>"I beat you because I wanted to FUCK you, Bevvie, that's

>>9317080
I remember this being pretty disturbing when I read it as a kid and didn't even know what a CLIT was

>Why do people take this hack seriously?
they don't

>>9317112
I hear normies cite him as "the best horror writer ever" frequently

>>9317123
>normies
there's your problem

>>9317080
When you read it in third grade it is pretty fucking intense, and the (old) movie is good.

Beep beep richie

>>9317109
>>9317229
I thought it was banned in all schools?

I HATE when authors CAPITALIZE words for EFFECT. It's like when comic BOOKS italicize every OTHER word.

I was wondering if I should give this a shot since I had seen that kinda shitty trailer recently.

>>9317080
I don't even know what this is. What is it?

>>9317520

I'm not going to now because I remember that this motherfucker bloats everything.

>my dear fuckbird and so and so forth

What I found effective about this section was that it made manifest the small suggestion of sexual abuse that Beverly's mother had put into her head with that question, 'Does he ever touch you?' He never did, but you can see her how that doubt about her father plagued at her, made itself this sharp menace that nevertheless couldn't become fully conscious, like the outline of an unfamiliar body you find in your bed, at night, in the half light.

I'm not articulating myself well, but I King's sense of childhood consciousness, its darker half, was very acute, and he expressed it honestly so masterfully, even given the faults of the book as a whole and in some of its details