Thank You Mr. King For The Time Warp

Fifty years ago today president John Kennedy was murdered.  I wasn't alive.  In fact, I wasn't even close to being alive.  The world of John F. Kennedy has always felt very far from me.  A world where men had not walked on the moon; a world where schools were segregated and churches were bombed.  I don't know that world.

Stephen King's novel 11.22.63 does what no history book can do -- it takes the reader on a wild ride back into the early 1960's.  We do not arrive in the past as historians, but on the trail of a story.  Following fictional characters through very real events is an amazing way to tell a story and bring history to life.  I loved it!  Of course, this has been done many times before, but the skilled storytelling from Mr. King is what makes the time travel so real.  I feel like I have indeed been to that era.

Here are some of my notes from my journal as I read 11.22.63

THE TIME MACHINE:

11/22/63 requires a simple leap that isn't very hard for 21st century readers -- time travel is possible.  We've had entire series of novels built on the time travel theory.  Because it is already an established storyline in our culture, King doesn't have to spend forever convincing of the concept.  However, King does some creative rule bending to make his story work -- namely the idea of "re-setting."

A few ways we've gone back in time:
--H.G. Wells novel, "The Time Machine" used a machine.
--Back To The Future, a Delorean.
--Star Trek flew real fast around the sun. (Star Trek 4) Actually, Star Trek often popped through time without a lot of concern for the method used.
--Superman flew real fast around the earth.
--The Gunslinger went through doors.
--In The Time Travelers Wife the traveler manipulated time himself (we think. . .) Of course, the rules of that game involved appearing naked in whatever time he found himself! Glad Jack doesn't have to deal with that little nuance.

Something outside the characters created a time portal.  It's not a machine carefully constructed by mad scientist; it's simply a rabbit hole of some kind.

By not building a time machine, King (brilliantly) fixes several problems.  For one thing, the novel doesn't need to focus on "where will we go?"  The answer is already determined.  The question to be dealt with is instead, "What shall we do when we get there?"  Also, by not constructing a time machine, King avoids the critical question, "Wow, a time machine -- how's that puppy work?"  Doesn't matter how it works!  Don't know.  It is, what Hitchcock would call a kind of "mcGuffin", existing only to propel the plot.

TIME IS ALIVE

King plows new ground in 11.22.63 with the concept of time itself being obdurate. 

What if time wasn't a thing, like a block of wood or even a machine -- what if it was alive?  What if time was insulted when people tried to change it?  And, the biggie -- what if it could fight back?  What if the time line itself was able to protect itself against time-travelers. 

Examine this quote, and notice how the past is indeed alive:

"Because the past is sly as well as obdurate. It fights back. And yes, maybe there was an element of greed involved, too."

King also writes,

"The past is obdurate for the same reason a turtle’s shell is obdurate: because the living flesh inside is tender and defenseless." (p. 827)  Time protects the people within its shell.

Sadie picks up on the theme and tries to relate to it but she uses the wrong word–malelevolent--instead of obdurate. She hasn't experienced the obdurates of the past the way Jake has!  It has beat him to a pulp! 

The addition of time having will is something I suspect future writers will pick up on.

Genre:

11.22.63 is a genre buster.  It is not alternate history!  King spends very little ink discussing the real heart of "what if."  So what is it?

The scenes after the assassination attempt reminded me of a John Grisham novel as the FBI sneaks George out of Dallas.  I enjoyed it, as it is the kind of stuff that King doesn't usually engage in.  Big government agents with their own agenda's out-smarted at points by the ordinary guy.

But 11.22.63 is not a legal thriller.  It may smack at moments of John Grisham; but it's not Grisham!  It's not alternate history.  It's really not sci-fi.  So what is it?  Well, maybe goolosh.  That stuff mom made when she had to clean out the fridges -- little bit of everything.  Maybe a better way to say it is that it transcends genre, and good novels do that, don't they?

As I traveled through the last pages, I realized what this book was.  It swept over me in a wave, and I almost cried out, "OH!"  It was both painful, and obvious.  This sucker is romance!  I'm reading a romance novel!  King isn't interested in time travel, he's interested in characters!  He's not even that interested in the alternate history -- he is laser focused on those people in the book. 

Love is such a messy thing, and gets in the way of good science fiction.  It certainly does in 11.22.63.  I like the love story quite a bit.  That said, I wanted more alternate history.  The love story isn't sappy; this ain't Danielle Steel!  It is engaging because it occurs while you are focused on other things -- and that's the way love is, it happens while other things are going on.  You're supposed to be focused don college classes, graduating, and some girl comes along and -- whoa baby!  How many missions have been messed up by love? 

Time Travel Tricks?

We never really get to learn what the world would be like if Kennedy had not been shot.  Why is that?  Because the science fiction gets in the way.  Yes, the world is changed by Kennedy's escaping assassination, but the future is also changed by other things George does.  So we don't get a "pure" look at the world.  More than that, things are being ripped apart by time travel itself.  I did not see how saving Kennedy would cause a giant earthquake.  The logic escapes me, captain Kirk.

Seriously, now -- which changes history more, 1. JFK escaping death , 2. An earthquake that kills thousands ?  I would say the earthquake!  Thus the alternate history is affected more by the events in California than by anything in Dallas or Washington.

In regards to the alternate history, I really struggled to accept some of the main ideas.  For instance, I think King gives Johnson far too much credit for the Civil rights movement.  I also do not see how Kennedy's living changes anything with Martin Luther King.  (?)  It seems that the civil rights movement had a voice so loud that any American president would eventually be pressed to join in. 

Also, would an American president really use nukes?  I know that's what LBJ warned about. . . but do we want to believe the press offered up in a political ad?  The further away from Kennedy that King got, the more unbelievable I found things. 

He creates mega changes to the flow of history, but then keeps smaller flukes.  He asks us to take a world where there are incredible racial tensions, hate meetings. . . but Hillary is president.  And who calls their meetings "hate" meetings?  Starting to feel like Orwell's 1984 here.  It felt like King just wanted to make Hillary president, so no matter what flow of history he went with, that was the end in sight.

Question Never Answered:
Why does the rabbit hole go to that date.  Is there something they are supposed to do?

11.22.63 Journal #9: Thinking It Over

That was a wonderful read! 

Because it is so different from King's other works, I'd hesitate to say things like, "It was his best!"  It was different -- and wonderful -- and difficult -- challenging and at moments mesmerizing.

Audio:

I read this book via the audio edition.  Yes, that counts as reading, Bryant. 

Craig Wasson makes James Hosty sound like Jimmy Stewart.  And that makes Hosty all out lovable to me.  One problem in listening is that you cannot hear quotation marks. There have been a couple of times when I was not sure if George was thinking something, or saying it.  Wasson's reading is very energetic.  He performs as much as reads, which I enjoy.  An example of someone who gets out of the stories way is Grover Gardner, who is often accused of being dry.

Genre:

11.22.63 is a genre buster.  It is not alternate history!  King spends very little ink discussing the real heart of "what if."  So what is it?

The scenes after the assassination attempt reminded me of a John Grisham novel as the FBI sneaks George out of Dallas.  I enjoyed it, as it is the kind of stuff that King doesn't usually engage in.  Big government agents with their own agenda's out-smarted at points by the ordinary guy.

But 11.22.63 is not a legal thriller.  It may smack at moments of John Grisham; but it's not Grisham!  It's not alternate history.  It's really not sci-fi.  So what is it?  Well, maybe goolosh.  That stuff mom made when she had to clean out the fridges -- little bit of everything.  Maybe a better way to say it is that it transcends genre, and good novels do that, don't they?

As I traveled through the last pages, I realized what this book was.  It swept over me in a wave, and I almost cried out, "OH!"  It was both painful, and obvious.  This sucker is romance!  I'm reading a romance novel!  King isn't interested in time travel, he's interested in characters!  He's not even that interested in the alternate history -- he is laser focused on those people in the book. 

Love is such a messy thing, and gets in the way of good science fiction.  It certainly does in 11.22.63.  I like the love story quite a bit.  That said, I wanted more alternate history.  The love story isn't sappy; this ain't Danielle Steel!  It is engaging because it occurs while you are focused on other things -- and that's the way love is, it happens while other things are going on.  You're supposed to be focused don college classes, graduating, and some girl comes along and -- whoa baby!  How many missions have been messed up by love? 

Time Travel Tricks?

We never really get to learn what the world would be like if Kennedy had not been shot.  Why is that?  Because the science fiction gets in the way.  Yes, the world is changed by Kennedy's escaping assassination, but the future is also changed by other things George does.  So we don't get a "pure" look at the world.  More than that, things are being ripped apart by time travel itself.  I did not see how saving Kennedy would cause a giant earthquake.  The logic escapes me, captain Kirk.

Seriously, now -- which changes history more, 1. JFK escaping death , 2. An earthquake that kills thousands ?  I would say the earthquake!  Thus the alternate history is affected more by the events in California than by anything in Dallas or Washington.

In regards to the alternate history, I really struggled to accept some of the main ideas.  For instance, I think King gives Johnson far too much credit for the Civil rights movement.  I also do not see how Kennedy's living changes anything with Martin Luther King.  (?)  It seems that the civil rights movement had a voice so loud that any American president would eventually be pressed to join in. 

Also, would an American president really use nukes?  I know that's what LBJ warned about. . . but do we want to believe the press offered up in a political ad?  The further away from Kennedy that King got, the more unbelievable I found things. 

He creates mega changes to the flow of history, but then keeps smaller flukes.  He asks us to take a world where there are incredible racial tensions, hate meetings. . . but Hillary is president.  And who calls their meetings "hate" meetings?  Starting to feel like Orwell's 1984 here.  It felt like King just wanted to make Hillary president, so no matter what flow of history he went with, that was the end in sight. 

In The End. . .

In the end, the alternate reality doesn't matter squat anyway!  In fact, none of it matters except the last strands of a love story.  That's what you're left with that's real. 

The middle section definitely lagged.  See, I didn't realize back there that this was a love story.  Now it all makes sense!  That stuff that felt slow is what was really the meat of this novel.  I would read it again with more patience for the character development and less urging for King to "get on with it!"

Does the book lag at points?  yes.  Is it a good novel?  Absolutely!  Is it King's best?  I don't know.  And neither do you!  It should be enough to say, that was a good book.

11.22.63 Journal #8

11.22.63 Journal #7: Obdurate

Obdurate & Stephen King: The Use of the Word “Obdurate” in 11/22/63
with notes from reader 19


Dictionary.com : unmoved by persuasion, pity, or tender feelings; stubborn; unyielding. stubbornly resistant to moral influence; persistently impenitent: an obdurate sinner.

"Because the past didn’t like to be changed. It was obdurate." -- 11/22/63 (p. 159).

Obdurate–a fascinating word. Not one we hear in everyday conversation.

King plows new ground in 11.22.63 with the concept of time itself being obdurate. 

What if time wasn't a thing, like a block of wood or even a machine -- what if it was alive?  What if time was insulted when people tried to change it?  And, the biggie -- what if it could fight back?  What if the time line itself was able to protect itself against time-travelers. 

Examine this quote, and notice how the past is indeed alive:

"Because the past is sly as well as obdurate. It fights back. And yes, maybe there was an element of greed involved, too."

King also writes,

"The past is obdurate for the same reason a turtle’s shell is obdurate: because the living flesh inside is tender and defenseless." (p. 827)  Time protects the people within its shell.

Sadie picks up on the theme and tries to relate to it but she uses the wrong word–malelevolent--instead of obdurate. She hasn't experienced the obdurates of the past the way Jake has!  It has beat him to a pulp! 

The addition of time having will is something I suspect future writers will pick up on.  Watch out, Captain Kirk, next time you go back in time, it might not just be the Klingon's on your tail!

And then there is the Yellow Card man. . .

11.22.63 Journal #6: Suspicions

Reading a good book is like eating a good meal -- don't rush!  I'm enjoying 11.22.63 quite a bit.  I'm in the final days, headed quickly toward the BIG day.  So, of course, all the answers are near by, I hope! 

Remember the guy who used to hang around Ed Wood named Criswell ? He was famous for saying, "I PREDICT!" And he would say crazy things. Well, I have a few to offer. and if you don't know who I mean, google Criswell. No, I don't mean the pastor of 1st Baptist Church of Dallas!

It is worth writing down some suspicions I have at this point, before I know the outcome.  So. . . here are some not so educated guesses!  Those of you who have read the whole thing, don't correct me! 

So. . .

1. I suspect this will turn out to be a dry run.  That is, our friend is going to reset history again once he sees the outcome of his efforts.

2. I suspect Sadie will help George carry out his mission.

3. I suspect on his second trip, George will protect Sadie better.  the best face lift would be a reset in the timeline.

4. And if he does do this all again, I think he should do a LOT more study before heading into the past. George jumped too quick!  He needed to spend some time with his friend google and wiki. 

5. I suspect saving Kennedy will do nothing to save MLK. 

6. And for the changes that would happen if Kennedy did live:

--Without LBJ, I suspect the civil rights movement might take more time. 
--I do think Vietnam would be avoided all together if Kennedy lived.
--With no Vietnam, I am left wondering about other wars.  Gulf Wars and various police actions.  No idea on those!  I hope King deals with them.

7. I know the yellow-card man will be back.  He is always lurking near by.  But what kind of wrench he will throw in the mission, I don't know. 

So there you go.  Notes from a guy who actually knows nothing!

11.22.63 Journal #5: What are you thinking ?

I am well immersed in 11/22/63.  It is great.  I find myself yelling at Jake quite a lot lately.  "What are you thinking?" is usually what Mr. Epping is getting from me these days.

Okay, rules of time travel say you should not do anything in the past that might change the future.  We are told over and over that the future is fragile.  So, if that is the case, why in the world is Jake building a relationship with a woman?  What if she is supposed to have children with someone else, and he is messing that up?  Why is he tracking Oswald?  He knows what the sucker is going to do, so just knock him off and get moving.  Doesn't moving in right next door, and bugging his house no less, seem a little -- dangerous? 

Didn't Al's notes instruct him not to fall in love?  If the past is so fragile, shouldn't he be executing this plan with a lot more precision?

Wait, because there is more.  By directing school plays, students are telling him he "changed my life."  If he is changing peoples lives. . . he is changing the future.

I haven't read the end of this book -- it's just a humble journal entry.  But I am wondering what's up with my friend Jake.  I like him very much, but cannot for the life of my understand why he does what he does!  If he's going to lead Sadie on, he might as well level with her.  She's in for a big surprise the night he kills Oswald, right?  Isn't he inflicting great emotional harm to her by killing someone and then disappearing out of their life?  And if he brakes her emotionally, might that mess up other relationships she was destined for?

That's the wonderings of someone who thoroughly enjoys this book, but is also yelling at the main character. 

11.22.63 Journal #4: Seriously?

Usually the thing about King's writing that most deeply connects with me are his characters. They think, speak and tend to make decisions the way normal people would when in similar situations.  Sometimes a characters logic baffles me.

So, I want to lodge a small complaint. . . but it's probably not what you are expecting.

The biggest (certainly most publicized) complaint I have seen about 11/22/63 has to do with the sex.  It has been said that the sex scenes are awkward or poorly written.  I must disagree!  The sex scene complained about was awkward. . . because it was someones first time!  Those leveling the complaint should read the whole book, not just use Kindle to search down the hottie scenes.

My complaint has nothing to do with sex scenes.  It has to do with secrets and our ability to keep them.  In one scene George suddenly realizes that maybe he should let his secret out of the bag and tell his lover the truth.  Now, everything in the reader is shouting at him, "Don't do it, you idiot!"  But something else was worming through the back of my mind.  It went like this, "Seriously, dude?  This is the first time you've been even slightly tempted to tell someone the truth?"

Most of us would be tempted to show off a little.  To take our knowledge for a little spin.  Of course, falling in love when on mission is stupid to begin with.  And telling the truth in this instance is not a good idea!  But the temptation should have been chewing him up.

11.22.63 Journal #3: Stephen King Slapped My Face

Stephen King slapped my face a few days ago.  It hurt a lot. 

There I was, happily bopping through the late 1950's with Mr. King narrating away at about 80 miles an hour.  I'm loving 11.22.63, and the blast from the past is a joy.  Root beer, short hair, ties -- we'd all want to go back, right?  Even the cars are something to long for.  And about the time King has you totally off guard, thinking sentimentally about a by-gone era. . . WHAM!  King gives a big, open handed slap to the face.  Not a girly slap; a hard, "WAKE UP, FOOL!" slap. 

I grew up in the 80's -- in California.  I was a white in a mostly black high school.  Race relations could be tense at times.  My senior year was the Rodney King riots, and it seemed like everything erupted in the Los Angeles area.  But my best friend was black, and somehow we navigated through some rough waters.  There was bad stuff going on around us, but for the most part we came out untouched.  My mom has said she was glad for my friend, because it protected me from bitterness. 

Any tension in 1980's California cannot compare to what was happening in 1959. 

As we bop happily along through the novel, King describes a stop at a gas station.  There's a men's and women's restroom, and then a sign for blacks with an arrow.  Follow the arrow around the corner, and you'll discover there are no indoor restrooms for blacks.  I'll not share the exact nature of the indignity, King does it better than I can -- but it made me angry.  Partly because it's not the world I come from.  And partly because it IS the world I come from!  Our entire nation has been touched by generations of racism.  When King describes the bathroom situation at the gas station, it evokes a righteous rage.  "That is SO WRONG!"

We exist in boxes; our eyes covered.  Racism is a thing of the past, it doesn't affect us -- right?  But when I felt that sudden anger at someone being forced to go to the bathroom outside, some things started to make sense.  The anger in the students around me as I grew up.  It didn't make sense at the time.  Why were they angry -- things were better for them than they had been for the last generation, right?  But the arm of injustice has a long reach.

Injustice, racism, hate can't be cut off in just one generation.  We live with the scars. 

Out culture and teachers have tried to slap us, but usually it didn't sting as bad as it needed to.  Movies like "Driving Miss. Daisy" are painful, but sweet.  King doesn't give any sweet to his open handed smack.  I remember reading Native Son in high school about a black man who accidentally killed a white girl, burned her body, and went to the electric chair.  That novel provoked the desired uncomfortable discussions in English class, but it did not deliver the sudden, unexpected, slap that 11/22/63 gave me. Even movies that drive the point home, like The Help, don't really slap you.  Because you see it coming!  But King doesn't announce he's gong to slap your face.  Of course, everyone should know at some point he's going to edge up on racism -- but when he catches you off guard and causes emotions to rush, it's both painful and a joy.

Baptist:

King sometimes shows us things from our own culture we don't like so much.  The angry, cussing, racist Baptist landlord we encounter in Dallas disgusted me.  That's outside my experience with Baptist (for the most part.  Anyone who has done ministry for long has encountered some pretty angry people).  I go to a racially mixed church (whites, blacks, Hispanics Asians).  Baptist would be quick to point out that Dr. King was a Baptist, as were many civil rights leaders.  Billy Graham, who publicly took a stand against racism by personally removing the ropes that separated whites and blacks  in his meetings was a Baptist.  But that's not the whole story, is it? 

I don't like the cussing, angry, nasty racist landlord being a Baptist. I would rather focus on the positives!  The MLK's, the Graham's and so on.  For a moment I found myself frustrated with King's writing.  It seems he often chooses the Baptist to be the racist (Reverend Rose in Needful things is an example -- only he hated Catholics).  And at least with rose, the character is not well developed.  He just hates.  But in 11.22.63, things feel a little more real.  These feel like people you might actually meet somewhere.  Not just a caricature -- but a true step back in history.  And if I could go back in time, I'd like to take a swing at that landlord! 

Thank You

So I'd thank King for the slap in the face.  Thank him for making it hurt.  For stirring emotions I've actually never felt; not very deeply.  Because I don't live in a culture where racism is so openly practiced, but we do live with the scars.  But people respond to one another based on their scars, and we don't always understand why they act the way they do.

11.22.63 Journal #2: Derry Doesn't Welome You

I don't know how many novel's Stephen King has written.  Do you count Blockade Billy?  Why is the Mist a novella, but The Girl who Loved Tom Gordon is a novel ?  Whatever the number -- it's a lot.  In fact, King has written a whole lot of novels.  Every one of them have been entertaining.  Each novel is also practice.  Put another way, King's writing keeps getting better.

I weary of people who suggest that King's greatest novels were the first dozen.  While I enjoy those novels a lot, I think it is naive to think that King's writing has not strengthened with time and experience. 

King has said that he tried to write 11.22.63 years ago, but discovered he was not ready to take on such a monumental challenge.  The novel is different from other King novels just by the amount of research and historical data required to build the story.  What is not different is King's crisp, entertaining and often lively narration.  While the book is long, King does not belabor scenes or commit the sin of boring the reader! 

That sign from the IT mini-series ought to read "Derry Does Not Welcome You."

King skillfully weaves history and fiction.  For instance, we all know Derry is really Bangor.  But it's a messed up Bangor!  A city where a monster roams and kills little kids.  In 1/22/63 King lets us in on a side of Derry we missed in IT.  He reveals what the city and it's adults are enduring as its children are killed.  How do child murders darken a city?  Makes me think of Atlanta. 

Derry is a city where people are not just guarded, they are down right unfriendly -- suspicious. 

In his wonderful book, "Stephen King Country", George Beahm writes

"In reading King, the sense you get is that his literary landscape -- a geographic jigsaw puzzle -- is an ongoing exploration, for not only was IT set in the mythical Derry, but so is Insomnia and, most recently, Bag of Bones." (Stephen King country, p.107)

Beahm also notes:

"Equipped with a street map of Bangor, you would be able to identify on a walking or driving through much of the geography found in IT.  In addition, the references to Bangor and the greater Bangor area dot the novel's imaginative landscape."  (p.104)

Beahm then takes us on a tour of real world / fictional world linkages.  I have added notes at the end of Beahms comments to connections I spotted in 11/22/63. (Beahms list is on pages104, 106-107)  Beahm's writing is in yellow and my notes are orange. 

The Barrens:

There are several photo's of the Barrens HERE.

 "[A] messy track of land about a mile and a half wide by three miles long.  It was bounded by upper Kansas Street on one side and by old Cape on the other."  (In the novel, this is where the sewer pipes lead underground to IT's lair.) 

This is also mentioned in 11/22/63.  Where half a dozen murdered kids were discovered.  There is a grassy pic-nic area between a fence and the drop into the barrens where Jack encounters a couple of the children from IT.  This meeting is a particularly magical scene for readers of IT.

Bassey Park:

 In IT, this is the park that flanks the high school.  Real-life Bangor has a Bass Park. 

In 11/22/63, this is where the "so called" kissing bridge is.  There are a lot of carvings on the bridge, including the words, "I will kill my mother soon" and someone else has carved, "not soon enough, she's full of diseeze."

Derry Library:

For two of the Losers -- Ben Hansomb and Mike Hanlon -- this library was especially significant: It was Ben's favorite place as a child; and as a adult, it was Hanlon' place of employment.  (He also kept in its vault his manuscript, "Derry: An Unauthorized Two History."  Real-life Bangor's Public Library is situated on Harlow Street. 

In 11/22/63, Jack visits the library to try and find census records.  Also at the Derry library, Jack researched the murders that took place between 1957 and 1958.  In 2011 Jack used the Derry library system to do research online.

The Derry Mall:

 In IT, Dave Gardener had one of his Shoeboat retail stores in this mall.  Bangor has Bangor Mall, now the major shopping area of the city. 

In 11/22/63 Jack uses the cover that he is scouting for a mall.  Though he never quite says this, he just says he's there on business.

Mount Hope Cemetery:

photo credit HERE
The empty spot in the middle is where Stephen King presided over the funeral in the movie Pet Sematary

In IT, this is where George Denbrough was buried.  (Readers of Pet Sematary will probably notice that this was where Gage Creed was buried.)  In Bangor, the Mount Hope Cemetery is where, for the film version of Pet Sematary, Stephen King, as a minister, presided over Creed's funeral at this real life cemetery in Bangor. 

In 11/22/63 the Cemetery is Longview -- where Frank Dunning visits his parents grave, and where some sweet justice is delivered.

The Standpipe:

 A prominent landmark in Derry, a water tower that holds almost two million gallons. Real-life Bangor's Standpipe, on top of a hill, is one of its most prominent landmarks, towering over the city. 

In 11/22/63 there are decorative pillows with the Standpipe embroidered in gold thread on them.


The Paul Bunyan statue

The statue is mentioned in 11/22/63 -- small replica's are sold in Benton's drug store.

The University of Maine:

Two of the losers -- Bill Denbrough and Mike hanlon -- graduated from here. . . Stephen and Tabitha King -- and Stephen's childhood friend Chris Chesley -- are graduates of this university. 

In 11/22/63 the narrator, Jack Epping has a B.S. from the University of Maine. He also says that Carolyn Poulin went to the University of Maine as a Business major. Frank Dunning seems to have a sweet spot for the school. It was his school of choice, but he got a girl pregnant and life took other turns. Dunning also took his kids to the football game at the University of Maine.

Penobscot County & River

Fictinal Derry as well as real-life Bangor are located in this county.  Penobscot River: The sewers in Derry empty into the Penobscot; running east-west, it bisects Bangor and Brewer.

St. Joseph Hospital:

After she broke her leg in a car crash, Cheryl Tarrent was taken here.  In reality, located in Bangor.

West Broadway:

The street in Derry known for its mansions and Bangor's most famous street historically, where the lumber barons at the turn of the century made their homes. The King's home is on West Broadway. 
Also:

• Shawshank (fictional): A Maine prison where an Air Force colonel is sent after getting Cheryl Lamonica pregnant.  (This is also where Andy Dufresne was incarcerated, in "Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption.")  In 11/22/63, Harry's dad was sent to Shawshank, and died of stomach poisoning.  There are about 3 references to this prison in the novel.
• The Viking Press: The publishing house in New York City where Bill Denbrough submitted his first novel, a horror story about ghosts.  before King defected to Scribner, he was published in hardcover by Viking.  There is no mention of the Viking Press in 11/22/63.  What a surprise!
• The Frati Brothers Pawnshop: In the novel, this store was replaced in 985 by a Trustworthy Hardware Store. In Bangor, not far from Betts Bookstore, you'll find the Frati Brothers Pawnshop.  In 11/22/63 it is called "Chaz Frati's Mermaid Pawn & Loan."  I was unable to locate this.

Other places in 11/22/63 that I don't think are actually in Bangor:

• Machen Sporting Goods.
• Derry Townhouse.
• The Lamlighter (a bar and grill.)
• The Center Street Market

George Beahms book "Stephen King Country" can be purchased HERE.

11.22.63 Journal #1 : Time Travel As A Story Device

Just some notes on time travel, since it is part of the core of 11/22/63.  A lot of this has to do with how King writes and structures a novel.

Not A Big Leap

11/22/63 requires a simple leap that isn't very hard for 21st century readers -- time travel is possible.  We've had entire series of novels built on the time travel theory.  Because it is already an established storyline in our culture, King doesn't have to spend forever convincing of the concept.  However, King does some creative rule bending to make his story work -- namely the idea of "re-setting."

A few ways we've gone back in time:
--H.G. Wells novel, "The Time Machine" used a machine.
--Back To The Future, a Delorean.
--Star Trek flew real fast around the sun. (Star Trek 4) Actually, Star Trek often popped through time without a lot of concern for the method used.
--Superman flew real fast around the earth.
--The Gunslinger went through doors.
--In The Time Travelers Wife the traveler manipulated time himself (we think. . .) Of course, the rules of that game involved appearing naked in whatever time he found himself! Glad Jack doesn't have to deal with that little nuance.

Something outside the characters created a time portal.  It's not a machine carefully constructed by mad scientist; it's simply a rabbit hole of some kind.

By not building a time machine, King (brilliantly) fixes several problems.  For one thing, the novel doesn't need to focus on "where will we go?"  The answer is already determined.  The question to be dealt with is instead, "What shall we do when we get there?"  Also, by not constructing a time machine, King avoids the critical question, "Wow, a time machine -- how's that puppy work?"  Doesn't matter how it works!  Don't know.  It is, what Hitchcock would call a kind of "mcGuffin", existing only to propel the plot.

How Doesn't Matter

King doesn't worry a lot about how things work, he's tracking with characters.  So it really doesn't mater how the Dome appears, or how the space ship in Tommyknockers really works, or how the car operates in Buick 8.  How exactly did cell phones ringing result in being turned into a zombie?  Not clear on that one!  And how does an ancient burial ground bring back the dead?  Doesn't matter.  The vehicle for King stories are never as important as the plot and characters.  They don't drive the story, they simply accommodate necessary transportation.

I like King's approach.  King also avoids the "why" question! Why is there a time portal here?  Well, at least the early side of this book doesn't worry about that.  The story just plunges forward! 

By cutting out the "why" "when" and "how" questions, King is given the freedom to explain the ground rules for the time portal without getting too detailed.  "But why does it work that way?" can't really be asked, since the answer is: Who knows! 

And the tricky little gotcha in this time travel scenario: Everything resets on every re-entery. "Why is there a reset?" Well, that can't be explained! Don't worry about it, because we don't need to deal with how's and why's.  King don't boar us with details about how it can be, he just says, "Go with it, okay.  This'll be fun."  I think people who get stuck on details find King difficult to read for this very reason.

My friend Bryant Burnette put it this way:

"If you stop and look at his bibliography, King has written a large amount of books and stories that can be considered to be sci-fi, but he's never worried too much about making his narratives be about the science more than the fiction. Instead, he comes up with scenarios that are just plausible enough that you figure they COULD have a scientific rationale. By focusing on characters who, themselves, don't know anything about how the science works -- Carrie White's telekinetic abilities are obviously scientific in nature, but she is in no position to tell us much about them -- King deftly avoids the need to craft hard sci-fi."  (His blog is HERE)

Teacher, I Have A Question

Now there is a question that comes to mind.  Remember, though, I'm writing as I read -- so many of you have answers I don't!  But a question the characters have not considered thus far is, why is THAT date important?  They have to wait several years to come to the Kennedy assassination.  Why does the rabbit hole go to that date.  Is there something they are supposed to do?