Stephen King on Religion (and How NewsBusters Got it Wrong)

The awesome Stephen King, from FanPop.com

Yes, NewsBusters again. I just extracted myself from a fight I kind of started at the supposed "media watch dog" site that is in reality an arch right-wing commentary site. I've commented before how the NewsBusters headlines often read to me like a big list of "so whats." They list a bunch of things that are supposed to outrage, but instead, I agree with them.

Well, this time, they went too far. They focused on one of my favorite authors--and I know he's considered somehow "not literary," but I don't care--Stephen King. Now, don't think I like King simply because he's a liberal. I like Dean Koontz too, and he's an obvious Orange County conservative. Still, King's stories are more dense, more layered. And with less focus on golden retrievers, Jeep Cherokees, and slightly mismatched male/female couples who verbally spar in humorous ways in the midst of catastrophe.

But one thing they both have in common is a seeming belief in the divine. Sure, they can skew that quite a bit, toward sci-fi, toward other-worldly rather than explicitly God, but other times they'll pretty much spell out a big-time, universe creating deity. As an atheist, this only bothers me a little. I mean, we're talking aliens, monsters, other worlds, alternate dimensions, time travel and IT. I can handle a little make believe.

So, how does this come back around to NewsBusters? Well, they are using him to make it seem that this very successful liberal author has duped NPR in his interview, by supporting Intelligent Design.
I ain't gonna lie, he said something along those lines. But they emphasize that as though it is his main point, but then downplay his conclusion.

My favorite King novel and adaptation was The Stand, 
in which religion is figured heavily. It didn't bother me.
But Randall Flagg and Mother Abigail could just be
"good" and "evil," right?

And I get what he's saying. We humans often say things like, "It must have been meant to be," and "it was fate." We say these things whether we literally believe that time and elements were physically guided or not. We can feel that something was going to happen, and fall into place, without necessarily believing that a supernatural entity was cataloging, manipulating and  guiding time and space to make something happen.

But, typical of NewsBusters, they will focus on what they want you to see. And their readers--as I've learned first hand in the last few days--will take the bait, and argue it strenuously.

Here is the line they highlighted: " if you say, well, OK, I don't believe in God, there's no evidence of God, then you're missing the stars in the sky, and you're missing the sunrises and sunsets, and you're missing the fact that bees pollinate all these crops and keep us alive and the way that everything seems to work together at the same time."

What they don't want you to notice is this, "But at the same time there's a lot of things in life where you say to yourself, well, if this is God's plan, it's very peculiar. And you have to wonder about that guy's personality, the big guy's personality." And then even more clearly, "What I'm saying now is I choose to believe in God, but I have serious doubts."

I'm just saying, that conclusion doesn't really square with their headline.

[Excerpt]

Stephen King Shocks NPR Audience: Nature 'Suggests Intelligent Design' by God

On Tuesday's Fresh Air on NPR stations from coast to coast, host Terry Gross interviewed author Stephen King on his new book  "Joyland," which features a young man in a wheelchair with muscular dystrophy and his grandfather, a radio evangelist named Buddy Ross, who insists the disease is divine punishment. . .

Read more at: NewsBusters

Ermahgerd! Stephen King's Under the Dome Set for CBS

Squee! I will admit with no shame that I'm an unabashed, unrepentant Stephen King fan. I like Dean Koontz too, though I prefer King's subtle liberal politics over Koontz's slightly more obvious conservative allusions. And I don't give a flying fig that "serious readers" consider this type of author to be substandard, or somehow lacking. I have ravenously gobbled up almost every King and Koontz book released in the last 25 years or so (except The Dark Tower series, which I seriously don't get).

So, when I really enjoy a particular book, it's always a thrill to see it optioned as a movie or miniseries. The actual results are more scattershot. For every good adaptation, there are several bad ones (sometimes even with the authors' input). When it comes to King, the best live action adaptations (in my opinion) are Misery, the miniseries The Stand, Pet Sematary and Carrie. There have been other good ones too (Creepshow, Stand By Me), but more often than not (Maximum Overdrive, Creepshow 2, the miniseries The Shining) they kind of stink on ice. So, I have high hopes for Under the Dome, a ridiculously thick page-turner I read in a frenzy. But my optimism is guarded with experience.

Under the Dome is a story about a small town that suddenly finds itself cut off from society, with a mysterious--seemingly impenetrable--barrier put around it. The aftermath of the event, and the efforts to thwart it take up hundreds and hundreds of pages. But I didn't care. It was an enthralling book. Can a broadcast television adaptation do it justice? I'll be watching to find out.

[Excerpt]

'Under The Dome': CBS Announces Premiere Date For Stephen King Drama, 'Unforgettable,' 'Big Brother'

Stephen King and Steven Spielberg's adaptation of "Under the Dome" will premiere on CBS at 10 p.m. on Monday, June 24, the network announced Saturday.   At the network's presentation for reporters at the Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour, CBS Entertainment President Nina Tassler expressed enthusiasm for the concept, hoping that it will become a "big summer event" for the number one broadcast network. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Book Review (Part 2): Stephen King's Under the Dome

Image from QuarterlyConversation

This moring, I finally settled down to read the last two hundred pages or so of Stephen King's Under the Dome.  I started at about 10:00 am, after watching last week's True Blood on the DVR.  I figured I'd read for an hour or so, then get up, get dressed, and take care of some errands and chores.  After a while, I decided to push through, and just read the whole thing. Imagine my surprise when I finished--thinking it must be 12:45 or so--when I looked at the clock and saw that it was a quarter til three!

That, in a nutshell, tells you how into this book I was.  "Couldn't put it down" applies. Sure, I'd pause to get a soda, or for a bathroom break (though I just popped a squat with the book on my lap. . .think of that next time you get a book from the library!).  Before I get to my review, here's an encapsulation of what I first wrote:

[Compiled from original post, July 17, 2010]

Under the Dome (a 1074-page book) takes place in Maine (naturally), just up the road a piece from Castle Rock, a town you're intimately familiar with if you've read very much King. The small town of Chester's Mill finds itself suddenly trapped--right to the town's borders--by a transparent, seemingly indestructible barrier. This has a calamitous effect on anything actually at the border at the moment the dome came down, or for anything preparing to cross it at high speed.

If you've ever read a Stephen King novel, you know that he can be wordy, sometimes at the expense of the story. As much as I loved Misery, I found myself skipping the "Misery Chastain" romance novel portions of the book only partway in. At other times though, say with The Stand, King's wordiness can be rich and rewarding. One thing I think I can be relatively certain of is that it won't have a rushed conclusion!

This first part of the book is an outstanding, gripping, can't-put-the-book-down good time. If your idea of a good time is kinda gory. Mine is. Anyway, a large section of the book deals with the setup, introducing us to a broad section of Chester's Mill's citizenry and public servants. By the time we begin to gather some vague understanding as to what's going on--about a third of the way in--we'd have already been to the end of many books of this genre (Dean Koontz's included). I was a little leery of what the thick mid-section of this book was going to be like. For the sheer genius that was The Stand, another long King book, Duma Key while good, wasn't quite as satisfying. So far though, I'm still along for the ride. There are protagonists I'm rooting for, a couple of deaths--hey, this is King--that I've lamented, and a few deaths I'm looking forward to!

[Part 2]

The middle portion of the book chronicles life under the dome, and what that sort of scenario would do to the populace of a small town.  A slimy politician who already fancied himself king of the town, takes his role to grandly inflated places.  Our protagonist, a former soldier with a heavy consience is appointed by the President to take charge as a Colonel, and our slimy politician doesn't take well to this news.  Much of the midsection of the book is built upon this power play, and if that sounds boring, it isn't.  King has done a masterful job of bringing an entire town to life, and the ways they interact and whom they align with is kept interesting, and sometimes surprising.

From outside the dome, there are a few efforts to bust through, with the results only emboldening the Big Bad and his son, Junior Bad.  Together they spin a fanciful tale, connecting the Colonel to a series of deaths, to a riot, to a drug ring, and even to the existence of the dome itself.  The story wouldn't hold together well in ordinary times, but the rattled citizenry clings to it, and sides with Big & Junior Bad.  Fortunately, there are some brighter bulbs in this bunch, and a resistance of sorts is born.

Through all of this, the atmosphere in town is getting rank, there is barely a breeze, and no rain.  The resistance tries to discover the source of the dome, and what to do about it, while simultaneously trying to free the Colonel from the clutches of the Bads.  All of this is great, page-turning stuff.  And twin events: a town meeting called by Big Bad, and a "meet your relatives on the other side of the dome" gathering at the edge of town, send the book hurtling into the scorching home stretch.

The secret behind the existence of the dome is an interesting departure for this kind of book, one that may not satisfy everybody.  And the ultimate conclusion is rather speedy after a long homestretch, but I understood the need for this.  As the characters get more and more desperate, a fast resolution was necessary to break the tension.  It was not an eye-rolling ending, or one that let me down.  I was satisfied, and said as I closed the covers, that was a good book. 

All through the book, I could see this as a movie, or more likely, a mini-series.  If it comes to that, I have a prediction.  Some characters will be combined. Some will be deleted. The Big Bad (who had an uncomfortable, but sadly underwhelming and solitary comeuppance) will have a more satisfying demise, and will infiltrate the resistance (which does not happen in the book).  I do know that if a Hollywood adaptation is in the works, I will want to watch it.  Highly Recommended

Book Review (Part 1): Stephen King's Under the Dome

Image from QuarterlyConversation

There's a reason I haven't blogged about anything since yesterday. I've been immersed into a book. A big, heavy, 1074-page book.  I first checked Stephen King's Under the Dome out of the library several months ago, but partly intimidated by its heft, I returned it unread.  Last weekend, while still reading Dean Koontz's Frankenstein: Lost Souls, a book I enjoyed but with which I was disappointed.  As I said in my review of that book, it left me wanting because it ended mid-story--or more accurately--only a third of the way in.  Unlike the previous Frankenstein trilogy, this edition didn't carry a chapter number, or any other indication that it was only one volume of a longer story.

I'm pretty sure that won't be an issue for Under the Dome. I'm only halfway into the book (at page 545!), and have only come up for air now, after reading since 7:00 am this morning!  If you've ever read a Stephen King novel, you know that he can be wordy, sometimes at the expense of the story.  As much as I loved Misery, I found myself skipping the "Misery Chastain" romance novel portions of the book only partway in.  At other times though, say with The Stand, King's wordiness can be rich and rewarding.  One thing I think I can be relatively certain of is that it won't have a rushed conclusion!

Under the Dome takes place in Maine (naturally), just up the road a piece from Castle Rock, a town you're intimately familiar with if you've read very much King.  The small town of Chester's Mill finds itself suddenly trapped--right to the town's borders--by a transparent, seemingly indestructible barrier.  This has a calamitous effect on anything actually at the border at the moment the dome came down, or for anything preparing to cross it at high speed. 

This first part of the book is an outstanding, gripping, can't-put-the-book-down good time.  If your idea of a good time is kinda gory.  Mine is.  Anyway, a large section of the book deals with the setup, introducing us to a broad section of Chester's Mill's citizenry and public servants.  By the time we begin to gather some vague understanding as to what's going on--about a third of the way in--we'd have already been to the end of many books of this genre (Koontz's included).  I was a little leery of what the thick mid-section of this book was going to be like.  For the sheer genius that was The Stand, another long King book, Duma Key while good, wasn't quite as satisfying. So far though, I'm still along for the ride.  There are protagonists I'm rooting for, a couple of deaths--hey, this is King--that I've lamented, and a few deaths I'm looking forward to! 

I'll be following this review with a complete one when I'm done reading. I may have to extend my library check-out period to do that, unless next weekend is as schedule-clear as this one was.  But so far, I've got to say I recommend it. Especially, I recommend the idea of books like this to other writers (you listening, Dean?).  Having the space to flesh out a story this rich, and not having to wind it up at page 400 or so has got to be a freeing experience for a writer. It's also an entertaining and memorable way to read one.  I've read hundreds of books, and if we winnow it down to just the King and Koontz stuff, I could name several titles, but few details.  That said, I can tell you that The Stand had characters like Mother Abigail and Trashcan Man, and the song "Baby, Can You Dig Your Man?."  Those big books stick with you!

Book Review: Dean Koontz's Frankenstein: Lost Souls

Image from Amazon.com
(Can't you tell? Hah!)

This won't be a full review, because Frankenstein: Lost Souls isn't a complete book. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining exactly.  I loved the book. But I started to worry as I saw the page count getting close to the end, and it felt like the story was just getting going.

Frankenstein is a modern imagining of the classic story, positing that the monster (Deucalion, a name I'm still not sure how I'm supposed to pronounce), Victor Frankenstein, and the whole original setup was real. What's more, both are still alive in modern-day America.  Lost Souls is actually chapter four in a series of novels.  Parts one and two were written by Dean Koontz with co-writers, and part three was written by Koontz solo. The story was originally written for television, and the first book apparently was made into a TV movie (which I still have not seen).  Part one was good enough, certainly engaging enough to make me want to read more.  Part two was better, and part three even better than the first two. After that, I thought the story was over.

So, I was surprised to see Lost Souls on the shelf at Sam's Club, but intrigued enough to buy it.  Diving in, I was quickly reacquainted with the characters of the series, now two years later.  The man and woman police team were now married to each other, and living in a different state as private detectives.  Victor Frankenstein--killed in the third book--is found to be somehow still alive, and bent on world domination. He is hunted by the detectives at the behest of Deucalion (Deuce-a-Lion? Doo-kaleon? Dough-salee-on?).  Koontz is much more descriptive and vivid in his word craft, and the characters (even the comic/horror-relief character, Jocko) are wonderfully drawn.  Koontz's stock plot devices (golden retriever, plausible explanation for otherworldly events) aren't relied upon as much, which is good.  I love Koontz, but some themes can repeat too much.

That said, there is still the "funny banter while under attack" trope, the "mentally challenged kid with a heart of gold" thing, and a few other standard Koontz themes.  In Lost Souls, it all works, but just as in Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, just as the characters are basically suiting up for battle, the book ends.  I'm not saying this to spoil it, only to warn you.  This is chapter 4 of a series, or possibly part 1 of a second series.  If you go in knowing that, you'll enjoy the book much more.  I'll definitely pick up book 5, no question.  It really is a fun read. But knowing that this is a further part of the series, I'd suggest getting books 1-3 before reading Lost Souls. By the time you're done with all four parts, part 5 should be on the way!

Recommended

Will Dean Koontz Finally Have a Hit Movie with Frankenstein?

Image from source, CinemaBlend

I'm a big Dean Koontz fan, even if I've given him a few middling reviews lately. Koontz is always an entertaining writer, even if I'm not always thrilled with his endings. The ride can be better than the destinations sometimes. But along with Stephen King (an author who Koontz is often compared to), he remains one of my favorite writers. One of his most entertaining reads was his Frankenstein series, initially begun with collaborators, and recently finished solo.

The three-book series began life as a treatment for a television series, which was turned into a (reportedly) lackluster TV movie. Koontz wasn't happy with the TV version, and wrote the book series. It puts Frankenstein's monster--with the original back story as the basis--into modern-day (but pre-Katrina) New Orleans. Victor Frankenstein is still around too, after hundreds of years, thanks to bio-mechanical upgrades. The story is one of Koontz's most engaging, and ultimately one of the most satisfying. I'm hopeful that the proposed movie version finally brings Koontz success in Hollywood. I mean, other than maybe Demon Seed, has there ever been a good adaptation of his work?

[Excerpt]

Dean Koontz's Frankenstein Headed To Theaters

A couple of weeks ago Lakeshore announced they were moving forward with an adaptation of Kevin Grevioux's graphic novel I, Frankenstein. Now 1019 Entertainment has announced it will produce a whole franchise of Franken-flicks based on Dean Koontz' series, Frankenstein. . .

Read more at: Cinema Bland

Book Report: Odd Hours by Dean Koontz

I've talked about my favorite authors here before, and why I'm defensive of them. Two of my favorites are Stephen King and Dean Koontz. I know I risk a reputation as a "non-serious" reader by publicizing this, and I don't care. While I'm the first to admit that popularity does not equal quality (witness FOX "News"), it does not disqualify something either. Most of both authors' books are enjoyable, can't-put-it-down reads. And both are so prolific, you can count on finding something of theirs you haven't read before, when you need a book to take on a trip.

Because of their voluminous work, there are a few clunkers from both. And there are also detours into different genres, different styles, and different presentations. King had a serialized, multi-book paperback series. He also had a weird (for this reader, impenetrable), dense series of Wild West/Outer Space hardbacks that were interwoven into his mainstream work. Koontz has deviated from the usual with a paperback series based on Frankenstein (unfinished as of yet, apparently because Koontz didn't like working with a collaborator), and with hardback sequels to previous works.

The longest series of sequels centers around Odd Thomas, a young man with limited psychic powers who finds himself in perilous predicaments, and is an extemporaneous and witty liar, when a gun is pointed at him. This time, in Odd Hours, Odd is faced with literally saving the world, and the read was never dull. The story moves swiftly, and the character of Odd is quite engaging.

Of course, the Koontzian elements are all here, if not as prominent as in some of his other works. A golden retriever makes a sporadic appearance, but his role is not central to the narrative. The story has an enigmatic heroine, but this one is not as seemingly perfect as is common in many of Koontz's stories. She is sidelined for almost all of the action and drama, stowed away with a happy/tragic woman we haven't met before. She is also not completely explained as a character, leading me to believe that her role (as well as the other woman) will be expanded--and the ending clarified--in yet another Odd Thomas book.

As enjoyable as it was, there were a few things that took me out of the story, interrupting my "willing suspension of disbelief." One was some of the dialogue, which just didn't seem to fit with either the character (a rotted-teeth meth-head, with perfect English), or the situation (easy familiarity with characters who have just met, usually with pointed guns). Also, the group of conspirators didn't seem like a crowd that would actually mix for such a scheme.

Despite these things, I've enjoyed the Odd Thomas series, except for a foray into anime, a prequel fifth book. In Odd We Trust, a recent paperback, was illustrated in the Japanese manga style, and didn't work for me. I didn't like the art, didn't like the story, apparently don't like manga, and didn't like Stormy Llewellan, Odd's doomed "soulmate." Which brings up the biggest flaw in the series for me.

A running thread in the series is Stormy, young Odd's girlfriend, who died during one of the early books. To Odd, her death was fairly recent (the books progress over a short span of time for the characters), but the way their relationship is portrayed, as eternal. . .well, it strikes me as rather silly. We're talking about a teen relationship that lasted at best a couple of years. Though the end of the relationship is tragic, a middle-aged reader like me is a little too jaded to buy into the eternal love thing. You learn as you age that no matter how much a person seems like "the one," there are other potential "the ones" out there. I guess Koontz may be taking us there in the next book, though it is possibly just reinforcement of Odd's/Stormy's "foreverness," I don't know.

Another thing I noticed was Koontz's politics. I learned--oddly enough, between two Koontz books--that the author is conservative, politically. I hadn't really noticed this in his writing before, but it sneaks through here and there. Fortunately, he doesn't hit you over the head with it, but it is there. Now, Stephen King is known to be more liberal, and that does come through in his more recent works. And I'm more on King's page than Koontz's here. But it's nice to know that I can enjoy both authors almost equally, while knowing that.

Which is a long way to go to say that, overall, I enjoyed Odd Hours, and look forward to the next installment. Unlike the previous Koontz book I read, I was not disappointed with the ending. It was a brisk read, and I wanted to read instead of doing something else (like blogging!). Also, it is not necessary to read any particular Odd Thomas book in order to enjoy the story. Pick it up for your next flight, or for a nice, lazy weekend.

Recommended

Another Lazy Sunday

Image from DeanKoontz.com

It was another lazy Sunday here at chez Greenlee. I got up late, watched Saturday Night Live on the DVR (host Tracey Morgan showed a distressing lack of range), as well as zipping through several of the Sunday morning political shows. Nothing much there to report. Almost all of the discussion was on the economy, obviously. But the talking heads and political types don't sound to me any more credible than CNBC's Jim Cramer.

So, I put away the clicker, and did what lazy Sundays are best for: I read a book. Actually, I started reading Dean Koontz's Your Heart Belongs to Me yesterday, but read the bulk of it today. It was a breezy read, and I quite enjoyed it for the most part. The typical Koontz setup of guy-meets-girl/couple deals with supernatural crisis/golden retriever was broken here with different narrative style.

I'm a pretty big Koontz fan, but this book confounded me in its last chapters. The resolution left me wondering if I'd missed a huge amount of subtext, which is ironic since the main character supposedly missed the same thing. I never suspected the true nature of the main "villain's" motives, so I had a hard time faulting the "hero" for missing it too.

All-in-all, though, I can think of worse ways to spend an afternoon. A comfy couch, and a book is a nice change of pace for me, even if it means fewer hits to the blog.

Book Report: Dean Koontz's The Darkest Evening of the Year

Image from Amazon.com

I was trapped waiting for my truck last week, after a routine smog check/oil change that lead to four visits to the shop and $1200 in repairs (so far). But on that first visit, to fill my time, I walked to K-Mart and found a new Dean Koontz paperback book to read.

I love Dean Koontz (and Stephen King, Robin Cook and John Saul), despite the derision he gets from "true" literary fans. I don't care if real readers don't like him, I do. The Other Half and I do have a joke about any new Koontz book though, "Wait, don't tell me. It's about a golden retriever, a man and a woman who fall in love under strained circumstances in a Jeep Cherokee in Orange County, and everything wraps up a little too quickly."

The Darkest Evening of the Year, the book I picked up, fits that joke exactly, except Koontz seems to have switched car preferences to Fords (this time an Expedition). But I can forgive him, especially as it pertains to the dog(s), since he lost his beloved golden recently. And despite the repetition in themes, I've always enjoyed his books. One of the interesting Koontz themes, is the tendency to have a seemingly supernatural force that is eventually explained to be natural.

In this book, the other-worldly happenings aren't explained away, in fact they are sort of shrugged off. It didn't lessen my enjoyment of the book, but it did lead me to sort of shrug it off when I was finished. I was interested all the way through, got to the end, and put it down. Done. Not interested any more.

The title has nothing to do with the story. The characters were interchangeable with those from any other Koontz books. The dogs were lovingly described, and I cared what was going on, while it was going on. But a lot of books leave me wanting more, leave me sorry that the book was finished. This one was just over and done.

It wasn't the worst book I've read by this author or any other. In fact, it was better than many, and a worthwhile way to pass the time. But I wouldn't go out of my way to catch this one. Read it during your next flight, or the next time you (like me) have car trouble. But seek out a different one if you're looking for a meaty story. I hope Mr. Koontz finds a suitable replacement in his heart for Trixie, his dog, and moves on to other material. And I'm sure I'll be back to read it, whatever it is.

Review: OK for fans, pass for others.

Book Report: Stephen King's Duma Key

I don't understand why my favorite authors are often considered to be hacks. I kind of take that as a personal insult. Is prolificacy (prolificness?) and success somehow a bad thing? Two of those favorites are Stephen King and Dean Koontz.

The most recent Koontz book I've read was The Good Guy, a story of mistaken identity, where the protagonist is taken for a hit man. He spends the rest of the book protecting the intended victim (a compatible female, natch). It wasn't his best book, but I enjoyed it. I've rarely been disappointed by Koontz. My only beef is (excepting the omnipresent golden or Labrador retriever) is that his characters tend to repeat: a perfect man and a perfect woman meet under dire, supernatural circumstances and banter amusingly while being attacked.

Stephen King doesn't do that. His characters are unique, and distinctly drawn. The stories are rich, and dense (too wordy for some people). In Duma Key, the protagonist is a successful building contractor, critically injured in a construction site accident. After a painful recovery (and the abandonment of his wife), he makes a new life in the Florida Keys. There, he takes up painting, and finds that his paintings not only depict past, present and future events, they can affect them.

The writing is very descriptive, and played in my mind like a movie--or mini-series. If I have any complaint, it would be that the setting does not resemble the Keys I'm familiar with. But I can reason that away fairly easily. The supernatural villain made it that way! There we go, all fixed.

So, if you want a good summer read (and a lengthy one at that), you'd be hard pressed to do any better than Duma Key. Buy it (or check it out), you'll thank me later.

Recommended

Stephen King turns 60

Photo from Wikipedia.com

Greenlee Gazette would like to wish a very happy 60th birthday to author, Stephen King. King has been one of my favorite authors for almost as long as I can remember. I started reading his books in elementary school, and have been hooked ever since.

I've read nearly novel and anthology he's published (minus The Dark Tower series, which I never really could get into). His books (and his readers, for that matter) are sometimes unfairly criticised, as though being prolific and successful are somehow a bad thing. It doesn't matter though. I don't read books to boost my self image, I read what I enjoy. And almost every King book I've read has been enjoyable, sometimes even thrilling.

'Salem's Lot scared me for days after reading it, and inspired vampire nightmares (as did the movie version). Misery actually made me nervous to turn the page, out of fear of what Annie was going to do to Paul next. It, Pet Sematary, The Dark Half, The Dream Catcher, The Dead Zone, all are difficult to put down. I can't count how many nights I've stayed up WAYYY past my bedtime, just to finish "one more chapter" that turned into several.

Don't confuse King's books for his movies. While there have been quite a few good adaptations (The Stand being by far the best), many suffered in their translation. Much like Dean Koontz (a writer in the same genre who I'm also a huge fan of), you cannot judge a book by its movie.

We're very lucky that King made it to 60, after he was crushed by a van several years ago. Of course, like Berkeley Breathed (creator of Bloom County, who broke his back years ago), he just managed to turn it into part of one of his stories. I'm glad he made it (though surely not as glad as he is), and I'm also glad that his supposed retirement didn't take.

Happy birthday, Mr. King!

Stephen King's Official Web Site: StephenKing.com