Anyone find Stephen King actually scary?

I'm a massive King fan. I've read nearly all his books and I love all of them (except Gerald's Game). I just never find myself looking over my shoulder or sleeping with the lights on once finishing one of his stories. In fact, I believe I was only truly scared by 'Salem's Lot.

My love of scary stories has desensitized me I think. I never get scared by any book.

But as I mentioned in another post, he did write one thing that has sort of crept into my mind from time to time that really gives me the heebie-jeebies.

In Gerald's Game (as you mentioned, not Stephen King's best book) that bit about the creepy man with his box of jewelry was really eerie. It didn't freak me out as I read it, but really keeps coming back to me in the years since.

'Salem's Lot didn't scare me because I honestly didn't like his Bela Lugosi vampire. The '70's miniseries did raise gooseflesh when the Glick kid was floating outside the window. That seems to be the scene that sticks with everyone. And I preferred their version of Barlow.

I haven't read all of his books, but the ones I have read - - while enjoying most -- didn't creep me out or anything. The tiny font The Shining I have irritated the crap out of me but once I got a better, readable copy, I liked it.

I've yet to be able to get into Desperation. I've given up twice already. Rather than scared I like to be creeped out. His books haven't done that for me, but I found most entertaining.

It is probably the only King book that scared me. That's because I have a very real fear of clowns. *blush*

His son's book Heart-Shaped Box had some parts that were very creepy!

Scaryguy,

How funny. I LOVED Desperation. Then I don't like the Dark Tower books that so many of his fans swear by. I guess SK has so many books in such a wide array of styles, there's something for everyone.

Oh! If you ever do finish Desperation, try to read The Regulators immediately afterwards. In fact, maybe you should try The Regulators and then try plowing through Desperation one more time.

Horror in any form has never scared me. I just like to read about other people having strange experiences. King's characters (and obvious love for them) are also a lot of fun and he always writes the inner monologues and thoughts of them very well.

Agreed about the creepy guy in GG, but what about the dog's dining habits. That was a nice touch.

It's been over a decade since I read SL, so I can barely remember it.

I'm currently reading Cell and I'm finding it, in a word, boring. 212 pages in and the only thing that's keeping me going is the fact that I'm invested for over 200 pages and I have a weird thing about finishing books (or movies).

I just get the feeling that King has used the same tropes so many times he just throws ideas into a bag and pulls out the ones he needs, like a painter using the same handful of colors repeatedly but putting them in different places on the canvas.

As for being scared...hell, the real world is scary enough, I can't imagine being scared by a book - except maybe the bible...that thing scares the crap out of me ;)

The first King I read was The Shining. I was newly married, living in a house I wasn't familiar with yet, and my husband was working night shift - so I was in the house alone. I had reached the part in the book where the topiary is chasing the kid and the wind made the bushes outside the window over the bed scratch the screen. Scared me right out of my nightgown!!

Bookmarque,

Jewelery guy was just so startling and out of left field. On the one hand I was like 'Okay Mr. King, that was just one step beyond acceptable coincidence for this story to sustain believability', but on the other hand it was the best part of Gerald's Game for me. It was such a weird image. And then to think later about what extreme danger she was actually in...

For me the dog was gross rather than scary, though it was a very memorable part of the book.

All this talk about it, I'm thinking of re-reading Gerald's Game just for those parts.

Shadow8pro,

The Bible doesn't scare me so much as some of its followers do, but that's a thread for a different message board.

Over at the group for Stephen King (Kings Constant Readers) we are kind of discussing Geralds Game (one of vaguest books in my opinion).

I loved It!

Well, I've only read the short story collection "Night Shift," but there were a couple stories that were pretty effective. One was "The Mangler"--large industrial machines are pretty scary. The other was "The Ledge"--not exactly scary, but really suspenseful. I don't think either made me feel jumpy, but it's been a long time since horror has affected me that way.

The Stand was the first book I ever read cover-to-cover that wasn't assigned reading. I loved it and it got me to go back and read everything he had wrtten before, starting with Carrie and proceeding in chronological order. I had everything he wrote, including Danse Macabre and other non-fiction books about him and his work.

I hate to say it, but I think King peaked early. Carrie, The Shining, Salem's Lot, those were easily his best works. Most of what he's written since then is too similar in tone and style for me.

Jseger9000I
"The Bible doesn't scare me so much as some of its followers do."

That's what I was getting at, but i was just trying to be polite.

There were a few scary ones, but scary is so relative. If you are a sixteen year old reading the shining while home alone at night, it's going to be much scarier than reading it as an adult in the daylight. For scary ones, I'd have to say The Shining, Salem's Lot, Pet Sematary, and maybe bag of bones and Cujo for pure suspense.

Shadow,

I hate to say it, but I think King peaked early. I don't know about that man. I personally wasn't too crazy about 'Salem's Lot. Also, don't forget immediately after that came The Stand (again, not a fav of mine, but many fans say it is theirs). I do know that every book up through Misery is a classic.

I will say that after that there was too much Dark Tower for my taste, but even later Stephen King had Desperation and The Regulators (two of my favorites).

There's been some decent stuff, but even by your accounting, that is up to Misery (and I agree that it's one of my favorites and I think one of his best), that came out in 1987. That was 20 years ago.

Carrie, Salem's Lot, The Shining, The Stand, Night Shift (which were the first short stories I read after reading Edgar Allan Poe) and Dead Zone, all among my favorites of his, were realeased before 1980. My other favorites, Different Seasons (with the classic Shawshank Redemption) and Pet Semetary, came out in 1982 and 1983.

Obviously it's just a matter of personal opinion, but he kind of lost me with Tommyknockers and I just haven't been that impressed with anything since (except for maybe The Green Mile).

I guess his "classics" are his older works by the simple definition of the word classic. But sometimes a book (or movie or album) comes out that you know is timeless, and I just haven't gotten that vibe from him in over two decades.

Around 1985 I started reading Clive Barker (ironically, on King's recommendation), so maybe it's just that my tastes started to run in a different direction, but I thought Barker's worker was darker and had more depth, more, I hate to say, imagination.

Of the 4 books of King that I've read so far, Pet Semetary has made me keep the light on at night. Insomnia was a total bore, Thinner was okay, and Misery was just great, but not scary to me.

Shadow,

Clive Barker pretty much lost me right after his six Books of Blood. Granted, his short work was darker and more imaginative than any horror I'd ever read before. (Don't agree about depth though. Even bad Stephen King has plenty of depth to it.)

Clive's novels though... I don't know. They aren't horror stories to me. They are dark fantasies and that just isn't my bag. I read all of them through the Everville. I still buy them when they come out, but they just sit on mt TBR pile. He's still a great writer, I'm just not enamored with what he's written.

Speaking of SK recommendations, I picked up Bentley Little for the same reason. I LOVE Bentley even if he is not the most consistent writer in the world. When he's good he's great!

jseger9000

You make a great point about Barker being more dark fantasy than horror (even though I think The Books of Blood were great).

I don't know Bentley Little. Any suggestions in the zomibe or PA realm?

I tried one BL & didn't like it much. Too many people doing stupid things over and over and over. Lacked realism. It was The Resort. I probably won't read another.

Shadow,

Bentley Little can be uneven. He has two different types of horror stories that he writes. One is straight up horror stories and the other is pitch black societal criticism/comedies as horror.

The closest I remember to zombies from Bentley Little would either be The Walking or The Return, but neither is Bentley at his best.

I'm not sure what PA is?

Anyway, some beginner recommendations:

The Ignored - (My favorite) A man who is so generic that he discovers he is 'invisible'. This was my first Bentley Little and I'd never read anything like it. Reminded me of my first Clive Barker though they are completely different writers.

The Summoning - Bentley Little does vampires. I don't go for Anne Rice weepy vampires. This is nothing like that.

The Association - A homeowners association from hell.

The Revelation - A religious shocker. His first novel. He won the Bram Stoker award for it.

PA = post apocalyptic, I think.

PA = post apocalyptic, I think. - D'oh!

I just finished Cell, and I hate to say it, but it was the most unsatisfying book I've read in as long as I can remember. Psychic, floating, pseudo-zombies (who don't do anything after the first few pages) who are infected by cell phones? Really?

Beyond the first scene there's almost no action. The psychic nonsense did nothing for me, and the resolution was, to put it mildly, ludicrous. I know he asks the question, 'what are the chances of finding his son?' But seriously, what are the chances?

I read that a woman had told Hitchcock after she saw Psycho she couldn't shower for a week. If this book was supposed to make me afraid of cell phones, it didn't. If it was supposed to make me afraid of Harvard, it didn't do that either.

I'm not saying a book has to answer every question it posits, but one or two would be nice. How did the pulse happen? Why did they do it? Or was it the machines? If this was global how would killing flocks here and there make them safe? Even if the signal did mutate, what are they going to do about all these useless, shambling people? Who was the guy in the hoodie....I mean why him and not any of the other tens of millions of phoners?

Not to be harsh, but reading this reminded me of why I stopped reading King in the first place.

Shadow,

Ouch! Good points though. In Cell's defense, I think Stephen King was playing off the helpless feeling an average person feels in a calamity. To me the book felt like it was informed by our current world situation and the absolute helplessness felt after something like September 11th or the London bombings.

It is strongly implied that the Pulse was sent out by terrorists and that the zombification and flocking were unintended side effects. That is never confirmed, but really if something like that happened and you dind't have access to TV or the internet, how would you find out?

I think the guy in the hood was just random. Somebody had to do the communicating for the flock.

I liked the ambiguity because you could tell that it was intended rather than the reult of poor writing (for an example of what I mean by that, try Simon Clark's Stranger).

jseger9000

I think you're right when you say that the implication is terrorists caused the Pulse. It is mentioned a couple of times, and the name of the book is, after all, Cell, obviously implying not only phones but terrorists.

I also agree that the hoodie guy was random, but I don't think the Harvard sweatshirt is random. Is King making a comment about the so-called intelligentsia in America? Or was that a smack at Dubya? (They did grant the guy an MBA.)

I like what he was trying to do: the isolation of this small group of people from the entire world, the breakdown of society, the collapse of civility (not only among the phoners but also among the survivors). The central question is a great one: what would people do if they lost their "conveniences?' No power, no way to communicate, no way to receive information, all while trying to escape/hide from "zombies." I just didn't feel the urgency or the fear which I believe would be so constant.

And frankly, I'm annoyed that he found his son just sitting on the side of the road. It was a little too clean. I know he'd been through a lot, but I felt that it was still a little too convenient.

I'm going to pick up Monster Island tonight on my way home. It seems to be a little more of what I'm looking for right now.

Shadow,

I agree with you about the son sitting by the side of the road. I thought it was going to lead to a Hollywood ending. But I let that slide because of the terrific way it ended the book. If it were a movie I could just see the audience anticipating what would happen... and the screen goes black.

You know, that Harvard shirt was tickling something in the back of my mind, but I never made the connection. Reading his recent interview in Time I wouldn't be surprised if your "smack at Dubya" theory was correct.

shadow8pro--

Monster Island is a fun one, man. I'd be interested to hear what you think of it when you're done.

I myself am a huge Stephen King fan and have been
grossed out by him on more than one occasion.
I have also been reading one of his books and one
second I'm scared and the next one I'm laughing
out loud hysterically. It's just that he said something
that really tickled my funny bone. Has this ever
happened to anyone else?

Librarianwannabe

I thought Cell might be Stephen King's way of relaxing and having a bit of fun with a book. It's not my favourite either but it's kind of fun in it's way. I know he has long been an admirer of the George Romero Dawn of the Dead film and perhaps he wanted to pay tribute to that. He's been through some tough times and finished off some epic stories with the Dark Tower series so perhaps he just needed to refresh himself with Cell.

Some of those groups of zombies in Cell were quite creepy (but zombies are one of the two things that always creep me out in a book or film. The other thing is anything about the devil.) I didn't think I was enjoying it at first either but I decided to read it as a kind of tongue in cheek nod to DotD and to the 1950's horror films he seems to love and after that I had a lot of fun with it.

The story of his that I think scared me the most is a short story in Night Shift about a man whose children have died and he is telling a psychiatrist that he believes a boogeyman has killed them. That story had me checking my wardrobe for years before I went to sleep and I still have to have the doors closed on it even now.

In DUMA KEY, King has made the idea of revenants scary again.

Jody,

Frank Darabont's first student film was an adaption of that Stephen King Boogeyman story. I think it's available on DVD. You ought to check it out.

You know, for some reason I tore through Skeleton Crew, Different Seasons and Four Past Midnight, but still haven't read all the stories in Night Shift, Nightmares and Dreamscapes or Everything's Eventual. I've loved what I've read from each, but haven't read any of these all the way through.

I can be thrilled by a King book, or any other in the "horror" genre, but I haven't been scared.

#31 jseger - I'd like to see that even though I have a feeling it will set me off with the wardrobe checking again. I know I won't find anything in the wardrobe but I also know if I don't shut the door, I will only have to get back out of bed to do it if I want to sleep.

I bet it would make a very creepy film.

# 28
I agree Librarianwannabe - I especially enjoy his made-up words ('Kinglish' I call it). Probably not what you meant and very childish I know, but even thinking about 'McArglebargle' still tickles me :o)

#33 Jody - I checked. Frank Darabont's student movie was another Stephen King story: The Woman in the Room.

However, it was released on VHS with another student film. That one was The Boogeyman. The tape is called The Night Shift Collection. Unfortunately it isn't available on DVD.

The Night Shift story that got me was the one about the astronaut with eyes on his hand. (I'm not at home, so I can't check the name.) The ending was pretty pridictable I guess, but I remember the sinister vibe I got from those eyes staring out of his hand.

I really never understood why King is considered by many "the king of horror". I've read Carrie (juvenil), The Shinning (boring as hell), "On Writing" (very good but, alas, it's not fiction) and I'm now reading "Misery" (50 pages on and so far it's very good) but it's not horror in any way.

Sorry, but books about girls with telekinesis and boys that read minds or whatever, are simply patetic.

For me, horror is Richard Laymon, among many others.

NIGHT SHIFT is the very first Stephen King book I ever read and also the one that hooked me into becoming a fan of his. After I finished reading
the book I just had to go out anf by all the
other books he had written up until that time.
I remember the book cover with all the eyes on
it really creeped me out. I think the name of the Story is called Battle Ground. Night Shift also has
The Mangler, Quitters, Inc., The Woman In The
Room, I Know What You Need, The Ledge and Strawberry Spring just to name a few. I remember reading The Ledge and Jerusalem's Lot which
later on would become Salem's Lot. When I was
reading The Ledge I kept thinking to myself
there is no way I could go out on the ledge
and walk around the building until I came back
inside again. I would've been terrified.

Librarianwannabe

Librarian,

Battleground is the one about the little army men.

The story with the eyes is I Am the Doorway.

#36 - Virose,

I think you need to open your mind to what can be a horror story.

King is 'the king of horror'... well, partly because with that last name it's an easy tag.

But let's be honest here: Stephen King is the finest horror writer since Edgar Allen Poe. (I love H.P. Lovecraft, but a good writer he ain't.)

There may be better writers who have written a horror story (Robert Louis Stevenson, say).

Then there are bucket loads of writers who write more 'horrific' horror (that would be folks like Richard Laymon or Edward Lee or Clive Barker).

But Stephen King is a guy that likes to tell scary stories and happens to be one hell of a gifted author. He would have been a successful writer whatever he wrote. He just happens to be drawn to things that go bump in the night.

Also you have to look at the history. Stephen King popularized horror in a way nobody else has. If you look back to when Carrie, 'Salem's Lot and The Shining came out, you'll see that he wasn't riding the wave of a horror boom in the book industry. He was creating that wave.

The reason for this is that he is able to draw in the readers that wouldn't normally go for a vampire or haunted house story by writing in detail about small town life and populating his stories with three dimensional characters.

Yea you're right about that I remember seeing Battle
Ground on tv. I Am The Door Way was still kind of creepy about the Astronaut that brought some kind
of Alien Virus back to Earth and he started to see all the eye balls on his hands. I would love to be around
a Camp fire someplace and have King telling Ghost
Stories.

Librarianwannabe

#36 - Without spoiling Misery for you in any way, there are moments that are very much horror, you just haven't got there yet.

Give PET SEMATARY a try. I love Richard Laymon too by the way. I think PET SEMATARY is the closest to true horror that King has been able to achieve up until this point. IT is a very close second IMHO.

I think that King even creeped himself out when writing PET SEMATARY.

Huge Horror Fan,

Good to see you again.

It and Pet Sematary are very good recommendations by the way.

I think the key thing to remember about the horror genre is its diversity. I'm reading a Paranormal Romance right now (never read one before) and while it falls under that big umbrella of romance that includes Fabio covered books, it still qualifies as horror.

Funny thing, I don't get afraid of the basement because of a book I read -- I guess I leave that for the movies -- but the odd, insistent upside-downess of the horror genre is what makes it what it is.

Horror is supposed to take things we take for granted (maybe even everyday things) and turn them, like a screw, ever so slightly. Now, that can be hardcore or soft (sorry for the porn analogy).

Soft: The priest at a local church is a vampire, looking for new converts.

Hard: the wine really is blood and the bread is dripping human flesh. And every one, including your tiny great grandmother, is gulping down this mixture with religious glee while you're the only one who can see and smell the real thing.

Some people would never read the latter, some the former because its too cliché or soft, but it all falls within that genre we all love.

Overall, I like King. I've liked more of his books than I've disliked. Plus, how many other authors can give you as many books to choose from? I think the more you publish the more you give critics. Imagine if King had only written a few books???

jseger9000:

King writes solely to sell books. OK, he likes to write and he's good at it, but he wants to sell a lot. That's why he writes this kind of "things", like paranormal girls bla bla bla...

And that's why he writes 2 books a year.

As I told you, I'm reading Misery and it's very good. But that's because it's the first book of King that I read where the characters aren't paranormal or things like that that simply put me off.

But of course I don't forget that he is a very important "horror" writer and he surely opened many doors to other horror writers.

Cheers

King has only slowed down after he had the near fatal
accident before that he was putting out 5 or 6 books
a year and would have several books on the NY Times
Best Sellers List at the same time.

Librarianwannabe

You have to give it to King though -- he certainly loves writing.

I heard a rumour that he was taking a break from writing and possibly thinking about giving it up altogether but I didn't believe it. I think perhaps he may take a break from publishing, but not writing.

For someone like him it would be like saying he was thinking about giving up breathing and I'm sure that if he never earned even one penny in his life from writing he would still be writing. It's not about the money (although it must be nice), it's something in him making him write. I'm sure that like the rest of us, he has bad days at work when he thinks he might give it all up for something else but ultimately it's what he does and what he loves.

Virose,

When Stephen King wrote those first novels stories about paranormal girls bla bla bla... that stuff was out of fashion.

He originally threw Carrie in the trash because he didn't think anyone would read it. That stuff sold because of his writing. It's not like his stuff sold because of what it was about.

I don't mean to come off as a King fanatic, but man, as a horror fan the man deserves utmost respect.

If he's only writing for the denero, how do you explain his Bachman books?

Also, if you like non-supernatural King, check out Different Seasons or Rage from the old Bachman books collection.

Good to see you too, jseger9000.

I will pop by once in awhile to catch up on the discussions. I am getting off topic, but have you made it to the Leisure Forum or are you still waiting for access?

Hey HHF!

I registered for the forums back in December and can log in, but still am not allowed to post. I just emailed them to ask what's going on. I'd kinda given up. Glad you reminded me.

If I ever get that sorted out, my username there is Atomic Punch! (I was thinking about changing my username here, but I'm kinda used to the one I have).

Cool name! I will make sure to keep an eye out for you. I had the same problems getting access to the site. I don't know if they are trying to drag you through the mud to see if you are worthy. Getting access was like going through the border nowadays. I hope to see you on there soon. I promise that you are in for lots of fun.

King writes because he's a born STORYTELLER. Not only that, but he's a writer with a muse that must look a lot like one of those cool old Ed Roth drawings of giant, slavering, bug-eyed monsters crammed into supercharged hot rods. It's obvious that King has simply been on fire for the last few decades. If he puts out two books a year, it's because they're THERE, and we readers can only reap the benefits.

Another - and perhaps the best - reason that he writes is that he obviously loves, and has great knowledge of and respect for, the horror genre. Despite his massive popularity, you can tell he's a Monster Kid at heart (and if you're a Monster Kid, you wear it on your sleeve).

I sure wouldn't want to stop for a minute if I had his drive and talent - would you?.

Thank you Ken, for summing up what I was trying to say in a better and more concise way.

I just finished Misery and let me say it's a wonderful book.

I shall read "Salem's Lot", King fans seems to love that book.

Lemmee know what you think of 'Salem's Lot. A lot of King fans swear by it, but it isn't one of my favorites.

I think it's more an 'important' book for the impact it had on the horror field than anything.

I just finished up Duma Key a couple of days ago. It was easily the best King I've read in a while.

Duma Key... Like Lisey's Story I barely know what that one is about. With Stephen King I know I'm going to buy the book regardless (once it hits paperback:)), so I don't much bother with the reviews. Glad to hear he can still hit a homer though.

King's "Room 1408" is genuinely terrifying; I honestly can say it's the scariest story I have ever read (skip the movie though). Other than that I enjoy his characterization and the nostalgia he injects into his stories (while re-reading IT I was actually annoyed when the horror interrupted particularly good "real life" passages), but I don't find any of them frightening in the least. Suspenseful sometimes, but not frightening.

I finished reading Duma Key a few weeks ago and immediately thought of this thread. It was pitched as being his scariest read in years. Was I frightened while reading it? No. Did I love it anyway? Absolutely. I often fell like his character development and insight take a back seat to the “horror” factor in his work. It’s great to get the heebie jeebies from a good scary story, but sometimes the it’s about a little bit more.

I strongly feel the need to chime in and ditto the general idea that King is an excellent writer who gets little attention to the fact because of the genre in which he chooses to write.

While rarely do I get the 'don't turn off the light' feeling when I read him (now that I'm physically an adult), I do appreciate his turn of phrase. He cracks me up.

I'm a huge fan too. When I start one of his book I can't let it go, yet they don't scare me. I feel tension while reading though :) One of my friend got scared by "It", she couldn't even walk in her apartment in the night alone.

You know, I love Stephen King, and I'll admit that some of his older work sent a definite chill up my spine--Salem's Lot comes to mind. But I've read a lot of horror, and I think the only two things I've ever read that actually scared me were In Cold Blood and The Collector of Hearts, "Posthumous" in particular.

#64 - Bentley, that's good to hear. I'm hoping to start Oates' Haunted soon, which seems like a similar collection.

First let me say that I am a King fan and I am one of his constant readers, whenever a new book comes out I grab it and read it immediately. However I do not believe that he is the "king of horror". I have never been scared by one of his books or short stories. I don't intentionally read Stephen Kings work for the "fear factor", instead I read his books because the characters always appealed to me as being "average Joes". I love the way that he could take such ordinary situations and distort them beyond recognition. I guess what I mean to say is that I like his plot techniques (although in a few books I found excessive wordiness/description to be a bother).

I know he can go on and on about describing things like how a half-full can of Coke Classic was left on the kitchen table and the sunlight was coming in through the window over the sink and how it reflected off of the coke can that was positioned at such an angle but that is what makes Stephen King, Stephen King. Sometmes I can be reading something from one of his books feeling scared one moment than immediately I break out laughing hysterically because of something one of the characters said or did that strikes me as being very funny at the time. Does this ever happen to anyone else or I am the only one this happens to?

beatles1964

#67 - Beatles,

You have a point about the intricate description that King indulges in, but for me it is all that detail (along with well written characters) that give his books that feeling of verisimilitude, that sense of place that I love so much. I know it isn't for everyone, but I can handle long-windedness if it is well written and interesting and for me Stephen King is both most of the time.

Yea I agree that his characters seem to jump right off of the page and you feel like if you met them in real life you could become best friends with them instantly and seem like you have know one another for years. You care about his characters and what terrible fates they seem to suffer through and feel sad whenever he decides to kill one of them off it's like losing someone you care very much about. I find myself rooting for them to escape whatever danger they may be facing at the time and am relieved when they barely do escape somehow at the last minute. Also for the most part the movie and mini-series versions of his characters seem to come across really well too. You either like them or hate them immediately like Flagg in the mini-series The Stand. You can also feel Sorry for them too especially if they were put in a horrible position to begin with they might not be such a terrible, horrible, evil person IF only the situations were different. Of course I find he more than most Horror Authors seems to go for the Gross Out, Sick to your stomach effect shock a lot of times. King's mind is twisted and bent which is a good thing for his fans.

One of my favorite King Quotes is "I have the heart of a little boy, and I keep it on my desk in a jar". And I like the fact that he starts out his novels with Dear Constant Reader. It's kind of like Alfred Hitchcock's Good Evening he would have in all of his books. They invite you to come into their world and walk down the path along with them but we don't know where the path is leading us to, only they know that dark little secret.And that path usually has some twists and turns along the way too that you never see coming until it's too late and is filled with all kinds of dangers that can jump out at you any time.

beatles1964

Beatles,

That quote: "I have the heart of a little boy, and I keep it on my desk in a jar" is from Robert Bloch (the author of Psycho), not Stephen King.

Otherwise, yeah, you are right on about his characters seeming so real.

I don't think King relies on the gross out (try Richard Laymon, Edward Lee, Jack Ketchum or J.F. Gonzalez for that), it's just that he creates characters you care about so that when something really bad does happen to them you realy feel it. He isn't afraid to 'cross over the line' when needed, but he is not the literary equivilent of a shock jock or anything.

I have to disagree with how Flagg was handled in the otherwise excellent TV version of The Stand. To me the actor they chose was too... beefy I guess. I pictured Flagg as more gaunt, more Heroin-chic than that.

I wasn't aware that Robert Bloch is credited with that quote. I have seen it being attributed to King. Thanks for putting the record straight. Some of his movies though aim straight for the gross out and as far I'm concerned he accomplishes that.

beatles1964

Actually beatles and jseger, I'm fairly certain I've seen him (King) say that quote in an interview. Whether or not it was his originally, I can't say. I may be wrong, but I recall it being from a TODAY Show interview a few months back.

That's what I thought too and why I attributed it to King as well. I have seen it in print in one of my Collectible King books I own. Maybe I should thumb through them and see if I can find the quote.

beatles1964

King must have been quoting Robert Bloch then. The original quote was “People think I must be a monster, but really I have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.”

Believe me, I don't mean this as a slam on King or anything remotely like that. He's one of my favorites whereas I've never read a Robert Bloch book. Just want to give credit where credit is due is all.

I never heard the quote that way before. This is news to me.

beatles1964

well it's funny as hell, I almost snorted out my tea.

I like king - not very scarey though - the one story that did disturb me was the raft in one of his short story collections.
I prefer Robert R McCammon - Swan Song (much better post apocalyptical novel than The Stand) & Wolf's Tale are excellent

I used to love him & read all his books when they came out. The Shining terrified me. I was home alone & had to have the tele on a comedy movie & read the book in the adds. When the hedge animals started moving I believe my hair actually stood on end.
Anyway, I read each book but then they started to seem a bit silly & I eventually gave him up.

#77 - yollom,

I like King - not very scarey though

I guess I can see where you're coming from. Really no scary book is really 'scary' to me. I think I'm jaded.

But like Beatles and I were talking about earlier, his strength is in creating three dimensional characters that you like and care about. Then when he does eventually drop them down the elevator shaft, well... it may not be scary, but it sure is a kick in the stomach (in a good way... is there a good way?).

I need to read more Robert McCammon. I've read Baal (which I barely remember at this point) and The Night Boat, which I enjoyed as a straight, unpretentious little horror story. I don't know how The Night Boat rates in his canon, but I could see reading it again.

Stinger will probably be the next book of his I read.

I did enjoy the excellent adaptation the '80's Twilight Zone revival did of his short story Nightcrawlers.

ive never been scared by stephen kings stories

ive always found the first few chapters of his books boring

its just all a taste thing

Like many here, and on the "Constant Readers" group, I have been reading King all my life. Many of his books gave me a good fright, though that has decreased as I have gotten older.

One of the things I love about him is the lack of shock-gore. I would rather be afraid because of my involvement in the characters then because something grotesque happens. And his characters are SO involving. Even when I don't love the story, I usually love the people.

One of the things I'm looking for on LT is writers who CAN scare me without grossing me out.

#81 - Exactly. I like that Stephen King isn't afraid of the gross-out. But he doesn't use it just as shock value (or I guess he does, but in a good way, as opposed to what I've read from, say Bryan Smith).

When something bad happens in one of his books, you may be shocked, but it is because you are so invested with his characters, rather than a reliance on cheap, over the top gore.

Some of his older books really scared me - I started reading Stephen King at the age of 14, starting with "It" which really scared me (I hate clowns). "Pet Semetary", which I read at the age of 15, I think, freaked me out - the scene in which the dead student comes back to haunt the main character, the dead kid... the whole book just scared me. I've reread it since and it doesn't have such an impact any longer - maybe it depends on the age you have when you read King? I no longer find him scary; "It", today, is just a nice horror story with lots of monsters in it but nothing more. The last book by King that freaked me out was "Gerald's Game"; whenever King decides to introduce psychological threats, he's really really good. And in his short stories; someone mentioned the story about the raft - that one disturbed me as well. And I remember one short story with a travel through time and space, a kid going to some planet with his parents via some sort of beaming (I think) but kinda cheating on the safety instructions to "enjoy" the ride (I think the travellers were given some kind of sleeping drug for safety) and arriving totally insane and aged. I can't remember the name of the story but that was a disturbing image.

I think that one about the kid in space is called The Jaunt and it's in Skeleton Crew. I could go downstairs & check, but that would be too much work. : )

Yeah, that's The Jaunt. Terrific story.

I always love Stephen King books. Even if they don't scare me, I still love them. The Shining had me terrified, as did 'Salem's Lot. Overall, though, I found his short story collections Night Shift, Nightmares and Dreamscapes, and The Skeleton Crew to be, by far, his scariest works. I agree with everyone who mentioned The Raft. I read that while on vacation on a lake and couldn't go out for a few days. The Mangler also scared the crap out of me. Many others did as well, but I don't feel like going back through the books and finding them all. While King always seems to write amazing fiction, I always though his true gift for scaring the pants off of people lay in his short stories.

By the way, has anyone read Just After Sunset? What did you think of The Cat From Hell? I look at cats in a completely different way now...

I didn't know The Cat From Hell was in Just After Sunset. (I'm waiting for the mass market paperback.)

FYI: That story was adapted for the Tales From the Darkside movie years and years ago.

You know, that movie has been in my Netflix queue for quite some time now. I might just have to bump it to the top so I can see the adaptation.

I knew that story was familiar! thanks Jseger!

One stephen king story scared me, and that was called the boogey man, plainly for the fact that I have a huge oak wadrobe in my bedroom and still not being an adult yet, I still find that silly childhood fear wont go away, It didnt really affect me that much until I read that story.

I haven't found King scary since Salem's Lot. After that? Meh...

#90 - I still find that silly childhood fear wont go away

It's funny. I'm a 37 year old atheist non-supernatural believing rationalist. That never stops me from getting the creeps if I am home alone at night. I know there's nothing lurking in the closet, but if I just keep the doors closed then I feel less worried anyway.

Great thread, folks.

To the OP: 'salem's Lot and Pet Sematary and a couple of the short stories ("Sometimes They Come Back" comes to mind) scared the shit outta me when I first read them as a teenager. Nothing I've read since has had the same effect. Just jaded, I guess.

Also to the OP (& #2): I actually thought that Gerald's Game was one of his best '90s novels. Incidentally, the scholar and critic S.T.Joshi is also a fan of the book (actually, it's one of the few by King that he likes).

To #12: I think King's written some great stuff since, but there's a certain energy/vibe/connection to the muse in his early stuff that I don't think he's equalled since. His writing used to be sloppier, but the stuff before... Thinner, let's say, just leaps off the page in a way the later stuff doesn't.

To #17: I always get Bentley Little confused with Brian Lumley - then I remember Lumley's the one that usually has the fanged skulls on the covers. :D

I loved Gerald's Game because it shows King's insight into psychology. The terrors in one's mind are far more powerful than those in the physical world. Also, I consider this novel to be a woman's odyssey of survival. King's aim is not solely to terrify, but also to examine universal topics which makes him a brilliant writer. He does occasionally create horror "just because". I think that's his way of having fun and playing with his audience.King is an author who is exploring the written word on so many levels it's just mind boggling. He is certainly a prodigy of The Craft. I agree that Salem's Lot was truly terrifying. It was my introduction to Stephen King and I almost abandoned him forever because of it. I'm so fortunate that I began reading him again later in my life and discovered his true brilliance.

Yes, his thoughts exactly in BAG OF BONES.

Yes! Sometimes you get his message and other times not. no matter how devout of a fan you are.No matter how much he tries to reveal himself through his writing, no one knows the real Stephen King. He is so multifaceted and complex.

I commend you for devouring his huge body of work. I don't think there are many fans who can claim to have experienced every one of his works.

*raises hand*

Good writer, yes. Scary? Only a very select few for me.

Salem's Lot probably scared me the most. I'd say King's books thrill me more than scare me. Occasionally I get the piloerection thing going. Sometimes out of anxiety, but most of the time out of the sheer pleasure of reading his prose.

First, let me apologize for not reading this thread of comments before posting. Second. ... When I finally read It at 33, it got into my nightmares.

ummmmm??

Useful comments in here. I've really enjoyed a lot of King's writing but scared? No. I haven't read It though.