Stephen King and his brother, Nosmo.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 7, 2005
Messages
47,985
Reaction score
13,245
Nosmo King? Geddit?

*sigh* Anyhoo...

This is inspired by the Books You've Thrown Across the Room with Force thread in the Novels forum, and the conversation about Stephen King which began around about this page.

I've only read a handful of King books -- Rose Madder, Bag of Bones, Dreamcatcher and a few others, and I wouldn't call myself a mad keen King afficionado.

Those who are more familiar than I with his work have referenced a difference between his 'too stoned to remember writing this shit, 'cause man, I was off my tits' books and his 'clean and sober' works.

I was just wondering what yous guys thought about this. Is there a difference between the two Kings? Do you think the drink and drugs made his books better or worse? Had no effect?

For those who see a difference, what exactly would you say that difference is? Were his books darker back then? More psychological now?

Which of his books would you say best illustrate this difference, if there is one?
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
I've enjoyed the stuff he's put out in the last few years, sober as a judge, as among his best work. For me, the endings are more satisfying.

Back in the day, he was sometimes (often) known to Frankenstein an ill-matched ending onto what was clipping along quite nicely, and It is the only book I've ever actually thrown.

These days, I can't wait to get my hands on the latest King. It's taken a lot of therapy and peaceful solitude, but I'm learning to trust again.
 

Carmine

Registered
Joined
Jan 16, 2012
Messages
44
Reaction score
3
Nosmo -- ha! I've read a fair amount of King. I can't make a broad statement about the effect of his substance abuse on the darkness his work, but I will say that there have been very bleak works throughout his career, from The Shining to Misery to Full Dark, No Stars.

The worst of King's works I've ever read is The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. It was so badly written and dull I wondered if King had really written it himself. I read later that it was written during a period of substance abuse. In that case, I could see a connection between his addiction and his writing, but it showed up in the quality, not the style or theme, of the work.
 

Dr.Gonzo

Wonderfully Irreverent
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
1,352
Reaction score
201
Location
Bat Country
Nice, Peaches.

I'm going to jump in and add Bachman into the mix, straight off. King wrote meaner when he wrote as him. Less subtle. Much more heavy-handed. There's something diry about that bastard, and I think he came to an end around the time King got rid of his monkey.

I find in general that the fantasy elements started coming into King's work when he stopped drinking and sniffing. I can't say which of his periods I prefer, because I like and dislike work from both times. In truth, there's probably more I like from the time he spent wankered behind his desk. But my favourite he wrote once he'd sobered--Bag of Bones.

If I did notice a drop in quality, I don't know if I could say it's because he's stopped drinking. I see similarities to some bands when I look at a lot of writers. They start to lose their edge. They can't write about life on the curb when they're sat in mansions, wiping their arses with £50 notes.

Maybe that's why he wrote more of the fantasy kind of stuff.
 

swvaughn

adrift
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
2,037
Reaction score
593
I've enjoyed the stuff he's put out in the last few years, sober as a judge, as among his best work. For me, the endings are more satisfying.

Back in the day, he was sometimes (often) known to Frankenstein an ill-matched ending onto what was clipping along quite nicely, and It is the only book I've ever actually thrown.

These days, I can't wait to get my hands on the latest King. It's taken a lot of therapy and peaceful solitude, but I'm learning to trust again.

I'd definitely agree with this. I adored older Stephen King stuff -- his early short story and novella collections like Skeleton Crew, Night Shift, and Different Seasons were great. I loved Carrie and Cujo and The Dark Half and Misery, Eyes of the Dragon... so many titles, can't remember them all.

I think the first King book that pissed me off was Wizard and Glass. Years between books 3 and 4 of the Dark Tower series... and I get a novel-length flashback?!?! GRRRRR.

Things kind of went downhill for me with King's stuff for a while. There were some really eek-worthy books. I'm not sure when he quit the drugs, but there was a noticeable decline in his work at some point.

(Just what was up with Desperation/The Regulators, hereafter known as The Desperegulators? I think I liked one of those -- but really, writing the same book twice, except one is by your pseudonym? Come on, Steve...)

And then came Duma Key. Which I LOVED. With a capital Love. Now I'm all about the King again. :D

The worst of King's works I've ever read is The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. It was so badly written and dull I wondered if King had really written it himself. I read later that it was written during a period of substance abuse. In that case, I could see a connection between his addiction and his writing, but it showed up in the quality, not the style or theme, of the work.

Whereas I enjoyed that book quite a bit. I found the girl's perspective refreshing, and thought he captured her feelings/emotions/reactions while being lost in the wilderness quite well.

The ending was a little weird, but I forgave it.

Of course, everyone is allowed their own opinions. :)
 

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
He is a much mellower and more mature writer now. His books have actual endings that aren't pulled out of some coke-fueled nether orifice. So in that respect, his writing has undoubtedly improved.

On the other hand, the books he wrote when he was a coke-fiend were pure junkie-fueled imagination without restraint (or taste, or filters). His flights of imagination were both spectacular and horrific. Tommyknockers is often considered one of his worst books, and while I agree that it wasn't good overall, it was damned creepy. Cujo is the one he says he doesn't even remember writing, but it combined two of his favorite themes (domestic violence, and the commonplace and familiar becoming a source of unspeakable horror), brilliantly.

It is epic, scary, creepy, and would blow every so-called "YA" novel off the stands with how superior it is to everything labeled YA today, except that it's obviously not YA despite the protagonists, and the ending, well, it would be a spoiler to describe it but everyone who's read it knows about that ending and says "Stephen King, WTF were you thinking?!"

Even his other mediocre works (Christine, Pet Semetary) were magnificently atmospheric and creepy. I mean, I read Christine and didn't want go driving in the fog because I could imagine this demonic black car stalking me.

In contrast, I really did like Bag of Bones, but you could tell he was transitioning to becoming a Serious Writer. It's more mature but not as balls-out crazy. And a lot of his later works, from Gerald's Game to Lisey's Story, rework the same themes he's written repeatedly. (I would start with Dolores Claiborne if you want to read one of his best entries in his "abused-woman-striking-back" series.)

I haven't read Under the Dome yet, but it sounds a lot like he's reusing elements of The Stand and some of the ideas from his short stories.

His short story collections are also worth reading, though they vary in quality just like his novels.

I'm also very fond of his Bachman novels. They're some of my favorites, actually.
 

crunchyblanket

the Juggernaut of Imperfection
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 18, 2011
Messages
4,870
Reaction score
766
Location
London's grey and pleasant land
Originally Posted by Carmine
The worst of King's works I've ever read is The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. It was so badly written and dull I wondered if King had really written it himself. I read later that it was written during a period of substance abuse. In that case, I could see a connection between his addiction and his writing, but it showed up in the quality, not the style or theme, of the work.


I actually loved that book, but each to their own.

One thing I did notice is that his older books seem much more...chaotic, for want of a better word. Like his newer books seem to have a clear idea of where they're going, even if they meander on the way. Reading some of his older books - Pet Semetary is a good example, I think - it's almost like he was writing on autopilot, not really knowing where the story was going until he got there. That might explain his inability, in the older books, to actually end a story. I agree that he's actually improved a lot in that regard (The ending to the Dark Tower series was a love-it-or-hate-it type ending but damn, I loved it)

His newer books seem more closely tied to one another, like most of them occur in the same tight knit universe. I seem to remember The Stand kicking that one off, and The Dark Tower picking it up in earnest.
I haven't read Under the Dome yet, but it sounds a lot like he's reusing elements of The Stand and some of the ideas from his short stories.

I really didn't like Under The Dome, alas. He's already done that story, and better.
 
Joined
Aug 7, 2005
Messages
47,985
Reaction score
13,245
Under the Dome (which I own, but haven't yet read) reminds me of the Simpsons movie.
 

Dr.Gonzo

Wonderfully Irreverent
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
1,352
Reaction score
201
Location
Bat Country
Under the Dome (which I own, but haven't yet read) reminds me of the Simpsons movie.

That's exactly what I thought when I first heard of it. The crazy fucker was probably in his cabin, rocking in his chair, watching Spider-Pig and thought, What if?
 

kelator

Registered
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Location
Dublin
Didn't he start Under the Dome years ago and trunk. Maybe the movie re-lit a fire.

Anyway I find he has hits and misses from both periods. However I don't know if he has changed editor, but i think his newer works could do with better editing.

I enjoyed Under the Dome but felt it could have had entire chapters cut out and characters combined. I haven't read 11/22/63 but judging from the size of it I fear it could be the same
 

seun

Horror Man
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
9,709
Reaction score
2,053
Age
46
Location
uk
Website
www.lukewalkerwriter.com
As far as I know, King wrote his worst book while stone cold sober.

Lisey's Story.

It doesn't work as literary or genre horror. It's totally flat with two of his most boring characters and oh my god if I ever read about bools or bad gunky again I'm going to fucking kill everyone in the world.

OK, now that's out of the way...his best work in terms of outright horror, emotional impact or imagination comes from when he was smashed out of his head and from his sober days so I don't think there's a point in terms of quality where he went from one to the other. For my money, his best works (again in terms of horror, emotion or imagination) include Cujo, 'Salem's Lot, It, The Bachman Books, the DT series, Rose Madder, Pet Semetary, From A Buick 8, The Stand, Gerald's Game, 11.22.63, and several of his shorter pieces.
 

quicklime

all out of fucks to give
Banned
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
8,967
Reaction score
2,074
Location
wisconsin
Nosmo King? Geddit?

*sigh* Anyhoo...

This is inspired by the Books You've Thrown Across the Room with Force thread in the Novels forum, and the conversation about Stephen King which began around about this page.

I've only read a handful of King books -- Rose Madder, Bag of Bones, Dreamcatcher and a few others, and I wouldn't call myself a mad keen King afficionado.

Those who are more familiar than I with his work have referenced a difference between his 'too stoned to remember writing this shit, 'cause man, I was off my tits' books and his 'clean and sober' works.

I was just wondering what yous guys thought about this. Is there a difference between the two Kings? Do you think the drink and drugs made his books better or worse? Had no effect?

For those who see a difference, what exactly would you say that difference is? Were his books darker back then? More psychological now?

Which of his books would you say best illustrate this difference, if there is one?


I think it is hard to say, because his books now seem to be more circomspect and "deeper". Not all have been good, not all his early books were, but I'm not sure how much of the difference was "look ma, no coke" and how much was just aging as a writer.

I DO believe the first couple books he wrote after cleaning up (thinking Dreamcatcher for one) were really bad, but I think it took him some time to recover both from drugs and learning to write sober, and also his van accident (Dreamcatcher was his first after the van I believe, he'd been sober awhile by then IIRC)
 

Phaeal

Whatever I did, I didn't do it.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
9,232
Reaction score
1,897
Location
Providence, RI
I'd say the main lesson to take from Stephen King's working life is: He's never stopped working. He's written sober. He's written drunk. He's written while recovering from horrendous injuries. He's written while working maggotty laundry jobs. He's written on long after he could have snuggled down into his royalties for the rest of his life.

Damn good lesson, that.
 

Thump

defying grabbity
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 19, 2006
Messages
1,380
Reaction score
288
Location
Spending one short day in the Emerald City
I'd say the main lesson to take from Stephen King's working life is: He's never stopped working. He's written sober. He's written drunk. He's written while recovering from horrendous injuries. He's written while working maggotty laundry jobs. He's written on long after he could have snuggled down into his royalties for the rest of his life.

Damn good lesson, that.

I'm putting that in my signature. I'm getting rid of the Cat and Baby collision, that's how much I like this post :D
 

Williebee

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
20,569
Reaction score
4,814
Location
youtu.be/QRruBVFXjnY
Website
www.ifoundaknife.com
I'd say the main lesson to take from Stephen King's working life is: He's never stopped working. He's written sober. He's written drunk. He's written while recovering from horrendous injuries. He's written while working maggotty laundry jobs. He's written on long after he could have snuggled down into his royalties for the rest of his life.

Damn good lesson, that.

ayup.
 

KathleenD

New kid, but no need to be gentle.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
454
Reaction score
80
Location
Inside your computer.
Website
kathleendienne.com
Duma Key made me yell "the man is BACK." I pulled an all-nighter finishing that sucker. Though for my money, the Hearts in Atlantis novella set at the University of Maine is one of the all time great short novels.

It's taken a lot of therapy and peaceful solitude, but I'm learning to trust again.

That's almost exactly how I felt ;) I loved his older stuff, I love his new stuff, but there's a big gap right after he got sober where I just don't enjoy the work.

I don't think it's anything to do with how good the ideas were - I think he had a certain rhythm, kind of a groove he used to hit when he was abusing drugs. When he took away what had been a huge chunk of his life, he had to rebuild all the systems from scratch. (Or as Quicklime said, learn to write sober.) The books were wobbly.

But he never stopped writing.

Ironically, the accident that almost killed him seems to have knocked him into somewhere solid. If I were qualified to have an opinion, I'd probably say he used to bullshit about mortality very, very well, but now he gets it.

One thing I did notice is that his older books seem much more...chaotic, for want of a better word. Like his newer books seem to have a clear idea of where they're going, even if they meander on the way. Reading some of his older books - Pet Semetary is a good example, I think - it's almost like he was writing on autopilot, not really knowing where the story was going until he got there.

His "On Writing" kind of explains that - all his stuff, pre-accident, was written with a single what-if scenario. He specifically said he didn't know where the stories were going until he got there.

As he's hit full maturity as a writer, he's more in control of things, although not entirely (because he doesn't want to be, not because he doesn't know how).
 
Last edited:

Drachen Jager

Professor of applied misanthropy
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 13, 2010
Messages
17,171
Reaction score
2,284
Location
Vancouver
When I read a book I'm pretty dedicated. If I make it through the first few chapters I finish it almost all the time. The only exception was King's Insomnia. I'd read other novels of his before, but haven't bothered since. That experience totally turned me off him as a novelist, although I did enjoy On Writing.
 

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,311
The worst of King's works I've ever read is The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. It was so badly written and dull I wondered if King had really written it himself. .

I loved that book, too. I think it was one of his best, but I believe it was written shortly after his real substance abuse period.
 

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,311
I think King's first few novels were great. Then, for me, he went into a bit of a tail spin. He came out of it with Bag of Bones, and has been getting better and better.

He has written a couple of books in the last ten years that I didn't like, but there was nothing at all wrong with the writing, or with the stories. They just weren't my cup of tea. But, for the most part, I think he writes better now than he ever has.

I'm another who sees his accident as a turning point. It seems to have knocked some sense into him.

But I'll also add this. As a novelist, King is good, but as a short story, novelette, novella writer, he's one of the best who ever put pen to paper. Many of his shorter works are phenomenal. And have made the best movies. Particularly Stand By Me and Shawshank Redemption.
 

quicklime

all out of fucks to give
Banned
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
8,967
Reaction score
2,074
Location
wisconsin
But I'll also add this. As a novelist, King is good, but as a short story, novelette, novella writer, he's one of the best who ever put pen to paper. Many of his shorter works are phenomenal. And have made the best movies. Particularly Stand By Me and Shawshank Redemption.


Quick derail for JAR:

I agree, esp. short stories. But what's your take on his shorts, because unlike his novellas, I found his earlier shorts seemed far, far better than his more recent (post "Nightmares and Dreamscapes" forays. Not always; I really liked the one with the old couple talking about the husband's dream--that one he really hit home both with the slow-dawning horror and also the reality of an older and somewhat distant couple, but for the most part, his earlier shorts in Nightmares, Night Shift, and Skeleton Crew were a better lot, imho
 

kaitie

With great power comes
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
10,994
Reaction score
2,525
I'm a fan of his newer works compared to the older ones. I loved Firestarter, and he has a couple of other earlier ones that I actually do appreciate to a degree (The Stand), but for the most part I'm not a fan of a lot of it, even the "classics" like It, Christina, Kujo, etc. The writing style was just not something I appreciated, and honestly even the stories weren't as good, IMO.

While he has a couple of more recent books that I also disliked, it was more for story than writing (Cell), and the books I think are sheer brilliance are definitely the newer ones. I think Hearts in Atlantis was great, and a lot of the stuff that's come out in the past few years has been really impressive on multiple levels.
 

firedrake

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
7,297
I love his earlier books up to and including 'It'. Then he went off the rails a bit. I loathed 'Rose Madder' and 'Delores Claiborne' was just sick. But, he's come back in style. I loved 'Under the Dome' and I have 'Duma Key', I just haven't got round to reading it yet.

I've always loved King. I've grown up with his books and I love that his books have been a 'constant' in my reading life. I'd be hard pressed to choose a favourite. Perhaps 'Salem's Lot' or 'It'. He is just so good at nailing small town America and scary, oddball characters.
 

dgrintalis

'Tis true, she is a monstergirl
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 26, 2009
Messages
6,816
Reaction score
2,789
Location
Betwixt a nightmare and a veil of shadowy dark
I'd say the main lesson to take from Stephen King's working life is: He's never stopped working. He's written sober. He's written drunk. He's written while recovering from horrendous injuries. He's written while working maggotty laundry jobs. He's written on long after he could have snuggled down into his royalties for the rest of his life.

Damn good lesson, that.

This, a million times over.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.