I have only a limited background on Stephen King’s books. I’ve read Carrie, Pet Sematary, and Salem’s Lot, and seen The Shining, It, and Christine. Not much there, huh? I would have read more, except as King once said, “If I cannot terrify, I will try to horrify; and if I cannot horrify I will go for the gross-out.” Carrie of course didn’t much scare me, although I enjoyed it (though it was strange to feel that the narrator both liked and hated Carrie). Salem’s Lot had some chilling moments, as when the vampire is floating outside the window, or when the basement staircase is cut away so visitors fall on the knives laid out below. Pet Sematary was creepy, but the climax wasn’t scary, and I got so bored reading the whole sequence where the father goes to dig up his son at the graveyard. What I really want to read is It, though I’ve seen most of the movie and read quite a bit about it. Still, what intrigues me about It is the way King refers to other books he’d written up to that point and the turtles. The turtles sound so creepy…
Anyway, I don’t know what prompted me to do it exactly, especially since I don’t like reading anything longer than a trilogy (which is why I never finished the Narnia books), but I picked up The Gunslinger over the weekend and just finished it. Needless to say, I had various feelings while I read it, not the least of which was, Wow, why doesn’t Stephen King always write fantasy? And then it came to me that this wasn’t quite fantasy – it was a western and horror and sci-fi. I ended up both loving the book and hating it. And now come the lists, since paragraphing makes me bored, hehe.
Loved:
1.) The Man With No Name. Err, I mean, the gunslinger. I admit I imagined Clint Eastwood’s face for most of the book, although it was jarring to learn that the gunslinger had black hair.
2.) The names. Alain, Rhea, Roland…then Jake, Steven, Cuthbert. So much variety, you know…and the first three names I listed there were names I had used in stories I wrote. Was Stephen King using babynames.com, too? Hehe. Probably not.
3.) The language. It took some getting used to. I expected some wild west slang, but then ran up against words like “yar” and “thee”, which threw me off until I figured out that this world wasn’t quite this, wasn’t quite that. The prose was nice and tightly constructed. Very clean, I thought, with just the right amount of detail. The kind of detail that makes me feel like I’m eating the words. Very filling. But: The repeated descriptions got annoying sometimes, such as the references to the sandalwood of the gunslinger’s guns, and the fact that Allie was the woman from Tull. I suppose it reminds me of epics like The Aeneid, when epithets often accompanied the names, but still. This is English, not Latin or Greek, and it’s prose, not poetry. I could have done without some of that.
4.) How real Roland’s world seemed. Of course, there were the obvious ties to LOTR, with Mid-World, but the world also had its own density. The descriptions of In-World contrasted with Mid-World nicely, and again, that edible detail everywhere was immersive.
5.) “The man in black”? Come on. Somebody’s been reading The Princess Bride.
Hated (okay, not quite that extreme):
1.) It eventually sickened me that every female character was shown in some sexual way. I assume it has something to do with all the Bible references and that the women are Eve (or Lilith) and living in some sort of sin or something… But it got old pretty fast. First we have Allie, who asks for sex in exchange for information, then can’t control herself and requests to know what the afterlife is like, which drives her crazy (a classic horror device, I suspect, but also a comment on the weak will of women, perhaps?). There was the preacher-woman pregnant with some demon baby – and did Roland put a gun up her…? I read that scene over and over and I’m not sure I want to believe what actually happened… Then there’s Roland’s mother, who cheats on his father; I think Roland kills her for it, but I’m only 98% sure. Then Susan, who I suppose was the pure one, but Roland still slept with her. Then the succubus. Then all the whores that fill up the background scenery from In-World to Mid-World. WTF? I hope we get some more positive representations of women in the next books, because that was about enough to turn me off from the rest of the series.
2.) The death of Tull. I could just imagine a shoot-’em-up video game during that scene. Not that I’m against violence, but something about killing everyone in some godforsaken town just isn’t fun to read – it’s just repetitive.
3.) The journey. I know it’s classic. I know Tolkien did it, and King greatly appreciates LOTR. But I’m getting sick of it. It isn’t just The Gunslinger, it’s all these fantasy books I’ve been reading lately that involve moving from point A to point B and the endless description of the environment on the way. Though, of course, King has some great description, that doesn’t stop me from just knowing how the book is going to end up.
4.) The Dark Tower. Love it and hate it. I sincerely hope there’s more to the tower than what the man in black gives away at the end. Why? Because this is Book I out of seven. Remember the Da Vinci Code, how we found out what the Grail was halfway through? At least for me, that ruined the book.
5.) The Bible. The Bible. I know The Gunslinger was published back in the ’80s, so this Bible annoyance is just on my part, not on the book’s. First Narnia, then the Golden Compass, now The Dark Tower…and probably so many other fantasy books. I can’t think of any based on, say, the Koran, or the Torah. Something else besides the Bible… At least it’ll be interesting to see how King looks at this. I did find it interesting that Roland wasn’t an expert on the Bible at all. But I hope the final boss (lol) isn’t some red devil like in Legend.
So will I read the rest of the series? That’s the big question. The ending to The Gunslinger was conclusive enough for me to not want to read more (not like Uglies, that left me railing because it was a cliff-hanger). And I’m starting to remember the common themes in what few things of Stephen King’s that I’ve read/seen – his likes and dislikes seem to shine through, which is great because it defines his writing in a way, but also it’s a bit of a turn-off if you’re not in agreement. (I guess if you didn’t see Sergio Leone’s great trilogy, you’d be in the dark about what was going on with the gunslinger. And I still feel disgusted by the representation of women in this book.) Anyway, if I read more, you will know (what, thought I wouldn’t blog about it?). If you’ve read The Gunslinger, I’d love to hear your thoughts (but not spoilers! lol).
Update: Uh, yeah, I’m not finishing the Dark Tower. Partly because of what the commenter said below but also partly because of strong curiosity, I went on Wikipedia and read the summaries for the books in the series. I couldn’t make much of it – just that I know I’ll hate the ending and I’d rather not go through all that to end up with that as an ending. So feel free to post spoilers if you like!
July 2, 2007 at 3:31 pm
This is a case where King’s undisciplined imagination really riles me. He dragged the series on forever–I read the first one but that was it–milked the concept until the teat was wrinkled and dry…and made gobs of money off gullible fans. King has become a fiction factory and as a lover of serious writing, I simply can’t take him seriously. He shows disregard and contempt for his readers by releasing crap and reveals the dearth of critical book people out there–sharp minds should shun his books like faceless lepers.
August 23, 2007 at 9:57 am
I’ve noticed that both of you have only read the first book, the Gunslinger. You’re both basing your opinions of the entire entire series on the first book. It is 1/4 of the size of the others, meant to be an introduction to the series. Really, skip a few books ahead and read Wizard and Glass. It shouldn’t throw you off much from the series since it is mostly a flashback to Roland’s childhood, but probably my favorite of the series. By the time King began writing that one, the world he is portraying has really blossomed. And there’s no travelling from Point A to Point B if that helps anyone.
August 23, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Hey, Will, thanks for the comment. Maybe I’ll check out Wizard and Glass…
August 25, 2007 at 9:44 pm
what an asinine review. In the name of the man Jesus get a grip of yourselves and grow up (the above reviewers). If you have the cognative capacity to read more than a mills an boons novella, I strongly recomend the dark tower. Do not listen to the idiotic nonsense spurted by the self-righteous, pompous ass that wrote this (he sounds like a tit). Take GOOD fiction for good fiction.
August 26, 2007 at 1:07 am
Wow, Jodey, I enjoyed your comment, and your “cognative” capacity, but I hope you weren’t referring to *this* pompous ass. But why do you recommend the Dark Tower? I think everyone gave their opinion, and you just hated on them and didn’t give us much of anything… What is GOOD fiction to you?
August 26, 2007 at 6:20 am
Mate, apologies to all the above, was plenty drunk when I wrote that last night (in the mood for a rant). Good fiction is all about the journey. I’ve heard lots of folk winge about the ending of books. But, so what if the ending doesn’t hit all the right buttons, the four or five thousand pages of rich, surreal and vastly varied prose more than makes up for it.
In the dark tower, King takes us through the full range of emotions remarkably well. The single book that has been read by yourselves was written when he was nineteen, and there is more than twenty years writing experience gone into these books. King has learnt a lot in those twenty years.
If the guy that was disgusted by how women where portrayed in the first book, had made it to the second he would find out that one of the strongest and most endearing characters is a women. The point about the bible is farcical. The books based on a bloody western. West man, not the east (we all know how partial they are to the Koran in the New Mexico Desert).
So if anyone reads the blog written above this, don’t bloody listen to it. If you’re looking for something of epic proportions give the series a bash. I’ve lost many an hour taking the tower journey and would not ask for any of them back.
Oh and “faceless leper chappie“. Are you nuts? Serious writing, it seems, has probably addled your noggin. Leave Catherine Cookson aside for a bit and chill.
August 27, 2007 at 7:27 am
Hiswizardeyes, please accept the apologies of a “pompous ass”. I’m a man, (probably ten years your senior), presiding in Scotland. Quite obviously I never made the time or effort to read anything else of yours and find out who you are; I assumed you were male, roughly same age as myself, (well done you though, you write well for your age), and probably writing from a basement full of Spawn dolls and starwars figures.
Assumption tends to make a person feel a little silly. Especially when assumption is fuelled by a skin-full of strong alcohol. I stand by the points I made, if not the abuse I doled out, just substitute he’s for her etc…
Once again, humble apologies and please ignore my ignorance. Take care.
September 3, 2007 at 11:35 pm
Thanks for troubling to come back and clarify, Jodey. And thanks for the apology. Usually I don’t let irritating comments stand on this blog, but I thought you had something there in your original comment and was hoping you’d come back to write more. Thanks again for the extra insight into King’s writing, and for visiting my site =D
December 12, 2007 at 1:15 pm
I happened to read your over-view of the 1.st book just by pure chance. Actually I was looking for pictures that depicted Roland and your review just happened to pop up with one and I thought why not read someone else’s opinion on the book.
I must agree with Jodey because you really can’t judge this series by just reading the 1.st and the smallest book of total 7. Besides as Jodey said, King was only 19 when he wrote the first book and it took over 20 years to complete the series.
The Dark Tower series is actually the first King’s book that I’ve ever read so I can’t compare it to his other books. I bought the first book just to see if I like his creation. At first it was quite difficult for me to read it, because English is not my native language (as you can propably see
) and there were some strange words that you can’t generally see in everyday texts but I got used to it soon. I finished reading the whole saga this summer and I practically read it in a row because I just couldn’t stop and I loved it.
As for the ending I can’t say it was bad. Yes, it was uncommon and I actually didn’t expect it to end that way and when I read it first I was quite furious actually but in a way that was the best ending and the only logical one. BTW if I remember correctly, then King himself warns the reader before the last chapter that they might not like the ending.
November 10, 2008 at 8:30 pm
In order to enjoy King’s story telling in this case, you simply have to be the kind of person who enjoys the style. It is very reminiscent of the (very) old Icelandic sagas and old English stories. I felt that the book was a direct mix of the saga of Roland (by the way it flowed), the fantasized old west (the imagery) , and Stephen Kings own flair for a story. I can’t say I appreciate the Christian references, but as in any other case, it’s the man’s own work and he is free to make it like he wants without having to brook my displeasure. (btw, read 1001 nights if you want fantasy based on the Koran and fantasized Islamic culture). King can really make a character both despicable and irresistible to study at the same time. The poem which inspired the work is also worth the read, “the childe Roland to the dark tower comes” google it.
April 9, 2009 at 10:09 pm
You absolutely shouldn’t base your opinions of the series on this one book – it was written by a very different, much younger King than the other books in the series. The series has its failings, but I attribute them to King’s shortcomings as a writer rather than any cynical motives. I wouldn’t call it literature, but I sure loved the books all the same.