Kevin's Watch

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:25 am**

So there we were, my wife and I both relaxing in an apartment in Nouméa (New Caledonia), reading our respective books. I was thoroughly enjoying The Dark Tower 4 "Wizard and Glass", and my wife was working her way through the very thick Dostoyevsky tome "The Brothers Karamazov".

To spice up the excitement of our evening of literary pleasure I suggested we each read a little of our respective books to each other. Why not? My wife goes first with a page from Dostoyevsky, which in part reads like this

Having uttered that last phrase he had suddenly sensed, with a feeling of hopelessness, that the whole thing had fallen through, and that all he had done was to talk the most dreadful gibberish. "It's strange: while I was on my way here, everything seemed fine but now I'm spouting all this gibberish!" suddenly rushed through his hopeless head. During all the time he had spoken the old man had sat immobile, watching his every movement with an icy expression in his gaze. Then, however, having sustained him in expectation for a moment or two, Kuzma Kuzmich at last gave utterance in a most resolute and joyless tone: "I'm sorry, sir, we do not involve ourselves in business of that kind."

... I think you get the idea. A Russian master deep in the middle of one of his greatest works.

My turn. I turned to page 404 of my paperback of Wizard and Glass, and began reading...

All of this Rhea saw in the glass, and wery interesting viewing it made, aye, wery interesting, indeed. But she'd seen shagging before - sometimes with three or four or even more doing it at the same time (sometimes with partners who were not precisely alive) - and the hokey-pokey wasn't very interesting to her at her advanced age. What she was interested in was what would come *after* the hokey-pokey.

*Is our business done?* the girl had asked.

*Mayhap there's one more little thing,* Rhea had responded, and then she told the impudent trull what to do.

Aye, she'd given the girl very clear instructions as the two of them stood in the hut doorway, the Kissing Moon shining down on them as Susan Delgado slept the strange sleep and Rhea stroked her braid and whispered instructions in her ear. Now would come the fulfillment of that interlude...and that was what she wanted to see, not two babbies shagging each other like they were the first two on earth to discover how 'twas done.

Twice they did it with hardly a pause to natter in between (she would have given a good deal to hear that natter, too). Rhea wasn't surprised; at his young age, she supposed the brat had enough spunkum in his sack to give her a week's worth of doubles, and from way the little slut acted, that might be to her taste. Some of them discovered it and never wanted aught else; this was one, Rhea thought.

This eloquent passage penned by our illustrious Mr King, resulted in a good 30 seconds of stunned silence from my wife, then, the repetition of one word, increasingly louder with each pronunciation.

Spunkum...Spunkum...SPUNKUM?!

After much discussion I was able to successfully argue that Stephen King is very, very widely read, and is considered by many to be one of the great authors of our time.

Needless to say, The Dark Tower has been dubbed the "spunkum book" by my lovely wife. Throughout the rest of the holiday experience, I was plagued with inquiries regarding my spunkum, the spunkum book, and any other manner of spunkum related queries, accompanied by dark and moody glances.

Posted: **Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:45 am**

Ironic, since I consider W&G King's best work.

King'll never be remembered in literary circles like Dostoyevsky, but the guy does have his moments.

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:19 am**

I do believe King is our best popular writer of this age. Twain maybe? Dickens?

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:34 am**

Cail wrote:Ironic, since I consider W&G King's best work.

King'll never be remembered in literary circles like Dostoyevsky, but the guy does have his moments.

what you're saying (i think) is that King will never be in "the canon" but...the canon is fluid! you never know! i'll be teaching King if i ever get my damn degree. my sole purpose in getting a degree and teaching is to bring works into the canon that are presently not there. (Martin, Donaldson, Tolkien, Gibson, Jim Thompson, Raymond Chandler, and the like)
i mean, do you think Virginia Woolf or Maxine Hong Kingston or Toni Morrison ever thought they'd be in the canon? but they are now. the canon is fluid.

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:35 am**

It all depends on who you talk to.

And what your genre definitions are...I'd consider Chandler to be canon...for his genre...King too for his at that.

But is he ever going to be compared favourably to the serious literature? To the Dostoyevsky's and the Joyce's and the Milton's? Even the Tolkein's?

I doubt it.

That doesn't make him bad or anything...it just has to do with what you write and who you write it for among other things.

--A

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:01 am**

Does King have literary merit? Well, the only other author who is "canon" who wrote in a similar vein to King that I can think of is Edgar Allan Poe.

So that begs the question, is King as good as Poe? What do you guys think?

Once I've finished W&G (nearly there, I read slowly) I'm going to have a crack at finding literary merit in W&G. Stay tuned for that post.

Oh, and this topic was also meant to be funny - comparing King to Dostoyevsky was hilarious as they're so different!

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:17 am**

duke...

I know you said you are mostly skipping the additional books that can be tied to the Tower cycle. However, if you are looking for literary merit within it, Hyperception believes Hearts in Atlantis is King's best literary work.

...although I also know Av said he didn't care for it...

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:34 am**

Avatar wrote:But is he ever going to be compared favourably to the serious literature? To the Dostoyevsky's and the Joyce's and the Milton's? Even the Tolkein's?

I doubt it too.

I think King's writing is also similar to Stephen Crane's (who is certainly cannon), so it is possible that he'll be held in some esteem for his genre writing (as Chandler is).

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:17 pm**

Tolkien is genre and he seems to be accepted.

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:26 pm**

You'll have to wait for King to die before anyone will ever dicuss his merits as a "literary" author. King himslef refers to himself sarcastically I assume as the "schlockmeister".

Kings problem is that when he misses, he misses badly. Also, some of the themes in his lesser books are repetititve and predictable.

However, the one thing I will say is that I love his prose and the way in which he allows his characters to draw themselves. He NEVER uses adverbs to describe a characters actions. He allows the reader to form the description in his own mind's eye based on the KNOWLEDGE of the character that King has fleshed out.

Also, when he succeeds...he does so marvelously. W & G is a truly great literary novel. It is tragic and thrilling. i would argue the Stand is also a great book.

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:35 pm**

The Stand is a great book because of the scope of the story and the strength of its characters.

W&G is a great book for the same reasons and because it is astonishingly well written.

Posted: **Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:41 pm**

W & G is the first book that made me cry while reading it.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:14 am**

Cail wrote:The Stand is a great book because of the scope of the story and the strength of its characters.

W&G is a great book for the same reasons and because it is astonishingly well written.

Agreed on both counts.

Duke wrote:Oh, and this topic was also meant to be funny -

You never can tell where topics are gonna go on the Watch.

I definitely agree with Cail that King will always be held in high regard within his genre...that he is already in fact, to an extent. Even if he never writes something as good as W&G or Insomnia again, his contribution to the genre has been noteworthy.

--A

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:52 am**

Stupid question...

What genre is the DT cycle? Prior to reading it, the only King I had read was Firestarter and The Stand, and I firmly believed he was solely classified as a horror novelist. Now, after following Av's suggested list for the cycle, I am unable to classify him.

I don't see it as Fantasy, nor Science Fiction. It's not Western. It's not Mystery, nor Romance, nor...?

***edit***

I just asked Hyperception his opinion, and he says "epic fantasy" for the entire cycle, and different classifications for each individual book. Do y'all agree? I've never thought of King as a fantasy writer, even while reading these books.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:33 am**

I've always thought of these ones in particular, (The DT) as fantasy. And they're surely epic. I agree with Hyperception.

--A

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:17 pm**

No question that the core DT books are epic fantasy.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:20 pm**

Avatar wrote: I definitely agree with Cail that King will always be held in high regard within his genre...that he is already in fact, to an extent. Even if he never writes something as good as W&G or Insomnia again, his contribution to the genre has been noteworthy.

Avatar wrote:I've always thought of these ones in particular, (The DT) as fantasy. And they're surely epic. I agree with Hyperception.

So...you are saying that King will be held in high regard within the fantasy genre? Compared favorably to Donaldson and others? Really??

Yes, I'm enjoying the cycle, and think it's well written, but...

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:48 pm**

Oh no, I meant within the "horror" genre. The DT was a stylistic departure for him I think. (And the best books he ever wrote.)

--A

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 1:00 pm**

Agreed with Av.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:01 pm**

why not popular fiction? the core books may be horror, but DT is fantasy. he also has his book on writing. some of his short stories also defy the horror classification. (some Sci-Fi, some thriller)

Kevin's Watch

King Vs Dostoyevsky

King Vs Dostoyevsky