|
ImpAtom posted:One of the big things about It is that childhood has power, and that power is both was leaves them vulnerable to but also allows them to confront It. That is why returning as adults is so dangerous, because they've lost that. I hate to defend this scene because it is a really weird occurrence in the book, but the ideas they used to defend themselves against It weren't successful because they were childish things, but because they were magical, powerful things to the kids and the kids believed they were magic. Beverly's belief was in her love for Bill and the rest of the Losers, and because of the fact that the only way she knew to express love to that point was sex, she had sex with them. Its really creepy, but I don't think its out of place for the character or the act of fighting It.
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 03:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
Victorkm posted:I hate to defend this scene because it is a really weird occurrence in the book, but the ideas they used to defend themselves against It weren't successful because they were childish things, but because they were magical, powerful things to the kids and the kids believed they were magic. Beverly's belief was in her love for Bill and the rest of the Losers, and because of the fact that the only way she knew to express love to that point was sex, she had sex with them. I haven't read It in years, was it explicit that her dad abused her sexually? Because using sex like that would make a grim sort of sense. I used to have the DVD/saw it many more times than I've read it, and despite how much they cleaned it up (she didn't even smoke, if I'm remembering right) that guy had a really pervy vibe to him. I just like how It is the big scary thing that no one in Derry ever talks about as well as being the word that kids use to talk about sex and I'm sure a very stoned King thought this was just too clever not to write some weird sex-magic poo poo in. I really wish someone would write an exhaustive biography about him that included interviews or correspondence with Tabitha and all the editors and their conversations about how inappropriate that scene was.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 03:30
|
|
|
Victorkm posted:I hate to defend this scene because it is a really weird occurrence in the book, but the ideas they used to defend themselves against It weren't successful because they were childish things, but because they were magical, powerful things to the kids and the kids believed they were magic. Beverly's belief was in her love for Bill and the rest of the Losers, and because of the fact that the only way she knew to express love to that point was sex, she had sex with them. It was belief, but it was belief born from being children. They believed in things in the way that an adult can't. Even if you're going with the "Bev was abused" (and I believe the book directly refutes that with her saying that he never touched her but was still a creep) interpretation, it's weird for her firm magical child-belief to be in sex and sexual things, especially after the scene with Patrick and Henry. The only thing it seems to have to do with her character is that she's the girl.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 03:45
|
|
|
From the suggestions in the thread earlier, I picked up Skeleton Crew. Amazing! I've finished the first few already and wow, there's some great stuff here. The Last Rung on the Ladder kicked me in the guts, and the one about the writer just grabbed me and forced me to keep reading faster and faster until the end. When King is on, he is REALLY on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 07:59
|
|
|
JustFrakkingDoIt posted:I haven't read It in years, was it explicit that her dad abused her sexually? No, I don't think he did but it didn't make him any less creepy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 08:01
|
|
|
 http://tessiedesigncompany.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/stephen-king-universe-flow-chart.html
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 12:33
|
|
man
|
ImpAtom posted:It was belief, but it was belief born from being children. They believed in things in the way that an adult can't. Even if you're going with the "Bev was abused" (and I believe the book directly refutes that with her saying that he never touched her but was still a creep) interpretation, it's weird for her firm magical child-belief to be in sex and sexual things, especially after the scene with Patrick and Henry. The only thing it seems to have to do with her character is that she's the girl. IMO her belief wasn't in the sex, it was in the love, and sex was the way she knew to express the love. I think her mom had possibly talked to her about sex? I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 12:45
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Post posted:No, I don't think he did but it didn't make him any less creepy. There were a few hints that he was on the verge. Warning! Way too long analysis of potential childhood sex stuff incoming!! I think I remember a small, throwaway paragraph early on to the effect that since she started developing breasts, there was a weird tension between her and her father. Something like, when her mother wasn't around, the air wasn't right or something in a way that made her father more irritable. There was a scene where Bev's mom asks her "Does your father ever touch you?" I'm not an expert, but I wouldn't ask my own kids something like that unless I thought there was something not-right going on. So maybe the mom picked up on something? When the narration is from Beverly's point of view, she mentions hearing her parents having sex sometimes, and also that her dad hits her mother too. She also talks about how much she & her mom love her dad, so it's a weird combination of sex + violence = love like grownups. Then, when It goes after Beverly, it takes the form of her father and tries to get her naked, saying that he thinks she's been having sex with the boys, and wants to see if she's "intact". Couple of points here - first, when It would go after a child, it would take the form of the thing that they are most afraid of. I think that Beverly's subconscious picked up on what her father was feeling towards her. Secondly, by making the confrontation about sex, It gave the act power in a way. Sex became the thing that Beverly was most consciously afraid of - not the murky, subconscious stuff that had been going on before. So when each of them has to confront their fears, she has to face the final It. I think the long, drawn-out description served a weird purpose - from "I have to do this terrifying thing if we want to live" to "this isn't really the most horrible thing in the world" to "OH HELL YEAH!!" It's not so much about pedo-porn as it is someone accepting, overcoming, and embracing the thing that scares them. King did the same thing with the other Losers' non-sex fears. The fact that she's a child and the fear is sex makes it very uncomfortable now, I admit. When I first read It, I was about the same age as the Losers, and it never really occurred to me that THAT SCENE was any sicker than any other sex scene in a book.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 13:02
|
|
|
Mr.Brinks posted:The Dark Tower. I don't know what annoyed me more, the total lack of ending or the 30ish pages towards the end of the fin al book childeing me for having the gaul to expect an ending. also the ususal "duex ex magical retardica" And that without even going into the self-insertion crap. Someone said earlier, and it seems to hold, most peoples experience with king goes: The Stand ---->Interchangable samey book 1---> Interchangable samey book 2 --> 3 ---> gently caress this. OR About half of the Dark Tower series --> gently caress this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 13:03
|
|
£
|
I know all of you guys that just love It so much will be overjoyed at this new announcement: Stephen King's 'It' to be made into Two Films http://www.shortlist.com/entertainment/films/stephen-kings-it-to-be-made-into-two-films quote:It's been 22 years since Pennywise the Dancing Clown scared the bejesus out of us in the TV miniseries based on Stephen King's novel It. I can only cringe in horrorticipation at how terrible it will be, especially stretched out over ~4 hours.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 20:45
|
|
|
Pound_Coin posted:Someone said earlier, and it seems to hold, most peoples experience with king goes: It "seems to hold" based on what? Given you've obviously read all of the Dark Tower it didn't even apply to you. I don't think this remotely resembles most peoples experiences with King. There probably isn't a most peoples experiences with King. People just like to make up dumb truisms like this based on their own experience.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 20:59
|
|
|
Yeah, you got me there, I saw like 2 people express such views and jumped the gun. And guilty of still reading his drat books 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 13:38
|
|
|
That drat Satyr posted:I know all of you guys that just love It so much will be overjoyed at this new announcement: Nope, there is a lot that goes on in this book and two films will give a lot more time to the subplots that really make IT awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 13:59
|
|
|
That drat Satyr posted:I know all of you guys that just love It so much will be overjoyed at this new announcement: The TV miniseries was godawful outside Tim Curry, but a full blown couple of movies to flesh out the whole story might work. It seems like it would be a difficult book to adapt, because while it's split sorta in half with the Kids stories vs the Adult stories, they are very intertwined so I don't know where the cutoff point is. Do you do the Kid story first? The Adult story is mostly them reminiscing about being kids. That said, if they find a way to work in the "derry interlude" stories like the Black Spot and the Ironworks explosion, I'm all for it. Those were some of my favorite chapters. Also no matter what they do there's no way they can make anything as lame as the final battle in the miniseries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 23:52
|
|
|
The problem with splitting up It is that you can't really cut it in half with kids stuff then adult stuff since a lot of the adult stuff is them not really remembering what happened when they were kids.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 03:53
|
|
|
Now accepting Pennywise casting nominations. I say we slather Tim Curry up in greasepaint again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 09:38
|
|
|
The only thing that made Pennywise less terrifying to adult me was the realization that he was played by Tim Curry.  Now I'm going to be staring into sewer drains again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 12:12
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:The problem with splitting up It is that you can't really cut it in half with kids stuff then adult stuff since a lot of the adult stuff is them not really remembering what happened when they were kids. It would be like the edition of The Godfather that goes in chronological order. It could technically work, but it won't be as good as the original 2 was, because the past stuff contrasted or paralleled the present stuff in a narrative sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 15:44
|
|
|
That drat Satyr posted:Stephen King's 'It' to be made into Two Films
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 18:45
|
|
|
April posted:Then, when It goes after Beverly, it takes the form of her father and tries to get her naked, saying that he thinks she's been having sex with the boys, and wants to see if she's "intact". Couple of points here - first, when It would go after a child, it would take the form of the thing that they are most afraid of. I think that Beverly's subconscious picked up on what her father was feeling towards her. Wait, I was under the impression that this was just her father finally losing it. What indicates this was It? It didn't change form or have any of the tell tale signs of being It. I am pretty sure her father just went loving nuts on her.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 19:05
|
|
|
I thought this was the part where the book explicitly says it wasn't her father and she was all alone in the apartment with It? And he chases her and the little boy sees him as some kind of spider-monster or am I getting scenes jumbled up?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 19:08
|
|
|
I think there were two separate scenes where Bev confronted/was confronted by her dad: One when she was a child, right before they want into the sewers for the final confrontation with IT. I think it was pretty clear that her father (and all the people who witnessed their fight) were under the influence of IT. I forget which character said that the whole town was IT, and when the bad stuff was over, none of them would remember. The second was as an adult, when she went back to the lovely apartment on lower Main st. She went in for tea with "Mrs. Kersh," which turned out to be an illusion because the old lady was actually IT. When Bev realized what was going on, IT transformed into her father and said something like, "I beat you because i really wanted to gently caress you." I may have the order that they happened mixed up, though. It's been years since I read IT -- though now I kind of want to re-read it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 19:20
|
|
|
Ensign_Ricky posted:Now accepting Pennywise casting nominations. Daniel Day-Lewis could probably equal him in terms of sheer insanity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
Edwardian posted:I think there were two separate scenes where Bev confronted/was confronted by her dad: Yeah, this is how I read it too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 02:02
|
|
|
crankdatbatman posted:I haven't read it yet, but I'm the type who has to read everything in a book when I get into it; so pray for me, I'm going in. Alright but don't blame me when it literally causes you to lapse into depression. "The Last Rung on the Ladder" was pretty cool/suspenseful for most of the story, then has a suddenly depressing ending. Enjoy that one too!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 05:30
|
|
|
You may be interested in this series from the Grauniad. This chap's going to reread everything King's ever written, in chronological order. http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/may/24/rereading-stephen-king-carrie
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 11:12
|
|
|
Gambrinus posted:You may be interested in this series from the Grauniad. This chap's going to reread everything King's ever written, in chronological order. Oh boy, I really hope he includes ever more tenuous links to Randall Flagg in every article!
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 12:02
|
|
|
Relatively mild 11/22/63 and DT spoilers ahead. From pg. 803 of 11/22/63 as Jake is taking in the Kennedy-Lives future, "I saw half a dozen parked cars, and every one of them was either a gas-electric hybrid or equipped with roof-spinner devices. One of them was a Honda Zephyr; one was a Takuro Spirit; another a Ford Breeze." From pg. 88 of Wizard and Glass after they defeated Blaine, "Eddie stopped, looking at a little car near the end o the row, white with red trim. "A Takuro," he said, mostly to himself. He went around to look at the trunk. "A Takuro Spirit, to be exact. Ever hard of that make and model, Jake of New York?" Jake shood his head. "Me neither," he said, "me loving neither." Is Epping responsible for the version of America that the ka-tet arrive in? This can't possibly be a coincidence. Duece Ex Machina fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Jun 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 21:16
|
|
|
Duece Ex Machina posted:Relatively mild 11/22/63 and DT spoilers ahead. DT, 11/22/63, and bonus The Stand spoilers ahoy. no, but I think it may have set another Flagg/Superflu event in motion in that timeline. I also think he is responsible in some part for the thinnies, and I think the thing his time muckery was damaging were the beams. One thing to keep in mind, though. They find a newspaper detailing a superflu pandemic but don't mention Tripps, also, there were no off brand cars in The Stand. My guess is that there are a few different timelines where Flagg and the superflu went down, one of them because the one Jake caused. I also don't believe going through the portal again resets time, I think it puts you into a fresh timeline split off from the main one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 21:33
|
|
|
Continuing above discussion: 11/22/63's post-apocolypse is a combination of earthquakes and nuclear warfare, not disease. I don't know how it would be connected then, I forgot about the newspaper clipping.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
Actually in W&G the newspaper clipping did say Captain Trips. Go to the Amazon page and do a "search inside this book" on it, and look for trips. Fourth result: CAPTAIN TRIPS SUPERFLU RAGES UNCHECKED. But you're right that it was in a world with Takuro Spirits, which Jake/Eddie/Susannah had never seen. Everybody seemed relieved by this (because their thinking was "no Takuro Spirits = no superflu in my family's future"), but I don't know why: the only thing we know for sure from that is that Eddie's world isn't the superflu world. Jake and Susannah's relief is premature; it's kinda like someone in the 80's saying "Yay, there's no 9/11 in my future, because there's no such thing as iPods!" That's a poo poo analogy, I apologize.Jealous Cow posted:also, there were no off brand cars in The Stand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
jackpot posted:Actually in W&G the newspaper clipping did say Captain Trips. Go to the Amazon page and do a "search inside this book" on it, and look for trips. Fourth result: CAPTAIN TRIPS SUPERFLU RAGES UNCHECKED. But you're right that it was in a world with Takuro Spirits, which Jake/Eddie/Susannah had never seen. Everybody seemed relieved by this (because their thinking was "no Takuro Spirits = no superflu in my family's future"), but I don't know why: the only thing we know for sure from that is that Eddie's world isn't the superflu world. Jake and Susannah's relief is premature; it's kinda like someone in the 80's saying "Yay, there's no 9/11 in my future, because there's no such thing as iPods!" That's a poo poo analogy, I apologize. Wow, totally forget that it mentioned it! I don't even know what to spoiler anymore... I can't decide if I believe there are a fixed number of timelines and moving between them/messing with one that isn't your own damages the beams, or if there are new branches created all the time, but these branches are held up by the same beams and as you make more of them the beams get weaker. I tend to like the latter better. While it may have been a retcon, perhaps Roland and Flagg are unique in that they can move between the timelines without the help of mystical magical diner closet. Consider this: at the end of The Stand, Flagg wakes up someplace else with no memory of what has just happened, and yet immediately starts in on the same thing he always does. At the end of DT, Roland wakes up someplace else with no memory of what has just happens, and yet immediately continues doing what he's always done. I think the world that DT takes place in is sort of the dumping ground of the universe. Some people know about it, and go there to take advantage of it's resources (Think Talisman), wage war, etc. Roland was probably like Flagg, but got it in his head that he could fix things by achieving the Dark Tower (Think Jake and saving Kennedy). I don't know, there are too many things that don't make sense. Flagg seems like such a different person in DT than in The Stand. In DT he seems to know exactly what's up and have a plan, in The Stand he seems to just be a manifestation of evil and destruction without a purpose. My apologies to anyone who read that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 02:31
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:I don't even know what to spoiler anymore...
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 17:54
|
|
|
There was a big thing about it a few pages back, the consensus seemed to be to just use good judgement--don't needlessly spoil important plot points without tags, but don't feel like you need to black bar everything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 18:33
|
|
|
My library finally got in "11/22/63" and "The Wind Through the Keyhole" both at the same time, so I marathoned them yesterday and today. As far as the "11/22/63" and "Dark Tower" connections go, Jake was stepping into a world that was absolutely COVERED in new timeline strings, thanks to Al. We see later on that Jake's actions cause so many harmonizations in the strings, it begins to tear that version of the world utterly apart. We already know by the end of Dark Tower that Roland has been making this journey over and over and over again. Al thought that leaving 1958 through the rabbit-hole and coming back effected a total reset, when actually it was just creating another string. That's ALSO the way it seems to be in Dark Tower: Roland is constantly traveling to the Dark Tower, and presumably, he makes it every time, goes inside, but because he doesn't have the Horn, his end cannot be "Childe Roland to the Dark Tower Came". Every time it isn't, he "resets" and presumably goes back to chasing the Man in Black across the desert. But, here's my question: What if the reason Mid-World is getting shittier and shittier as Roland goes on is ENTIRELY because he himself is dooming it to? If Jake and Al's constant travels and adventures in and out of 1958 through the rabbit hole are creating multiple strings that are weighing down on the Beams, why wouldn't Roland's constant "quick reloads" be doing the same thing? The Crimson King and Randall Flagg/Marten Broadcloak/The Man in Black/Covenanter are actively TRYING to break the Beams and have been for a while, which is probably what started the whole loving downfall of Mid-World. But Roland has undertaken a gigantic quest where he is actively loving up SO MANY different timelines. Jake discovered everything he did in 1958, even the most miniscule things, completely affected the way the world worked because of the Butterfly Effect. Well, Roland was doing poo poo like pulling people in and out of Mid-World (affecting multiple timelines, since Eddie, Jake, and Susannah didn't all exist in the same timeline), bringing things from America into Mid-World and vice-versa, having Jake die and then bringing him back, all sorts of poo poo. I'd really love thoughts on this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2012 00:55
|
|
|
Lolitas Alright! posted:My library finally got in "11/22/63" and "The Wind Through the Keyhole" both at the same time, so I marathoned them yesterday and today. I agree 100% and was trying to convey that earlier but did a very poor job, but I think there is a hole in that. If the resets put him back at tracking the MIB across the desert, there are still a ton of events relating to the MIB that happened before that point. During W&G the description he gives of Mejis and the kingdom in general seem pretty bad, plus there are already thinneys showing up all over the place, which indicates time fuckery already happening. Ok.... that said, let us not forget Star Trek: TNG's series finale, All Good Things... where the spatial anomaly extended back through time to the dawn of life on Earth. Perhaps Roland's time shenanigans have caused damage to the fabric of time and manifests itself backwards as well as forwards in time. Ok that was the nerdiest thing I've ever written.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
There are a few differences though. Roland seems to be helped by an outside force that seems to be able to change the past before his time jump. And his actions at algul siento really did fix the beam.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2012 05:33
|
|
|
True. Jake doesn't have anyone helping him, just warning him. Roland seems to have some sort of guardian angel going on. I do like Jealous Cow's idea very much though. However we only have one verified case that Roland is getting reset to chasing MIB through the desert over and over again. We don't know whether that's actually happening every time he makes it into the Dark Tower and the world resets. To address what Vorgen said, Roland could be getting jumped back further in time and we'd never know about it. Unfortunately, it was just easier for SK to go "Welp, he jumped back to the desert but now he's got the Horn somehow!" I don't know if I'm remembering this correctly, but doesn't Roland actually notice and go "Hey, I have the loving Horn now! I never lost this thing in the battle!" Vorgen's theory of an outside force makes more sense that way, because Roland's forgotten that he made it to the Dark Tower a billion times already, but SOMEHOW is permitted to remember that he had lost the Horn at one point and suddenly has it again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2012 16:00
|
|
|
Has it been established that 11/22/63 is connected to the Dark Tower? If so, whoa...
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2012 19:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:If the resets put him back at tracking the MIB across the desert, there are still a ton of events relating to the MIB that happened before that point. This touches upon a thought I've always had about the end of DT. [spoiler]Roland can't bear being sent back to the start of The Gunslinger, but between the fall of Gilead and where we first meet him, he's been travelling for, what, hundreds of years? The time it takes him to get from the desert, form the ka-tet and travel to the Dark Tower is just a little bit of piss in the ocean. I don't know what he's complaining about, really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2012 19:49
|
|
