Category Archives: books

Really disappointed with King’s decision

ItIt by Stephen King

My rating: 1 of 5 stars

I wanted to say how good this is. It started off amazing even if one scene was way more explicit than I wanted it to be. (Stephen King does not know the meaning of TMI). The narration of childhood and the attempt to grapple with suppressed memories of horror makes for an amazing novel.

And I wanted to mention that I think King bit off more than he could chew in this one. He created an unearthly, magical, super-powerful monster. So he had to come up with a way to explain how eleven-year-olds could fight It. The contrivances of magic and symbolism got to the edge of how much I could suspend my sense of disbelief.

But none of that really matters now. In King’s attempt to create a sense of primal magic, he inserted a scene in which the one female of the seven child friends does something totally wrong with all of them in a row (trying to avoid showing up in the wrong kind of searches here). It isn’t just evil and senseless, it actually makes the paranoid and perverse accusations of one of the villains in the story come true.

And I’ve just lost interest. I’m not reading about these characters anymore because they aren’t understandable persons anymore.

I’m not bothered as much by the fact that King wrote the story this way as that he did so after he had kicked his drug abuse and didn’t re-think the concept in the review process. And neither did anyone who saw the manuscript. And the reviewers all gave high marks to it.

Ugh. I’m done. Over and out.

View all my reviews >>

An omen worth considering

Good Omens CDGood Omens CD by Terry Pratchett

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

OK, I got nervous starting this because it seemed it could lead to Heinleinesque (SIASL) levels of blasphemy. But despite the heterodoxies, this was hysterical as a parody of all the end times horror stories told by Hollywood and the likes of Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye, and Blue Oyster Cult (!). It skewers gnosticism and “last days” literalism.

It also makes a profound statement that the ultimate war will not be between heaven and hell but between humanity/earth and both the other places. This will seem to be one of the heterodoxies, but it should be given more credit. We will judge angels. We won’t conquer heaven exactly, but we will inherit it. And heaven will enjoy all our special drinks, novels, and all the rest of the stuff we make. (The angel character needn’t have feared he would lose those.)

The main thing the authors can’t seem to settle on is human nature. On the one hand they make it clear that humans are more depraved than demons. On the other they make out that being human is an alternative to being either angelically good or demonically evil.

The message about fate and prophecy was wonderful. Reminded me of the end of Tim Powers’ The Anubis Gates or Terminator Two.

Outstanding humorist novel.

View all my reviews >>

Review of City of Bones: stay away

City of Bones (Mortal Instruments, #1)City of Bones by Cassandra Clare

My rating: 2 of 5 stars

I’m giving this two stars because it did have an interesting alternative world. I got about 2/3 or 3/4 through it and gave up when the girl kissed the bad boy. This is teen-girl-lit except I wouldn’t encourage any teen girl to read it. The descriptions of skin, jaws, eye-lashes, bred like maggots throughout the text.

And the similes! Who will save us from drowning in them? I can’t remember any thing or event in the book which wasn’t described as “like” “like” “like” x 50 billion something else. When I heard a sentence on how he or she “deflated like a balloon pricked with a pin,” I began striking my forehead with my fists, repeatedly, like a pinata with a layer of bone around the thick oozing candy.

And every single character who describes anything to anyone else also abounds in using the similes as well!

The combat scenes seemed bizarre because things that should have happened fast somehow allow for shouted warnings and elaborate evasions.

Hearing the story read put me in mind of Saturday morning cartoons like Super Friends. That struck me as an apt embodiment of the writing. Only with more boy crushes.

As a Christian, I didn’t approve of the pluralistic, agnostic stuff that coated the otherwise medieval urban fantasy. This did not offend me however since I didn’t expect anything else. I did not with satisfaction that for all the talk about how a mosque or synagogue would work just as well, readers got to tour a Roman Catholic Church to get weapons to fight against vampires.

By the way, vampires and werewolves as enemies is getting really old. And vampires are getting even older. I was glad that much of the story centered on demons rather than these other two.

To end this back on an positive note, I did think the actual story, as far as I got through it, was an interesting plotline.

View all my reviews >>

Tolkien, Twilight, and Cultural Optimism

Twilight is a huge seller and one might be tempted to despair.

But don’t.

It is still amazing the number of Tolkien references one finds in Twitter and on Facebook. Tolkien! Not J. K. Rowling. (I would assume she has more references, but she still has movies coming out. Tolkien is still amazingly influential.)

And for all the idiocy of Twilight, I’m sure there are many readers who wanted something better and will continue to look for it.  True, they will be misled by a host of books trying to imitate the worst features, but eventually another Rowling or two will come along.

And Tolkien will continue to be a lighthouse in every scifi/fantasy bookshelf in the world.

There was a time when “Swords and Sorcery” was a real minority report among readers.  It was mostly pulp fiction.  Tolkien changed the world forever by both transforming and popularizing the epic fantasy genre. He and Lewis had insisted people were hungry for it and, while nothing about Tolkien resembled an entrepreneur, he did in fact find a new market.

Gary Gygax has said he was expecting to market D&D to a small group of wargamers. He two broke into a new market, in large part because he had Tolkien to make a way for him.

Yes Twilight has been successful, but it is not going to be here a half-century later. No one is going to vote for Meyers as the author of the century in 2101.

It will pass.

Instead of judging the world by the popularity of Twilight we should look at the enduring popularity of Tolkien and also his better innovators like Rowling.

Just my opinion; but you know what an optimist I am.

Is Sunday School creepy enough?

100 CupboardsHow many kids grow up with the nagging feeling that the whole “flood thing” was a bit of an overreaction? Look at the felt board and listen to Mr. Sunday School Teach, and you’ll get the impression that people had a big party, stayed up too late, and maybe got a little tipsy. And so God . . . smote the earth, collapsed the sky, and sent the continents spinning like air hockey pucks, killing pretty much EVERYTHING?

Muting the black distorts God. Revealing it is frequently theodicy.

via The Rabbit Room. In which N. D. Wilson responds to a comment thread on an excellent plug for his book 100 cupboards.

We are the Hobbits

The_HobbitI loved this essay from The Rabbit Room because I think it captures the genius of Tolkien’s strategy really well. I elaborate here not because I think it needs additional commentary but because I can’t help myself after reading such a helpful essay.

Lewis like many other fantasy authors before and after wrote about mere mortals finding their way into a magical realm.  The one exception is the story of Shasta, except that Calormene is somehow as secular and magicless as any modern place so that the effect is the same.  So the story of Shasta comes closest to resembling Tolkien’s strategy.

Tolkien starts The Hobbit as well as The Lord of the Rings with a magical creature that is quiet, short, and lives in a hole.  That is all a misdirection.  The Hobbits are actually comfortable English middle class.  They know virtually nothing about the heroic and magical world of great men, elves, dwarves, and dragons (Note to Mozilla: get your spell checker to recognize Tolkien’s revision of the dwarf plural just as you have done for his revision of elves and elven rather than elfin.)

In other words, the Hobbits for all their exoticism are actually just us.  Magic is great for fireworks but the perils are not recognized.  Their general insularity and xenophobia does not actually amount to realistic fear of the dangers around them (it just means that they are over-confident in their self-sufficiency).  As I point out in my forthcoming biography, Tolkien shows the only Hobbits capable of resisting tyranny from the outside are those who left the Shire to face the outside.

Disbelief in dragons just makes you easy prey to them.

A report early in my Stephen King fandom kick

Until a couple of years ago I had read a total of two Stephen King novels, both in high school: The Stand and The Eyes of the Dragon.  He came into town when I was working at Davis Kidd in Nashville, Tennessee–back when it was an independent bookstore and King was doing his motorcycle tour of independent bookstores.  So at one time I owned a hardback of Insomnia and a matching T-shirt (but I didn’t go to his presentation). This would have been around 1993. I notice that now King is doing video interviews with Barnes and Noble and what was once the nation’s largest bookstore in Saint Louis, The Library Limited, stands empty last I checked.  So the borg won.

But I digress, and I still love Barnes & Noble.

Anyway, I picked up the hardback of On Writing on a remainder table somewhere and really enjoyed it–and appreciated him both as a writer and a human being.

So I checked out Cell from the library, which I would have enjoyed a great deal more if I had ever read Richard Mathison, but enjoyed anyway.  Then I read Salem’s Lot which was much better than Bram Stoker’s Dracula.  I moved on from there to The Dead Zone and then finally Carrie (“Finally” here means that he wrote about writing that book in his On Writing and I had been wanting to read it for some time to get a complete picture).  Recently I picked up Needful Things and It from the library.  But time and emotional drain simply didn’t give me the kick I needed to start making headway in those thick books.  So I have returned them for another day.  Right now I am about half-way through Firestarter.

Cell and Salem’s Lot have some similarities, but they both strike me as rather original productions.  Others are also original, but they more obviously come from Planet Stephen King, where raving lunatic religious women and powerful but uncontrolled girls roam the landscape, and God works in undeniable but senseless ways.

There seems to be, in other words, a few themes or characters that keep finding ways into many of King’s books.

If I recall correctly, The Dead Zone came after The Stand. Both are concerned with the problem of evil.  Specifically, how can God send anyone to meaningfully battle against evil if, in fact, he is omnipotent?  Why give Johnny Smith, for example, a brain injury that lets him see the future and not give the bad guy he must confront a brain injury that makes him no longer a danger? (I don’t know if King believes in a personal God, but he does seem to think there are mysterious forces at work beyond Newtonian cause-and-effect.)

Reading Firestarter I am obviously meeting Carrie again.  This time, however, she doesn’t have psychotic parents.  She has good parents who love her and are trying their best to help her.  And she still has problems!  (Of course, the psychotic fictional Intelligence agency does a lot of damage in the place of Carrie’s mother.)

There are passages about a psycho teen boy and his care in Carrie that I know are the seeds for the later book Christine.

Carrie’s mother is an insane religious fanatic.  At first, this seemed entirely arbitrary–a stupid stereotype motivated by need.  (The idea of Protestant religious believers that think sex is at best a necessary evil is a recurring myth that one has to try to believe in many of King’s books).  But as the story progresses one sees that King does work on developing a compelling history that explains her mentality.  In The Dead Zone there is another insane religious mother (who believes that Jesus rides in UFOs) but she turns out differently because she has people who love her and it helps her move in a better path.

So, rather than being boring, the similar characters in different circumstances are actually kind of thought-provoking.

King’s protagonists are not (often?) sexually moral.  And I often get almost a nihilistic vibe that bothers me.  There are also places in Salem’s Lot that make it clear that King is every bit as gifted as a writer as Ray Bradbury.  I’m tempted to say that he does for small-town Maine in the seventies what Bradbury did for Middle America small-town life in the 1930s or so.

I Am Legend

I have a ton to do today so this must be quick. But I have to take a moment to express what a joy it is to suddenly discover the horror author, Richard Matheson (he’s wider than that but I’m going to read all his horror first if a I can). His novel, I Am Legend was just amazing. It was the kind of thing where you realize most of the vampire fiction you read before was completely second-hand and this was the source that inspired all those wannabe imitators.

I read this novella because I had seen the movie I Am Legend and had been incredibly impressed with it.  One person told me that it wasn’t as good as the book, but I have to assume that is because he wanted the movie to be a copy of the book.  It isn’t.  It is very much indebted to the book but it is a different story.  In fact, one of the great experiences involved in reading the book second was realizing what brilliant decisions the writers had made to use different situations and actions and history to get some of the same emotional stress.

I don’t want to give either story away.  One difference is that the book is about vampires while the movie is about zombies, though the zombies have some vampire features that make more sense once you learn about the book as a source.

One of the things that the movie does, which blew my mind, is show there is more going on than what the protagonist sees, without ever bothering to explain to you what exactly is happening.  To avoid spoilers, when you see the movie and hear the protagonist say that the zombies have lost their last bit of humanity, ask yourself if what he is describing is not showing exactly the opposite.  As it turns out, this element came from the book, but it is simply used to add complexity rather than as a plot issue that must be resolved.  I think it was brilliant.

I have to admit, I didn’t like the end (as in the very last page) of the novella.  I wish Matheson had written part two (which would have been pretty easy to do, in my opinion) and made it into a complete novel.  Also the movie is very much a Christian story with a theodicy (when the camera focuses on graffiti at the beginning, pay attention) and a protagonist who had real faith (before he lost it).  The original novella is much more naturalistic and unbelieving.

They are both amazing though, and I highly recommend them both.

Why Lewis Lovers should Read Tolkien’s Letters

By “Lewis lovers” I especially mean people who love his non-fiction, his essays and books

You should read Tolkien’s letters to realize he is every bit as intellectual and deep and thoughtful as Lewis was.  You may claim you have never doubted that this was the case, but I’m skeptical. Some forms of knowledge depend on direct experience and the affirmation from someone lacking that experience just doesn’t seem credible.

I appreciate that Tolkien’s best work is his fiction and that he would be more than satisfied if you stopped with it.  But I really wish more people read his letters.