Welcome to my message board.
New member registration has been disabled due to heavy spammer activity. If you'd like to join the board, please email me at MaxDevore at hotmail dot com.
New member registration has been disabled due to heavy spammer activity. If you'd like to join the board, please email me at MaxDevore at hotmail dot com.
Someone needs to fill the void
Someone needs to fill the void that King will leave behind
Column like we see 'em
By JOHN NIGRO
Staff Writer (Pitt News)
January 19, 2005
Some time ago, Stephen King announced that he will no longer be writing horror novels after his famed "Dark Tower" series is completed. The news sent a stinging shockwave through his devoted fan base, which has clung to the master of terror for more than 30 years of thick, surly novels.
While he is tinkering with nonfiction works (such as his book on the last Boston Red Sox season), he almost certainly will not be spinning off any more masterpieces such as "The Stand" or "Pet Sematary." In fact, his last novel, "From A Buick Eight," bewildered critics and was, ultimately, a lifeless disappointment. So, with King marching off of center stage, will his retirement be an end to a literary era?
Well, perhaps the most upsetting facet of his retirement is that his genre is somewhat indescribable, and therefore even more difficult to replicate. Sure, it's horror, and few would disagree with this typical classification. But to pigeonhole his entire collection simply as "horror" would be unjust. Most novels traveled paths that other horror fiction couldn't (or wouldn't) venture onto, whether it was the unnerving domestic abuse in "The Shining" or the character development of a troubled 13-year-old girl in "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon." The depth of his work will be the most difficult for any pioneering writer to continue past King's retirement.
King has offered books that would make the strongest soul shudder. Beginning in the early 1970s with "Carrie," his tradition of taking an inside-out look at his characters has been among the most engaging elements of his style. This continued throughout the 1990s, with works like "Insomnia," which took a chilling look at the life of the elderly through their own eyes.
Few other novelists have proven they can establish such character development in quite the same way. Even contemporary best-selling writers such as Robin Cook or John Saul have often veered to the general story template to save their novels, relying on a neatly boxed plot and two-dimensional characters for a safely written package.
King carved out his own niche, and market demand followed, not vice versa, which is the case for many other novelists. His early 1970s renegade book "Carrie" was a ghastly microcosm of our cultural demons, released at a time when America was still drunk on the glorified innocence of the '50s and '60s. His style shifted over the years, mainly from an earlier all-horror tone to more recent flirtations with poetic themes, but his boundaries have held steady. His uncanny ability to construct a haunting storyline in even a beautiful tale (see "Bag of Bones") is an unmatchable quality that will likely be lost from literature with his departure.
Many other authors have tried to emulate King's style, but the elusive x-factor within his novels will always set him apart from the rest. The horror genre will be without its shining star, its capstone leader, who has proved to critics that scary stories can be -- and certainly are -- worthy of literary recognition. "The Stand" did this much and is often cited as one of his most impressive pieces of work, depicting a battle of good versus evil.
While King was zealously writing over the years, he has developed a loyal following. His readers span the spectrum, from adolescents to grandmothers, from businessmen to English professors. His fan base will be somberly looking for another to replace him. Will anyone take his place? Hopefully some talented novelist will rise and again elevate the horror genre to the level King established.
Column like we see 'em
By JOHN NIGRO
Staff Writer (Pitt News)
January 19, 2005
Some time ago, Stephen King announced that he will no longer be writing horror novels after his famed "Dark Tower" series is completed. The news sent a stinging shockwave through his devoted fan base, which has clung to the master of terror for more than 30 years of thick, surly novels.
While he is tinkering with nonfiction works (such as his book on the last Boston Red Sox season), he almost certainly will not be spinning off any more masterpieces such as "The Stand" or "Pet Sematary." In fact, his last novel, "From A Buick Eight," bewildered critics and was, ultimately, a lifeless disappointment. So, with King marching off of center stage, will his retirement be an end to a literary era?
Well, perhaps the most upsetting facet of his retirement is that his genre is somewhat indescribable, and therefore even more difficult to replicate. Sure, it's horror, and few would disagree with this typical classification. But to pigeonhole his entire collection simply as "horror" would be unjust. Most novels traveled paths that other horror fiction couldn't (or wouldn't) venture onto, whether it was the unnerving domestic abuse in "The Shining" or the character development of a troubled 13-year-old girl in "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon." The depth of his work will be the most difficult for any pioneering writer to continue past King's retirement.
King has offered books that would make the strongest soul shudder. Beginning in the early 1970s with "Carrie," his tradition of taking an inside-out look at his characters has been among the most engaging elements of his style. This continued throughout the 1990s, with works like "Insomnia," which took a chilling look at the life of the elderly through their own eyes.
Few other novelists have proven they can establish such character development in quite the same way. Even contemporary best-selling writers such as Robin Cook or John Saul have often veered to the general story template to save their novels, relying on a neatly boxed plot and two-dimensional characters for a safely written package.
King carved out his own niche, and market demand followed, not vice versa, which is the case for many other novelists. His early 1970s renegade book "Carrie" was a ghastly microcosm of our cultural demons, released at a time when America was still drunk on the glorified innocence of the '50s and '60s. His style shifted over the years, mainly from an earlier all-horror tone to more recent flirtations with poetic themes, but his boundaries have held steady. His uncanny ability to construct a haunting storyline in even a beautiful tale (see "Bag of Bones") is an unmatchable quality that will likely be lost from literature with his departure.
Many other authors have tried to emulate King's style, but the elusive x-factor within his novels will always set him apart from the rest. The horror genre will be without its shining star, its capstone leader, who has proved to critics that scary stories can be -- and certainly are -- worthy of literary recognition. "The Stand" did this much and is often cited as one of his most impressive pieces of work, depicting a battle of good versus evil.
While King was zealously writing over the years, he has developed a loyal following. His readers span the spectrum, from adolescents to grandmothers, from businessmen to English professors. His fan base will be somberly looking for another to replace him. Will anyone take his place? Hopefully some talented novelist will rise and again elevate the horror genre to the level King established.
Comments
I came here to post this link! I guess Mr. Nigro doesn't know that Lisey's Story is categorized as a Horror Story! ;D
I will admit, as much as I hate to, that yes, Stephen King will no longer be with us and that there will have to be someone to carry on his torch but I'm not worried about who it will be. There are so many talented budding writers out there who at any second are going to hit "mainstream" I'm certain including our own Bev, the four Brians, Brian Keene, Brian Freeman, Bryan Smith, and Brian Knight, Kealan Patrick Burke, Tom Piccirilli, Tim Lebbon, James Moore, and I would LOVE to see Jack Ketchum receive the same recognition as King does.
I enjoyed Buick8 also!
I suppose it is a fact of life that the King's and Herbert's and Koontz's of this world will only write for so long, and a new fresh talented generation comes along to pick up the mantle of excellent fictional books.
Although, I have only read some of Bev's work that he has kindly showed us, it would be interesting seeing some new writers unfold to carry the torch.
For mainstream definitions - if they appear all the way over here on Amazon.co.uk then they have made it into the mainstream here.
I believe Bev has already made it
(In no way is this intentioned as a kiss ass statement!) - Just pointing that out.
lol
Glad me other maties have enjoyed "From a Buick 8" also
I would like to add a Gary Braunbeck to the mix too, if you don't mind
If one of the great things about King was the inability to pigeonhole him into the "horror" genre, maybe people looking for talented up-and-comers would benefit from more reading *across* genres.
(To clarify, the "people" in my statement wasn't directed at anyone who posted here, just generally at people who think anyone who will "fill the void" must come from the "Horror" section at the local bookstore.)
I think people should read across the board for depth and new experiences. I don't particularly like people being tagged as this or that because of how they appear to write genrically (I wonder if this word exists or if I have just created it ~ genre-ically - minus the "e")
For many, Clive Barker for instance is the numero uno of horror fiction - don't tell King (hehe), well am sure you get my meaning, like this writer or that writer is the No 1...it must be mighty crowded up on that 1st Spot.
Anyways, I digress -
For me, I believe Barker has transcended any type of genre, espeically a horror one, as I like his works that are more towards the metaphysical and fantasy based. He writes excellent characters with great depth and intense love and lust relationships (for how can one exist without the other) - that's what I really love about Barker - he writes about both sides of the coin.
King - ah, King...he writes and breathes an ephemeral life into his stories, that take you on a telepathic journey into the heart of places that feel like they exist. I like King because of how he writes, and how he makes you see...
Koontz - I see as more a thriller "everyday" type of writer that places you quickly and effortlessly into events and depictions. Making you live a very visual journey. In many respects he is much like King.
For an alternative to horror fiction for want of a description, I have mentioned a few times Harry Turtledove who writes about alternate history, and has created worlds so like this one they could one day be this one.
I like lots of different fictions and I think the genre titles are merely signposts: guides to help us on our way, because what work of fiction ever stuck to one genre?
All works of fiction encompass and embrace all genres, so maybe they should just be labeled "Imaginative Fictions".
Granted, I don't know that that's necessarily what Chabon is pushing for in his essay. And it could be confusing in bookstores.
I guess what it comes down to is that sometimes genres imply exclusion as much as inclusion, e.g., if a particular novel is in the "horror" section, it must not include "romance." Or if a novel is in the "literary fiction" section, then it's not going to have anything supernatural/fantastic in it. ''
At any rate, I'm not entirely sure I have a point - I don't know if I want to be confronted with everything Danielle Steele has written while browsing the fiction racks. It just seems to me that people think they're looking for a "horror" writer in replacement. Maybe they're not. Maybe they're looking for a "literary fiction" writer who uses horror elements in his/her stories.
(Realizing that I am, indeed, rambling, I think I'm going to shut up now.
I have never really been drawn to romantic fiction as I believe it can't really compare to what I see romance as in my own mind, and also alot of it might be despairing in its nature.
I think people are drawn to horro, and King put it aptly here, because of the horror in the world we see around us. Sometimes it's good to escape to places where we can see the horror and then see it beaten and thus know that some part of our mind understands this.
Unfortunately the real world invariably isn't like that.
I'd frankly face vampires and werewolves and all manner of monsters than go through anything you regularly see in the newspapers or on the TV - escapism with a good ending usually...
Fiction - works
What it boils down to in my head is that this "genre-ism" can be restrictive. It has its uses, because as I said before, I don't want to get bogged down with dimestore romance novels when I'm looking for a book.
On the other hand, as a browser, I tend to stick in the literary fiction section. I don't venture into horror/sci-fi/fantasy because the cheesier and more clichéd aspects of those genres don't appeal to me, whereas someone else might be happy picking up absolutely any book involving space travel - no matter how badly written or overdone of a plot - because it's something about which they like to read anything they can get their hands on.
What this means, for me, is that any novels that are good, literary works that are shelved into those areas, I'm not likely to read unless someone strongly recommends them to me. Someone who has a reason to think that *I* would actually like them.
Conversely, I think people who only shop in genre-labelled sections like that are probably missing out on some good stuff, too. Someone who, perhaps, really likes fantasy but thinks "literary fiction" sounds too pretentious might not ever find those literary fiction books where fantasy is an element.
That's just what a little devil would do too!
hehe - you're funny, matey