www.liljas-library.com/article.php?id=6872
It’s a Holly Gibney book in which the coronavirus plays a big role.
www.liljas-library.com/article.php?id=6872
It’s a Holly Gibney book in which the coronavirus plays a big role.
I know a lot of people don't like Holly, but I love her. This is great news for me!
I like her more than when she first appeared but it’s crazy to think how she’s on her way to surpassing Roland as King’s most used character. Just three more books before they’re tied at eight novels and a novella.
I'd love another Holly book. A book where the 'rona is a plot point? Not so much.
She’s a great character in my eyes. Easy to root for and never bland. I am excited.
If it's a COVID-19 book, interesting it's supposed to be sent in 2021 and not 2020.
I don’t have issues with Holly. It’s just in the past, his books have been mostly new ideas and different. He said it himself in the interview thst he quit reading 3 authors because they became so predictable. I love Connelly, but he uses the same characters over and over. Holly disposed of the last bad “guy” to easily. That was my problem in Dr Sleep too. The main character was able to dispose bad guy - Too easy.
I'll read it but not with great enthusiasm. Holly is not very interesting. Recycling a character over and over is a lazy way to write and read books. It avoids having to develop and introduce a new character to an audience. Just plug an existing character into a new plot and hit play over and over again. It's a big tactic in the detective genre. And I definitely agree about the criticism of how easily she disposes of the bad guys. Making great use of a sock.
It's hardly a case of King reusing Holly to prevent creating new protagonists. After the Mercedes trilogy she appeared halfway through The Outsider which at that point already had its own protagonist and supporting cast. And he's been writing numerous other books during this period. so it's not like every other novel is "the continuing adventures of Holly Gibney".
The reality is King keeps on revisiting Holly because, well, he really likes her: "I just love Holly, and I wish she were a real person and that she were my friend, because I’m so crazy about her." [source]
Plus King has been really into detective fiction over the past several years, so that shows. I don't mind it at all, and I don't think it's copy-pasting, either. Setting a novel in a COVID world sounds cool and urgent.
If SK writes it I'll reserve it at the library (like I have been doing post 11/22/63) and gladly read it.
I like Holly; King's use of her in Hodges trilogy/Outsider (I haven't yet read If It Bleeds) felt pretty organic, so no problem for me there (yet).
The COVID factor is another story; I can tell exactly where that is going to go (the attitude, not the plot) and have no interest (I'll read reviews, of course, and it's possible I'll eventually read it, but my default position will be skip unless reviews clearly show that I'm wrong).
There are more good detective fiction writers than you can throw a brick at. In contrast, there are very few good horror writers. I like both genres but would prefer to see King write more horror or supernatural books because of that and horror is what he does best. Also no one is getting any younger. So for every new Holly book there is one less horror-themed book.
I prefer King when he's exploring other genres. I feel like he's done everything there is to do with horror. I read his books for his language and it's comfortable going back to someone whose writing abilities I admire so much, over and over. So plot or characters or genre is almost secondary to me. Obviously, if it's a great unputdownable plot like Under the Dome or 11/22/63, that's all the better. But yeah, I'm sure King won't abandon horror or supernatural stuff altogether until the end of his days, but I'm glad he's getting into other things, other than horror. He's never been a pure horror writer, anyway.
I also enjoy the other stuff, but I miss the feelings I got from:
- when the sun was going down near the end of Salem's Lot
- COME HOME COME HOME COME HOME (it gives me goosebumps just typing this)
...to name two. It just feels like it's been a while.
Yes, it's been a while since he wrote a true "horror" novel. Revival was touted as his return to horror but that book was a big disappointment. Most of his books have at least some supernatural element, though. It may be somewhat unfair to compare the aging King to the guy from the 70s and 80s but the difference between those books and the tepid novels he has released in the last decade or so is stark. The last King book that I enjoyed was 11.22.63. Hard to believe but I think that was released a decade ago or so. That was a great one that ranks with his best in my opinion. The others since then were not very good and a few were even dreadful.
I don't mind him exploring other genres but he's now written several detective/crime books. He is not just exploring that genre, he has taken up residence. Maybe it is nostalgia for his early books, but I find his more recent books to be fairly mundane and boring with characters that are portrayed as laughable stereotypes or hark back to the 70s as though King has been trapped in a time capsule. Kids still playing board games, people giving each other high fives etc. It's clear that King hasn't had much exposure to normal people including kids or minorities in the last couple of decades. And he overcompensates by writing about them as he envisions them to be or as he sees them on TV or through his woke prism. In his early days, King was a great storyteller, but an average writer. Over the years that has flipped. His plots have become mundane, even laughable and his characters are difficult to care about. Just cardboard figures to move the plot. How many characters in Billy Summers went nowhere or were uninteresting? Most of them. I miss the raw power of his early books and stories.
Revival was a great example of what I mean by a supernatural-tinged one; while bits of that are present, it's generally a slow-burn thriller type thing, not horror at all really. I think that was the one for which King said (pre-release) something like "you'll need to get your nerves ready for this one," and boy was that overselling it. I liked it, but it was no headliner.
I don't expect a 74-year old man whose children have since all grown up to be "down with the kids" but I had no problem believing the characters in The Institute for example. Likewise with him writing minorities; Jerome wasn't his best character but Kalisha in in The Institute was fine.
As has been said before... I don't think we will ever get something like "It" again. In that sense, he's probably peaked. But the idea that King has lost his touch is completely premature. He's always had his hits and misses. In 2006 he did Cell and Lisey's Story, neither of which are on many King fans' top ten lists (I know Lisey is King's favorite). Then over the next five years he gave us Duma Key, Under the Dome, 11/22/63, The Wind Through the Keyhole and Joyland. Some of those are in my opinion among his best. 11/22/63 in particular seems to be a top five book for many people.
More recently, King has went from Sleeping Beauties which is IMO one of his worst to The Institute which, while not his best, was still a very engrossing and fun novel that kept me hooked throughout. Again, hits and misses.
My major problem with The Institute was that the characters (mainly kids) felt dry and flat to me, like penciled in "characters" and not real people. This was strange; usually even in his lesser works, King characters feel pretty real to me.
I don't contend that King is out of touch; I might actually prefer that to his current habit of making a point that he's going out of his way to be "with it" (criticizing as "outdated" the idea that a male character in The Institute didn't want to be seen crying in front of others, and woke-isms galore sprinkled throughout that and Elevation). This doesn't ruin his recent fiction for me, but it is distracting, and distractions aren't fiction's friend. It feels mighty contrived and stands out like a strobe light every time he intentionally throws a bone to "newer ideas" as if to say "gee how dumb we all were until the kids handed me these notes 5 minutes ago."
Im about 75% through Billy Summers, and hasn't been much of that, if any. It's set in 2019, so some of his characters make passing references to Trump - pro and con. But the younger character wasn't obnoxiously woke - or even very woke at all - and neither was the tone of the book.
I'm not at all concerned about COVID being a plot point of the new book. Our entire society was changed for 18 months - it stands to reason that writers are going to write about it. And no doubt some of King's characters will still complain about Trump ... and some won't. Just like real life.
HBJ
Right. And King was making political jabs at political figures as far back in The Shining.
On top of that King has always been political. There’s a lengthy chapter in It detailing the homophobia in Maine culminating in a hate crime that was based off a real incident at the time. The abortion debate was a huge part of Insomnia with the climax involving terrorists attacking a woman’s clinic. These are just what come to mind off the top of my head.
The idea of King that King inserting politics into his work as just something he did recently to hop on the ‘woke’ bandwagon is unfounded.
While I won't know what's in a particular King novel until I read it, and my hope is that I'm wrong, I think it comes down to how successfully he can keep his Twitter feed out of his work, and based on bits of Elevation, The Institute, and the Hodges trilogy, I'm concerned that he might not.
For the record, I would find it just as dull if I shared his positions (I don't want characters to slap each other on the back and compliment each other's MAGA hats).
Normally I wouldn’t expect passing references to be obtrusive, but I’ve heard from someone who started Billy Summers that the 5 Trump references he noted in the first 57 pages caused him to stop reading it (at least temporarily).
I would be very happy to be proved wrong about Billy Summers.
I agree it stands to reason that writers will tackle it, but I doubt his ability (or willingness) to do so without politicizing it (he almost certainly will pick a bone with someone, and it ain't going to be China).
I would be very happy to be proved wrong about this future novel.
Specific occasional jabs are one thing; ongoing fixation with the specific individual about whom his side of the political spectrum has obsessed for 6 years is another.
Homophobia isn’t political (those who disagree on gay marriage agree that violence against gay people is unacceptable); it only becomes political if/when one side tars the other with imagined support for it.
The Mellon incident was notable and informative in the context of It because of what it said about Derry (willingness to ignore witnessed horror, primarily the widespread disappearance of children - also apolitical, unless some thought conservative readers rooted for Pennywise) and what it said about those who attacked Mellon (who acted on behalf of their twisted ideas about, and their insecurity with, their masculinity - not on behalf of the Reagan agenda).
While abortion battle lines do tend to follow political positions, as you note, those that attacked the clinic didn’t do so because they were conservative, they did so because they were terrorists (not to mention under the influence of "higher level beings" that manipulated characters in order to ensure the death of a particular character).
All of which is to say: while King has done a good job involving and examining social currents in America through things like Mellon, Susan Day, and others, this isn't what readers like myself are referring to.
...and I still like Holly.
...to take another crack at the dead horse, I suppose everything comes down to the delivery: I found Barlow's anti-capitalist/anti-American rant positively hilarious (Salem's Lot).
Five references in 50 pages is hardly a manifesto, and the references themselves are (if I recall correctly) more talking about whether a character supports Trump or not, rather than jabs or snide remarks at Trump himself. And the characters aren't divided into good and evil, or into smart and dumb, based on that preference, either. I'm not 100% sure I recall correctly, honestly, because the Trump references barely registered with me. They are not relevant to the story or characters. Anyone offended by those references is looking for a reason to get offended, in my opinion.
But you should read the book for yourself.
HBJ
Under The Dome is SK's most overtly political book with Big Jim Rennie and Peter Randolph as thinly disguised caricatures of Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.
For my own interest, I looked up the first five references to Trump in Billy Summers.
I assume these five passages were the five mentioned; I am reading these on Kindle so I don't know the page numbers, but the last one is 12% in which would be about 50 pages.
Spoiler tags, as I don't want to beat the dead horse even deader:
Spoiler:
All I can say is: judge for yourself. If I were particularly sensitive to criticisms about Trump or Trump supporters, I might take offense at one of the five references; my own reaction would most likely be to snort derisively and keep reading, though.
HBJ 09-23-2021 04:26 AMshaqI like Holly, but find the investigate crimes, supernatural tendencies, find and kill a little formulaic, but I like Kings writing so I will read.
Someone mentioned Roland, and I’m not sure why I went to this thought, but wouldn’t surprise me that one day, she may end up a gunslinger of sorts.
I’d like her stories to be a little less frequent, but he’s the boss. 09-23-2021 04:58 AMCyberGhostfacePeople are always fixated on whoever the president is. King has done a few digs at Trump but he hasn't written an entire novel with a Trump analogue yet like he did with Bush and Cheney.
Having gay characters experiencing homophobia period has been deemed political. I.E. it's with the Christian Right it's "the gay agenda". People were writing negative reviews for Elevation because it was "political" even though it was probably the most softball thing King ever wrote with as much edge as a butterknife. But hey, it's a lesbian couple experiencing prejudice, why does King have to go 'woke' etc,
Even if you are looking at it from as neutral perspective positive (I.e. they're being influenced by a cosmic force to kill someone) you still have pro-life activists attacking an abortion center. One of the main antagonists beats the crap out of his wife because she signed a pro-abortion petition.
If King wrote, in 2021, the same exact book in response to what's going on right now in Texas and the Supreme Court I have no doubt that the people who think King is too political and riding the woke train would attack him for it. 09-23-2021 06:55 AMRichardXQuote:To the extent that any politics needs to be included in King's books (and I'm not advocating that), it would have been somewhat more interesting if Billy Summers, as most military vets, had been portrayed as a Trump supporter instead of detractor. At least more realistic and intellectually honest. But King can't write a book in which a sympathetic main character, even an assassin, is portrayed as having any beliefs that differ from King's own. Thus, only anti-Trump types can ever be the good guy. King is trapped in the woke box and can't get out. The message of Elevation was particularly ironic. Basically that everyone should be more open minded and tolerant of other views. Sounds good. But that only applies when others are deemed to have the "correct" beliefs (i.e. the same as King). So the real message is that conservatives must change their views to be accepted or they are evil and racist. It's kind of humorous to promote tolerance and acceptance while constantly berating and demeaning others who have different views as King has done for years now on Twitter. 09-23-2021 06:59 AMmaeIf someone is racist, that's not a "view" to be open minded about. Tolerance means being intolerant of intolerance. 09-23-2021 07:52 AMBen MearsIf there were to be any covid related political views expressed in the Holly novel, the year it is set in (2020 or 2021) and the administration in charge at that time should have an impact on those views. If they are intellectually honest, that is. 09-23-2021 08:16 AMCyberGhostface 09-23-2021 09:47 AMRichardXThat's not the point obviously. The point is King gives the impression that those who have a differing view of politics from him do so only because they are bad people. For example, there are no good Trump supporters in his world. All 70+ million Americans who voted for Trump are white supremacists or uneducated rural hillbillies. You will never encounter a character in King's books who is a decent person and Trump supporter. They will always be depicted in a negative way (i.e. racist or stupid). Obviously, this does not promote the principle of tolerance when you vilify those with differing opinions. Very decent people can have views on abortion, death penalty, immigration, and many other issues that vary from King's without making them evil people. King's definition of tolerance is that others who disagree with him should change their minds. It doesn't work both ways, though. 09-23-2021 09:52 AMKingfan24