Log in

No account? Create an account

Occupation: Girl

Please close the door and switch on the fun without fail.

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
So I read the new Stephen King
yahoo winter
...because the two or three weeks after Christmas are my traditional Book Wallow. And I really like Stephen King's short stories, which tend to be more high-concept and less tangential than his novels. That is to say, you get a handful of really interesting ideas, rather than one idea that goes on for three hundred pages longer than it should. Full Dark, No Stars is actually another one of his novella quartets, like Different Seasons and Four Past Midnight. But still: short stories, less rambling, more skillful endings. So I curled up with this one and plowed through it in one sitting, as I tend to when at all possible.

I will say, even an hour's contemplation has made me feel a little kindlier towards the stories. They're not badly written. They're just really, really unpleasant. You get to the afterword, and King even says, "The stories in this book are harsh. You may have found them hard to read in places. If so, be assured that I found them equally hard to write in places." Well, GOOD, is all I have to say about that. But we'll get there in a moment.

Major spoilers:

"1922": This is an incredibly depressing, elegiac story set in the last year before the Depression (or at least before it hit the farmers, we are told). I mean, it's written as a confession: we know from the beginning that things are going to turn out badly. I think the character I really latched onto here was quiet, tender-hearted Henry, his teenage son, whose downfall takes a romanticized turn I (at least) didn't expect. King may be at his best when he's writing about parents and children, particularly fathers and sons, and I think that comes through here. I just wasn't all affected by the use of rats as a physical source of horror. If I had a nickel for every time King has brought out the rats in his fiction... well, I'd have at least twenty cents. Rats just don't resonate with me as a horror trope, for some reason. Now, put in some cockroaches, and I'm not sure I'd be able to make it through the story. But that's a personal preference, not a valid criticism. A valid criticism, I guess, would be, "He does use rats effectively, but--seriously? Rats again?"

But then again, I think I'm always more interested in emotional horror. What happens to Henry--and Wilfred being the agent of it but unable to stop it--is far more awful to me than whatever does or does not happen to the corpse of a woman he came to hate.

"Big Driver": If you have rape triggers, skip this one. This is not a story where rape is an incidental plot point; this is a story about rape, about the physical and mental trauma of it, and then an ensuing revenge drama. I don't even have triggers and it was upsetting. It's supposed to be upsetting. I think, in fact, that the real reason I'm writing out a book discussion entry is because I want to warn people about this one. Unlike most of King's stories, this isn't even about something that could happen to people; it's about something that does happen to people, and statistically has happened to some of the people who will be reading this book. It could have been worse, I suppose--at least he does treat rape seriously, rather than a trivial or incidental plot point we just move on past, tra-la-la. And I think the first half of the story--particularly Tess's mental trauma--is effective, or it wouldn't be so upsetting. I'm just saying: maybe on this particular day you don't want to read a well-written story about something horrific that too many women do, in fact, experience. If I hadn't noticed the word "violated" on the book jacket, I would have been in for a very ugly surprise. At least now you can skip it if you'd rather.

Actually, the first half, the really upsetting parts, is the half that's better written. It's the revenge part where I started to roll my eyes--there were two reveals that got an out-loud "OH, COME ON." In fact, there's an entire character who is one big walking "OH, COME ON." Some of it's interestingly done with the voices and all, but--I don't know. I just suspect there's a reason they give away "violated" on the inside flap, and it's because the publisher knew there needed to be some kind of warning.

(The book jacket is also a bit heavy-handed in point out that the theme uniting all the stories--supposedly--is each main character discovering THE STRANGER INSIDE EVERYONE, which is also explicitly mentioned in three of the stories--maybe all four, I'm not sure.)

"Fair Extension": A Deal with the Devil story that seemed really strange yet simplistic to me at first. Dave Streeter has cancer! George Elvid (NO REALLY) can offer him a life extension! However, Dave has to choose someone else to get screwed over to balance things out. Who is his worst enemy? His best friend since grade school. The devil, once he stops laughing, is like, OH MAN, THIS IS GONNA BE AWESOME. The problem with Dave's best friend is that he's perfect, with a perfect life, and much of that perfect life achieved at Dave's expense. And so Dave gets not only another 15-20 years on his life, but incredibly good fortune for himself and his family. His best friend? Has his life torpedoed in the most horrific ways. Not just his own life, but his family's. And by the end, Dave is like, "You were right, Mr. Devil, that was TOTALLY AWESOME." No remorse, no second thoughts, no ironic payback, nothing. And he makes sure to stay friends with the guy so he can witness every miserable moment of it. It's like every fantasy of schadenfreude you've ever had taken to its purest, most vicious logical extreme. I kept waiting for some kind of something to happen to Dave as a consequence of the deal, and--it never came. All you're left with at the end is this incredible horror at the discrepancy between this guy's glee--not just at his own good fortune, but specifically at his friend's misery--and the outrageous overkill of what happens to Tom. All I can think is that the real message of the story is--you were totally with Dave when he first started reciting how Tom had wronged him, weren't you? I was, certainly. And if all the jealous, spiteful things you ever imagined in your worst moments about your Tom came true, you would be a horrible, horrible person. Because, oh my God: SUCH A HORRIBLE PERSON. Maybe that's ~THE STRANGER~ Dave discovers inside himself: a complete and total asshole.

"A Good Marriage": I actually liked this one a good bit, and if I were to go back and reread any of the stories, it would be this one. King says in the afterword that it was inspired by the BTK killer and his wife, and it's actually something I've wondered about--I think any girl, any woman, who's interested in true crime asks herself at least once what she would do if she realized she was married to a serial killer. Or at least a criminal of some kind--some kind of ongoing crime, the Mafia, a hit man, a bank robber--something that isn't just a blip in his past you can try to rationalize away (he was a ~different person~ then, u guys!), but something you have to make a moral choice about, something that could save lives. Or, for that matter, get you killed if you try to turn him in. And that question is complicated when children are involved--are your innocent children's futures worth the lives (and horrible deaths) of strangers? I mean, reading this story, I was like, YOU ASSHOLE, TURN HIM IN, but if it's actually happening to you, I imagine you're going to be blinded by so much emotion--so many conflicting emotions, and perhaps clinging to a desperate attempt at denial. Or an attempt at moral bargaining (which I imagine you see in a lot of romantic fanfic about serial killer characters): could I keep him from killing again, if I were a good enough wife? Could I hold him at bay? Could I even change him for good? And I've already discussed why something like that is appealing at least as a fictional fantasy. And the reason it only works as a fantasy--aside from the fact that it wouldn't work at all in real life--is because it ignores the crimes that have already been committed, victims who already deserve justice but won't get it. In real life, trying to love a killer into submission isn't just stupid (or, more to the point, impossible); it's selfish.

Which does not necessarily reveal Darcy's choice in "A Good Marriage"; her situation is on the "realistically awful" end of the spectrum. I'm just saying--and you long-timers know this already--that I'm fascinated by the psychology of the other end of the spectrum, the fantasy of loving someone dangerous, and why it does (or does not) work.

Anyway. Rats: not my thing. Moral quandaries involving murderers: apparently my thing.

Also my thing: King's stories that deal more with glimpses of the weird. "Mrs. Todd's Shortcut" and "Strawberry Spring" have always been two of my favorites, and I really liked "N." in the last collection; I think I like the secretive club in "The Breathing Method" (but not much of the rest of the story itself) almost more than anything else in Different Seasons, and I like that book a lot. But I tend to like glimpses of the weird more than an onslaught of weird, I notice--I love the first half of "1408," where the writer is being told the history of the hotel room, but the part of the story that takes place in the hotel room doesn't live up to that glimpse for me. Which may be one of the reasons I like "L.T.'s Theory of Pets" so much: I mean, you can do the math and figure out what probably happened to the wife (which itself is pretty weird), but there's just this gaping hole in this guy's life where he will never actually know for sure. Whereas Full Dark, No Stars is almost completely weird-free. It's got plenty of horror, but not very much weird, and you used to get a lot of that in the earlier King stories, even though they weren't technically as well-written. So. I guess what I'm saying is, if you like real-world, humanistic horror, you will probably enjoy at least three of these stories.  

Next up: I have to choose between The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and Matched, which is apparently the new big YA thing recommended for "people who liked The Hunger Games." I have not yet read The Hunger Games, but I need to keep up with The Big Things better than I have. Even though Matched's fans seem to already be divided into Team This Guy and Team That Guy, which sets off my Sparkle Motion sensors. On the other hand, the original title of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was Men Who Hate Women. But at least I know that going in.

And yes, we will get back to Varney. Sometime this week, I hope, although I think I may take this week off from Secret Life to spend some time working on the entries themselves.

Site Meter

Just a head's up: The Hunger Games also features teams. Where there is the Next Big Thing, there's a Team, I think. (Cap instead of lowercase because the idol-worship demands a cap.)

Yeah, I actually know how the Team thing ends up on that one. It's the one I guessed, too.

"1922", or as I retitled it, "The Tell-Tale Rats".

I was kind of disappointed in Matched. Delirium, which is coming out in February, was along the same plot lines and I liked it a lot more. I don't know yet about Matched being the next big thing - I liked it well enough, but it hasn't generated the buzz I'd have expected for the exposure it got whereas I kind of think Delirium's trilogy might be the next big thing. As far as Hunger Games comparisons go, aside from them both being dystopian, I dunno. I think the Chaos Walking trilogy is much more Hunger Games like, and I actually kind of liked them more.

(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
I haven't read The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, but I have read Matched, and found it utterly underwhelming.

which sets off my Sparkle Motion sensors

Coincidentally (or not), Ally Condie and Stephenie Meyer share the same agent.

I read hunger games and it was a pretty decent book, but I hated the ending so much that I didn't even want to read book two. my friends love two and three though... but I won't be going back. I'm done with "team" books, unless it's a lot more subtle or even just better written! (grammar check?)

long time reader, first time poster! <3

Have you ever read "The Demon's Lexicon"? /curious I know the author is pretty much "teams? sounds fun! I am Team Everybody! :DDD"

I vote for girl with the dragon tattoo because I'm also planning on reading it and then we could discuss?

I just finished The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (yay library!) and found it excellent. Want to read the sequels now.

I just finished the second one literally today. Really love this series. (Though this one should also have a massive "HEY RAPE TRIGGER YO" warning on the front. I read spoilers before reading the first one, but I still wasn't prepared for how graphic/intense it was. However, I might be a wuss.)

Glimpses of the weird? Horror? High Octane Nightmare Fuel? Cleo, you should read Dan Simmons's Hyperion. The first story in particular still makes me uncomfortable, looking back on it.He just keeps ladling on the psychological horror.

And House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski, too. That's more than a glimpse of the weird, it's a full-on dive into insane architecture, typesetting and mind-screwing.

Edited for grammar. Hello English language, have we met before?

Edited at 2010-12-29 01:49 am (UTC)

(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
On the other hand, the original title of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was Men Who Hate Women. But at least I know that going in.

Ohhh . . . you don't. You really, really don't.

There are some brutal scenes in Men Who Hate Women, just warning you.

From your review, I'm going to have to hunt down A Good Marriage now. Part of the thing is that serial killers like Dennis Rader are so rigidly controlled that they can keep the different aspects of their lives separate. I mean, the only reason he was caught was because he came back to taunt the police for not catching him decades earlier.

/too much serial killer knowledge

There are some brutal scenes in Men Who Hate Women, just warning you.
And, man, are they brutal to watch on film.

(Deleted comment)
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is very good, though you may not think that in the first 60 pages about economic fraud. Past that, though, it gets awesome, but I needed my Swedish friend (who'd already read and loved all 3 before I started) to cheerlead me or I would have quit. Also, while the first book is self-contained, I have been told that the second and third are really tightly linked - like, if you start the second, there's no stopping until you've finished the third. Which is why I haven't started the second - fear of commitment. Good luck!

Yes, the third book more or less continues minutes after the second one ended. I'm in the middle of the third at the moment - got stuck there for a while but I've started again now.

A woman at Starbucks today actually asked me about the book as she'd gotten it for Christmas and didn't understand a thing because she didn't know the other two existed (the books have pretty random one-word titles over here which makes them less noticeable I suppose).

/random ;)

Matched doesn't ring any bells, but we're always a bit behind with these things over here.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo on the other hand is amazing. I'm reading the third part or the trilogy, The Girl who Kicked the Hornet's Nest at the moment and these books have been the highlight of my year, book-wise.

First, I second (heh) the House of Leaves recomendation.

Girl with the Dragon Tatoo is addictive - to the point where I don't know if I could say it was REALLY well written or not - I'm reading the last in the series for my book-a-thon....

...but please realize that there is a fairly horrific act of violence in this book that is....fairly horrific. IT IS a required plot point - not gratuous. But.....well, brace yourself.

Do you mean the bit with [female] and [asshole] or the bit with [male] and [completely totally unhinged]?

TEAM PEETA. Wait, what are we talking about again? After reading THG, I read The Forest of Hands and Teeth, which is another teen dystopia, and I did not really care for it. Like I said in my lj, the protagonist mentioned the ocean so much that the word just started looking like gibberish to me and I kept getting Tegan and Sara's "The Ocean" stuck in my head. Stop worrying over the ocean, stop worrying over zombies...

But I am also behind on my teen lit. I'm just now reading Uglies. Re: the late Stieg Larsson, I love Lisbeth Salander so much and I really like the books in general, but they are clearly using the Swedish equivalent of Stephen King's editor, especially in the 3rd book, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest And Also The History of Modern Swedish Government Oh Did You Fall Asleep So Anyway As I Was Saying Säkerhetspolisen or SAPO was founded In....

PS: I almost got knifed by a Twihard last night. What delightful people they are.

Edited at 2010-12-29 01:40 am (UTC)

The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest And Also The History of Modern Swedish Government Oh Did You Fall Asleep So Anyway As I Was Saying Säkerhetspolisen or SAPO was founded In....
If you think that's bad, try reading Between Summer's Longing and Winter's End by Leif GW Persson, which is a fictional account/retelling of a true assassination. It is ... they try to compare it to Larsson's series, but holy crap. It spends so much time with government/bureaucracy that you wonder if you're reading a novel or a history book. I don't know how I made it through the book, or even why I liked the damn thing, but I did.