• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Stephen King: Lisey's Story

Yap yap yap, goes SFG.

Believe what you want. You're entitled to your opinion, and I am to mine.

And this book was boring... beyond boring. It did not interest me. Even the crap Bag of Bones was much better than this filth.
 
Even The Green Mile was better. Even if it was boring.

But King believes this is his most powerful novel, lmao.
 
Yap yap yap, goes SFG.
Click to expand...

I'm honestly just asking for specifics as to how you have formed the views that you have about the book. I have specifically given evidence and alluded to specific parts of the story in the book to back my assertions. You have done neither. You give broad, generalized statements followed by an angry "smilie" that is somehow, supposed to take the place of even an elementary form of analysis.

Yapping...conversing....kind of the expectation around this place. I have nothing wrong with anyone who doesn't like King. Heck, the last book I read, I read the negative comments first so as to read along and see if I discovered the same thing. Check out The Book of Fate thread to see what I'm talking about. I'd like to do the same with your comments, but you are short on the specifics and long on the generalizations. I am not trying to be difficult, just trying to get you to elaborate on the reasons given for your response to the book. However, getting you to discuss the book in an in-depth manner is like pulling teeth. If you don't want to discuss it in this manner, so be it. Feel free to post, I suppose we'll go our separate ways on this one.
 
Damn. I just deleted a little blurb bitching at eyez0nme in another thread. I thought my present mood was influencing my post too much so I deleted it. If I read through here first I would not have.
 
I'm currently just a tad-bit past page 200. I'd have to say that the story is coming along very well. Anyone who has been married for a long time can tell you that there are some "bumps" along the way, periods of time where you were miserable and in thinking back about it, agree that you were miserable. Not that you are unhappy with one another, but rather, you are unhappy with a work situation or personal situation involving others that just leaves you exhausted every day. The trip to Germany and how they procured the bed from Scott's teaching stint was an interesting read in that it detailed this very phenomenon. The "blood bool" thing is quite odd, something that is a stretch I believe, in regards to human behavior. The actions of Amanda are very predictable though. Cutters can be very deceptive and act out when least expected. In this regard, King has done his homework.

The Washington Post has an interesting review to check out.

A jab at critics is clearly given as well:

For months, Lisey has been hounded for access to Scott's papers by "the collectors and the academics who maintained their positions in large part by examining the literary equivalent of navel-lint in each other's abstruse journals; ambitious, overeducated goofs who had lost touch with what books and reading were actually about and could be content to go on spinning straw into footnoted fool's gold for decades on end." (Take that, Dr. Bloom!)
Click to expand...

:D :D :D
 
Let me tell you why I found this book medicore and prosaic, after your done.

I'll give you specifics--if that's what you honestly want.
 
If that's what we really want? Real reasons why a book is not good beyond "it sucks"? No we don't want book discussion on a book forum. Just useless shit statements like "it sucks" or "You'll love it". If you have something worthwhile to say say it. If it contains spoilers use the spoiler tag. SFG is a big boy, he can decide if he wants to read them or not.
 
What makes you think I finished it? What a waste of twenty eight dollars
Click to expand...

Failure to mention that you didn't bother finishing it.
Now are there any Stephen King books you actually enjoy? And if not, why do you bother reading his books if you already have a response to them made up?
 
I value my membership, so I won't elaborate too much on this. My thoughts and opinions are well known. eyez-the majority of members feel that you need to be more specific and that you need to knock off the negativity about King. Explain yourself and contribute. That's all that is asked of you. Consider the tone of responses to you, I think there's a common theme. Not everyone is delusional.
 
The Toronto Star had a pretty even review.

I think poor Stevie may have a really good piece of Literature in him. Just a hunch really. But would it be well received? The majority of his fan base would be mortified if he submitted something...I dunno, akin to Edward Jones and what Literature pundit is going to be the first to write that Stevie has written a piece of Literature deserving of a Pulitzer? Just thinking out loud.
 
ions said:
The Toronto Star had a pretty even review.

I think poor Stevie may have a really good piece of Literature in him. Just a hunch really. But would it be well received? The majority of his fan base would be mortified if he submitted something...I dunno, akin to Edward Jones and what Literature pundit is going to be the first to write that Stevie has written a piece of Literature deserving of a Pulitzer? Just thinking out loud.
Click to expand...

Well, he did win the 2003 National Book Award. I believe that you're on to something here ions. Lisey's Story is pretty good compared to his other works, at least ones that I've read. Perhaps because he's branching out a bit more? Who knows. I do believe that you are right though, after publishing what he has published, if he creates something that is out of the ballpark for him, I'm not certain he would get his due for it simply because....well....he's Stephen King.:eek: :p
 
Seems to me King has been trying to "branch out" for years - at least since "Rose Madder" or "Gerald's Game". I really believe that "Hearts In Atlantis" is his attempt at writing in the Great American Novel genre (and it IS a genre), albeit one with supernatural elements, and it's not a completely failed one either. And after all, his characters were always his strong point, so I don't think it's completely impossible that he'll be able to pull it off - if fans and his own muse let him. He'll never be DeLillo, but... there's no reason he should spend the rest of his career only writing about monsters and zombies.
 
SFG75 said:
Well, he did win the 2003 National Book Award.
Click to expand...
Just to correct you, he won the 2003 Distinguished Contribution to American Letters from the National Book Award Foundation. Bit of a difference. ;)

Stephen King said:
For far too long the so-called popular writers of this country and the so-called literary writers have stared at each other with animosity and a willful lack of understanding. This is the way it has always been. Witness my childish resentment of anyone who ever got a Guggenheim.

But giving an award like this to a guy like me suggests that in the future things don't have to be the way they've always been. Bridges can be built between the so-called popular fiction and the so-called literary fiction. The first gainers in such a widening of interest would be the readers, of course, which is us because writers are almost always readers and listeners first. You have been very good and patient listeners and I'm going to let you go soon but I'd like to say one more thing before I do.

Tokenism is not allowed. You can't sit back, give a self satisfied sigh and say, "Ah, that takes care of the troublesome pop lit question. In another twenty years or perhaps thirty, we'll give this award to another writer who sells enough books to make the best seller lists." It's not good enough. Nor do I have any patience with or use for those who make a point of pride in saying they've never read anything by John Grisham, Tom Clancy, Mary Higgins Clark or any other popular writer.
Click to expand...

Do you think that his attempts to branch out into more experimental works is perhaps an effect of his receipt of the 2003 National Book Award? I see he was preceded in the award by Arthur Miller, John Updike, Toni Morrison, and Philip Roth, among others. He was succeeded by Judy Blume in 2004.
 
Half way through it. :)

Well, I just about have this one wrapped up, just a few observations. First, the death of
Paul was truly something else.:eek: Vintage King right there. That portion had me on the edge of my seat for the entire reading duration.
Second, I definitely got into the part where
the "deep space cowboy" broke into Lisey's home and beat her to a pulp. Was the professor involved? That character was a funny, yet enraging one.
There were two sections that I was disappointed in. First and foremost, when
Lisey went to visit her sister and got her out of the coma by simply pleading her case and visiting her sister at Boo'yah Mountain..Moon...whatever it's called.:rolleyes: I believe that King could have made an excellent section here had he just stretched it out over a few more details, or at least had he given it some more time. I think he rushed that scene.

The NYT review had listed the "cutesy" talk between Lisey and Scott as bordering on the pathological.:D All attempts at psychological humor aside, I don't believe that is a practical observation. It's what made the couple them and it's what made their dialogue more believable, if not different, than the interaction between the others who dealt with the respective main characters. Rather than a detriment, I see it as an important part of the book.
 
I couldn't help but notice that one of the characters in this book was named Lisa Lemke. Wonder if she's part of the Lemke family from Thinner...?
 
Anamnesis said:
I couldn't help but notice that one of the characters in this book was named Lisa Lemke. Wonder if she's part of the Lemke family from Thinner...?
Click to expand...

Probably. There's an Andy Clutterbuck in the book too, and I seem to remember that name from something else of King's that I've read, although I couldn't tell you what.

I started the book on Saturday and will try to review it properly once I'm finished, but initial thoughts are that the opening is a rambling mess. But it eventually gives way to something coherent around the 150 page mark and has been plodding along okay since.

The title of the novel, Lisey's Story, seems to be a bit of a misnomer given that she doesn't appear to have a story. I do note that the third part shares the name of the novel, so I'll reserve judgement there. The language is really annoying and repetitive. An editor could have cut through the majority of it with his red pen and probably produced a better narrative. It's also rife with annoying transliterations of accents (if anyone can tell me what 'a puff-ickly huy-yuge batch of orifice' is supposed to mean...perfectly huge something...then let me know). I don't mind an author using a phrase I don't understand in the book as the context may explain it or I'm not meant to know just yet, but King is putting these words and phrases in Lisey's head - surely she doesn't occasionally think in all manner of accents. Another page expander happens to be the annoying habit of using 'as so-and-so would say' and 'what so-and-so would call a' with regards to almost every phrase in the book. And then there's the word smucking. :mad:

The "blood bool" thing is quite odd, something that is a stretch I believe, in regards to human behavior.
Click to expand...
There's much made of the derivation of the word, being from boo, book, and clue. As far as I can tell it's derived from bollocks. It doesn't make sense, no matter how much King has tried to explain it, and it makes every character that uses it appear childish. It's more than a stretch: I think King has snapped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top