Four Past Midnight Journal 2: NOVELLAs

I'm wondering why King's Four Past Midnight gets sold on individual story at a time -- while Full Dark No Stars gets sold as one big book.  Does it matter?  Sure.  It's the difference in 1 audible credit verses 4.  Or, 1 month's payment verses FOUR.  Different Seasons is also broken up.

Know why I like Four Past Midnight? I do think the stories are pretty good.  I also think it is because I read them at a time when reading Stephen King was a little dangerous -- a little naughty.  I was a teen and it was pretty cool to read Stephen King.  I was pretty new to the world of Stephen King, having just come off The Stand and the first few Dark Tower novels, so I had a sense that anything could happen in a SK novel.  King novels did things that would never even come up in the books our High School teachers handed out.  I tried to endure Cat's Cradle, but really didn't know what Mr. Vonnegut was talking about.  King I did understand. 

So my excitement about this book my be as simple as emotional association; I read it when I was happy to be reading anything by Mr. King.  Some of the elements of the stories did disappoint me; but I still liked them.

I LOVE NOVELLAS!

I was first introduced to the wonderful world of Novella's with John Steinbeck's The Moon Is Down.  It was a great story -- and it was short!  As a kid in school, I was a big fan of the entire idea of a short novel.  The only problem was, the teachers wanted us to read those short novels faster.  The short novel was far better than the chopped novel -- parts of novels all cut up in "reader" textbooks.  Who wants to read the Readers Digest version of Great Expectations?

Novella's are often written in a big burst of energy.  They are just short novels that feel like the author is exploding all over the page!  It seems like you can sometimes feel the writers raw energy as he works, pressing an idea forward as if he is about to get run over by a train.

Animal Farm has been inflicted on numerous school children -- and for good reason!  Orwell tells his story with that raw energy of an idea being hammered out.  The story is a parable of government and power; how those promising to help  the underdog quickly use power to get special privileges.  Animal Farm is more than a Social Studies lesson, it's brilliant writing.  Farm Animals plot the overthrow of a farmer; I thought it was a great story!

My favorite King novella is THE MIST.  Again, you can feel King's energy flowing as he writes.  He is driven by a story that has to get out, and quick.  In fact, he doesn't even have  time to end it! So it's not processed through deeply -- it's just gutted out.  But sometimes what we find when a writer just goes with a story is delightful.  I kind of like those  paperback editions of The Mist that appeared in bookstores to promote the movie.  Something about seeing it all by itself -- kinda naked -- was great.  It didn't need all those other stories crowding around, it was ready to stand on its own two feet!

My favorite novella's:

• A Christmas Carol, Charles Dickens (But no more movies, please)
• Nightfall, Isaac Asmov 
• The Time Machine, HG Wells
• The Moon Is Down, John Steinbeck
• Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck
• Animal Farm, George Orwell
• The Hound of the Baskervilles, Arthur Conan Doyle

The Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury exists in some strange world of novel/short novel/book of short stories.  What is it?  All the stories make a novel.  But not a long novel.  The narrative flow is uneven, but beautiful.  What is this thing? -- it's just Bradbury being wonderful.

Really, story length should not matter.  Often I don't know what a book is!  Is Joyland a novel  or a novella?  I dunno.  I guess you could do a word count, but in the end, does it really matter?  Nope.

Good Sequels

In an interview with EW, Stephen King said one of his hesitations about doing a sequel to the Shining is that "most sequels really suck."  He gives only two exceptions: Huckleberry Finn  and the Godfather II.

Do you agree?  I'm not sure I do.  I think sometimes a story is better as it continues because the writer is in familiar territory and is working to their strengths.

Here are a few sequels that did not suck:

1. The Drawing of the Three, Stephen King
2. Odyssey, Holmer (The Illiad)
3. World Without End, Ken Follett (Pillars of the Earth)
4. The Empire Strikes Back, Glut/Lucas (Star Wars)
5. Piercing The Darkness, Frank Peretti (This Present Darkness)
6. Return of Sherlock Holmes, Conan Doyle (Sherlock Holmes)
7. Catching Fire, Suzanne Collins (Hunger Games)
8. Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets, J.K. Rowling (Harry Potter)
9. Patriot Games, Tom Clancy (The Hunt For Red October)
10. Leaving Cold Sassy Tree, Olive Anne Burns (Cold Sassy Tree)
11. The Two Towers, Tolkien (The Fellowship Of The Ring)

(I have not read Talisman or Blackhouse)

Many famous writers have actually resisted the temptation to go back  and write sequels.  Charles Dickens and John Steinbeck to name two. I also notice that John Grisham also does not do a lot of  sequels.

I think King may feel some pain when it comes to sequels, since his own works have had to endure  the likes of Return to Salem's Lot, Firestarter II and all those dreadful Children of the Corn movies.

George Beahm once said that  Eyes of the Dragon deserved a sequel.

JOIN THE CONVERSATION:

1. What is your favorite sequel?
2. What Stephen King book would you like him to write a sequel  to?

Carrie Still Grabs Us

Remember how at the end of the 1976 De Palma version of Carrie, Carrie's hand reached from the grave?  It  was great!  And in a way, it was a deeply symbolic scene.  De Palma was making good  horror, not intending to symbolize anything.  But the truth is, Carrie still grabs us, doesn't she?

There are still Carrie stage plays, a major Broadway musical just wrapped up -- even after a major flop -- the book has been made into an audio book and in 2013 it will be a major motion picture. . . again.

Sissy Spacek did the unabridged audio edition in 2005 -- Twenty Nine years after she starred in the original  movie.  It's like Carrie just reached out and grabbed her.

Question: Why all these editions of a young writers first novel?  
Answer: Because Carrie still grabs us.

The writer of Carrie has gone on to do many other things.  Has he outdone Carrie?  I think in strict terms of writing, he has.  King is a much stronger, engrossing writer now than he was when Carrie was written.  But the story itself has not been "outdone" by King.  It continues to engage us, draw us in and fascinate us.

Stephen King has gotten older, yet Carrie remains eternally young.  New editions come like waves, retelling this strange story of a kid with powers that could blow the entire town of Haven off  the map.

Here  are the raw elements that make Carrie so powerful:

1. We all identify in some way with Carrie.  We've all been tormented in some way, cruelly picked on in Junior High or High School.  It was "middle school" in the town where I grew up, and it was terrible!

Before Carrie reached from the grave, she reached from the trashcan!  Stephen King's wife saved the novel from the trash can.  She was moved by it, thought it was powerful, and convinced King to return to the book.  What's so powerful about it?  Why does it touch us so deeply?  Come on -- the thing starts in a locker room!  Who hasn't  endured that agony?  Worse, for girls, Carrie suffers her  first  period in a pubic and scary scene.  The sense of shame, embarrassment  about her own body and teasing are all things almost everyone can identify with (though women can identify more directly with the period thing).

2. We all identify in some way with Carrie's tormentors.  Many of us have found ourselves on the wrong side of picking on someone else. Belittling someone, joining in or piling on -- and in our hearts, we were disappointed in ourselves.

3. Crazy people really do exist.  Mrs. White might be nuts, but she is the kind of nut who is not so far out there that  we can't all say, "Yeah, I know someone a little like that!"  She has a twisted theology that allows her to hate (in her case, hate men).  She believes that being hard on herself, and Carrie, will result in God's approval, resulting in self-righteousness.

from www.facebook.com/CarrieMovie

Religious nuts have the ability to miss the full sweep of the Gospel and pick up on bits of minutia -- twisting them into their own strange doctrine.  They particularly love prophecy, since no one can "prove" them wrong (in their own minds, at least).  Did anyone see the postings recently for the new  Carrie movie on facebook?  They showed  notes from Carrie with quotes from Revelation.  No doubt this is the work of Mrs. White.  Revelation is the favorite book of the religious weirdo.  There aren't just a few of these people!  There are so many, most of us have encountered more than one.

SIDE NOTE. . . what does the note mean?  A lot  to crazy people!  But to sane people, not much.  Wormwood: Revelation 8:11 , Revelation 9:10 Scorpions.  You can make whatever you want of such symbols, if you don't worry about context. . . and when it comes to Bible exposition, Mrs. White does not worry about context. 

4. Carrie nukes her oppressors.  It's wonderful!  She gets even with those who hurt her.  We look forward to seeing everyone get what they deserve.  Or, put another  way, Carrie pays off.  Some books don't.  They tease  and play and then leave you empty.  (Try the Needful Things movie for an example of hollow endings).  But with Carrie, the bad guys get sunk!  In fact, she does what everyone wants to do from time to time -- she drops burning heaps of revenge down on her  tormentors.

Another  "Bully" book that gets remade a lot is Steinbeck's "Of Mice And Men."  The book also has a surprise ending that leaves us talking and rethinking things.  I wouldn't change the ending even if I had the power to . . . but I would like a choose your own adventure on that story.  How about Carrie White lend Lennie Small her powers for a moment and let him do in the big bad farm hands, who are nothing more than taunting teenage girls.

5. It doesn't take King long to get his work done.  Carrie is a short novel.  Any adaptation follows the  same pattern of torment and  then revenge.  But a nice thing about Carrie -- the revenge sequences are not a quick tack on at the end.  In Carrie, we get to relish her powerful revenge.  There are a lot of "oh yeah" moments as Carrie brings down the house.

6. Surprise -- We keep going back, partly, because we want to see HOW exactly she'll carry out her revenge in each edition.  I like De Palma's version best, where mama gets a strange form of crucifixion.  More than that, De Palma lets Carrie reach from the grave. . . very nice!

I asked my wife, "Why does Carrie continue to have such life?  Why does the story about a tormented school girl get so many editions?"  She said it is a timeless story, yet as years go by it lends itself to  new perspectives.  So the story remains essentially, but allows  room for creativity.  This is exactly why I am looking forward to the new Carrie movie.

For a novel written in 1974, Carrie continues to  have an amazing grip on us.

Salem's Lot Journal #3

I will assume you already know. . . this is a great book!  I've said that, right?  Right.  Okay, then.  But, just so you know: THIS IS A GREAT BOOK!

I really like the way King writes.  He talks directly to the reader throughout most of the book.  It is a style that I've heard was a writing "no-no."  In fact, writers are told to "show" not "tell."  But King takes great delight in telling the reader.  Why bother with pages of detailed example when he could just explain something outright.

A good example of this is chapter 10, The Lot III.

Present Tense:

The chapter opens with, "The town knew about darkness."  Now, that is one fantastic opening line, right?

I like the way that the writing moves to the present tense in the description of the town.  Note this line, "The land is granite-bodied and covered with a thin, easily ruptured skin of topsoil."

This passage answers a rather complicated writing question.  (This is stupid, so hold on to ya britches).  Question: Can I speak in the present tense about things that will later be destroyed or killed in the book?  Can I speak in the present tense about a character who is about to die. . . since in my "present" reality, that character would already be dead.  If you can't track with that line of thinking, it's okay, everyone can't be as smart as I am.

A Dark Steinbeck:

The present tense description of the town, all the way to it's soil, reminds me of John Steinbeck's wonderful novel, The Grapes Of Wrath.  Really, King is giving us a dark Grapes of Wrath.  Only, it's not the banking sucking the town dry, it's vampires.  Either way, the town is left desolate, broken and empty.

Get these lines, only imagine they were written by Steinbeck about the 1930's instead of by King about the1979's: "The bank has you, and the car dealership, and the Sears store in Lewiston, and John Deere in Brunswick.  But most of all the town has you because you know it the way you know the shape of your wife's breast."

The Death of A Child:

I find King's discussion of Tony and Marjorie Glick's dealing with the death of their son incredible.  It smacks of realness as King describes Margei's compulsion to clean.  Then, right when King has us identifying with this lady, he goes and gets the monster out of the cellar.  Out comes the dead kid to visit his mama, and suck at her breast.  Only. . . the kid is now a vamp!  Now that is messed up!

"I've had the most lovely dream the last three or four nights, Tony.  So real.  Danny comes to me int he dream.  he says, 'Mommy, Mommy, I'm so glad to be home!  and he says. . . says. . . he says. . . that he's my baby again.  My own son, at my breast again.  And I give him to suck and. . . and then a feeling of sweetness with an undertone  of bitterness, so much like it was before he was weaned but after he was beginning to get teeth and he would nip -- oh, this must sound awful."

Interesting:

King's sense of humor shines in this novel.  Get this line from Ben: "Make the connections.  the world is coming down around our ears and you're sticking at a few vampires."

There are references that do not necessarily slap the 2012 generation the way they would have when the book was first published.  References to Hiroshima are actually lost, because we live in an age when we accept nukes at a different level than people did in the 1970's.  Also, King's references to Ellery Queen a quickly overlooked by the current generation.

I also enjoyed King's discussion of the part of town few tourist ever see.  King has the ability to not only scratch under the surface of a small town, but to give you the guided tour of places you never even considered.  How about a trip to the dump?  Or a shack?  Anyone. . . Anyone. . .