Having been a Stephen King fan for many years I figured that
this would be an interesting philosophical discussion of his more disturbing
(or not) works. Having previously studied branches of philosophy for academic
work , I thought I was partly equipped for what was to come, but I was oh so
wrong. Jumping straight into Desperation after the forward set the tone of the dialogue,
since the dark and good themes in the book weigh quite heavily on the mind.
Moving into Carrie and Pet Semetary, the discussion moved past casual reading
for me. It was like being back at varsity and I put the book away a number of
times. So much repetition and rewording of the same ideas just gave me a headache.
Once we hit the topics of bonds of friendship in The Body and Rita Hayworth I
started feeling like it was a book I could read comfortably again, and the
writing flowed a lot better for me. More interesting ideas were now explored
from the teacher/pupil dynamic in Apt Pupil, to the possibility of time travel
in The Langoliers and 11/22/63 and the application of power and violence in The
Running Man and The Long Walk. Of course The Shining and The Dark Tower cropped
up time after time with a look at many different aspects of the books.
This is not a light read by any means and I wonder sometimes
if we can't just read a book for the sake of reading it. Do we need to dissect
the author's intentions or just accept it for the narrative it is meant to be?
I thought that too many of King's books were overlooked with some of the same
books repeated in a number of different chapters. In some places the write ups
about the authors were far more entertaining than the philosophy. An
interesting take but not my cup of tea - I think I'll stick to "Stephen
King for Dummies".
No comments:
Post a Comment