Mary Dogood is the ironic name of title character of this novel, and from the very first page when she tells you how she attempted to kill her abusiveMary Dogood is the ironic name of title character of this novel, and from the very first page when she tells you how she attempted to kill her abusive father, you know she is capable of some seriously bad stuff. Some of the deaths in this book are pretty gory, so it's not for readers of a weak stomach, but what keeps the pages turning is her strategic and creative planning. Also, evil as she is, the people she takes on are worse, so you find yourself cheering her on. I've never been a particular fan of anti-hero stories, but this one had me riveted. I read it in a single day. My one criticism is that it has a few typographical errors. Perhaps it was self-published or something. But if you look past that, you're in for a harrowingly good story....more
Attentive readers of my reviews know that I’ve been doing a d-i-y Stephen King creative writing course lately, and his non-fiction book on the craft oAttentive readers of my reviews know that I’ve been doing a d-i-y Stephen King creative writing course lately, and his non-fiction book on the craft of horror writing was next on my list, but after checking out the reviews on it, I discovered that he devotes twenty pages to this classic, so I knew I had to read it beforehand for proper background. Shirley Jackson has long been on my to-read list anyway. Her psychological thriller The Bird's Nest blew me away when I read it ten years ago. I don’t know what’s taken me so long to try more of her work.
This book differs from The Bird's Nest in that it has supernatural elements, but the protagonists of both books are similar: upper class women who are timid to the point of pathological repression. I actually found Eleanor, the protagonist of this book, more relatable than Elizabeth. Her insecurities were very familiar. But while this book is in the horror genre and ostensibly scarier, it was not as much of a page-turner, at least not until the ending. Perhaps all the waiting around the characters do before the haunting really takes off is meant to convey their bored mood, but I didn’t enjoy it. I’m curious what Stephen King will say since there’s never a dull moment with him.
The most compelling character, other than Eleanor herself, was Mrs. Montague. She’s a clueless know-it-all, always a fun sort to have in a plot. If she had shown up earlier, perhaps I would have been more interested in the overall story. But the ending – wow! There’s a reason Shirley Jackson is known as such a master. I look forward to exploring more of her oeuvre. ...more
Decades before Stephen King wrote On Writing, his famous book on craft, he wrote this book, which is specifically about the craft of horror writing, tDecades before Stephen King wrote On Writing, his famous book on craft, he wrote this book, which is specifically about the craft of horror writing, though it can also be read as a history of the genre. He doesn’t just limit his retrospective to books either; movies, TV classics like “The Twilight Zone,” and even radio plays are all in here. I loved every insight he gave on the writing process and the breakdown of the emotion of fear. Terror, horror, and gross-outs are three separate things, explains the master of scariness. Terror is all psychological, horror is about crossing boundaries, and we all know what a gross-out is. Terror is the ideal, but King says he’s not above the gross-out where necessary.
The book did have two flaws. First, whenever he went on about some movie I’d never heard of, I grew bored. Since he’s such a master storyteller, I stuck with those parts because I knew a good personal story would eventually follow, but if you’re not a big horror fan, some parts of this book will probably bore you, too. Second, the book is dated. It was written in the 1980’s. But datedness has its own charm, so I’ll focus on that for the rest of this review.
The fun thing about datedness is that you get to see the author’s old perspective in light of what you know now. For example, King discusses 1970’s science fiction movies about environmental apocalypse. They still make movies on that theme today, but now that we’re nearer the crisis, the tone is even more dire, and the subject is more likely to be taken up by journalists than fiction writers. The same goes for Arab terrorism. The Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran was the big threat when this book was written, but even the dark imagination of Stephen King didn’t foresee 9/11.
The differences in his personal life were even more interesting. He refers to his seven-year-old son Joe a few times in the book, and it made me chuckle. But the best part was in his attitude toward the film adaptations of his books. At that point, only three had been made: Carrie, 'Salem's Lot, and The Shining. It’s now known that King detested the film version of The Shining, and I completely agree with him. The movie didn’t capture any of the depth of the psychic child at the heart of the story. But his criticism was mild in this book. He said the directors treated his work “fairly,” and he felt “relieved.” But director Rob Reiner tells the story that when he screened “Stand By Me,” for King, at first he was quiet, and then he said he needed to take a walk. When he returned, he said, “That was the first time a movie really captured what I meant in the book.” But that hadn’t happened yet, and he didn’t know how good an adaptation could be. Since he cites Kubrick’s previous movies with admiration, you can understand why he consented to letting the famous director work with his material. He had hopes, and he was disappointed, but he couldn’t express them as fully then. But now that some directors have done his work justice, he can feel the contrast all the more strongly.
If you’re looking for the scary entertainment that Stephen King delivers so masterfully, you won’t find it here. But if you like analysis of craft, whether as a writer or as a horror fan, there’s plenty to gain by reading this book. ...more
Although I saw the movie adaptation of this book years ago, I was curious about reading it because Stephen King wrote in On Writing that the captivityAlthough I saw the movie adaptation of this book years ago, I was curious about reading it because Stephen King wrote in On Writing that the captivity of the author is a metaphor for his struggles with alcoholism. Additionally, another Goodreads reviewer called the book “a love letter to the writing process.” Since author Paul Sheldon struggles with blockages, it’s more of an honest relationship story more than an all-sunny love story, but in any case, that’s what attracted me. I’ve been experimenting with fiction writing myself of late, so I was hoping I could learn something from the masterful storyteller, Stephen King. I was not disappointed.
The book is structured as a story within a story. There’s Paul’s struggle to free himself from Annie Wilkes, and there’s also the novel he’s writing for Annie Wilkes. That’s where the insights into the writing process come in. Paul doesn’t know what his characters are going to do next, but he pushes forward with the writing and rejoices when the solutions occur to him. He also uses his external circumstances to inform his plot. The mood of his novel darkens as his situation darkens. And though Stephen King himself leads a much more ordinary life, if you listen to his interviews, he’ll explain that he works in precisely this way. (Cujo, for example, was inspired by his encounter with a stranger’s enormous St. Bernard.) It’s encouraging for aspiring writers to read this if only to know that blockages are normal, even for the most prolific of professionals.
There’s actually another book within the book, and that’s Annie’s Memory album. Paul discovers it at the halfway point in the novel, which is where authors are supposed to place their biggest plot twists. In the movie, that halfway point is the Most Famous Gruesome Scene, which works better for a movie. Film is a visual media, whereas print allows for a much slower and psychological reveal, which is what Annie's backstory is for Paul. Having said that, what Annie does to Paul in the book is even more gruesome.
If you’re not a big horror fan, but you are obsessed with craft, this book will both educate and entertain you. With only two characters, it’s easy to track, and yet you see how King brought new voices into the scenes with such a limited cast (such as the sports announcer playing in Paul's head to narrate the action). It helps to read On Writing first because you’ll understand both the author and his alter ego better. And if you’re reading for a craft lesson, go ahead and watch the movie first, too. That way, you’ll know more or less what’s coming and you won’t be swept away by the plot. It really is a good one. I can see why he considers Annie Wilkes his best villain ever....more
Henry James greatly admired and was influenced by Jane Austen, but this Gothic ghost story is much more reminiscent of Charlotte Brontë. Bronte's ghosHenry James greatly admired and was influenced by Jane Austen, but this Gothic ghost story is much more reminiscent of Charlotte Brontë. Bronte's ghosts are never actually supernatural like the ones in this story, but the protagonist, a seemingly demure governess with a hidden will of iron, might as well have been Jane Eyre herself, though responding to a very different set of challenges. Watching the character rise to those challenges is a beautiful portrayal of courage and the greatest pleasure of the book, but the mystery of the whole situation is what keeps the pages turning. It doesn't have quite the bang of a Stephen King story, but if you like psychological horror and/or literary fiction, this little novella is definitely worth a quite afternoon. ...more
Like most people, I read this in a high school class. I remember enjoying the discussions it generated, though it's too gruesome a story to tempt me eLike most people, I read this in a high school class. I remember enjoying the discussions it generated, though it's too gruesome a story to tempt me ever to read it again. ...more
I read this in one sitting shortly after graduating from college. Had I read it for a class, I probably would have spent more time thinking about whatI read this in one sitting shortly after graduating from college. Had I read it for a class, I probably would have spent more time thinking about what Kafka was actually saying about selfhood, but as it was, I came to no conclusion. Still, I remember the plot vividly after all these years, and I happened to have been reminded of it the other day because of this podcast, which is pretty darned funny if you've got the time....more
This is one of those books whose storyline had me riveted in spite of myself. Not only do I regret having read it, I regretted it while reading it. AnThis is one of those books whose storyline had me riveted in spite of myself. Not only do I regret having read it, I regretted it while reading it. And yet I stuck with it till the end. Perhaps for that reason, my rating of 2 is not really fair - an addictive story is a sign of good writing - but if you want to keep your mind and soul clean, this is not the book for you.
The book is a fantasy/horror love triangle between a naive 18-year-old boy, a practicing witch, and a third character whose identity would spoil the whole plot. It's also got some meta elements because the narrator is an 82-year-old writer (much like Richard Matheson himself) telling the story of what happened to him when he was 18. Because he is a writer, he frequently inserts critical comments on his word choices in telling the story. Some of these are funny, but sometimes, it just comes across as gimmicky. The best part by far was the very beginning - realistic descriptions of war; the protagonist fought in World War I.
But seriously, this is one I should have avoided. The word "erotic" in the flap copy was a sure warning sign, but I ignored it because it was Richard Matheson, author of Somewhere in Time. I'm sorry to say, I probably would have had a more kosher Pesach without it....more
My teenage son called this book “awesome,” and when he says that about something that isn’t a computer game, I’m instantly intrigued. Now that I’ve reMy teenage son called this book “awesome,” and when he says that about something that isn’t a computer game, I’m instantly intrigued. Now that I’ve read the book, I completely agree with his assessment. It’s a time travel book that’s also a mystery since the story isn’t given to you contiguously. You get a letter dated 1952, a narrative beginning in the 1990’s, and a journal of sorts from World War II. From there you have to piece the whole thing together. Of course, you don’t quite get the whole picture until the very end, and then, just like with the Harry Potter series, when you look back at those earlier scenes, you can’t help but be awed at the author’s brilliance. The hints were there all along and the pieces fit together perfectly!
One warning: this book is dark - much darker than Harry Potter, which at least has a strong redemptive message. At all times, the protagonist inhabits a violent world. But he himself is a likable character and his story is riveting. I agree with my son completely. It may not be the stuff of classical literature, but this book is awesome....more
Like most Americans born in the 20th century, I've seen enough B horror flicks and spoofs featuring Count Dracula to know something of the story withoLike most Americans born in the 20th century, I've seen enough B horror flicks and spoofs featuring Count Dracula to know something of the story without having read the novel, so much of the mystery was spoiled. A young man shows up at Count Dracula's castle for a job interview and is kept waiting all day. He wonders why. Well, we already know why. But it was well-written, so I read through Book I and then started Book II, which looked even more promising because it was from the point of view of his fiance, who warmed this journal-keeper's heart by saying something along the lines of "If you write everything down about your life, you remember an incredible amount of detail." But it was Shabbos afternoon and time for my shiur (religious lecture), so I put down the book and went. When I returned, I had no desire to continue the book. It may be a well-written classic, but why should I immerse myself in all that darkness? ...more
There's nothing like a comic fantasy, especially when you've recently read a realistic tragedy. The protag of this book is Nessy, a kobold, which is aThere's nothing like a comic fantasy, especially when you've recently read a realistic tragedy. The protag of this book is Nessy, a kobold, which is a creature with human intelligence and a dog's body. She works as a housekeeper in the castle of an evil wizard, and she is by no means alone. The castle is full of cursed souls who got on the wrong side of the wizard and who want nothing more than to see him dead so they can go back to their old forms. The most prominent of these is Sir Thaddeus, who used to be a knight, but is now a bat who talks with a Scottish brogue. There's also Echo, a former poet turned into a disembodied voice, which is an aptly funny curse for a poet. There are many other such creatures, but I won't tell you about them because it'll spoil all the jokes.
Unfortunately, when the evil wizard dies, the curses don't break. As a matter of fact, once he's gone, the dark creatures of the castle - and there are many of them - really start to go haywire. So it's an all-out battle of good vs. evil with complex twists and turns of magic and plenty of laughs in between. Harry Potter fans will definitely enjoy it; it's similar without being a copycat. Have fun!...more
Call me a snob, but I never read Stephen King until I heard an English teacher on a radio interview say, "Good readers don't always have to read good Call me a snob, but I never read Stephen King until I heard an English teacher on a radio interview say, "Good readers don't always have to read good books. Sometimes, they're in the mood for Stephen King." So I read The Shining, and I think the teacher was unfair to him. The portrayal of the kid seeing into his parents' minds was excellent characterization. Later, one paragraph describes the boy's power and its effect on the house as a key turning a music box. I'm not really doing the metaphor justice, but I'd go so far as to call it literary.
Okay, the book's not literary overall. The symbol of the wasps' nest was overdone, and I didn't like that all the ghosts in the hotel were the results of Mafia murders. I prefer a little more intrigue in a ghost story, more psychology, as in the portrayal of the kid and his parents. But as horror, it worked. I was sitting in my house reading when I suddenly heard a man's voice seemingly out of nowhere. I jumped like it was a ghost, but of course, it was just a man passing by outside. So I concluded that horror's not my genre. But the book sure did beat the movie. ...more
Loading...
