a couple of drawbacks that would have made me uncomfortable if I were King too.

It's not just the Greek mythology allegory or tenuous Dark Tower connections that don't land perfectly. I have always thought that Norman Daniels was one of Stephen King's best and scariest villains. He's definitely in the running for most unambiguously evil. Like Annie Wilkes, Greg Stillson, Henry Bowers, Big Jim Rennie, and Brady Hartsfeld he seems to have no redeeming qualities, and fewer than those other five I mentioned for sure. And if I were King, I might dislike the book for that. Because King spends a LOT of time inside Norman's headspace in a way he didn't those other five loathsome characters I mentioned, even Brady Hartsfeld, and that had to have been hard on him. I don't mean hard for him as a writer. I mean hard on him as a person. I do everything is my power to stay away from evil characters who are realistically toxic, and those I do create I spend very little time in their headspace. Channeling a person like Norman Daniels in your writing is NOT fun. Some people might think writing villains is, and it can be. But when it comes to toxic people like Norman with mundane, base, real motivations it costs the writer a lot.

And I see King's struggles with it. For the first half of the book Norman is so damn scary and plausible, I think King spooked himself so badly, he pulled back on the realism for his own sanity. What King did midway through at the point Norman discovers the bull mask, is turn the character semi-comical. Him running around and crazily talking to the mask turns him into a parody of himself. For the first half of the book he's so horrible because he's realistic. He seems a LOT less realistic once King decided he had enough trying to believably write a person this terrible, and understand things from his viewpoint.

And if I were King, THAT'S the thing I'd dislike about the book. Remembering having to write Norman would be what left me creatively unfulfilled. But if it were me, I'd set aside every single misgiving I had about it and call the many abused women it's helped take back their lives it a damn win.

What's interesting about Rosie to me is that she is a seriously bad judge of character. Because Norman messed her up that badly. She is always shocked at how decent everyday people are, and how society sort of exists to look out for each other. Part of this outlook makes her seem naive and childish, but it's also a very good demonstration of what a number this guy did on her. Stuff we take for granted (like people being allowed to stay in a shelter for a few weeks) amazes her for existing at all. It's both endearing and frustrating.

I don't feel like Rosie's violent rage at the end of the book felt as well resolved a plot thread as it should have. I probably just noticed it this time out because when Rosie asks Rose Madder at the end if she's her, I realized for the first time that she might be thinking Madder is a future version of herself that eventually wound up trapped in the painting, and feared that maybe her life was headed towards a predestined time loop with her someday turning into this bitter, diseased, and insane supernatural creature. The rage being cured by planting the tree instead means that isn't the case, and that also makes the rage seem both pointless and too easily solved. And set up far too late to truly effect the reader.

Gert is awesome. Her pissing on Norman's face was as satisfying to me as a reader as it was for her as a person with a full bladder and no toilet. Ahhh. That felt GOOD.

I love the downstairs neighbor's gunshot wound in the arm being described as "a flesh wound with pretensions". King knows the best expressions.

King connections of note: Ka is straight out of "The Dark Tower", and the character of Cynthia also later pops up in "Desperation" (and an alternate Universe version of her can be seen in Richard Bachman's "The Regulators"). Susan Day from "Insomnia" is mentioned, and both Rosie and Anna are fans of Paul Sheldon and Misery Chastain from the novel "Misery". Sheldon seems to have gotten his second writing wind, and is still churning out Misery books, which makes me smile.

I would not have enjoyed writing this book if I were Stephen King. But considering that the book actually HELPED women who were suffering and abused, I also wouldn't ever talk smack about it and would just accept the damn compliment. ***1/2.

I have always been a bit ambivalent about this novel. But upon this reading I guess I can finally admit I dislike it. It's one of King's scariest and most violent novels. But the thing that bothers me is I can't figure out what point King is trying to make. The stuff with God and the bummer ending makes the morality of the book entirely unclear. I don't mind ambiguity in fiction at all. But if you create a fictional story this gruesome and horrific, I don't think expecting a self-evident moral is out of line. If anything, that makes it MORE necessary, not less.

For a story about God, what Biblical allegory King is going for isn't clear. The Book of Job? If that's so, it's wrong because the ending isn't horrible ENOUGH. I really can't understand the message here, or what King is trying to get across about faith.

All the God stuff really rankles me for that reason. Stephen King has his share of precocious kid characters, like Mark Petrie from "'Salem's Lot", Scarecrow Joe McClatchey from "Under The Dome", and Luke Ellis from "The Institute". King is not afraid of making child characters either capable or cool, and I admire him for not giving a crap about what fandom believes about kid characters, mostly that they are all annoying.

But I DO find David Carver annoying. I found Mark Petrie's knowledge of the supernatural compelling, and Scarecrow Joe's science nerdiness relatable, and the fact that Luke was an equal opportunity genius was excellent too. David's expertise in God is not something I like or appreciate the character for.

The ties to its mirror universe Richard Bachman novel "The Regulators" are something I was always leery of. The same characters in different situations isn't as neat as King thinks it is, and makes both stories feel more like gimmicks instead of actual stories in and of themselves, with real stakes and characters for you to care about. "The Regulators" very much feels like a sick joke for that reason.

Johnny Marinville is also one of the most unlikable protagonists King has ever created. Part of that is done to keep the reader guessing on whether or not he really IS going to wimp out and be a worthless human being, but having him do horrible things to "keep us guessing" doesn't make me like the character at all.

I liked seeing Cynthia Smith from "Rose Madder" in the book, and I like that she survived this one too. She survived Normal Daniels, she'll survive Desperation. Cynthia is one of the only characters present (along with Steve Ames) to survive both this book AND "The Regulators". Many are killed in both. The rest besides Steve and Cynthia survive only one or the other.

King Connections Of Note: Besides the connections to "The Regulators", the chants by Tak seem to have some bearing on "The Dark Tower". I think the terms "can toi" meaning Low Men in "The Dark Tower" can be chalked up to an actual Universal coincidence, but Tak's chants can also be heard in the tent of "The Little Sisters Of Eluria", a prequel Roland Deschain short story found in "Everything's Eventual". The supplementary material from "The Dark Tower" Marvel Comics by Robin Furth also hint at further connections between "Desperation" and Eluria as well, although Furth herself is quick to point out those comics exist on a separate level of the Tower. Cynthia mentions her ordeal with Norman Daniels, as well her friendship with Gert from "Rose Madder". Ellen Carver is a Misery fan from the book "Misery". "The Tommyknockers" are mentioned, as general boogeymen / gremlins, rather than the hostile alien invaders they were in that self-titled book. The actual Regulators connections make this story a good example of how the Multiverse and different levels of The Dark Tower work in the Stephen Kingverse too.

I finally made up my mind about this book, (on what was probably my fifth read). I think it largely sucks. **.

Stephen King was going through a career rough patch with "Insomnia" and "Rose Madder". He didn't like either novel, neither did most of the critics, and they both sold relatively few copies with his fans. It's clear he felt better about "Desperation" and "The Regulators", but both critics and fans could take or leave those too.

I think "The Green Mile", and then "Bag Of Bones", are the true start of King's later career Renaissance. Of course if you compare "The Green Mile" to the rest of his later stuff, it's not as good, but the serial novel format rejuvenated King's mojo just the same, and got him on solid footing with both critics and readers again. King's writing was suffering in the 1980's from his substance abuse problems. And the first few novels he did when he got clean were, I don't want to say pedestrian, but King playing it a bit safe. He also sort of got on a bit of a kick about being defender of battered women, and while that's an admirable mindset, all his books at the time turning into that was kind of a problem. I feel like King going from Parts One through Six of this specific story in the course of six months had to have been an exciting writing experience, because even HE probably didn't know exactly how it would end. Really, the only other serialized franchise King ever had was "The Dark Tower", and cool thing about "The Green Mile", is King would actually be able to finish it in good time. And it's King as his strongest as a storyteller here, and started the phase of his career where he pretty much stopped writing terrible books altogether. There is some upcoming stuff of his I don't love (I am a rare critic of the Bill Hodges Trilogy, and "Revival" depressed the fudge out of me) but I'm done raging against King for how stupid he is for writing "IT" and his various Bachman debacles. If I dislike an upcoming King book or story, from this point forward it's a simple disagreement instead of me feeling rage for King doing wrong by me or the reader.

A lot of people credit King's outlook after being hit by the van and nearly dying as being a turning point in the way he told stories. And while I definitely think that King's writing after the accident is great, the accident doesn't explain how perfect "Bag Of Bones" is, or how similarly strong this and "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon" are (all three books were written before it). Maybe the accident wound up making King's writing slightly less cynical over the long run. But he was already on the upswing by the time it happened.

As these were initially separately sold novellas, I am going to review each part individually. Trust me, I will talk about critics' disgust in hindsight at John Coffey's role as the Magical Negro. You'll see as my reviews of novellas go on, I actually debate whether Coffey fills the role of the sainted black man who dies to help the white characters learn about themselves. Because in hindsight, I believe Coffey's gifts to Paul Edgecomb are the antithesis of help, and may in fact be a form of damnation under the guise of salvation for his failures in 1932. I also argue Mother Abigail from "The Stand" doesn't fit that trope either. But that's because Mother Abigail is not just sanctimonious and annoying, she's actually quite useless. For John Coffey, the gifts he gives come with a steep cost. Which a timid man like Paul Edgecomb, always afraid to stick his neck out and upset the applecart learns to his great cost. There is a little too much Old Testament retribution attached to Coffey's actions to make me believe he's the sainted black man who dies to teach those poor white folks a healing lesson. It's a lesson Jud Crandall once tried to teach Louis Creed in "Pet Sematary": Sometimes dead is better. And sometimes being saved means spending your unnaturally long life watching everyone you ever knew and care about die while you wither away to helplessness. Perhaps Paul's misery in the retirement home isn't just random happenstance. Maybe it is Paul finally having to pay the cost of the miracle after having sat on his hands decades earlier when he could have done something to actually help. And I like that the morality there is neither easy or obvious. And the downbeat ending feels entirely appropriate in this read-through.

A turning point for King, and truly the thing that got his career back on track. Serial Novel Overall: 4 1/2 stars.

Part One: The Two Dead Girls

Interesting start to the whole thing, and it's easy to see why this format became a success. John Coffrey's role as the fabled Magical Negro has been criticized in hindsight, but the truth Stephen King fans sadly understand is that King has done a TON more offensive black portrayals before that, so it never phased us. I'm glad King and the makers of the movie got crap for that. They deserved it. But the truth is there are a TON of black characters King deserved crap for and never got. Speaking as someone who has read most of his stuff, him being reamed over that kind of thing was simply long overdue.

But again, because I have the context of other black King characters, Coffey himself doesn't phase me. As far as stereotypes go, as least he's pleasant instead of ugly like Detta Walker or sanctimonious like Mother Abigail. I like him personally which is another reason I am not as hard on King about it as some of his critics.

The format so agreed with King, his readers, and the critics, it's a wonder he's never attempted this again. 4 stars.

Part Two: The Mouse On The Mile

In "Rita Hayworth And The Shawshank Redemption", the prison guards are entirely corrupt. It's interesting that with the exception of Percy Wettmore, King chose to make the prison guards here morally upright, empathetic and good at their jobs. Like the difference between cop portrayals in "Rose Madder" and "From A Buick 8", King seems to believe institutions are not inherently good or bad, and only as decent as the people who run them. There are bad and good prison wardens in his stories just like there are bad and good cops.

But Percy truly is a wet end. And Paul descriptions of both him and the guy Toot-Toot's antics "Not being right" seem to be really all that needs to be said. Edgecomb can't even give a solid reason why Toot-Toot shouldn't be vulgarly goofing off during the execution rehearsal. Other than it's wrong. And that's all he really needs to make the judgment there.

Interesting chapter with a good cliffhanger. Wharton sure knows how to make an entrance. 4 stars.

Part Three: Coffey's Hands

It's not a huge thing, killing a mouse, but the cliffhanger is dark and horrific for that reason, and sort of fills the reader with dread about the upcoming things in the next chapter. Spoiler alert: Things are going as badly there as we feared, although Mr. Jingles fate and John Coffey's are not over by a longshot.

Paul's description of how difficult it was to work with Percy and why is good writing on King's end, because we've all met people like that before. And most of all have probably met quite a few of them. We recognize and are outraged by Percy's cruelty because we've seen other people do it first-hand. Even Paul acknowledges that fact by noting the eerie similarities between Percy and the abusive rest home worker Nolan. We see people like this all throughout our lives, and Nolan is proof-positive to Paul that there is no escaping them. And King paints that picture and frustration beautifully and hauntingly. 4 1/2 stars.

Part Four: The Bad Death Of Eduard Delacroix

Holy crap! That was awful! What a great storyteller Stephen King is. Everything that COULD go wrong with that execution went wrong. Percy is a pure monster.

Weirdly, the part of the chapter I dug most was Paul gathering the other guys at his house at the end to discuss temporarily breaking out John Coffey to heal Melinda Moore. For some reason all of that dialogue just slays me, and is as riveting as that damn horrible execution. I doubt many people will agree with me about that, but I value different things from fiction than most people. ****1 removed link

Part Five: Night Journey

King knows how to spin a yarn for sure. I'll talk a little more about how this went down in the review for the next part.

King Connections of Note: Weirdly few, as far as the story goes. But Paul talking about potential forces of Discord and The White are ideas found in "The Dark Tower" series, and that's what King is referencing there.

Addictive storytelling. 4 1/2 stars.

Part Six: Coffey On The Mile:

I was always deeply unhappy with the last part, and felt Paul Edgecomb's sad fate was unfair. I see it with different eyes now. Paul Edgecomb is a nice enough guy, and a kind death-row warden, but I stopped thinking of him as precisely a good man. Recently events in the news since I've last read the book remind me that evil is allowed to prosper when "good men" sit back and do nothing. Him and Brutus make convincing arguments to his wife that nothing they could do could change Coffey's fate. That they'd ruin they're careers for no gain.

The thing is, if Paul was truly righteous, he would have made the fuss and ruined his career anyways. The fact that he didn't so much as try is damning. Brutal himself says he fears his soul is Hellbound. What is supposed to tell Saint Peter at the gates of Heaven? He murdered a gift of God because it was his JOB?

And suddenly Paul having to spend his final years alone learning that salvation and damnation are the same thing if you live long enough, felt like the proper cautionary tale. Maybe Coffey COULD have helped Janice at the end. Were he still alive. All of the suffering Paul goes through later in his life might not have happened then. And the suffering in the rest home which he interestingly (and insightfully if you ask me) calls "dangerous", is most certainly penance for going along to get along in 1932.

Back in the day, I thought Coffey telling him he didn't want to live anymore absolved him a little, and it's clear Paul thought that too. But it doesn't. Paul being forced to essentially commit a murder of not just an innocent man, but a gift of God seemed to have Biblical implications in making Coffey a martyr for our sins. But maybe Paul isn't the guy whose sins Coffey died for. Maybe the part of the Biblical Allegory Paul must look to for guidance is the role of Judas Iscariot. Or at least the Jesus-denying Simon Peter (or Doubting Thomas). As far as disciples of divine beings go, Edgecomb falls into the camp of the flawed ones. And while his ending isn't as bad as Judas', maybe part of Coffey's protection from harm IS a life-long curse that has finally caught up to him. And maybe on some level he deserves it.

I like Paul. I like how he conducted a very dirty business for the most part. But when push came to shove, he took the easy way out. You can tell yourself Coffey is a Biblical martyr, and being killed for stuff they didn't do is how they all go out. But he's also a living man so afraid of the dark he begs Paul not to put the mask on him before the switch is thrown.

I love the reason Paul grants this request. The mask is done as a courtesy for people watching the execution. So they don't lose their lunches. Just this once, nobody present deserved that courtesy.

The whole "I wish I could tell you / I wish I could say" thing at the end is very much reminiscent of Red from "Rita Hayworth And The Shawshank Redemption", and the beloved movie based on it. I see entirely what drew Frank Darabont to make a movie of this story too (although I haven't seen either that movie or his version of "The Mist" yet).

Maybe the ending is sad and unsatisfying because the choices Paul and his coworkers made in 1932 led them to no other outcome. Instead of being entirely sympathetic to Paul's pain, I feel very much as if Ka is a wheel. Again, I like and admire Paul. But he IS the Good Man Who Did Nothing. And I liked the ending this time out because it suggested there can be real consequences to that if the stakes are big enough. If it's true enough in a Biblical / supernatural fictional setting, part of me disillusioned with the open criminality by powerful people in our real world, that are allowed to get away with their crimes, hopes that not only will the William Whartons and Percy Wetmores of the world get what's coming to them, but that the people who sat on their hands and let them run amok are in for a reckoning as well. Brutus fears Hell for his cowardice and complicity. I would very much like to believe it should be a real fear for people not bringing criminals to justice because it might upset people.

That was a dark ending. But now I think it's the right ending. And John Coffey can still get proper shade from being a problematic fictional black character. But his death doesn't actually absolve or save the white folks or make him a martyr for their sins. In reality, those sins must be paid for, if not in death, than cruelly long life. If Paul's ending were kinder, I'd more fully agree with the Magical Negro complaints. The thing is, just because his initials are J.C. doesn't stop his fury from being Old Testament. If he was purely benevolent, both Percy and Wharton would have ended their lives differently (and less violently). There is an Old Testament "Eye for an eye" component to John Coffey's gifts that makes it hard to believe his role is to die for the white folks and make them feel bad about it at worst. In reality, his death is the murder that Paul cannot ever escape from. I haven't seen The Legend Of Bagger Vance but if you told me that movie's arc was remotely similar to THAT idea, I'd be surprised.

I've changed my mind, and think it is a fine closing chapter of the serial novel. 4 1/2 stars.

As far as Dark Tower books go, the fourth was always my least favorite after the first. And the problem for me is evident here too: Mid-World is a pit, and it's a bummer to experience it without the perspectives of characters from Earths resembling ours like Eddie, Susannah, or Jake. The whole backstory of Roland's past in Mejis us qute ugly and gross on a very real level.

But can I be honest? I liked this reading of it more than I remembered, and I think I can also properly compliment the cool things about it while noting the sucky things.

The best thing is the beginning and the resolution of the cliffhanger with Blaine The Mono from the last book "The Waste Lands". Having Eddie defeat him with dumb jokes is pretty much the only possible resolution (the truckload of dead woodchucks / bowling balls joke still cracks me up) and Roland's chastened over the top pardon crying is made funny when Eddie tells him he can't help his nature, and he realizes that never occurred to him. It is a purely pleasurable opening.

But my favorite bit of that is Eddie remembering his brother told his friends he'd want Eddie in his corner in a crisis. "Because when Eddie is ON, when he's in the [f-wording] zone, he could convince the devil to set himself on fire." Let me blunt. That is the coolest compliment I have ever heard. People have said nice things in my life but nobody has EVER said anything that nice to me. And I like it because we've spent the past two books we've known Eddie believing that Eddie's adoration for his turd of a brother is unwarranted and hindering his growth as a person. That right there says that no matter what Henry's faults are, Eddie is right to worship him after all. And I don't think any of the other characters were ever really allowed to understand that. If Eddie had actually told Roland and Susannah the voice inside his head that told him how to defeat Blaine the Mono was Henry Dean, great sage and eminent junkie, they would have been shocked. It's for that reason I think it's a little bit of a shame Eddie keeps that bit to himself.

Likewise the parallels to the world of "The Stand" are interesting too because things here actually must take place in an alternate Universe from that novel. Not only was the plague widely known about and reported here instead of successfully covered up by the government, it occurred in an entirely different year. King cannily explains this by suggesting that with the weakening of the Beams, perhaps Captain Trips is infecting a multitude of Universes.

One thing I love about the flashback, (and I don't think anyone has spoken up about this) is that despite what a loathsome villain Eldred Jonas is, the fact that he and Coral Thorin truly dig each other and care about each other is interesting because it strikes me as a saving grace for a character with no other redeeming virtues. And that's freaking important to make him feel real and like an actual person. And I'm truly impressed with that this time out. Well done.

I have mixed feeling about Susan's death on the Charyou Tree pyre. As written, it's perfect drama and brings Da Big Hurt to both the reader AND Roland. And I don't know if mid-90's King understood this, but the death did not need to be as perfect as it was to have value. In fact, it's very perfection loses it a lot of credibility in my mind.

Susan goes to her deathly utterly nobly, proclaiming her love for Roland and her wish for him to brighten up the lives of all he touches after she's gone (which of course he always fails to do). It's sort of done to twist the knife for Roland's carelessness regarding not coming to her rescue. But I don't buy it.

Susan, sweetheart, the dude left you for dead for his damned Tower. You are allowed to be pissed at him. Your last thoughts are allowed to be regrets that you ever met this bastard. And maybe that would tarnish Roland's memory of Susan's perfection and virtue, but what I think it would also do is add to his guilt, which would make it worse. It's a beautiful, perfect death. It should not be. The scenario doesn't call for it and hasn't earned it. And really, that's only something I noticed this time out.

Also why does Susan HAVE to be perfect? Why is that expected of her? Roland sure as hell isn't.

The ending is not as bad as "IT", but I think it's one of King's worst endings ever. Truthfully, the flashback to Roland accidentally killing him mother doesn't suck, but all the Wizard of Oz stuff? Terrible. It makes no narrative sense, and only exists because King felt like doing a tribute to it. As a matter of fact, the speculation that the fellow Flagg exists in a story near their own is a far better meta moment than the red shoes and the green palace. It's clunky, not funny, and truly feels like King simply ran out of gas and is throwing random crap at the wall in hopes that it sticks. King rarely uses outlines, which I consider a crazy way to write, but the lucky son of a rat somehow can usually make it work. But no outlines is how the stupid final part of this book comes into being.

After the build-up at the end of the last book, Tick-Tock Man is utterly wasted here. He's killed off immediately for one thing after being being built up as some major future threat. And the sad truth is Randall Flagg is wasted too. Yes, he comes back in the last book, and yes he is explicitly identified as not just Martin Broadcloak but Walter too. But he and Roland never see each other again or get a final confrontation which always pissed me off. Would an outline KILL you, Uncle Stevie? Also pretty sure that the promise that the story of how Roland losing his mother's belt would be told and relevant to the Tower is bogus too.

Not all set-up here isn't paid off later. First mentions of Thunderclap, and the Crimson King seen in "Insomnia" is mentioned here too, and it's suggested Farson took his sigil as his own and answers to HIM. The Afterward written in 1996 shows that even before he was hit by the truck, and would turn that real-world incident into the crucial lynchpin of Keystone Earth's existence, Father Callahan from "'Salem's Lot" was already envisioned to appear in the lands near Thunderclap. The clues King speculates about for the final three books here perhaps suggest that the accident didn't actually change the subtext of the meta plans King probably already had for the franchise. What it probably did though is unintentionally PERFECT them. Ka is a wheel, folks. It always was.

King Connections Of Note: Aside from the stuff from "The Stand" and "Insomnia", the biggest connection I noticed is the fact that the Big Coffin Hunters are also referred to as Regulators.

Perfect cliffhanger resolution, crappy Wizard of Oz ending, middling flashbacks. The fourth book is a mixed bag. **1 removed link

Stephen King had been clean for a few years before this was written, but it's the actual turning point in his career, not the van accident. After this he stopped being America's schlockmeister and simply became a great novelist. You can speculate why it didn't happen sooner, but the truth is it probably had to do with him changing publishers. King was yearning to write more literary types of fiction and I think Viking was resisting that. And when King WAS allowed to do it at Scribner, it's just as scary and exciting as his previous fiction. There is just a richness and depth to the story absent the earlier stuff.

It's not perfect. I don't like the actual romance between Mike and Mattie. He's too old for her. He has these concerns in the book himself, but the fact that he and Mattie have decided they are a thing before fate decides differently make me feel like King, in his late fifties when this was written, was engaging in a bit of creepy middle-aged wish fulfillment.

The N word is heard somewhat frequently in the book's darker passages, but when King has Mike relaying the characters using it, it feels like it's being given the proper weight it should, instead of King just trying to be edgy. I wish I could say King's edgy use of the word has been retired completely, but the totally overrated Mr. Mercedes is still in his future. But we'll get to all that in due time.

The little girl Ki does not just steal Mike's heart, she steals mine, and I assume every other person who reads the book. Her telling Mike to take care of her because she's "just a little guy" is heartbreaking and adorable at the same time. And Mike saying she's his little guy now says that even though the adoption is up in the air by the time Mike finishes writing this memoir, in my mind it actually isn't. Those two'll be okay.

Mattie's death is one of the most gutwrenching deaths King has ever written. Only Wolf's from "The Talisman" moved me more. It is purely devastating, especially Ki's heartbreaking reaction afterwards.

Speaking of weighty deaths, my favorite part of the book actually occurs in the Epilogue. In it Mike opines that writers of fiction should take the death and murders they portray seriously, which is how I've always viewed it. I've always believed every death in fiction makes a statement, so you need to be EXTRA careful what statement you are making when portraying them. Mike doesn't say exactly that, but the fact that it's Stephen King of all people realizing something very similar which is what I think is amazing.

King Connections of Note: On various "Works by Stephen King" pages Bag Of Bones is always in bolded font to denote it being Dark Tower-related, but I find the connections a stretch. Yeah, Nineteen is a thing, but out of all of the Dark Tower-related books, only Bag Of Bones has not earned that designation in my mind.

Other King Connections: Norris Ridgewick from "The Dark Half" and "Needful Things" appears at the end, and Alan Pangborn and Polly are mentioned. Thad Beaumont from "The Dark Half" is referred to as a writer who committed suicide. William Denbrough from "IT" is mentioned, and the book starts off in Derry. Both Ralph Roberts and Joe Wyzer from "Insomnia" have small cameos. Shawshank Prison from "Rita Hayworth And The Shawshank Redemption" is mentioned, as is Juniper Hill from "IT". The Tabloid "Inside View" from "The Dead Zone" and "The Night Flier" is mentioned. If the Sheriff Nehemiah Bannerman from the flashbacks is not the ancestor to George Bannerman from "The Dead Zone" and "Cujo", I'll eat my hat.

From here on out King stops being a so-so writer in that he almost stops writing bad fiction altogether. I hate the short story collaboration with his son Joe Hill "In The Tall Grass", but I believe outside of that, King stops writing outright bad stories. A lot of is great literature, a lot of is good storytelling, and the rest is mostly fine (if not great). King's mid-career slump is over, and frankly, he's never been better, and will always continue to be this solid for the remainder of his career. *****.

This is one of Stephen King's situational books. It's a book where a character is thrust in a certain unusual / scary scenario and the entire book is them getting themselves out of it. "Gerald's Game" and "Misery" are also in this high-concept genre, and so to a lesser extent is "The Mist". The premise sustains the book rather than the characters.

I frankly prefer stories where King is more concerned with the characters than the scenario, but of his situational tales, "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon" is still one of his best. I care about Trisha McFarland for one thing. For another the book is a quick, brisk read and doesn't overstay its welcome (although I'd argue many of the individual chapters are too long).

God may love sports, but not necessarily the Red Sox. King writes that as a knowing baseball fan, and a (so far in 1999 when this was written) hapless Red Sox fan.

King connections of note: Only one I noticed is that Trisha first gets lost in the woods of TR-90, the setting of his last novel "Bag Of Bones". But that's the only one I noticed.

I would argue this is one of three of King's stories that could be read by children. There are a few f-bombs, but that's really nothing. This story, "The Eyes Of The Dragon", and the short story from "Nightmares And Dreamscapes" called "The House On Maple Street" are really the only King stories that I think little kids would really dig.

Solid, fast-paced novel. And the ending is pretty satisfying too. ****.