'Salem's Lot - 1979 TV mini-series

I’m definitely going against Marcus’ advice and running a King Long View alongside this reading project.



I’ll be honest and say that I found it hard to get past how dated it looks. It’s so seventies it hurts and I can’t begin to imagine where the $4 million budget went. Presumably on James Mason’s wage. Not to mention it has got David Soul in it. Aside from the fact that he can’t act and has the most preposterous hair and those glasses, I always pictured Ben Mears as younger and more virile.


Barlow’s appearance was almost equally strange. He was blue and what were those teeth?


I’m entirely willing to acknowledge that I missed something and let Soul and its datedness get in the way of an objective viewing, particularly as a self-professed film aficionado friend (particularly vampire films, it would seem) listed it in his all-time top 5 vampire films.


James Mason was great, though. I’m only just realising how ashamed I should be of myself that I have hardly seen any of his films. I know!! I only saw Kubrick’s Lolita the other week!


Anyway, it made me want to read the book again. So, I’ve got hold of the audiobook so I can listen to it without interrupting my reading progress. Sweet.


I’ve also procured Carrie, read by Sissy Spacek and The Shining, read by Campbell Scott. How fucking cool is that! Campbell Scott is the bomb. If you haven’t seen Roger Dodger, make sure you do. Jesse Eisenberg’s in it as well.


I don’t know if I’ve said on here previously that I always keep an iPod full of audiobooks to feed my book hunger, but as long as this project runs, it’s my way of ‘reading’ things other than Stephen King. In this respect, though, it means I can read the books again while continuing the mission.


So, anyway, I’ll go back to basics soon enough and revisit ‘Salem’s Lot for real.

The Stand

Started on 8th March.  I said in the last post that I was looking forward to the next novel for a chance to immerse myself in his world. They don’t get much bigger than The Stand. 1421 pages – the uncut version, of course. Outstanding.
I’m a bit late with updating the blog, so am already past the 200 page mark. It’s a slow burner, but I know we’re building up to a beauty.

Night Shift 20th Feb - 8th Mar 2010

I love short fiction.


I’ve said that for quite a number of years, but am now starting to wonder how true it is. I don’t think anything has changed in my appreciation of the format and its particular ability to enchant, beguile, confuse and enlighten in such a short time. As a man of few words, vocally at least, I’ve always aimed to practice a level of efficiency in my dialogue to ensure that I say what I mean and little more. Speaking for the sake of it doesn’t interest me.


In the same way, I’ve always marvelled at how a story can be pared back to its bare flesh and yet still evoke something which is much more than the sum of its parts. I know I’m mixing metaphors, but I haven’t really sat down and thought about what I’m saying, I’m just saying it for a change.


As a necessary element of the short story, so much is left unsaid. Motives and reasons for being are often left to supposition and guesswork. Endings are often ambiguous. I love that about short stories. There are some people who baulk at this lack of resolution. They need to take away answers, not a list of questions. For me, though, the open-endedness is the beauty of it. Nagging questions enervate something vital and practically alive in the story. For something old and written by a long-dead author, there’s almost something magic about that. In the same way, a story where all the loose ends are conveniently tied up can be more easily put aside and forgotten.


It’s the reason I love Kafka. The Metamorphosis is hands-down my favourite fictional work. I know it’s on the long side to be called a short-story, but still.


Dan Rhodes’ Anthropology and a hundred other stories is an awesome example of the majesty of brevity and is highly recommended, along with every other word the man has written. Go to http://www.danrhodes.co.uk forthwith.


With all that said, I didn’t enjoy Night Shift half as much as I expected. That's not to say I didn't.  Just not as much as expected.  It was also clear from the publishing dates that these are the his earliest writings and you can tell.  Short stories generally come with a requisite powerful, intriguing, nerve wracking premise and plot where everything happens in a short period. I’m not sure horror really lends itself to that short window of exposition and action. My favourites from Night Shift were The Boogeyman, Sometimes They Come Back, The Ledge, Quitters Inc.


Considering I two of the four stories I just listed would be classed as horror, I’m clearly talking out of my arse. I also haven’t read a great deal of Poe. What a dick I am. I’m sure I’ve a worthwhile point to make somewhere, I just can’t vouch for how well I’ll make it.


Oh well.


Some of the stories didn’t do a thing for me and leaned too much towards B-movie horror. The Mangler in particular made me think of the 1990 film I Bought a Vampire Motorcycle.


I’m sure there are examples to prove me wrong queuing up around the corner, but it seems that when you write a regular suspense story, such as The Ledge, there are so many elements of the suspense, you can’t help but be swept up by it. You’ve got the people and their back stories, their motives, their uncertain depths of malevolence. All of this before the actual task of circumnavigating the building at such a precarious height. With the horror plots, the only surety is that the something’s going to get you. Whether it’s the eponymous Trucks or The Mangler, it doesn’t really matter how or why they are now intent on destroying humans, it just matters that they do and are particularly effective at doing so. There’s not much else to consider and the suspense is built almost purely on the when and where this will happen, and the almost inevitable failure of the protagonist to evade this destruction.

Anyway, the last thing I wanted to do when writing about my reading of King’s works was to start critiquing the master.

My main feeling when reading the book was looking forward to getting onto the next novel. I’m a sucker for stepping into the worlds King creates and, even half way through, Night Shift, I was pining for that immersion and comprehensiveness. I know it’s a bit lazy to admit, but short stories demand much more immediate participation on the part of the reader. Because there isn’t the same level of exposition and so much is left to the reader’s imagination, you actually have to do some work to get the most from the story. The novels, however, do much more of the thinking for you. You can be picked up at the beginning, carried on a long and tumultuous journey, before being dropped off at the end. It’s also possible to go away and come back, picking up where you left of for another instalment of the story, like an episode of a long running serial. I know all of this goes against the reasons I gave for my love of short stories at the beginning, but that’s the reason I’m wondering how true my initial statement is these days. As I’ve said in previous posts, my reading time is limited and often comes at the end of long days of work and family life and a bit of escapism and entertainment is a lot easier to get into than obscure or dense narratives. As I said, lazy!

Perhaps, by the next collection of short stories, I’ll have gotten over this indulgent hang-up and will just be able to enjoy the stories for what they are.

Carrie - Film

I watched Carrie last night.  I enjoyed it about a hundred times more than the first time couple of times I saw it when I was younger.  Probably for the reasons I keep mentioning.

Anyway, in lieu of a serious discussion of the film I'm going to summarise a major theme thus:

Girls can be cunts and boys will do almost anything for a sniff.

Sorry Brian...

The Shining - Film

I finished reading The Shining on Saturday night and it was a bit late and with a belly-full of wine I didn’t think I’d make it to the end of the film. So, I resolved to do so at the next convenient opportunity.
6 AM, next morning and BOING!, my eyes spring open and sleep eludes me. That’s 6 AM on a Sunday morning, which is a catastrophe in anyone’s book. So, while it’ll be a push to fit the whole thing in before the kids wake up, it’s still dark, I can still have the room and TV to myself, so I tramp downstairs, make a cup of coffee and put the DVD in.


I’ve come to realise that rather than saying that I’m not much of a fan of Kubrick, I should say that I haven’t watched his films properly and didn’t appreciate the complexity of what he was doing. With that in mind, when I went out to buy The Shining on DVD in preparation for when I finished the book, I ended up buying a box-set of his last eight films plus the Jan Harlan documentary.


So, lights off, volume up.


As I’ve said before, comparing books and film adaptations and getting all bent out of shape about the divergences from verbatim is for whiny tits. They are different and for good reason. Kubrick’s film is his vision, not Stephen King’s.
I’ve seen the film before, but this time it hit home. There are times when you wonder whether Jack Nicholson was the right choice for Jack. From early on, you can see the psychosis bubbling under the surface. His cracking up isn’t a big step and I’m sure, even for those who haven’t read the book, it doesn’t come as a surprise.


I made it through the first 45 minutes or so when I heard my son chatting away to himself. Well, I initially just heard some noises and, being a bit on edge from the film, wondered what it was. I paused the film and went to the foot of the stairs to find that he was calling me. So, I went upstairs to find him leaning over the headboard of his bed and peering out the window to announce,
“Daddy, it’s snowing!”
I hardly watch any scheduled television and very rarely see the news or weather reports, so this snowfall came as something of a surprise. There wasn’t much on the ground at that time and it could have gone either way, but after three hours steady snow, we had to cancel the day’s plans (cinema followed by dinner at the mother-in-laws) and were effectively, although much less dramatically than it sounds, snowed in. At this point I had to leave it there and, far from contemplating a bloody conclusion to the day as the mildest of cabin fever seeped in on the heels of the Tinkerbell dvd followed by lashings of Thomas the Tank Engine, we made the best of it.
I eventually finished the film that night. Awesome.
I know many people have a problem with film adaptations for not sticking to the source, but the few I’ve watched so far, ‘Salem’s Lot (2004), The Shining and Carrie last night have been so much better for having just read the books. Far from spoiling them by taking away any of the surprise of the plot turns etc. you can appreciate the film much more as ‘the film.’ There’s no need try to work out motives or who did what (or even who’s going to do what) and, a bit like the inverted detective story format favoured by Columbo and Hitchcock among others, you are free to sit back and revel in the spectacle of it all. Done well, you can see the actors breathing life into the characters, see the director’s take on the vision and, done badly, you at least get a reminder of the Stephen King story and, quite often, a nudge to read the novel or story again.

Night Shift

20th Feb...
I'd been looking forward to reading this as my first experience of Stephen King's short stories.  I'm a big fan of short stories and wanted to see how he fared without the usual 500-1500 pages.  It was only when I picked up the book and made a start on Jerusalem's Lot, that I remember having read The Body years ago.  Whether I actually read the whole of Different Seasons, I can't be sure.  I'm leaning towards thinking not, as I'm sure I would remember having read Rita Heyworth... and Apt Pupil as I've seen the films (who hasn't).

Jesus, sorry.

Short stories are awesome.  Let's see how awesome King's are...

The Shining 5th-20th February 2010

Amazing!!  More brain vomit to come.

This is my favourite read of this project so far. While it was quite difficult to read the book without seeing Jack Nicholson, his hairline and eyebrows, it was long enough since I’d seen the film to not have Shelley Duvall or Danny Lloyd in mind. I had someone else completely in mind for Halloran, but can’t, for the life of me, think of his name at the moment, or anything he’s been in to be able to look him up on IMDb.com. It’ll come to me.


One of the things that struck me when reading The Shining was, having set up this mammoth task, I’m always conscious of keeping it moving and keep catching myself looking at the road ahead, rather than where I’m planting my feet. Due to the express purpose of this mission of immersing myself in the experience of the books, this will never do.

Related to this is the defence mechanism I tend to feel kicking in when the horror/suspense of the plot situations sometimes hit and other times they don’t. For example, when I read the part where Danny has slipped the passkey into the lock of Room 217 for the first time and, thinking better of it he walked away and had the encounter with the fire hose. I read it, and realised that despite the language, pacing and suspense of the writing, all of which, when I read it a second time, should have had me gripped and feeling Danny’s fear. However, I read it matter of factly and a plainly as any other prosaic plot turn. I think a big part of this has to do with something I heard Neil Gaiman say in an interview (yep, the same one where he described a book as a movie without a budget) where he discussed the disparate attitudes of adults and children to his book Coraline. He said how adults had seen it as a horror tale, whereas children viewed it as an adventure story. He put the children’s point of view down to their conviction that everything will turn out alright in the end. It sounds about right; there are no Arlington Road endings in Disney family favourites. So, while I know that things aren’t necessarily likely to come to a happy conclusion with his books, for the ones that I have read or seen the film at least, I know how things turn out, and with that in mind, the story marches inexorably to that end and despite any plot twists and turns, there are no real surprises.

So with these two factors, it’s taking some concentration to stick to my intended modus operandi. With the one’s I have read before, I’m fascinating in the language, the characters and, above all the story. In that respect, I loved The Shining and am already looking forward to reading it again in the future.

I read somewhere (and hope I’m not making this up) that Stephen King referred to his books as dating quickly. By that I mean they are entrenched in the time in which they were written. So far, I’d agree. From references to cars, popular culture, and in ‘Salem’s Lot, Ben’s presumably near-full tank of gas costing a little over $3, it’s not hard to judge the year of writing. It’s not all that related, but when I picked up the book, I saw it had been published in 1977, the same year as I was born. That got me to thinking that the book and I will always be the same age (I know that’s obvious) and as such, we have been around for the same amount of time. I’m not sure that’s as significant as I’d like, the more I think about it. What I do think is that I’ll never have a static relationship with the book. While the book has had thirty odd years to be read, digested, analysed, and to suffuse itself into our consciousness, I have had the same amount of time to grow, learn, develop and cultivate a mind with which to receive it (not exclusively of course, I’ve got a bit more going on than that.) Like I said, I think I’m inventing significance, or at least not explaining it properly, or perhaps misinterpreting the significance. Fuck it.


If you haven’t read The Shining, do.

'Salem's Lot - 2004 Mini-series

I finished watching the 2004 ’Salem’s Lot TV mini-series last night. I watched it over two nights due to its almost three hour runtime and wanting to make sure that had some time on both nights to keep on going with The Shining.
Before I started this project, I was speaking about it to a friend who has read a lot of Stephen King and we got on to the point of the film and TV adaptations and he said he hoped I wouldn’t be wasting my time with some or most of them. Of course, I have pretty much ignored his advice.
I know some are better than others and some, as films in themselves, without the reference point of the novels or stories, are dire. I am prone to accommodating my obsessions, though, and can already see myself going against my better judgement and adding any adaptations to my LOVEFiLM online DVD rental list soon after closing the book.
One of the things that steered me towards not considering it to be a massive waste of my time to watch these adaptations is an interview I heard with Neil Gaiman. When asked why he subsequently wrote a novel of the TV series Neverwhere he said that he saw the book as a ‘movie without a budget’ (I’m a little reticent to put that in quotation marks as I can’t remember the exact wording and haven’t got the interview to hand). Anyway, this idea rings true with me. It’s part of why I love books and reading. Your enjoyment of a book is a subjective thing. Regardless of the quality of the writing, it’s the depth of your imagination that brings the words to life and injects vividity into the black and white of the type. And imagination isn’t bound to or restricted by how much you’ve got to spend on special effects and how advanced these technologies are. Stephen King’s a great writer, so he puts a great movie into your head. It’s a comparative interest, then, to see someone else’s imagining of the story, the characters and the action.
It’s interesting to see what they include and omit, what they alter or invent and to consider the reasons, obvious, less so or purely cynical, for doing so.
So, the ’Salem’s Lot as imagined by Mikael Salomon and Peter Filardi…
Of course, it was hampered by budget, strange performances from Donald Sutherland and Rutger Hauer and, of course, Rob Lowe was is it. And not forgetting, it’s always nice to see that my teen crush, Samantha Mathis, is still working. They also changed quite a bit of the book. But it wasn’t horrible.  (By the way, I can't be bothered hyperlinking anymore.  You know how Google, Wikipedia and IMDb work.)


My main enjoyment came from reliving my imagining of the book while seeing someone else’s. Having just read and enjoyed the book, it’s a shame that, due to my need to keep things going with this project, I have to put it down and pick up the next one. There isn’t a lot of time to dwell on it, consider it and let the whole thing sink in. With some of the books, The Shining in particular, I plan to reread at some point. It will be a long time in the future, but it’s on my ‘to do’. At least with Kubrick’s film and the mini-series whose script he oversaw, I can stay in the world of the book while I move on to Night Shift.


I seem to have forgotten to say that anyone who says that a film isn’t as good as the book on which it is based is a tool. It goes without saying. The two are incomparable.

The Shining

Once again, this is one of the books that I have already read. I’m not sure whether I saw the film before reading the book, although I’ve certainly seen it since. Perhaps I merely knew the basics, particularly the “Here’s Johnny!” scene and picked up the book at home (my parents seemed to have quite a few decent books lying around when I was young (One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and Kramer Vs Kramer are ones I remember most clearly – maybe they only read novels that had been adapted to film, who knows), although they’ve never been what you’d call readers. These days, such a description would be doing them a disservice as, my mum particularly, consistently has a book on the go.

Anyway, the reason I mention the film is that it’s barely possible to conceive of the novel without the image of Jack Nicholson in your head as well as so many of the scenes from the seminal film. I’m going to do my best to separate the two as I re-read it, concentrating more on the writing and allowing myself to follow the story as Stephen King told it. Only then will I go back to the film and try to see that in as great a degree of isolation as possible.

Out of the books I’ve already read and those of which I haven’t, but know something about, this is one that I’m most looking forward to and will be opening myself up for.

Rage 31st Jan - 5th Feb 2010

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rage_(novel)

I read Rage as a kid and am, thankfully, not one of those dicks who thought emulating Charlie Decker would be a good idea. When I initially read that Rage had been taken out of print in reaction to school shooting/hostage incidents, I didn’t realise just how many there had been. I, of course, live in the UK where Bill Hicks’ bit on hooligans isn’t exactly wild hyperbole. Kids generally take knives to school here, not guns.

I was going to say something about censorship and that, in this case, that conscience driven self-censorship, is sad and (I hate to use the word) unfair. People are dicks and insist on pissing in the punchbowl. However, I don’t have a particularly informed opinion on adolescent crime, the availability of firearms and the root causes of kids shooting up their schools and classmates. And I don’t really have the time to get one. So, I won’t waste my time or yours opining on it.

Why not read Mr. King’s own word on the subject - http://www.horrorking.com/interview7.html

Rage

I don't know whether it was a test, but when I was first talking about doing this, a friend asked me whether I would be reading King's 'Bachman' novels. I said 'of course'.

I'd read them before when I was younger and they may well have been the first things I read by him. I remember seeing 'The Bachman Books' lying around at my parents and picking it up a number of times before actually reading it. I'd already seen the Arnie film of 'The Running Man' and at a tender age, thought it was great. Being well shy of the '18' certificate probably added to my estimation of it and also made watching someone being cut in half with a chainsaw one of the best things I'd ever seen. Particularly when followed by the cutting line - "What happened to Buzzsaw?"

"He had to spleeet."

Eventually, I decided to read 'The Running Man'. That led on to the the other three. "The Long Walk" was the stand out for me and, aside from the obvious factor of the anal comprehensiveness of this reading mission and the way he has since (unlike the original four) published books as Richard Bachman despite everyone knowing it's Stephen King, it's the main reason for my including all of his Bachman novels.

So, on with Rage.

'Salem's Lot - 18-31st Jan 2010

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27salem%27s_Lot

I finished 'Salem's Lot' today and really enjoyed it. I hadn't read it before so it was good to go on a journey of discovery with the big guy, rather than an (admittedly illuminating, entertaining and worthwhile) retread of previously covered ground, as with Carrie.

King talks of the effect Dracula had on him when he read it as a youngster and it was reassuring to be reading something with more in common with Stoker and the old school than the glut of airbrushed, teen-angst vampire romances that we're being subjected to these days.

I think it would be over-dramatic and a bit of a lie to say that I had a nightmare during the course of reading 'Salem's Lot', but I did have a spot of 'irrational mind activity' similar to when I watch a horror film that gets under my skin. When I say they get under my skin I certainly don't mean that I believe that this shit could happen to me e.g. the supernatural stuff of j or k-horror or a good old demonic possession. I'm an atheist so know that it's all bollocks. It's all a matter of being swept up by the storytelling, empathising with the characters and fearing the unknown or the thoroughly terrifying specifics of the beastie's actions and capabilities. It all comes down to these factors. And Stephen King knows his stuff.

So, anyway, I'd got to the bit where Mike Ryerson stay's at Matt Burke's house and dies and I called it a night. I fell asleep fine but an hour later, I woke up with a start and had the fear. I'd heard a loud noise, so I'm convinced someone's downstairs nicking the new telly or has kicked the back door in. So I creep down to check, shitting my pants despite knowing there isn't a vampire waiting for me and the back door will be intact and the telly still there. I get back in bed and quiz my wife on what this noise could have been. She's a lighter sleeper than me and didn't hear a thing. I've since concluded it was her 'tractor engine' snoring and have left it at that. The thing was, it then took me a while to get back to sleep and the next morning, although a bit out of sorts, inconvenienced by the lost sleep and annoyed by letting a vampire story affect me like this, I was also pleased that it did have an effect on me. I'm throwing myself at his mercies and am depending on his talents to take me places I've never been. Otherwise I'm proving two of my friends right in their assertion that I am wasting my time reading two or three Stephen King novels, nevermind all of them, one after the other.

The rest of the book didn't have nearly the same effect on me. I've a feeling I've let the recent cartoonising and cauterising of the vampire legend taint the true terror inherent in its premise and details.

Or maybe I just rushed it.

'Salem's Lot

I started this last night - 18th Jan 2010. It's one I haven't read before, so I'm buzzing off that for a start.

Carrie - 14-18th Jan 2010

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrie-(novel)

I finished Carrie last night - first book down. Plenty to go. I read it quite quickly, but then again, it's a short book. It's one that I've read before, although I can't remember it being an epistolary novel - I know, go figure. I guess it must be nearly twenty years since I read it. Having already read the book and seen the film, there were no surprises with the general plot and, as a horror, it didn't really touch the sides. I no doubt rushed it in the race to get things going but it was a good introduction and proof that, even at his young age when writing, he had it.

Maybe I'll come back and say more, but the last thing I want to do is go down the reviewing road. That's not the point of this. It's supposed to be a blog of the effect of reading one of the most prolific and well known horror writers of our times.

Carrie

I finally got this mission underway on Thursday 14th Jan with King's debut novel, Carrie.

The library so far...

This the collection so far. My sister picked up Salem's Lot, The Shining and The Tommyknockers on her last trip to the States, but I haven't seen her since she got back.

I had plenty of luck with the charity shops between Christmas and New Year, my sister got me three for my birthday and my mother-in-law got me Under the Dome for my birthday. I'm over half-way through American Gods now, so the beginning is in sight.

Five more...

I went through to Sheffield today, to the always rewarding Oxfam bookshop and picked up five more. Needful Things, Bag of Bones, The Dark Tower I: The Gunslinger, The Dark Tower III - The Wasteland and The Dark Half.

Result.

Annoyingly, I hadn't taken my list with me and couldn't remember which four novels constitute the collected Bachman books. As a result, I didn't buy Thinner. I'm a douche.

Anyway, here's the eighteen I have so far...

Why? - Part 2

The more I think about how vast this task it, the more I think I should have a better reason for reading all of Stephen King's fiction in order of publication than 'something to do'.

The interesting thing is that, so far, only my wife Lisa has actually asked why I'd want to do such a thing. With such a huge bibliography, and as most will know, King's not one for knocking out 150-200 page novels, his are generally the size of house bricks, I'm going to be reading nothing but Stephen King for, at the very least, the next three to five years. That simple issue of the exclusion of all other authors for such a long time unsettles me a bit, never mind the fact that King is generally a 'horror writer'. It's going to be a long and disconcerting journey (something I'm counting on, otherwise what would be the point?) that may well unhinge me in some way.

But the length and intensity of this project appeals to me. The endurance factor and total immersion in his work seems to me to be the purest way of appreciating, experiencing and respecting the author and the material. It's a bit like watching the extended DVD versions of all three Lord of
the Rings films in one day. Something I've managed twice. For those 12 hours-ish, you live the story, the conflicts, the loss, the redemption and resolution and it's such a satisfying commitment to the work.
Of course, it's nothing like that at all, but you get it...don't you?

I keep mentioning stories. I love stories. Always have. I read like a bastard when I was a kid and it has stuck. I've always loved the deeply personal aspect of reading. It's just you and the book on a journey together. And I definitely don't mean in the X Factor journey from auditions to crashing out in the live finals cliche. It's almost like a virtual reality machine, but vastly cheaper and more mobile. They suck you in and take you for the ride. Unlike many, that has been my solid modus operandi for reading...let the author take you. Don't try to second guess where it's going or whodunit, let the writer lay it all out and work his magic without trying to undermine him.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating completely passive readership. There has to be a level of engagement and dialogue between writer and reader.

Whatever...

I've never been a big fan of writing or reading book reviews. My love for books has always been in the moment of reading. In the midst of story lines, of chapters, of sentences I am captivated. I am held by writers and their expansion of ideas, plot turns, narrative arcs, ability to convey the purest of universal truths in the most everyday events. Jesus, a turn of phrase can take my breath.

That's part of why I love reading. And that's part of why I like Stephen King and am confident that building on my youthful encounters, I will come to love his work.

I'm racking my brain but the only book I can think of that has made me cry, aside from the Bill Hicks biography by Cynthia True is The Long Walk by King writing as Richard Bachman. If that isn't a reason to order more drinks from his bar, I'm not sure what is.

Why? - Part 1

One of the main catalysts in my decision to read all of Stephen King from start to finish was Ryan McKenney from Trap Them and his blog http://insomnialways.blogspot.com/

For anyone who doesn't know of the band, they are tremendous. If you have a palate for hardcore punk/grind/d-beat, you're in heaven. If you also get wood at the idea of a guy who writes lyrics set in and about a fictional ghost town, then meet your new favourite band.

Anyway, the guy's compelling and here are two King related bits from his blog.
The first is a feature on the Decibel Magazine website where he was asked to pick his Top 5 King works.
http://decibelmagazine.com/Content.aspx?ncid=336222

And the second is an essay on reading and Stephen King.
http://insomnialways.blogspot.com/2009/01/constant-reader.html

Clearing the decks

I feel a bit like I've shown you my morning wood the day before there's any chance of us getting it on. Peaked too soon might be deemed to be on the grandiose side, but the fact is that I've put the wheels in motion on an admittedly ludicrous project and, as I've said I won't be starting until the new year, this blog is a bit like one of those "In Construction" pages people put on the pages of their sites they haven't got around/couldn't be arsed to do.

Shit.

So, I'm left with two options.

1. Let it go stagnant for the next month or so, only updating the bibliography as and when I find the books lurking in charity shops or jumble sales etc.
Or
2. I could do a bit of background on why I've decided to set myself this project/mission/"spirit walk" as some sort of prologue to the blog proper, more about why I've chosen Stephen King and tell the tale of acquiring the books.

Now, I am acutely aware that blogs are the most self-aggrandising, piss in the wind, auto-fellatory, faux-significant entities in the cosmos. So don't ever think that I think this has any real importance. It is merely the best way for a few friends who think this is an ok/terrible idea to keep tabs on my deteriorating grasp on reality and see how I write, or just which new words I've learned recently, but haven't figured out yet how to use properly.

So, I'm going with option two. I'm going to offer some prologue or introduction before I get my head down for the long haul.

The sole reason for not having launched straight into Carrie the moment I dreamt up this project is twofold, and yet really the same thing twice.

I had a couple of books out from the library that I'd already renewed twice and thought I'd better just read (Battle Royale and Sin City Vol. 2 - A Dame to Kill For) and I've also bought a few books recently that I'm really looking forward to reading. It's all just clearing the decks. I'm always buying books, in the hope that I'll find the time to read them. Some can more patiently stare at me from the shelves for the next few years, but there are a couple that I insist on reading before I begin my King affair.

Here they are















American Gods - Neil Gaiman
2666 - Roberto Bolano (if any one knows how to get the ~ over the n on here, please let me know. I hate to be rude.)
The Devil in Amber - Mark Gatiss
Twenty Thousand Streets Under the Sky

The first two are books that I'd wanted to check out after seeing Ryan McKenney, singer for the band Trap Them mention them on his blog - http://insomnialways.blogspot.com/. There's a shred of correlation here, as reading McKenney's blog was one of the catalysts for me starting this project. More on that in the next post.

In the throes of my fledgling excursion into reading graphic novels, I had a go at Sandman. I failed. Considering the boundless praise on the back of the volumes they had in my local library at the time, I was a bit perplexed to not make it past the first ten or so pages (I'm sure I'll give it another go). As always, when I read an author new to me, I go down the wikipedia route and find a bit more about the person who has just taken me on that wild ride. In this case, it was a search to see what I had missed. I reasonably concluded that I must have something wrong with me if I don't like Neil Gaiman. So I bought American Gods to allow him to convince me.

I'm not sure about 2666... From the heft of the tome and the comments I've read about it's readability, it may cause cracks in my skull and, considering how I'm hoping to motor through these before I start into King, I've a feeling I'm echoing the implausibilty of the project as a whole in thinking I'm going to get through it in a month, nevermind the other three.

Mark Gatiss' second book should be a steady jaunt. I've a strange fondness for him from his League of Gentlemen days and his turn in the middle episode of Psychoville was sublime. He can also write an erudite, crafty and gentle tale.

I've had designs on reading some Patrick Hamilton after reading Dan Rhodes - http://www.danrhodes.co.uk/, one of my favourite authors opine, on his greatness. All these years later, I buy the book and then come up with a plan to exclude him from my consciousness for another 3-5 years. Brilliant.

So, after all that thinking out loud, I'll leave 2666 for the time being. Maybe my mind will be so fucked when Stephen King's had his way with me, it'll be like reading a Ladybird book...

Oh, I'm also only 1/5 of the way through The Book Thief by Markus Zusak.

Double shit.

The sooner I wrap this up, the sooner I can knock these off and clear the decks.
Luckily, I know that no one is waiting with baited breath for this blog...