Why do you hate Stephen King so much? He writes some mediocre books, yet /lit/ hates him for some reason.
>>24853333i can feel his arms around me from behind whenever i read a sentence from him i can't explain it
>>24853338thats gay.
What‘s the last actual good book he wrote? I‘m going to go against the grain and say I liked The Dark Tower ending, particularly because of the artistic frenzy and metafictitious stuff which getting smashed by that car occasioned; but I can barely name much less defend anything from the twenty years since which makes the win-some-lose-some defense for being a pulp mill kind of hard to sustain.
>>24853333I imagine that it's like this.People in this board like the more "respected" kind of books be it Joyce, Dostoevsky, Sanderson sorry, just kidding.While King is genre fiction, but the King of genre fiction. hahaha King is the King, got it? and people who don't read tons of books tend to like him.So, the elitist, contrarian spirit of people in this board tend to dislike him.I have never read any of his books and have nothing against him. That said, he is the King of "movie books" and I really like "The Green Mile" movie.
He’s a faggot leftist creep and was visiting epsteins island to fuck kids
He's better at writing magical realism than horror. Sometimes his horror is as low brow as "What if cell phones turned you into a zombie". Name it Cell and print it. No one else would get away with that shlock. Fatigue is also a factor. He writes a book a year no matter what, sometimes more. Prose is often over descriptive on things that don't matter and characters are recycled stereotypes without any depth, usually.
>>24853458Is this true or speculative >>24853483"What if cell phones turned you into a zombie"Is this what Cell was about? I remember it differently. One of us is a retard. Ermm well technically they'r—>>24853366Huh?
He ruined a generation of future writers with his On writing.
>>24853333He writes stories that are interesting in concept but then absolutely fumbles the execution and it's deeply frustrating.
>>24853632Based. Softening up my competition.
>>24853333He confirmed that the tooth fairy, the Easter Bunny, and Santa Claus exist.
>>24853769>but DRUMPF You've been doing this for 10 years now. Get some help.
>>24853769>and yet you still support himSource?
lit hates successful capitalism
Reminder that for every Stephen King book, someone already wrote a better version of It, see:>Burnt Offerings > The Shining>Stinger > Under the Dome>Swan's Song > The Stand>Ghost Story > Salem's Lot>Floating Dragon > It>Hell Hound > Cujo>Jerusalem Man series > Dark Tower series
Revival was good.
>>24853333not for his novels, but for his nauseating 'here's what you're supposed to believe' tweets from a few years ago
>>24853366I love and lot of genre, but King is tough to get through. He has some great imagery, but he has cringe self insert characters and his dialogue is nails on chalkboard. Also a pedo.
>>24853333He's liberal and the facebook-tier normies that infest this board seethe that he has so much reach because of his books appealing to other normies. He's the kind of guy that someone quotes at thanksgiving to anons when they trot out their racist, shitty opinions.
>>24853333I only sporadically come on to /lit/ for a few week span every couple months but for me it's the fact that he's dogshit at horror because he just badly apes lovecraft without any of the art or understanding how and why Lovecraft did what he did, and he marries it with the godawful "Americana Grunge" of putting things in some dusty or wet shithole town full of cardboard cutouts. Reading his horror works are like being rolled through dirt slowly for an entire dull hour, and the dirt smells faintly of animal feces. Soulless, vapid, and just has nothing of value because his prose is flat, his plots are meandering slop, and his characters aren't compelling.And yet, and YET, it doesn't have to be this way. he can write well. He can conjure wonder or complex stories with actual meaning or purpose. He just only does it when he writes a fantasy story taking place in a world that isn't "the miserable asshole of some random american small town".I see this same phenomena with McCarthy, actually. His work was similarly terrible and empty garbage, except when he wrote horror, for some reason, McCarthy had an amazing talent for horror and really anything to do with mysticism.I've long thought that there are some authors who exist as cosmic fucking jokes, their talent is truly suited to writing one genre, but for some godfuckawful reason known only to jews and baboons, they insist on writing absolute fucking slop in another genre for almost their entire careers. It's just that King and McCarthy are the only ones I can 100% point to where this is the case because I know of where they're the only ones prolific enough who have done 180s into a single different genre once or twice that just blows the entire rest of their bibliography away.
>>24854236>cringe self insert charactersI remember that in some of the films. The "wise man" is a "terror novelist" who is basically treated like a doctor in a medical emergency.
>>24853333Israel supporter
>>24855056>t. only knows It
Salem's Lot was a good book. Pet Sematary was not. I am neutral on King. I find his idea on bad/good/great writers to be fair and humble
>>24855101>Anon is really pretending "Under The Dome", "The Mist"and a dozen other works don't exist.If you cut out the "aliens" for "Mundane bullshit" or "psychics!" you cover even more of his catalogue.
>>24855110>If you just completely change my argument, it works!
>>24855113I'm going to ask, if you can't read, as seems to be the case going by how nonsensical this response is, why are you on /lit/. This is for people who *refuse* to read, not "literally can't".You might want to try your luck on tumblr or maybe twitter.
Lovecraft, one of King's most important inspirations, wrote stories that (most often) were exactly the right length. Some as short as nine pages long, if memory serves.If King had written the same stories he would have added 5+ characters, given them all cheap gimmicks and not much depth beyond that, and then made the stories at least 200 pages too long, without actually adding to the story. Like taking one of the old Twilight Zone episodes (the 30 min ones) and making it a Netflix series.It's not that I have anything against long books, but I loathe books that are longer than they need to be.
>>24855117Yeah buddy. I'm sure you're so well read with your idea that the mist is really lovecraftian in origin despite it being directly tied to military experimentation.
1. he is a boomer2. he is a libtard3. he cant write endingsi think these are valid criticisms of him.also guy loooooooooves the magical negro trope
>>24855154oh yeah also wow, the main character is a writer, how orginal steve
>>24855072Op asked why do we hate him
>>24855117Also kek at you using reddit formatting for italics and telling someone to get off /lit/
>>24853366horror is a very specific type of genre fiction, the genre fiction lit likes is fantasy and scifi.Horror writing as genre fiction is underrated anyways clive barker > king
>>24853333OP do you want to try making threads about books you read rather than punching at ghosts.
>>24853458I liked him until he became unhinged woke leftist. Since then I simply can't read any of his works or watch any of his movies because it soured his legacy. It's not just because it's leftism. Frank Miller also soured his legacy. I really think we have to go back to celebrities keeping their political opinions to themselves.
