Smythe's review of The Stand



James Smythe at gaurdian.co.uk has posted a unique review of The Stand.  (HERE)  The article is the the next installment of his journey to read the King books in chronological order.  Like most King readers, the Stand is a favorite of Smythe's.  And, like many of us,  he discovered the Stand while  he was young.

Smythe begins with the conclusion that The Stand is essentially the book of Job -- with a little fantasy thrown in.

About the line-up, Smythe writes:
Where King's previous antagonists were small fry (or protagonists flipped on their heads), Randall Flagg is never less than pure evil. He has a counterpart, as all evils should: Mother Abigail, 108 years old, who communes with God, and who is the frail good to Flagg's evil. 
Job and Revelation:

And, about the Biblical book of Job (pronounced Jobe) Smythe  offers:
I read once that The Stand was essentially the Book of Job, with the survivors in Job's place: tested by good and evil both; pushed and challenged to see how much they could endure, as if their suffering were a game. There's a little more epic fantasy here than in the Bible, maybe, and it ends not with a war, but with an accident; with the chaos of Trashcan Man finding a weapon, and with Flagg's showing off going to far. But I can still see it. Good wins by default, because evil cannot. Those were the rules in the Old Testament, and they're the rules now.
That's an interesting perspective.  The Stand is very much like Job!  However, in Biblical terms, I think the Stand is more like the book of Revelation.  (No "s" in Revelation.)  Plagues are poured out on the world, evil rises up and people must choose which side they will turn to.  As evil rises, the good must decide if they will  bow down  to evil (take the mark of the beast) or stand up against evil (the mark of God.)  Yet, in the end, man cannot stand against evil alone, only the work of God can end it.  Thus in revelation fire comes from heaven and destroys the enemies of God, while in the Stand, the finger of God brings an end to evil.

What I like about The Stand as end-time fiction is that it does not play the rapture game.  The rapture is a ridiculous view -- new to the scene theologically -- that God will rapture out his people before the Great Tribulation.  In this case, King gets it more right than the Left Behind series!  God does not rapture his people out in the hour of evil, he expects them to "stand."  In fact, Christ clearly said that those  who "stand to the end will be saved." (Matt. 24:13)

Here's a fuller  post of mine on The Stand and the Bible.

An American Lord Of The Rings

As I read this, I keep wanting to shout, "me too, me too!"  For instance, Smythe notes that King said in the introduction that  he wanted to write something like Lord  of the Rings.  He notes, "I didn't read Tolkien when I was a kid, I read this."  YES!  Me too.  I did read Lord of the Rings -- for as long as I could.  I find Lord of the Rings difficult.  I know this will offend many, but it does not connect with me at all.  It seems like they just walk around a lot.  (I just realized that in The Stand. . . there's a lot of walking around!)

That said, what does  connect with me is The Stand.  It is more than an American version of Lord of the Rings, I think it reaches far beyond.  The Stand doesn't build an unknown world as a stage for its characters to play on -- in the Stand, the characters are on our stage.  

Some of my favorite lines (from the Smythe review)
  • The Stand is a masterpiece. . . 
  • When swine flu broke out in 2009, I lost track of the number of tweets referring to it as Captain Trip.
  • About Flagg: "I've mentioned him before – in my Carrie and Night Shift rereads – but here's where he makes his grand entrance."
  •  This is my most reread book.
  • as I read The Stand again, I realised that I am wholly, totally indebted to King's book.

7 comments:

  1. There is one aspect of Smythe's review that I disagree with. It's when he says, "Evil is inherently stronger. It's easier".

    You're forgetting your Augustine, old boy...so to speak.

    As for King and Tolkien, I think King has, in a sense been writing in the style of "Lord of the Rings" throughout his career. Many times when reading something of his I' think, you know, this sounds just like Tolkien.

    That said, I kind of understand when you say you're reservations about "Rings". I'll confess I'm one of a handful of Tolkien hands who likes the Hobbit more than "Rings", yet I can't deny the other novel as a classic that deserves to be up their with Dostoevsky and Joseph Conrad, two authors with who's work Tolkien's book shares many parallels.

    ChrisC

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've been enjoying these Guardian articles. Looking forward to keeping up with them!

    For my part, I don't think "The Stand" is half the novel "The Lord of the Rings" is; the sheer amount of imagination that went into Tolkien's novel (or novels, if you prefer) is literally staggering. That's not a knock against "The Stand," though; it's a great piece of work, too.

    I'd actually compare the "Dark Tower" cycle to "The Lord of the Rings" moreso than "The Stand." It's much more of a quest story than "The Stand" is.

    ReplyDelete
  3. YES! I can see Dark Tower being more Lord of the Rings than The Stand. The STand is a different genre, not fantasy exactly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They've also got the similarity of being tales that the respective authors spent decades upon decades writing.

      Actually, that's not entirely true. Tolkien spent most of his life working on the middle-earth mythology. "The Lord of the Rings" was only a small part of that.

      The counterargument to that would be to point out that "The Dark Tower" can be viewed as only a small part of the vast tapestry of stories King has written which connect to one another.

      If you ever want to read a great book about Tolkien's work that will make you look at his work in a new light, read Tom Shipper's "J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century." The depth of that man's work is quite astonishing.

      Delete
    2. By which I mean Tolkien's work, not Shippey's (although he deserves big-time kudos too).

      Delete
  4. Thanks for mentioning T.A. Shippey. That book along with (T.S.) "Eliot and his Age" revolutionized the way I read Tolkien.

    As for the Tower books, I think you said elsewhere that while they're good, he's written better. Allow me to add to that something I noticed after awhile. His (king's) heart isn't in the Tower series like it is with It, the Shining, or Green Mile.

    Despite all the time he took on it and his saying it's the "One that waits" for him, I'm convinced it doesn't turn all his literary dials up to 11 the way a stry ike 11/22/63 does.

    King seems more in his element chronicling the American 20th and 21st centuries than having to make up another world whole cloth.

    Just my thoughts, anyway.

    ChrisC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ooh, I don't think I agree with that at all, Chris. Consider how incredibly personal certain elements of Book VII are; that, to me, speaks of an extremely close personal connection to the story he's telling.

      Glad you, too, are a fan of that Tom Shippey book, though. It completely blew my mind when I read it. Beforehand, I knew I liked Tolkien's work, but I had no idea it was as intricate as it is. I'm WAY past due to sit down and reread his books (plus the various Histories of Middle-Earth, which I bought a decade age and have yet to tackle).

      Delete