Friday, September 28, 2007

Stephen King's "The Stand"

Be warned!: if you value your time and sanity, do not read this book!

I've often wondered about abandoning books. As a youth I thought it was almost criminal to stop reading a book in mid-read. I figured everyone had something worthwhile to say and, besides, the book might get better. My best example is Sir Walter Scott's Ivanhoe. The first seventy pages or so are tedious but after that it becomes a great historical adventure/romance.

But as I get older I find I no longer have the patience or the time to spend with a book that just doesn't interest me that much. Some books are just so awfully bad it's hard to justify spending so much time with them (Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard springs to mind). Some books I feel I'm not prepared for yet. Some books just seem to have a lot of promise and eventually go straight downhill. The Stand by Stephen King is one such book.

Let me give you a description of my experience so you'll understand my revulsion:

First, the book opens with a scene describing some awful/weird happening going on. The opening is full of action. It is kind of disorienting. You're not sure who these characters are or why they are going through what they're going through. It is a great opening scene. It is intriguing and makes you want to keep reading to understand what is going on here.

Then the characters are introduced. Background is given on each character while sections are interspersed explaining the larger story concerning the epidemic. You get to learn about the characters, believe in them, understand them, care for them, and worry about what will happen to them when the epidemic hits them. By the time the epidemic starts affecting all the characters Stephen King has got you where every author wants you, a rapt listener to his tale.

So the second part begins--a major event has occurred and you want to know how these characters will deal with it. But a nagging voice inside your head keeps wondering when this story will pick up steam. There is plenty to see and experience but you start to wonder if maybe it isn't just a bit too much. There are so many characters to deal with and you start wishing that Stephen King didn't feel the need to go into minute detail about each characters' idiosyncracies and thoughts and lives. When every character is important, none of them are. But the story is so strong at this point that you let that voice subside for awhile.

Now you find yourself at page 300 or 400 and you're still not exactly sure where this story is going. A story concerning an epidemic hitting the world, decimating 75 or 80% of the population, and the consequent anarchy and loss experienced is a gripping tale. But Stephen King keeps inserting these annoying glimpses about something supernatural. By page 200 or 300 you don't need something completely new inserted. The story was interesting just as a tale of survival in a post-apocalyptic world. Why do we need some pabulum about prescience and good vs. evil now? You start to feel tricked by the author. It's almost as if he had this idea about writing some grand epic on good vs. evil, chose a vehicle (the epidemic) to tell that tale, and when the background tale was better than his original conception he refused to let go of his original idea.

But, like a Scientologist who figures, "I've spent a lot of time and money believing this, I might as well keep on going," you read on.

I've got a pretty good memory and I think I'm an attentive reader. But after awhile you either start to forget the characters or you just don't care. When that happens, reading becomes a chore, not a pleasure. I would read The Stand right before going to bed and it would truly help in putting me to sleep. I wanted to scream at Stephen King to bring back the good story he had going, not this cosmic good vs. evil stuff. I was interested in how people could live after such a disaster (a great, human story) not some banal metaphysical rubbish. Now there's some evil man trying to conquer the world with cosmic powers and some annoying, saintly woman who is somehow going to stop all this because of her faith in God.

Stephen King, you robbed me of several hours where I could've been sleeping or farting or reading a better book. Needless to say, I abandoned the book. I couldn't go on. Around page 700 I gave up. The story wasn't interesting anymore. The characters became flat and mere vehicles to further the cosmic agenda. You fooled me again, Stephen King.

Stephen King is not a bad writer. People who refuse to read him or disdain him because he writes horror are snobs. But he is far from being a great writer. Some of his worst qualities are abundantly in evidence in this novel: prolixity (get an editor once in a while, please?); lack of discipline (stories told not because they need to be told, but because they can be told); and an obsession with the minutiae of everything to the point where the story becomes obscured. But the worst sin Stephen King commits in this novel is abandoning a good story for a poor one. He should've let his muse take him where she would and not allow his own internal editor try to make this into something it was not.

If you like Stephen King read The Shining or Four Past Midnight. He has done some good work in the past. But this horrible, tedious, pointless novel should be left for future literary critics to disembowel.