Has Stephen King gone too far in the politicization of his novels?
I don't care about King's politics. I don't even live in the USA, but it just seems ludicrous. He puts in this forced, ridiculous scene, NOT played for laughs, where this Somalian immigrant who runs a convenience store is shot through the lung in a robbery. The man's ONLY concern is that the scratch-off State lottery tickets be returned, because they are still property of the State. How heavy handed can you get? Also, this:
“You see the problem, George thought to the others. Kalisha did. They were stronger together, yes, but still not strong enough. No more than Hillary Clinton had been when she ran for president a few years back. Because the guy running against her, and his supporters, had had the political equivalent of the caretakers’ zap-sticks.”
― Stephen King, The Institute
He's obviously gone nuts. These are laughable.
- AndrewLv 74 weeks agoBest Answer
The wide majority of his body of work is laughable. What reason is there to fixate on something like that? The man is a one-trick pony, but at least a few of his earlier novels had character and atmosphere. His later work is just godawful. Where to even begin... He's incredibly long-winded, his dialogue is cringe-worthy, he peppers all of his rubbish with pop culture references that only serve to date them terribly. He's had some truly masterful ideas over the years, no one can detract from his level of imagination, but his execution is poor. His endings are a continual source of disappointment.
He's incredibly prolific, but as with any writer who's been around for that length of time, there's a vast difference between his early works, those that he churned out during his middle period, and the more recent ones.
From his debut novel up until around "The Dark Tower", a lot of the material was decent. He wasn't pretentious and those early novels were just fairly entertaining romps if you're into that sort of thing.
With "The Dark Tower", his style matured and despite a few real duds before and after that point, notably "Cujo" and "The Tommyknockers", mot fans would argue that the strongest material he ever produced, books like "The Stand" were produced during that period.
His downfall really started with "Needful Things." It's hard to believe what a difference there was between "The Stand" and "Needful Things."
Of his very worst books, they're all post-"Needful Things." At least with the early novels, it was simply a case of him not having grown and developed and progressed as an author. His later stuff is just nonsense.
And he's fully convinced that he's a better writer now than he's ever been, which is insane. Why anybody still bothers to slog through the bilge he puts out now is beyond me.
- 4 weeks ago
He started with the politicization long ago. I recall that the protagonist of "Under the Dome" has to remember the moment in his life he is most ashamed of. He chooses the time he laughed at Hillary Clinton when she cried on live TV after some political setback. Seriously...
- TinaLv 74 weeks ago
Well, I'm quite glad that he doesn't write a scene in which a Somalian immigrant is shot through the lung that *is* played for laughs.
What a revolting idea.
- ajtheactressLv 74 weeks ago
What a strange thing to fixate on.
The Institute, like many of his books just needs a good editor. 150-200 pages less would have made for a better book.