Is Stephen King a good author?
>Grinch physiognomy Tell this hack to pack it up to Whoville
Yes, his short stories rule. Night Shift and Skeleton Crew.
I liked Carrie and Salem's Lot.
>>24848659He's not a good author but he is an innovator. Stephen King was writing AI slop before there were personal computers.
>>24848659He's going to be remembered as the honorary genre writer to make it into the canon, as the man who basically invented modern genre fiction and somehow got his writing style adapted into every university creative writing class.
>>24848659No, and if you think he is then you're a simpleton.
>>24848662kek
>>24848659he's the "writer's barely disguised fetish" meme, using horror.
>>24848659>The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.Does that answer your question?
>>24849105Seems fine
He's great, I enjoy his fiction, whether he is overrated or not is up to you but I think he's earned his place as a writer.
>>24848710yep
>>24848659I hate him because he copyrights good set ups or premise and then shits the bed, and you're legally not allowed to do a rewrite of it because it's still 50% similar.
I'm really enjoying The Stand. Am I a pleb?
>>24848659Sure, sometimes. Some of his book are good, some are bad and some are absolute slop.
If one defines an "author" as a professional writer, that is, one whose goal is to achieve fame and wealth by the craft of writing, then yes, he is a very successful author.If you mean "good author"in the sense that his books are of good quality, then no. King is a hack. Though I suppose his editors share some of the blame, after all an author is seldom ever solely responsible for the final product. King's responsibility in that regard is to produce a manuscript, and it is the editor's job to make it into something appropriate for the market. If King's books are bloated and tedious in their final version he gets 50% of the blame for that.
>>24848659>isnope>>24848450
Good? No.
>>24849105>Speech destroys the functions of love, I think—that’s a hell of a thing for a writer to say, I guess, but I believe it to be true. If you speak to tell a deer you mean it no harm, it glides away with a single flip of its tail. The word is the harm. Love isn’t what these asshole poets like McKuen want you to think it is. Love has teeth; they bite; the wounds never close. No word, no combination of words, can close those lovebites. It’s the other way around, that’s the joke. If those wounds dry up, the words die with them. Take it from me. I’ve made my life from the words, and I know that is so.This is a better example. He can be pretty good at times. He's actually underrated by literary types.
>>24848659Hit-or-miss, really. Some things he does exceptionally well and some things he doesn't; some of his works are great, some not so much.He's at his best with short stories, novellas and shorter novels, hands-down.
I really hate him, and I'm a retard, so it's not like it's because I consider him too low brow, or something, even though I do.I.liked that one mystery book where they're trying to identify a dead body.. I can't remember the title.. The Cincinnati Kid? No that's a Steve McQueen movie..
>>24852008It reminded me of that suspected spy they found on the beach in Australia.. The Somerton Man. Maybe I'm just not into supernatural horror.
>>24848659No. His writing itself is pretty bad and is saved only by his talent for plots and characters. There's a reason why so many of his works have been adapted to film. Unfortunately, while he knows how to begin stories, he has absolutely no idea how to end them and I can't think of a single King book that didn't disappoint me with the ending.
>>24852026Revival has the goofy ending but the whole novel is setting itself up for it so it worked. 'salem's Lot had a good ending too. That's about all though. Cell didn't end too badly, not great though.
>>24848659Most of his adaptations are vastly superior to the original books
>>24848659Yeah. He has a very distinct style and voice. Excellent sense for characters, settings, scenes. It's not an accident a lot of his stuff has been made into movies, he has a lot of highly memorable scenes and images, with a distinctly unique "feel" to them. He also has a great talent for causing unease, for conveying the sense that something is off. A lot of people like to look down on him for writing genre fiction, but I suspect those people might be giving more credence to the idea of belonging to a group of literary elites than to enjoying literature itself. Or maybe I'm wrong, but there's no way to know. Not like any of you dumbasses will ever convince me.In any case, yeah, good writer. Definitely taps into some sort of collective unconscious.
