I recently spent 22-and-a-half hours in a rental car on a work trip to St. Louis and surrounding counties - just about the same amount of time as The Outsider audiobook, read by Will Patton, which was my companion for all this time in the car. I hit play just as I was pulling from the curb at 5 am Tuesday morning, and the end credits were rolling just as I got back to Chicago, 2 pm Thursday afternoon. That worked out pretty well.
I wasn't expecting much going into this. I'd heard mixed reviews, and I knew Holly Gibney - one of my least favorite characters from two of my least favorite King books - was a prominent character. I'd heard it was "political," as well, and King's politics these days annoy me muchly.
And yet, I quite enjoyed it.
I figured I'd like the first half, where the murder dilemma is established: unshakable forensic evidence ties Terry Maitland, upstanding citizen of Flint City, Oklahoma, to the grisly rape and mutilation of a child; equally unshakable evidence has him at Capital City, many miles away, at the time of the murder. Before the arraignment, Maitland is killed. Detective Ralph Anderson (no relation to Mike Anderson's son from Storm of the Century) and Howie Gold (Maitland's attorney) form a tenuous alliance to work out the discrepancies of the case.
From there the book takes a determined turn into the supernatural and where Holly Gibney is brought in. That's where I expected it to lose me. And it almost did. For the most part, Will Patton's narration is excellent. He brings the characters to life and keeps the momentum flowing about as well as any audiobook reader ever could. Then he. Adopts this. Halting. Rising and Falling Like. Garrison Keillor mixed. With the Thermians from. Galaxy Quest. And not just. For Her Dialogue. But all her POV too.
It's such an amazingly ill-considered approach that I yelled at the car speakers half a dozen times. Then I shrugged it off. And now that it's all done, maybe I was wrong. Irritating as I found it, didn't I end up liking Holly a lot more here than anywhere in the Hodges trilogy? And I did end up liking her, something I thought impossible. Her "poopy and IMDB schtick" as I've seen it described is indeed played out and never was that interesting to begin with.
All of which is to say: listening to a book and reading it are quite different experiences and rely on factors other than the voice of the author. The best complement one another; perhaps this is one of them. I wonder how I'd find the Hodges trilogy, also read by Will Patton? Could I overcome the considerable problems I had with it? Given world enough and time, I'd love to find out.
It involves a little second-guessing/ speculating on the author, which is always slippery ground, but hear me out. King's always likened his storytelling to excavating rather than plotting; he digs the story out of the earth and its final shape is as much a surprise to him as it is to anyone else. Sometimes this bugs me, but what can I do about it? That's what the man's telling us, so I take him at his word. Obviously he's struck on a method/ metaphor that works for; look at his body of work by Gan.
So, I picture him writing the first part of the book - the Colorado Kid / unsolvable crime kind of set-up - like the first part of a dig. Like Bobbie Anderson, he's roped off his area and made his incursions and now he's really into it. Suddenly, he finds Holly Gibney. I imagine a hit to his confidence here, as if he thought he was digging out a new tomb but had inadvertently dug into another one he already excavated. But no, he checks his dig again and sees this is new, and there's Holly. So he digs a little further and a new shape starts to emerge. Suddenly the story needs a bridge to the supernatural; his characters from the first part have to get to the end that's suddenly coming into view. King might've thought, okay, do I invent a ghostbuster of some kind, some paranormal investigator that joins the other characters? Or do I have my characters make that leap all on their own?
From this angle - and I sincerely hope you don't mind my indulging it - Holly Gibney is an economical choice. A logical enough bridge existed (Howie's investigator Alec worked with Hodges on that one stolen plane case), why not use her? I agree with this take:
* Is this a real movie? Or some analog of The Wrestling Women vs. the Aztec Mummy with Lorena Velazquez?
It's possible King hadn't intended the story to become supernatural at all. If so, then maybe the above represents the point where he just gives up on the dig and goes on autopilot. If this is the case, then (a) I very much appreciated the lack of sudden onset of telepathy, and (b) it's an autopilot that didn't alienate me.
She'll be played by Cynthia Erivo in the adaptation.
(1) The Outsider. Both the physical hunger and supernatural abilities are basically Pennywise's. Once the supernatural becomes a reality in the story, it's the same supernatural we've seen in It and Salem's Lot and other places, too. (2) The litanies of Hoskins's deterioration ("The Outsider has a Renfield!" says Holly.) are all very familiar. I mentioned Pennywise; here is Henry Bowers and so many other King antagonists, developing a mantra projection on the protagonist's perceived usurping of the life he was supposed to have, etc. And (3) General story beats: the heroes walking into a trap, goading the killer into making a premature move, the worms from Slither, and then the barbecue at the end where loose ends are tied up.
But is this really so bad? What can I say - this is autopilot King does enjoyably. King will forever be linked with AC/DC in my head, so I liken it to AC/DC putting out another version of "Heatseeker" or something. You've heard it before, but who cares? In fact, I wish AC/DC did more of that instead of so much of the other crap they've put out. And you can't really say that for King; his "other crap" in this scenario is quite varied.
Sooo. If the supernatural turn doesn't work for other Constant Readers, that's cool, I can totally understand why. The set-up is airtight, and then something we've seen before slowly takes the novel over. But we've seen the airtight set-up before, too (The Dark Half, The Colorado Kid) and the end of this one is way more satisfying than one of those, mainly because it has one.
(I mean, "this book actually has an ending!" isn't really a selling point. But sheesh, Colorado Kid. Any chance I get.)
- I was curious what the French edition would be called, since L'etranger is pretty well taken. I guess they just call it The Outsider.
- Along the lines of resemblance to It and Salem's Lot, etc., good thing no one in this book ever read any of those or saw the movies. There might have been more immediate go-tos than Mexican Wrestling Women Meet the Monster. FWIW I'm glad they didn't appear, though. I don't need every damn King book to reference another, even if sometimes, versimilitude-wise, the characters in-book sure as hell would.
- Are Harlan Coben and Stephen King friends? I'm always curious about that kind of thing when real-world writers show up in other writers works.
- Detective Sablo gets the weird "Eees no problem, hombre" dialogue King can't seem to stop himself from. It's so bizarre. But: I liked the character. So what do I know?
_ Similarly, I liked Claude Bolton and his Mom.
I wasn't expecting much going into this. I'd heard mixed reviews, and I knew Holly Gibney - one of my least favorite characters from two of my least favorite King books - was a prominent character. I'd heard it was "political," as well, and King's politics these days annoy me muchly.
And yet, I quite enjoyed it.
THE EFFECT OF AUDIOBOOKS
ON THE READING EXPERIENCE
I figured I'd like the first half, where the murder dilemma is established: unshakable forensic evidence ties Terry Maitland, upstanding citizen of Flint City, Oklahoma, to the grisly rape and mutilation of a child; equally unshakable evidence has him at Capital City, many miles away, at the time of the murder. Before the arraignment, Maitland is killed. Detective Ralph Anderson (no relation to Mike Anderson's son from Storm of the Century) and Howie Gold (Maitland's attorney) form a tenuous alliance to work out the discrepancies of the case.
From there the book takes a determined turn into the supernatural and where Holly Gibney is brought in. That's where I expected it to lose me. And it almost did. For the most part, Will Patton's narration is excellent. He brings the characters to life and keeps the momentum flowing about as well as any audiobook reader ever could. Then he. Adopts this. Halting. Rising and Falling Like. Garrison Keillor mixed. With the Thermians from. Galaxy Quest. And not just. For Her Dialogue. But all her POV too.
It's such an amazingly ill-considered approach that I yelled at the car speakers half a dozen times. Then I shrugged it off. And now that it's all done, maybe I was wrong. Irritating as I found it, didn't I end up liking Holly a lot more here than anywhere in the Hodges trilogy? And I did end up liking her, something I thought impossible. Her "poopy and IMDB schtick" as I've seen it described is indeed played out and never was that interesting to begin with.
All of which is to say: listening to a book and reading it are quite different experiences and rely on factors other than the voice of the author. The best complement one another; perhaps this is one of them. I wonder how I'd find the Hodges trilogy, also read by Will Patton? Could I overcome the considerable problems I had with it? Given world enough and time, I'd love to find out.
HERE'S MY TAKE ON HOLLY
SHOWING UP IN THE OUTSIDER
It involves a little second-guessing/ speculating on the author, which is always slippery ground, but hear me out. King's always likened his storytelling to excavating rather than plotting; he digs the story out of the earth and its final shape is as much a surprise to him as it is to anyone else. Sometimes this bugs me, but what can I do about it? That's what the man's telling us, so I take him at his word. Obviously he's struck on a method/ metaphor that works for; look at his body of work by Gan.
So, I picture him writing the first part of the book - the Colorado Kid / unsolvable crime kind of set-up - like the first part of a dig. Like Bobbie Anderson, he's roped off his area and made his incursions and now he's really into it. Suddenly, he finds Holly Gibney. I imagine a hit to his confidence here, as if he thought he was digging out a new tomb but had inadvertently dug into another one he already excavated. But no, he checks his dig again and sees this is new, and there's Holly. So he digs a little further and a new shape starts to emerge. Suddenly the story needs a bridge to the supernatural; his characters from the first part have to get to the end that's suddenly coming into view. King might've thought, okay, do I invent a ghostbuster of some kind, some paranormal investigator that joins the other characters? Or do I have my characters make that leap all on their own?
From this angle - and I sincerely hope you don't mind my indulging it - Holly Gibney is an economical choice. A logical enough bridge existed (Howie's investigator Alec worked with Hodges on that one stolen plane case), why not use her? I agree with this take:
"Given how the Bill Hodges trilogy took a turn for the paranormal in the concluding volume, it’s fitting that Holly is the person to turn this crime novel on its head. She does so in the most extraordinary fashion, describing El Cuco – the creature that murdered Frank – by referencing a Las Luchadoras film, Mexican Wrestling Women Meet the Monster. * The scene is pure cheese (King has always reveled in “low culture”) and a masterclass in storytelling and beat perfect plotting."
* Is this a real movie? Or some analog of The Wrestling Women vs. the Aztec Mummy with Lorena Velazquez?
It's possible King hadn't intended the story to become supernatural at all. If so, then maybe the above represents the point where he just gives up on the dig and goes on autopilot. If this is the case, then (a) I very much appreciated the lack of sudden onset of telepathy, and (b) it's an autopilot that didn't alienate me.
She'll be played by Cynthia Erivo in the adaptation.
WHAT I MEAN BY AUTOPILOT
But is this really so bad? What can I say - this is autopilot King does enjoyably. King will forever be linked with AC/DC in my head, so I liken it to AC/DC putting out another version of "Heatseeker" or something. You've heard it before, but who cares? In fact, I wish AC/DC did more of that instead of so much of the other crap they've put out. And you can't really say that for King; his "other crap" in this scenario is quite varied.
Sooo. If the supernatural turn doesn't work for other Constant Readers, that's cool, I can totally understand why. The set-up is airtight, and then something we've seen before slowly takes the novel over. But we've seen the airtight set-up before, too (The Dark Half, The Colorado Kid) and the end of this one is way more satisfying than one of those, mainly because it has one.
(I mean, "this book actually has an ending!" isn't really a selling point. But sheesh, Colorado Kid. Any chance I get.)
SOME LAST THOUGHTS
- I was curious what the French edition would be called, since L'etranger is pretty well taken. I guess they just call it The Outsider.
- Along the lines of resemblance to It and Salem's Lot, etc., good thing no one in this book ever read any of those or saw the movies. There might have been more immediate go-tos than Mexican Wrestling Women Meet the Monster. FWIW I'm glad they didn't appear, though. I don't need every damn King book to reference another, even if sometimes, versimilitude-wise, the characters in-book sure as hell would.
- Are Harlan Coben and Stephen King friends? I'm always curious about that kind of thing when real-world writers show up in other writers works.
- Detective Sablo gets the weird "Eees no problem, hombre" dialogue King can't seem to stop himself from. It's so bizarre. But: I liked the character. So what do I know?
_ Similarly, I liked Claude Bolton and his Mom.
~
(1) "I'd heard it was "political," as well, and King's politics these days annoy me muchly." -- There are things in the novel that could be read through a modern-day political lens, but otherwise I didn't think King veered very far down that path. How did you end up feeling regarding that aspect?
ReplyDelete(2) That description of Patton's voice for Holly is probably enough to keep me from ever listening to those audiobooks. Nothing in an audiobook will lose me faster than what I perceive to be a poor acting choice for a specific character. (I'm thinking of Willem Dafoe's "The Langoliers" right now and it makes me want to punch myself in the ears.) I know most people count audiobooks as reading these days, but this is one the reasons I will never, ever, ever be persuaded that there's no difference. There damn sure is!
(3) I'm glad you liked Holly in this book. I think I'd like her a lot more -- and I might even love her (though probably not as much as King seems to) -- if the aforementioned "poopy and IMDb" aspects were not present. Thing is, I'm sure they're realistic. Anyone with this sort of personality issue is bound to have habits like that that make no sense to those around them and which actually annoy people quite severely. So I don't know, man; there's probably something to be said for her. I'm just not the one to say it. That said, I kind of agree that she acquits herself admirably enough here.
(4) And yet, I kind of sighed in resigned acceptance upon learning that she's also going to feature in King's 2020 novel "If It Bleeds," which is purportedly about a journalist who kind of psychically feeds upon the people in some of the stories he pursues. How Holly fits in, I do not know; but while the idea of another book with her kind of aggravates me, I'm inclined to think that if what King is doing is building an arc for her across an entire series of books, then maybe if that process ends in a good place -- by no means a certainty, but a possibility for sure -- then it will retroactively help make the Hodges trilogy more interesting to me. Probably not, but you never know. By the way, if you conduct that experiment for yourself with Patton's audiobooks, let me know how it goes.
(5) "I imagine a hit to his confidence here, as if he thought he was digging out a new tomb but had inadvertently dug into another one he already excavated." -- I actually imagine it to be the opposite; I suspect that he was happy as a lark when Holly showed up. I could be wrong, but I think he's working out some weird wish-fulfillment stuff with her. Interestingly, there doesn't seem to be any creepy-old-man salaciousness at work (which itself would be understandable enough). So I'm guessing he's loving spending time in whatever mental area she activates for him.
That said, I can imagine it going the way you describe. I can imagine him fretting a bit over people responding with something less than enthusiasm to this novel turning out to be a sideways sequel to a trilogy of books that he has to know are not universally beloved among his fans.
(1) Can you give me an example? There were King's stupid ideas about Trump voters here and there out of one or two mouths, but only one or two. I thought it was worse/ more overt in END OF WATCH.
Delete(3) The poopy/ imdb thing is even weirder because it's so cliched by this point. For me, even if he consulted with a psychologist who said "someone with the conditions you describe would absolutely talk like this, and not to do so is wildly unrealistic," I'd have been like "yeah but this is a cliche by this point; who needs another character like this? Why would I inflict such banality on anyone?"
Buuuuuut. For the umpeenth time in my King-reading life, no one consulted me, verdammt. Ah well, I did like her here, which really surprised me. Too bad they felt the need to stunt-cast her for the adaptation. I'm sure King will tweet something appropriately moronic about it.
(4) I hadn't heard about that! Sounds kind of a cool idea for a book. And yeah if King's building an arc for her across multiple books, the aforementioned stuntcasting makes even less sense.
(5) You could be right. I picture him questioning what he's finding, but an equal part of me pictures him sneaking Holly into the dig in the middle of the night and then "discovering" her in the light of day. "Oh! Holly Gibney!" Somewhere at the excavation site, Tabby sighs and rolls her eyes...
(1) If King is, in fact, being political with this book, then it marks the first time he's managed to pull it off. If this is the case, the it seems to be an instance where the message and the narrative are able to meld and mesh into a seamless whole, rather the former dominating the latter (as in the case of "Sleeping Beauties") and thus creative a narrative dissonance that makes the finished product come out flat and somehow less than interesting.
Delete(3) My experience was the same. When Holly came on, I didn't know what to expect, and was surprised to find how much she didn't ruin the book, but that I found her to be an interesting and involving character for the first time.
(4)(5) With Holly and Hodges, I'm starting to wonder if there's a professional publishing business angle at work. What I mean is that I wonder if King is currently under some sort of contractual obligation to churn these out for some reason.
I don't know what King's deal is with his current publishers, however I do know that publishing in general is in kind of a slump. As much as I hate to say it, figures like King, Gaiman, and even Hill can be thought of as legacy writers. In other words, they are holdovers from an analog age. Still, they are cash-cows, so, keep them around, but since the market has changed, now the publishers dictate to them on occasion.
Just on idea. I've also heard that the protagonist of ""Gwendy's Button Box" will be appearing in another novel by Richard Chizmar.
http://richardchizmar.com/?rc=1
So maybe there's one potential piece of the puzzle, if if it's even worth looking at it that way.
ChrisC
(1) Maybe I really missed something. Did you find it political as well?
Delete(4) You could be right there, Chris. That would make sense if his publisher/ other aspects figure into these things.
I still have to read GWENDY'S. And SLEEPING BEAUTIES, too.
The hypothetical quid pro quo of this idea would probably go something like: "If you want to continue to write the books you desire, and have them published by our company, then you must provide us with X amount of characters or plots that we can market for our own purposes.
DeleteOtherwise, no deal. No deal, no published books. No books published means you're right back where you started after a lifetime of fame.
Gosh, that would be an irony. Then again, perhaps ales dire version the above scenario could offer an alternate account for the one clear sense of auto-pilot for Doctor Sleep.
Just an alternate idea, is all.
ChrisC.
Replying to McMolo here:
Delete(1) I didn't find it to be overtly political at all, personally. There are things that could be viewed that way: it's a Mexican monster (an immigrant!), and the unknowability of the truth (fake news!), etc. If one were really desperate for it to be there, it'd be there. Beyond that, I didn't think that aspect of the book really existed. And I guess I was glad for that (although I do sometimes like King in that mode, such as "Under the Dome").
(5) I think you may have hit upon the actual explanation there! "Oh, uh, haha, hi Holly, how'd YOU get there, I mean, if Holly is actually your name, I can't even really really, uh, remember, haha!" More vicious eye-rolling from Tabby ensues.
I kind of hope that's it, to be honest.
Replying to Chris:
Delete(4) No chance, in my opinion. King is too headstrong; he wouldn't let a publisher dictate to him, nor would he ever be in a position where he had to. I'm sure he's on a book-by-book basis, and if Scribner tried to make demands such as that upon him, he'd walk. Somebody else would be more than happy to make zero demands. If nobody else, Cemetery Dance (speaking of Chizmar) would.
So good theory, but no way in this case.
(6) "I sincerely hope you don't mind my indulging it - Holly Gibney is an economical choice." -- This is an interesting angle I'd not considered.
ReplyDelete(7) I'm still not sure how I feel about the monster being trapped by virtue of having been referenced in a Mexican lady-wrestler movie. What a crazy idea. But I remember being not merely entertained by that scene, but creeped out by it; weirdly, it helped make the monster seem MORE real to me, not less. That King was able to achieve that via such a cuckoo method must surely count as some sort of achievement.
(8) I don't think I've seen Cynthia Erivo in anything, but I know she got great reviews for "Bad Times at the El Royale." Part of me wishes they'd used Justine Lupe from the "Mr. Mercedes" tv show, though; she's pretty good. And, too, I wonder if casting Erivo will result in the excision of all hints of the Hodges backstory. I'll find out sometime in 2020, apparently.
(9) "I very much appreciated the lack of sudden onset of telepathy" -- Oh, man, 100%.
(10) "But is this really so bad? What can I say - this is autopilot King does enjoyably." -- King is so innately great a storyteller that his autopilot is better than most writers' best efforts. Heck, even the handful of his novels that I'd claim to dislike either had me hooked the whole way or had individual scenes that I thought excelled. He's never yet, so far as I know, published a complete turd. So if all he ever wrote again were books on autopilot, I'd probably be happy to read them. As you say, why you one want AC/DC to not be AC/DC?
(7) The case could definitely be made that when the novel takes that turn the other characters are not sufficiently convinced of the possibility. In that case some incontrovertible appearance of the monster or something combined with the movie might've done the trick. there's one disadvantage of the audiobook method, in that it's tough to gauge the pace of things sometimes. Did it happen too fast/ easily in the reading of it?
Delete(7) As it so happens, part of the reason I may have liked this one is because it was nice to see King acknowledge my own culture's take on the Boogeyman myth.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coco_(folklore)
I myself grew up hearing that name passed around, so it was always just a backdrop feature of my life. Nothing special, like Mt. Everest, it just was.
When King brought on the whole Luchadora scenario I think I just about bust a gut. It was both incredibly dumb, totally out of left field, and so well executed for my money. I also looked around, wondering if that damn thing was real.
When it comes to El Cuco, I believe George Lopez provides at least the same pronunciation we always gave it in my house growing up (you need to skip to the 3:32 mark to get to the reference):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5eUNLIECqQ
(10) I've written elsewhere that some archetypes can re-arrange themselves into similar, yet differing scenarios, settings, and character types. I think this process is at work in a lot of King's writing. To his credit, he seems to know this, and seems comfortable with it.
I'm not sure that this is "auto-pilot", I think "Outsider" can be considered a work of actual "inspiration". Granted, it's not on the same level as "It" or "Salem's Lot", yet it's still good on its own terms. It's seems to be the same ingredients and concepts in a secondary, as opposed to primary mode like the more famous texts.
ChrisC
(7) I liked that aspect, too. Although there was so little of the Outsider's backstory/ origin. Are there more of him out there? Perhaps some native to Central America? I didn't need this in there, which is to say I don't think the novel lacks this aspect/ tie-in, just curious.
DeleteI agree, though, this scene was fun/ creepy to me and I'm glad it was in there.
Man, I haven't thought of George Lopez in awhile. I have a friend I used to watch Monday Night Football with who looks exactly like a French-Canadian George Lopez, and that clip took me back to those days (like 20 years ago). I used to always tell him that. That clip is pretty funny, hadn't seen that before.
(10) I tried to sketch out what I mean by autopilot, here, but yeah, just things we've seen in a dozen other King works. It's his modus operandi/ default; he does these things well.
(11) "But sheesh, Colorado Kid. Any chance I get." -- Aww, I dig that book. In fact, I just the other day got a copy of the new illustrated version that came out. Okay, fine, TWO copies...! Hey, it's cheap!
ReplyDelete(12) Sablo reminded me more than a bit of Hank's DEA partner in "Breaking Bad" (whose name escapes me at the moment). That character had a certain amount of similar attitude, as I recall. But yeah, Sablo is in some ways Jerome 2.0, and golly what a weird thing this is. I just can't believe nobody tries to talk King out of doing these things. But maybe they don't; maybe they sense that he means no harm, and they just can't bear to bring it to his attention. All I know is, I dearly hope I never have to deal with a sassy trans character or something like that from Uncle Steve.
(13) Claude reminded me of a character from Joe Hill's "NOS4A2." In fact, now that I think of it, Holly herself reminds me more than a bit of another character from that book: Maggie, a librarian who is a bit off the beaten path. That book actually came out before "Mr. Mercedes," so it is by no means impossible to think that King had read it and was influenced by it.
I suspect Hill has had as profound an influence on his dad as his dad has had on him, as regards writing. I'm unable to back it up, but as a fan of both, I do feel it.
(14) Great post! Apologies for having comment diarrhea after consuming it.
(11) Man, I used to be more positive on that one but now it just pisses me off. Anyone can set up a mystery and NOT solve it; to do so is no achievement. That people continue to enable this delusion offends me! Not really. But sheesh. "The point of it is there's no resolution" is just really weak. That he has TWO novels like this is crazy to me.
Delete(12) "But yeah, Sablo is in some ways Jerome 2.0, and golly what a weird thing this is. " Exactly. And like you say it's so weird. The way King is going, he may indeed have sassy-trans on the radar, God help us. Or he could just wait and then they'll cast sassy-trans as Roland and he can virtue-tweet his rolling over on that one too. "Shut up, bigots!"
Don't mind me. Carry on, ye narrative overlords.
(13) I really wish he didn't have a twitter account. I just can't with him. I should've just unfollowed/ muted him like I did his Dad, but it was too late in Joe Hill's case. Anyway, it's too bad.
(12) Hmmmm, decisions, decisions...
DeleteDo I, as a Mexican just admit it all straight and say that I wasn't offended, or is there some way to poke fun at all this...
...annnd then realizes if there's room to exploit it, he's just not George Lopez caliber.
...Dang it.
ChrisC
(12) Oh I wasn't offended by any of it, or I saw no offense in it, I should say. I just mean he's got this weird tic with any non-white characters where suddenly he gives them every verbal affectation he can think of.
Delete(12) To be fair, he indulges in a lot of tics with his white characters, too. I mean, Holly, right?
DeleteMy take on it was that I liked the character, felt as if King himself liked the character and wanted me to feel the same, but simply couldn't help himself when it came to being a little ... iffy in the depiction. It might read very differently to someone raised on Twitter, of course, but [shrug].
That's a good point; it's not just the non-caucasians that get the crazy dialogue. Throw in "ka" and "ka-mai-ding-dak! Gan!" and really, everyone gets in on the fun.
DeleteAh well. It's really/ probably all flowing from the 'beep beep ritchie' part of his brain and no other, it's just such a constant feature I always feel the need to point it out.
I think you have to give King credit in that his politics don't bleed too much into his work. Like if we didn't know who he was from his Twitter account we wouldn't see political shit in his books at all. Even under the dome for my money never leans too hard into the evil of the Republican Party, even though that seems to be where it's coming from. Maybe he still has an editor. That would be a twist.
ReplyDeletePossibly. I love the acerbic politics of UTD, for some reason those don't bother me. I think because it's just a metaphor I like. Obviously Big Jim is Dick Cheney etc. but who cares? But his Trump stuff is different in that it's so intrusive (or has been.) A nurse comes into a room and likens Brady Hartsfield to Donald Trump, etc. It doesn't make sense for the scene, for Brady, or for the nurse, but stuff like that.
DeleteMaybe I just missed it with The Outsider, or maybe I'm just getting old/ immune to it, I don't know.
I think with under the dome it helps that it came after that administration was out of office, so it was more of a hindsight thing than an in the moment thing the trump stuff is. Plus trump has so much media attention that I think seeing it anywhere it "doesn't" need to be in causes a negative reaction.
DeleteMy guess with the outsider is that the core concept is so cool that a lot of the negatives like holly or trump get outweighed by a strong premise.
Trump is not present in "The Outsider" except -- somebody correct me on this if I'm wrong -- as a piece of graffiti on, like, a rock or something. And even then, it's not presented with much bias either way; it's just present in not even as obtrusive a way as a bumper-sticker would be. I simply can't see that as political; that's just landscape.
DeleteYeah it didn't really stick out to me, I must say. I can see what you say above, there, about some of the metaphorical reads of things, but if that was what he intended, I don't know if he was all that successful. That'd be a bit of a stretch. Like you say, there if one wants/ needs it (and plenty do) but as someone who generally rolls his eyes/ feels alienated from that kind of narrative intrusion, it didn't bother me I guess.
Delete