Why is Stephen King is so controversial here on /lit/?

nabokov hates him

>>5228279
Because he sucks but people are idiots so they like him.

Because of his stupid ugly unsettling face.

>>5228279
Not really controversial.
He just writes genre fiction best sellers.
I even heard a guy once saying that he deserved a Nobel. Laughable, but not controversial.

I liked A Long Walk

Should I read The Dark Tower series/The Mist?

I loved The Mist's film adaptation, how's the book? The atmosphere really drew me in.

I don't think he's that controversial, most people (regular /lit/ users, I mean) just flat-out dislike him. If somebody makes a thread and tries to discuss his writing they are usually new here

I don't hate him, I read him a lot when I was in high school and I get the appeal, it's just that there are a lot of young men who don't know very much about literature and happen to be extremely familiar with only him and few other commercial fiction writers. They don't really pick up on his various shortcomings and are overly defensive when somebody points them out

>>5228316
No you shouldn't read any Stephen King. At all. Ever.

The only good thing Stephen King ever did was provide a loose framework for Kubrick to make an awesome film with. That's his greatest achievement. He inspired someone infinitely greater than him once.

>>5228279
because he's too mainstream

>>5228330
I have no problem liking a popular author. Hemingway is popular. I like him.

King is a hack. He writes goofy stories in a mediocre manner solely for profit. That's why I dislike him.

>>5228316
stephen king said that he thought The Mist's ending was even better than the one he wrote.

>>5228328
Shawshank Redemption is pretty good too.

>>5228347
>He writes goofy stories in a mediocre manner solely for profit.

This is not a criticism; you could apply this description to almost any popular writier

People on /lit/ are dumb. King's among the only contemporary authors who are going to be studied 50 years from now.

File: 1404080257074.jpg (307KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 1920x1080px

>>5228975
oh no you didn't

he's a good writer of genre fiction.

NOT literary fiction/character-driven literature though.

nothing wrong with this. but they aren't the kind of novels to turn your worldview upside down and make you wonder what it is to be human or possibly question stuff in a way you hadn't considered before.

Stephen King is pure entertainment. Nothing of literary merit.

What pisses me off is when people act like his stories are some how scary and think they're badass for reading him for fun.

>>5228389
>almost any popular writier...
...is shit. Your point?

>>5228279
To put it simply and non-polemically, there is a portion of /lit/ who just loves to read novels... sci-fi shit, King shit, GRRM shit, whatever shit. The other portion of /lit/ are obsessed with literary theory.

And, these days, the place has been flooded with bait, spam, and just general prickery because

A. /tv/-/v/-/lit/ crosspost escapade of 2014
B. "lol it's 4chan we're dix here psshh nothing personnel kid"
C. "Wow, you actually believe ___ philosophy/theory/view? How stupid can you get?"

So, if you want to have an actual Stephen King thread, maybe you'll post at the right time and the devourers of genre fiction will come from the shadows.

>>5228279
>>5229888

One more thing: /lit/ is better in the morning when the NEET shitposters are snoring. That and we get Britfags in the morning, who are delightful, and I can always spot the fuckers too.

>>5229888
>non-polemically
>sci-fi shit, King shit, GRRM shit, whatever shit
It is shit though.

>>5229894
I mean "shit" like "stuff".

If we're gonna start introducing barbs, I would wager that the genre fiction guys have read a HELL of a lot more than the average /lit/crit guys, pound-for-pound.

>>5229914
Sure, because it's easier to read. You can read some shitty book in a day while you need two or more days to understand a short article (or transcribed lecture) of some difficult theory.
And when you know some theory you notice stuff way faster so you don't need to read as much shit to learn something either.

>>5228316
I for one liked the Dark Tower series, or have liked them as I'm currently reading the fourth book in the series as of this moment.
I can understand peoples views, seeing it as nothing but a juveniles first encounter with literature, but hey, I dont discriminate.
His works are not deep and world changing but if you're out for some light reading to entertain you and not enlighten you, go ahead.

He's Wallace without the intelligence

I liked 'Rage' though

File: l33j4.jpg (117KB, 450x373px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 450x373px

>>5228975
>King's among the only contemporary authors who are going to be studied 50 years from now.

>>5228279
Carrie was pretty fun.

>>5229873
>but they aren't the kind of novels to turn your worldview upside down and make you wonder what it is to be human or possibly question stuff in a way you hadn't considered before.

It's funny because The Stand did all of those things, at least for me. I won't claim he's some super genius though, just capable and decent at what he chooses to do.

>>5228328
Elitist faggot detected.

I enjoy his aversion to "deep prose" immensely.

He's actually a pretty good writer. Don't listen to what these idiots say; anything that's popular is shit to them. Though I'd agree his new stuff isn't that great.

Because most of /lit/ is still in the middle of taking, "intro to college literature" and they think the only thing that matters is milton or faust or some shit.

I'm sure most who claim to hate him have never even read his stuff, they're still in the the unbearable pretentious phase of their life.

>>5228279
King's just a lot of fun to read. The dude's a born storyteller and knows how to tell them well except for his repeated use of deus ex machina.

Top tier King books:

The Stand
The Gunslinger
The Wasteland
Salem's Lot
Misery
Firestarter
On Writing
Mr. Mercedes (best thing he's done since his car accident)
[spoilers]Maximum Overdrive[/spoilers]

And his upcoming novel, Revival, sounds pretty cool.

File: 1387381312511.jpg (40KB, 500x475px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x475px

Because some people here read to feel superior to the sheeple and classy is one of the key factors in the construction of the belief of entitlement and intellectual superiority.

If King is not complex or confuse or obscure or deep or edgy or classy why wasting time in a thing that won't jerk your ego?

>>5235522
>>5235535
>>5235592
>I don't understand how someone can be bored with the simplistic writing of a hack that communicates nothing interesting

>>5229929
Listen, I ENJOY reading and analyzing texts presenting, or based on, some complicated theory of metaphysics or philosophy, and I enjoy immersing myself in a figurative whirlpool of imagination where all the different possibilities implied by such ideas collide, evolve and disintegrate, but god damn it if I personally wouldn't be equally happy writing a straight up supernatural murder-fiction novel where such ideas are either banned, or only wait at the perimeter of the story, as I have equally fun letting a human character bash a vampire pretty-boy's head in with a wrench before staking and burning the body. Not that I've ever published or even shown more than a fraction of what I write to anybody, but my point is that I understand where he's coming from.

What I'm saying is that some writers take the route of more easily digested fiction not out of disinterest or incapacity of more nuanced or complex works, but because it's simply more fun. I've read and listened to several interviews with King and what he always returns to when someone asks how he comes up with an idea is that he thinks either "what if..?", or simply "wouldn't it be fun if..?". That's where he gets his energy from; he imagines something interesting, throws a couple of characters into the mix, and simply rolls with it. I'm reading "Just after Sunset" right now, and it is always this toying and exploration of a simple "what if?". Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five can be summed up as something akin to "an exploration of morality in a moder and post-modern society and of what the effect of a fourth-dimensional perception of existence would entail", while a Stephen King story could be "imagine a college guy shooting up a school" (this was before Columbine), or "what if this horribly repressed and bullied girl got psychic powers?" and then just rolls with it.

Is it deep? No, it rarely is. Is it entertaining? Hell yes.

>>5235601
Of course you can be bored, but there is a difference between getting bored with an author not living up to your personal preferences and dismissing him as a hack.

He is rarely anything beyond shallow, but that should not be seen as a critique of his actual writing. His style is very simplistic, but at least I experience that same bluntness as an excellent way for him to communicate interesting characters. He has his stereotypes, absolutely, but they are communicated extremely well.

>>5235637
hack: a writer who is paid to write low-quality, quickly put-together articles or books

Sounds like King to me.

>>5235640
That last paragraph on style that >>5235637 wrote fits you perfectly, too.

>The famous man looked at the red cup.

He's a liberal

a) Annoyance that he is both popular and wealthy.

b) A feeling that he holds an understanding of all the techniques backed with plenty of experience, so that he could write a work of high literature, something truly great, and shows no interest in doing so.

He has value in being picked apart, and studied. This may be the greatest annoyance of all, that he does not huddle defensively behind his art glaring back at you - but is cheering you on to do so and apply yourself.

File: 1404614996354.gif (463KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

463KB, 200x200px

>Grill asks me to recommend her books to read
>Well you're since you're a girl I'd say anything by Stephen King
>I don't know who that is :)

Despite insisting humility and acceptance of his role as a pop author, he's awfully pompous in interviews and passively aggressive towards anyone or anything that even remotely suggests that there's a distinction to be made between literature and popular fiction. I'm sure it's probably quelled with age, but it's definitely present in his earlier books and interviews.

He's certainly been published long enough to appreciate the compromise between art and success. Maybe he's bitter about it? I don't know. I wouldn't be if I was sitting on as much money as him.

>>5228279
why are writers all so fucking hideous, even those who write pulp

>>5237101
>Stephen King
>not Dickens
It's like you've never met a girl.

>>5237171

Not understanding le new meme

>>5230053
But Wallace isn't intelligent...

>>5235655
>comparing a novelist to a poster on a Chinese cartoon board

Really?

>>5235678
>He's a liberal
Oh, fuck! Here comes the Stein Gang!
http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/gertrude-stein-and-vichy-the-overlooked-history

>>5237155
>he's awfully pompous in interviews and passively aggressive towards anyone or anything that even remotely suggests that there's a distinction to be made between literature and popular fiction
Now I like him even more! :3

>>5237549
Neither was King. King was certainly the less intelligent of the two.

>>5228310
That was -literally- the worst ending to a book I've every read, and I've read a lot of Stephen King books.
>he's been walking for days, is delirious and close to death, and was seconds away from giving up and getting a ticket, but OH SHIT HE MANAGES TO SPRINT AWAY FROM EVERYONE AND HE RUNS MIRACULOUSLY INTO THE SUNSET

>>5237765
>OH SHIT HE MANAGES TO SPRINT AWAY FROM EVERYONE AND HE RUNS MIRACULOUSLY INTO THE SUNSET
Nigger, he literally went insane.
His mind cracked.

>>5237765
King can't end a book for shit.

The Stand ends in a literal Deus Ex Machina.

File: graficscat.jpg (127KB, 808x728px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 808x728px

What are your favorite King books /lit/?

Mine would be

>It
(For some reason the themes of childhood trauma and revisitation really made me enjoy the story. I loved all of the characters, and the amount of time he spent explaining their upbringing and histories was excellent)
>Misery
(Even though I already knew the ending, it felt so tense as I was reading it. Annie made my skin crawl with some of the stuff she said; she was written perfectly as the classic psychotic fan)
>Dreamcatcher
(I know that his newer stuff gets a lot of shit, usually for good reason, but I felt like this book in particular was on par with his classics. The story was original, and the portrayal of Mr. Gray was great as well)

>>5237771
But he was the only one who DIDN'T go insane. Even Stebbins cracked by the end of it, yet Garraty or whatever his name was showed no signs of losing it, other than the constant off-topic ramblings that all of King's characters do.
Even if he had gone insane, there could have at least been some sort of leadup to it. King described him in the same ways throughout the book, and Garraty didn't do or say anything especially bizarre like basically every other character did at some point.

I still liked the book, think it's one of his best early works, but the ending is like something out of a cartoon.

>>5232122
I wouldn't say he'll be "studied" (outside of niche specialty areas) but he will definitely be read 50, 100, 200 years from now. Stephen King is this generation's Arthur Conan Doyle.

>>5237773
It felt really rushed too. Like the book was so long and it was building the entire time but then it just ends in holy fire.

>>5235673
That's not Stephen King's style, that's Dan Brown's style. Learn your hacks.

/lit/ can't stand the idea that someone could write a book for any other reason than feeding the reader's sense of superiority and making them feel Really Smart.

Daily reminder that Mr King is one of the top five short story writers of the past several decades. That is truly where the guy excels.

>>5237883
Was just about to post something similar. His short stories tend to stay out of the weeds so much and avoid the infamous deus ex machina in so many of his novels.

>>5228279
because he's for girls

File: 1355209087177.jpg (188KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 640x360px

>>5237883
ladyfingers they taste like ladyfingers

I enjoyed Joyland quite a bit

>>5228285
>Because he sucks

Really? Why do you think he sucks?

>>5237923

Because his books are bad.

>>5228279

Hey guys, I don't want to open a new thread but I'm relatively new to reading (started ~3 years ago at 23) and I really like Stephen King.

Granted English is not my mother tongue and probably one of the reasons is his very simple prose.

What other authors are similar to him in terms of style and narrative?


I tried reading Catch-22 but just couldn't get into it. I didn't like Fahrenheit 451 either, but I enjoyed Wool (the series).

>>5237938

PS: I have only been constantly reading for about a year.

I found that reading has helped me a lot with learning in general, I can study for longer periods of time and my attention span is longer than what it used to be (short).

>>5237941
Depends on what you like about him but probably dead koontz, or if you wanna step it up a notch go for classic hardboiled crime like jim thompson or raymond chandler.

>>5228381
Shawshank redemption is the most overrated narrative in history.

Because the plebs love him and those who have never even read any King think hes the greatest writer out there.

I've got no problem with King. He makes for comfy popcorn reading

>>5237947
This.

>goes to jail for nothing
>escapes
hurr du durr

>>5228316
The Mist is just a short story and really stupid. Remember that climactic ending in the movie? Prepare to finish with blue balls.

Same with Shawshank. I was very disappointed that this was a rare occasion where his books were actually worse than the movies.

I remember enjoying Misery, though.

>>5228324
Can somebody name his shortcomings?

>>5237971

You can dismissively summarize any novel like this.

Lolita
>guy wants to fuck a little girl
>he kidnaps her but then she runs away
hurr du durr

Moby-Dick
>crazy guy wants to kill a whale
>the whale kills him
hurr du durr

Les Misérables
>goes to jail for nothing
>escapes
hurr du durr

>>5237962

>popcorn reading

have you ever actually eaten popcorn while reading a book

>>5238065

fuck now i want some popcorn :(

My favorite is "It" but there are some questionable scenes.

>The 11 year old gangbang which magically helps them escape the tunnels somehow
>"Come back here kid, I'll blow you for free"
>The boys giving each other handjobs in the junkyard

Not to mention that with every sex scene he goes into 50 Shades of grey mode and uses 5 pages to describe it all in the most clichéd ways possible.

>>5237938
Read Slaughterhouse-Five.

>>5238065
have you ever actually heard of an analogy before

>>5238074
>11 year old gangbang
That was one of the only times that I legitimately asked myself, what the fuck am I reading right now

What's even better is how it has absolutely no significance to the plot and was used to "create unity" or some bullshit explanation like that.

>>5238084
I dunno man, it sounds pretty hot. Maybe King isn't so bad after all.

>>5238090
I don't know man. I laugh at pedi jokes as much as the next guy but they was she kept saying "I love you guys so much" and stuff like that while they were taking turns fucking her in a sewer, then all went on with their business, weirded me out a little.

>>5238095
>they was she kept saying "I love you guys so much" and stuff like that while they were taking turns fucking her in a sewer

you're doing a very poor job if you're trying to convince me this scene isn't hot as fuck

>>5228279
Why does he wear such ridiculous glasses?

>>5237804
It, wasn't that bad. He did a good job showing the way a child's mind works. The ending sucked.

>>5228279
Because his eyes are too close and no one else but me sees it! >:(((

>>5238137

He is uncanny.

>>5238137
The man is practically a cyclops.

File: YIKR6Pi.gif (3MB, 294x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 294x240px

>>5237910
Same here, I really enjoyed that book and it was the first and only book I've read from him. Now I'm half way through reading N0s4a2 by his son Joe Hill and its pretty good.

>>5238157

This is from a porno, right?

>>5237901

Survivor Type is the only thing he wrote that really scared me. Fuck, my skin is crawling just thinking back to that fucking story.

>>5228279
because the goat and everyone hates the goat

>>5238166
Kiera Winters is her name.

>>5238139
>>5238149
I know right? It's not just me! I told my mom and dad about how Stephen is the sign of the devil and of the time to come but they told me to go back to that minecraft website chan and play with my ponies. I sulked for a few days and slammed the door shut whenever I was sure no one could hear me as a sign of defiant rebellion.

But then I had the brilliant idea of buying a replica gun and spray-painting the guns clitoris black. Then I went to the mall and shouted "Allah akbar stephen king hackbar" but the mall ninja tackled me. :( Long story short I have to take these pills now.

>stephen king
>not even once

>>5237896
I've read two of his short stories and I thought they were pretty good. Entertaining, concise, and with minimal bullshit.

I haven't read any of his novels (I suspect half the people in this thread haven't either) but I respect him as a writer. His output is astounding, the man is prolific. Roughly 60 novels in 30 years, discounting plays/comics/etc and that car accident.

>http://www.authormagazine.org/articles/thayer_james_2009_04_09.htm

According to this he used to write at least 2,000 words a day.

He may not be my cup of tea, but he's dedicated to his craft.

>>5238256

Ugh, where did this culture of respecting "dedication" and "effort" over quality come from?

I would take one author who writes one great novel and croaks before the age of 40 over a hundred Stephen Kings.

This world has more than enough books. Anything less than greatness is a waste of my time.

>>5238381

Quality takes dedication and effort.

>>5238388

And if effort and dedication are directed for decades without producing quality, you don't need to respect it.

>>5238059

Fucking spoilers on Moby Dick, man!

>>5228279
He dreams up good plots, it just feels like he's shit at putting them down on paper.
Which is probably why his short stories work better.

>>5238059
dude you just spoiled Moby Dick for me...

what the fuck?

i'm so fucking angry right now i just bought the book 3 days ago

I've never read anything anything by King, but what I get from this thread is that he's basically to literature what Tarantino is to Cinema. Have I understood this properly?

>>5238448

There is a subtle but fundamental difference : Tarantino seriously thinks he's hot shit, while King is perfectly aware of what he is and is fine with it.

>>5237171
>not being on /lit/ 24/7 thus not getting maymes
disgusting

>>5238381
His books aren't low-quality though. He may not appeal to you, but to the audience he writes for he's very good at what he does. It's impossible to put in that amount of time into a skill and not become good at it. Find me a writer who has anywhere near the same output as King but hasn't improved at all.

Where did this culture of entitlement and thinking a writer is good because he got lucky come from? Is Harper Lee a good writer? No.

>>5238448

When you put it that way, you are exactly right. Can be enjoyable, but not as deep as it pretends/attempts to be.

>>5229873
>genre
Made-up concept.

File: 7oxr0XM.jpg (11KB, 277x329px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 277x329px

>>5238074
>tfw you never had a gb at 11 y/o and never will

>>5238074
>BOBBY BLOWS YOU FOR A DIME
>BOBBY BLOWS YOU ANYTIME
>FIFTEEN CENTS FOR OVERTIME

>>5238436
I was meaning to read Moby Dick, is it good so far?
I've heard that it's so stretched out it loses it's appeal fast.

>>5239301
>I've heard that it's so stretched out it loses it's appeal fast.

whoever told you that hasn't read moby dick.

>>5235551

>Complains about King using deus ex machina
>Calls The Stand his best work
The literal Hand of God appears at the end of that book, you dunce

>>5237934

His early short stories are immaculate, though. The Jaunt, Survivor Type, The End of the Whole Mess, The Raft, Dolan's Cadillac, Cain Rose Up...

The guy can write a hell of a short story. I miss his Nightmares and Dreamscapes era when he was freely incorporating surrealism and Jungian archetypes into his work. Like that story about the kid who gets mauled by a tiger in an elementary school bathroom.

Even his more recent short stories are still okay. Everything's Eventual had a few standouts.

>>5238408
>>5238436

>Complaining about spoilers

The book's 163 years old, man. It's become pervasive in American literary culture. There is no way you didn't know how that book ended. And even if you honestly didn't, there's a statute of limitations on spoilers, and 163 years is way fucking beyond that statute.

>>5238448

Only in that they both peaked decades ago and basically continue their craft just to stay occupied. The biggest difference between them, though, was already stated in this thread. Tarantino honestly thinks he's God's gift to American cinema, while King knows he's a genre writer and has no real aspirations to literary immortality.

>>5238046
can't end his books
can't write about emotional relationships btwn man and woman
conversational style is pleasant at first then progressively lazy
can't do imagery
books can usually be summed up in their premise
struggles w/ big themes (death! good v. evil! lmao)
the shit to alright ratio is not looking very good
he's enjoyed by plebs

his short stories are alright sometimes

File: stephen-king.jpg (19KB, 550x600px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 550x600px

the only thing that thrills or creeps me out w/r/t king is his face. jesus fuck. like a downie fleshmask ... stretched and wrinkled in all the wrong places

>>5239536
>w/r/t
You don't have to do this

>>5239543
my english sucks and "about king" wouldn't have sounded too much like i'm talking about the person rather than the person + what he does. apologies tho

>>5239301
Ishmael is the only survivor of Moby Dick's assault on the pequod. He survives by floating on a water-sealed coffin made for his friend, who only gets to use it in life and not in death.

There I saved you the trouble of reading it. The ending is probably all you care about anyway.

>>5239412
>trying to justify being a cunt

i hope mods will ban you

>>5238743

To Kill a Mockingbird is 20 times better than the best novel King ever put out.

>>5240011
This. I don't get this hate for Lee. If you're that butthurt about having to read a book in high school, then you shouldn't be here.

>>5228279

i fucking hate his face

>>5239390
I know, but that's one cast where it doesn't lessen my enjoyment of the book. While I think King relies too much on that stuff, I still loved the book.