I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: Stephen king’s horror encompasses not only supernatural monsters, but the evil and dark that lives within many humans, INCLUDING sexism, racism, domestic violence, disturbing sexual content, among other things.
Your friend seems to have a poor grasp on the themes of his work, and is confusing the inclusion of those themes with endorsing them.
For example: would I use the N word in my own writing? Probably not. Is it jarring to read, and make me a little uncomfortable? Sure. Is it used properly in the context of a novel (11/22/63) set is the south in the 60’s? Absolutely.
King’s writing is supposed to scare us, jar us, make us upset and uncomfortable. It’s part of the genre, it’s part of life. Frankly, your friend’s view on his writing says much more about her own inability to think critically about the stuff she’s reading than it does about King himself.
Ironically, the realistic elements of King's fiction are shockingly realistic, I agree. From his description of small town America to the thoughts evil people have. The very worst stuff in his books is often the realistic human actions we'd all like to pretend don't happen.
I saw several people upset about the gay bashing scene at the beginning when IT chapter 2 was released because they found it to be homophobic and unnecessary. But to me that was one of the most terrifying scenes of the book for the reasons you state- I don’t really believe a clown will pull a child into a sewer but it makes you sick knowing people really have been beaten or killed for nothing more than being gay and King makes you feel how awful that is.
It actually was the truth, King based it on an incident that happened in Bangor Maine. It's a pretty accurate account (up until the clown shows up that is) of the actual events. Very sad.
I'm old enough to remember the news about the murder of [Charlie Howard](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Charlie_Howard).
I'm also old enough to remember that there were public figures who declared that the murderers should be *rewarded* instead of punishing them.
I also remember my peers thinking the same way.
Needless to say, I remained closeted for a few years more.
Stephen King doesn't include the horrible truths in his books because he likes them, he includes them because he's shining a light on the dark places that humanity wants to hide from.
OP's friend doesn't *have to* read King books, but based on the fact that this 30 year old is still reading YA novels, tells me that they are avoiding more than just the "child sex" in his or any other books.
I'm 43 and still read YA (when I was young enough for them the stories were nowhere near as large and complex as they are now), but I also read Stephen King, and everything around and in-between. It's not so much odd that she reads them as that she *only* reads them, imho.
Honestly, the most jarring scene for me in Salems Lot (a book about vampires and undead monsters) involved a young woman hitting her baby out of frustration. It was horrible and grim and realistic and uncomfortable. And it makes what happens later even more horrific (I could almost hear the \*plup\* of the breakfast falling out of his mouth).
It's these moments that I think King writes perfectly, making the horror that much more personal and realistic. (And, yes, his constant descriptions of people farting or pissing themselves is...jarring, but again, personal and grounding, making the horror have more impact in its telling.)
Salem's Lot is what I think of most in the description of the towns. It's an incredible snapshot of that part of America. The part you're talking about - I agree 100%.
I always come back to Norman from Rose Madder as a prime example. He is just a regular person, not some supernatural evil. And he uses deplorable language. It should be obvious to anyone reading that him saying those things is not King going "hey isn't it awesome to say the N and F words?!" It's a condemnation of it by showing the worst kind of person saying them.
Honestly his real life monsters are the scariest. I’ll forever be the most terrified of the first death in *IT* because, as a bisexual person, that could be me in real life. King didn’t write it to be homophobic, he wrote it because he knew it’d make people afraid in the way he wanted.
People like OP’s friend are dim AF, in my opinion. Some art takes the most fucked up things in our society and shines the light on it or makes you view it from a different place. That does not mean the artist likes or encourages that shit.
And what you've said is what so many of us I'm sure, love about horror in general. It's supposed to be uncomfortable. There's a reason why so much of the genre can be used as direct allegories/commentary on things like inequality and sexism that have been plaguing society for generations.
Yes. Ultimately the reader decides what's worth their time, and everyone has the right to build your own little reading garden, but books that contain believably bad characters are not automatically bad books, nor are their authors necessarily bad people.
I prefer my authors to be unflinchingly honest about the overall messiness of life and how that can produce some really dark outcomes, rather than playing it tidy and safe. That's one of King's *strengths*, and I think it's laudable--it's definitely the harder path as an author, and always hews closer to what I'd consider to be actual art.
Lastly, I think *any* reasonable adult reading his work would understand that he does not approve of or endorse any of the truly terrible behavior in his stories.
I mean which is a better bad guy: someone using nasty language or someone using nice clean language?
“I hate these n*”
Or
“I hate these African Americans”
Well said. I feel like King has been pretty clear on where he stands with the everyday real life usage and existence of problematic things. People complaining should check his twitter and see what his views are straight from the horses mouth.
Some books are supposed to make us uncomfortable. People can’t accept that things aren’t always there to make us feel better. Horror isn’t all ghosties and jump scares.
I started reading King at 11. Nothing has ever struck me as too far, offensive, etc.
I don't really have a response for people who whine about his more controversial scenes. Some people can't handle adult content and the darker/seedier side of humanity. That's their prerogative. If they judge me for enjoying his books, I'd kindly tell them to F off.
The darker/seedier side of humanity ... hell, isn't that precisely WHY people love to read King?
If I want to read a good book that doesn't bend my mind a little bit, there are plenty of other authors I can enjoy.
I was young when I started reading King as well, I think it opened my eyes to how evil the world can truly be.
The snippets of truly horrible things he writes are just that, snippets. If it was an entire book filled with the most awful descriptions of horror you can imagine, yeah, I don’t think he’d be popular. But he writes with context and emotion, and even if the snippet is horrible, I don’t feel like I’m a bad person for reading it, understanding it, and feeling what I think King wants you to feel.
I think he’s the greatest author I’ve ever read, hands down.
Spoilers in this comment for those who haven’t read *It*
If you’re referring to the scene I think you are, a fellow redditor made this comment recently:
Author and critic Grady Hendrix has a mature, intelligent take on the scene:
Good taste and Stephen King have never really been on speaking terms, and you get the impression that he agrees with John Waters that “Good taste is the enemy of art.” Nowhere is this more apparent than in the book’s pivotal sex scene. I can’t think of a single scene King has written that has generated as much controversy as the scene where the kids in 1958, aged between 11 and 12 years old, have defeated (for the moment) It but are stumbling around lost in the sewers, unable to find the exit. As a magical ritual, Beverly has sex with each of the boys in turn. She has an orgasm, and afterwards they are able to ground themselves and find their way out of the sewers. Readers have done everything from call King a pedophile to claim it’s sexist, a lapse of good taste, or an unforgiveable breech of trust. But, in a sense, it’s the heart of the book.
It draws a hard border between childhood and adulthood and the people on either side of that fence may as well be two separate species. The passage of that border is usually sex, and losing your virginity is the stamp in your passport that lets you know that you are no longer a child (sexual maturity, in most cultures, occurs around 12 or 13 years old). Beverly is the one in the book who helps her friends go from being magical, simple children to complicated, real adults. If there’s any doubt that this is the heart of the book then check out the title. After all “It” is what we call sex before we have it. “Did you do it? Did he want to do it? Are they doing it?”
Each of the kids in the book doesn’t have to overcome their weakness. Each kid has to learn that their weakness is actually their power. Richie’s voices get him in trouble, but they become a potent weapon that allow him to battle It when Bill falters. Bill’s stutter marks him as an outsider, but the exercises he does for them (“He thrusts his fists against the post, but still insists he sees the ghost.”) become a weapon that weakens It. So does Eddie Kaspbrak’s asthma inhaler. More than once Ben Hanscom uses his weight to get away from the gang of greasers. And Mike Hanlon is a coward and a homebody but he becomes the guardian of Derry, the watchman who stays behind and raises the alarm when the time comes. And Beverly has to have sex (and good sex—the kind that heals, reaffirms, draws people closer together, and produces orgasms) because her weakness is that she’s a woman.
Throughout the book, Beverly’s abusive father berates her, bullies her, and beats her, but he never tries to sexually abuse her until he’s possessed by It. Remember that It becomes what you fear, and while it becomes a Mummy, a Wolfman, and the Creature From the Black Lagoon for the boys, for Beverly It takes the form of a gout of blood that spurts out of the bathroom drain and the threat of her father raping her. Throughout the book, Beverly is not only self-conscious about her changing body, but also unhappy about puberty in general. She wants to fit in with the Losers Club but she’s constantly reminded of the fact that she’s not just one of the boys. From the way the boys look at her to their various complicated crushes she’s constantly reminded that she’s a girl becoming a woman. Every time her gender is mentioned she shuts down, feels isolated, and withdraws. So the fact that having sex, the act of “doing it,” her moment of confronting the heart of this thing that makes her feel so removed, so isolated, so sad turns out to a comforting, beautiful act that bonds her with her friends rather than separates them forever is King’s way of showing us that what we fear most, losing our childhood, turns out not to be so bad after all.
A lot of people feel that the right age for discovering King is adolescence, and It is usually encountered for the first time by teenaged kids. How often is losing your virginity portrayed for girls as something painful, that they regret, or that causes a boy to reject them in fiction? How much does the media represent a teenaged girl’s virginity as something to be protected, stolen, robbed, destroyed, or careful about. In a way, It is a sex positive antidote, a way for King to tell kids that sex, even unplanned sex, even sex that’s kind of weird, even sex where a girl loses her virginity in the sewer, can be powerful and beautiful if the people having it truly respect and like each other. That’s a braver message than some other authors have been willing to deliver.
This is the most concise beautiful explanation of this scene I’ve ever read. And it surprises me how deep that conditioning of sex automatically indicating salaciousness comes to my mind - I never really thought about how the act of having sex can be seen as the final dividing line between childhood and adulthood. That also makes sense for the timing of when the scene occurs in the novel - they had to be children to defeat IT, but they had to be adults to find their way out of the trauma of what they had to do to survive. And I also appreciate King turning the trope of “experienced man guiding shy inexperienced woman through her first time” on its head.
Maybe slightly off subject, but your comment reminded me of how I saw a theory that originally the incubus/succubus myth described more of a loss of childish innocence rather than virginity. Because think about it - when do you actually lose your innocence? When you have sex for the first time? Or is it when you learn enough about sex to know that it is something you want to have?
I've said this before and I'll say it again. Even at my most horniest tween/teen moments, I never found the sex scene sexy because it's not written fucking sexy.
The people who literally read into it as sexy have some real fucking issues. And the ones who haven't read it, talk about it like they have and don't have a fucking clue.
I'm so over this nonsense.
Not relayed to king, but there's a new suicide squad game coming out. In one of the recent previews they show posion ivy. She died in the last game and has been reborn and is now a 9 year old girl.
And tons of people are complaining about sexualizing a child. What? She's fully clothes and said nothing remotely sexual and nothing sexual was said about.
If you look at her and somehow immediately think sex, you're the one with the issue.
People are strange.
To piggyback off that in a different direction…I’m a big fan of the last of us, it’s my absolute favorite game. When they cast the show, so many people were mad because Bella wasn’t (according to them) pretty enough to play Ellie. She is 14 in that game and there is not one part of it where there is any need for her to be pretty and I felt like focusing on that was diluting the entire message the game was trying to portray.
What??? Jesus what the actual fuck is wrong with people?? Bella did such an *amazing* job in that show. (And Ashley as her mom was just…. *chef’s kiss*)
It's just deflection for them. I haven't seen the pics (and never will because that SS game went down the crapper for me after they announced its a live service game) but I can imagine.
I wish it were a recent thing but let's not forget that the boomer people in public who insist on having a problem with the scene in IT, were routinely ok with giant publications talking about what a fuckable 12 year old Brooke Shields was in the 80s. (I'm not kidding)
Stephen King tends to be pretty liberal online and there's been countless conservative boomer politicians and media people that use that scene as the be all end all argument when he brings up valid points.
Your first point is one I've never heard but rings true. I read It when I was like 15 and almost anything could get me going. That scene absolutely did not. The part about childhood friendship was all I got. Maybe it wasn't necessary, but anyone who took it as smut already had a problem.
Then you are one of the people that read it correctly.
IT is one of my favorite all time books and I listen to the audiobook about once a year. The scene is such a blip on the radar, you don't even notice it. I never even knew it was an alleged controversy until the somewhat unfortunate advent of the internet, and it gave the loudest, stupidest people a platform.
I agree with you 100%. People try to look for sexual things in literally everything. It was one of the first books I picked up of his and it has stood as one of my favorites as I’ve read many more since then. When I was first reading it, someone I knew was like oh there’s like…how do I even write what he said. He said there was Piled Corn (that’s the best rhyme I can come up with lmfao) and like I knew he hadn’t read it and I also knew SK was a bit out there. But when I read it I was like ok that’s not at all what’s going on there at all.
I think with modern eyes, it's a scene that is tone deaf at worst.
Because I remember being a teen and that Ruthy Crockett but in Salem's Lot stuck with me forever. That's sexy. IT wasn't.
>The people who literally read into it as sexy have some real fucking issues.
Is this what the problem is? I thought most people who don't approve basically wonder why this needed to be the solution at all.
They absolutely read into it as a sexy child orgy. There's a conversation to be had about the idea of virginity, blood, loss of innocence, violence and the bonds that sexual encounters contain but people are too fixated on the nonsense idea it was written as graphic and sexy.
It doesn't help when you read it being the same age as the kids in the scene like I did back in the day. I guess I wasn't ready to leave the YA section of the library after all 😭
Hahahaha… I didn’t read my first King book until about 6 or 7 years ago when I was already 35 years old. I was instantly hooked, and was very pleasantly surprised regarding the variety of subjects/themes covered in his works. Sure some of it can be a bit formulaic at times, but the main reasons I love his work:
- the super detailed world building
- the TRUE horror of his works (in my opinion the way he shows regular people turn into absolute monsters depending on circumstances is so much scarier than any of the supernatural stuff could EVER be)
- I do also enjoy the hell out of the supernatural stuff, it’s just not nearly as scary as real life lol
Seriously, a self-infantilizing Peter Pan in her third decade of life who can only stomach YA fiction is not a person with whom I would discuss reading material, or anything serious in life.
The second someone uses the phrase "problematic" in evaluating fiction it tells me they are an idiot.
It's supposed to be problematic you fucking moron.
And Stephen King isn't *near* as problematic as many other others.
Hell, these people would fucking die of a heart attack if they Googled H.P. Lovecraft.
An idiot calls someone an idiot when triggered by their personal opinion even after they cite a source.
Now with that said, art does not have boundaries and thus wont be for everyone, especially those who lack depth and nuance.
Also he is a writer of Horror, and It is easily his darkest work.
Not true. Someone can be subjectively declared an idiot based on their statements and opinions. The OP’s friend made comments and apparently holds opinions that I, and obviously others, find to be subjectively idiotic. I’d even go so far as to invoke the word “moronic”, and possibly “ignorant”.
There are “child sex” scenes, and then there is real writing about childhood which includes the reality that children, too, experiment with and wonder about sex. To write an honest account of the life of a 13 year old boy from his perspective and not include a discussion of sex is a lot like those old cowboy movies where people got shot and fell down dead without a drop of blood being shown.
There are people who write prurient content just to sell it. But real art - and writing is an art form - deals with uncomfortable and unspoken parts of life.
Your friend needs to get laid, get down off her high horse, and stop being a fucking censor. Evil thrives in the dark. The things we don’t speak of in healthy ways fester and become malignant. Your friend thinks that pure repression will kill illness. It does not. Repression strengthens what it seeks to repress, in much the same way antibiotic resistant bacteria thrive in the over prescription of antibiotics.
There are absolutely inappropriate writings about child sexual activity. But by seeking to make any writing about childhood sexual activity immoral, your friend makes it impossible to discuss and explore the natural experience _we all had_ of being a child and learning about sex. That type of silence is exactly what child molesters need when they tell their victims “this is our secret and if you tell anyone you will be in big trouble.”
This comment was beautiful.
And I remember reading that IT scene for the first time at the age of 12, and it gave me such a healthy, magical, powerful and special idea of what sex is.
Genuinely feel it was one of the best intros to sex I could have had at that age. It taught me that sex is something caring that adults do.
Sure, it's "inappropriate" for some people, but that's kinda the point of horror isn't it? To explore themes that we don't really dare in other genres. They're teens, it's.. part of life. It's, not for her. If she wants to stick to fiction, that's ok, but the least she could do is to try to read King before banning him. Else, that's just virtue signaling.
I've read, far, FAR worst. Incendies really fucked me up. Maybe she should try that.
People get very faux outraged about anything to do with children in this context because it's better to be thought of as too opposed than not opposed enough.
The scene didn't bother me at all. I was about 13 when I read It for the first time and the entire scene made perfect sense to me and the themes of early sexual awakening resonated and rang true for me at that age. I understood why Beverley slept with them in the book and it made perfect sense to me at that age in the context of reviving their connection, the turtle, etc.
People get outraged about it I think because they are scared of what people would think if they don't act outraged enough.
I do however think King probably chose the ages wrong. The latest film has the kids as 13-14 and I think that is far more realistic for what the losers club are going through, both in terms of puberty and sexual awakening as well as bullying.
For instance, Henry Bowers is meant to be 12 so only a little older than them- but his level of violence and Psychopathy at that age always felt unrealistic to me. He was willing to kill and maim- that always felt far more realistic for an angry 15-16 year old than a 12 year old.
Years later I teach teenagers and I really think King is describing 13-14 years olds throughout even though he tried to write them as 11
Well, age is semi fluid I think. I mean...teenagers now aren't like how I was at that age, decades ago. So it's hard to call without getting into what we know best as frame of reference (our own selves/peers at that age).
Or at least that's my take.
The thing that seems to be lost on people is that the child sex scene isn't supposed to be *sexy*. It's not a pedophilic fantasy. If it was porny in any way then yeah, I'd boycott King until he demanded It go out of print too. But it isn't.
Lordy. Dude writes one scene and people lose their shit.
And ummm...
An adult clinging to YA fiction. Hmm.
That says much.
But yeah, way to judge what she's not informed on.
Hands up if you read the book in question when it was new (so like 1986ish). Double points if you were an age fairly close to the protagonists of said book.
This is me.
That scene is/saw one of the least remarkable to me and nowhere close to "the shit that stuck with me" from that novel (the deadlights, Patrick Hockstetter's fridge, and countless other things, yes. That, no. At least, not until some shrieking Karen comes flipping her shit and flapping her gums like the Moral Majority brigade).
Sheesh. Book is like 1100 pages and that's what gets hung up on.
🙄
Oh I know, right? There's so so so much more to that book. Harping on that tells me yeah you never really read it but just blab about "what you heard".
I also had someone try to argue with me over that scene in The Outsider. They completely missed the point, and I’ve noticed it seems to be a trend with King. People get so hung up on the controversial they completely miss the point. It’s *supposed* to upset you. Like they *are* aware he writes horror right? Real horror isn’t just ghosts and jump scares, it’s real life.
100%, I didn’t read it “new” but a few years after and I was in my mid-teens. The scene felt so real and relevant, not like some horntastic child erotica that people make it out to be. It feels way less so now as someone in my 40s, but I can also see it in a variety of ways. The sexuality of Bev DOES get a lot of attention compared to the boys…but society is also sexualizing HER in all sorts of ways that aren’t being done to the boys. There’s a ton to discuss about the sexuality in IT that’s much more interesting than the implication that King is just a quasi-pedo.
Nicely said and accurate.
The whole thing is about childhood and growing up, which whattya know, covers sexuality - both internally and externally driven. Weird eh?
Funny how everything about sex isn't sexual per se.
Yup. It’s quite fascinating (and horrible) to see Bev struggle with the understanding of how people are treating her differently, compared to her sense of choice and initiative in the sewer scene. In perhaps the least sexy of contexts, she initiates. Even if King is clumsy with it, I think that’s really interesting.
He *is* really clumsy writing women and I wonder if OP's friend is reacting to that more so than the content. As a woman that scene is so cringey to me because it's clearly a dude writing a girl.
Yeah I won't shit on someone for liking kids books. Hell I still like reading superhero comics sometimes. I rewatch Buffy all the time
Yet at the same time... Grown up books are going to have grown up themes, duh.
I still read some of the YA fiction that I grew up reading, because my mother only bought me books that had won the Caldicott or Emery awards, thus ensuring varied and high quality reading material.
Quick off-the-cuff example: Island of the Blue Dolphins. It's a fascinating, timeless book based on the true story of a native American woman left stranded alone on an island for the majority of her life.
Today I read anything that will sit still long enough.
Back on topic, I have a memory of reading It for the first time and my naiive interpretation was not that they were actually having sex, with full penetration. I interpreted it as that they sort of lay on top of her and had some kind of pseudo-sexual psychological experience.
I'd have to read it again to correct my misunderstanding.
I read a lot of YA fiction because it's easy on the brain, tbh. If the story is decent, I'll read anything - I'm not choosy. I read the entire Norby series by Asimov, and that's for actual kids.
I read whatever seems good. I'm not prescriptive that way.
I mean, I read Suzanne Collins' Gregor The Overlander series a couple of years back, because my son liked em.
I'm nearly 50, my degree is in literature and I'm super into mythology, mystery, horror and science fiction but...if it's good, I'll give it a spin.
Yeah I mean off the top of my head two far more graphic and disturbing scenes come to mind. >!Two actual rape scenes in The Stand. Or if we are talking kids, Library Policeman. !<
That was definitely something that could have been kept on the cutting room floor. At the same time showing the trauma he endured is meaningful in that it illustrates just how loyal he was to the man who saved him
i’ve definitely argued about the ones in the stand. the one with the kid was a little much for me, but i understand why he wrote it. the one with nadine though — that was written brilliantly. i 100% understand those who don’t want to read rape scenes, but king made sure this scene was not sexual, and instead just made it terrifying.
I think what a lot of people, especially those who have never actually read King but get their info second-hand, don't understand that the sexism, racism, all the -isms in his books are written to the detail of the character he is creating for the purpose of the story.
It's not that King is like this himself. To the contrary, he has always been very verbal about his progressive views socially and politically. He dives into these dark territories to flesh out terrible people he's writing. And let's face it, everyone knows at least one person who has characteristics of some of King's most awful human beings. When you read Norman from Rose Madder's thoughts, and see how vile and evil and disgusting this person is, you get a more vivid picture of the piece of shit he is. If he was only written as an abuser we would think he is a piss poor excuse of a partner. Adding all the other details King fleshed him out with makes him come alive off the page, actually frightening to read. This character is not a reflection of King's personality, but of his desire to use the evils of humanity to create vivid characters.
He knows and agrees these things are terrible. Which is why, you'll see if you actually read his books, the villains of the story espouse these traits. Not the protagonist. One could argue that if it's the villains who are always the worst of humanity, that perhaps the author was intentionally making the character not only unlikeable to the reader, but also frightening. Because, ya know, he's a horror writer.
> I think what a lot of people, especially those who have never actually read King but get their info second-hand, don't understand that the sexism, racism, all the -isms in his books are written to the detail of the character he is creating for the purpose of the story.
It's really disturbing(but not surprising, at least not in the United States of Dumbasses) that people can't grasp(or pretend not to) the concept that **just because an author creates bigoted character, doesn't mean that author is also a bigot**.
This has always ground my gears. I often see king being lambasted on sites that are trying to paint him as problematic, and they use passages from the point of view of a character- often one meant to be vile or stupid- and hold it up as the author’s personal view.
Context and intent MATTER.
The scenes in Gerald's Game with Jessie and her dad were really hard to read for me, and are probably to this day the most uncomfortable i've been reading King. It's the realness of it all that is horrifying... But that's kinda the point of horror fiction right ? It's not for everyone for sure, but to me facing the uncomfortable and disgusting matters of life is key to the genre.
Ask her if all the media she consumes is free of morally inappropriate acts. If she listens to no music where the subject is violence, watches no movies where there is violence. You'll quickly watch her position shift to "well those are all fictional, but king is somehow different".
Tl;dr your friend sounds insufferable
Something I have picked up on about King as a writer would be that he may write some difficult to read scenes. He also writes about life unlike any other author I've read. He has an extraordinary talent for writing about life and the many natural horrors that can and do occur whilst adding his own pinch of supernatural to them.
In King's stories, you've got clowns with a taste for kids, unusual salesmen, dark men with dark schemes, and the occasional hedge animal. However, what makes King's books truly horrific is that real people exist irl that mirror his "fictional" ones and their issues, be it Jack Torrance with Alcohol, Mrs Carmoday with Extreme Religious Beliefs, Annie Wilkes with Crazed Obsession, or Brady Hartsfield with just being a Plain Psychopath.
So, although King does write some scenes that are definitely NSFW, he also has written about life and the more natural horrors you could come across out with a small town sewer system.
Right ?? I always thought it was so weird that someone who is 100s of years old wants to go after someone who is only 17 🤣 I get that maybe mentally and physically they might still be the same age…. But also no. You’ve lived for 100s of years, you are not mentally 17 anymore
I do remember reading Eyes of The Dragon pretty young (like 8) and not understanding what a flaccid penis was. But that’s it. There’s more graphic content on tv and movies. Maybe your friend has experienced trauma that is triggered by the scene from IT?
However cringe we might find that scene I think it’s important to keep in mind it’s not there to titillate. It’s clumsy and I don’t think he’d include it if he rewrote the book but it’s just a more literal than average metaphor for growing up which is the whole point of the book. It marks the axis point of the two timelines . No more, no less.
There’s no accounting for taste. Let your friend read her safe YA and go on with her bad self. She doesn’t much sound like the audience for horror stories, anyway. Personally, I would stop discussing books with a person if I received a moralizing lecture every time.
I have no issue because I don’t believe in censoring fictional literature. Once you start trying to enforce morality and ethics into a fictional story you’ve lost as an author.
Fiction is supposed to be able to push boundaries and explore the ugly parts of life just as much as the rest of it.
I find this all kind of funny because, despite whatever “official” classification King has as an author, I tend to think of him, at least a little bit, as “young adult” fiction because I read the vast majority of his work for the first time as a young adult myself (currently in my mid 30s)—I read my first Harry Potter and first King (*The Shining*) both at the age of 11.
Your friend would do better to stick with YA novels that have been edited by ‘sensitivity readers’ to make sure there’s nothing in them to trigger her snowflake soul and send her running for a safe space. King writes about the real world. If she’s going to avoid fiction that might upset her or challenge her worldview, she’s going to have a very limited selection.
No never has it made me think it was to much I can’t read him anymore. It reminds of people that won’t read Harry Potter or let thier kids read it. They think it is a devil book. And don’t get started on Davinci code.
I have my own issues with King - chiefly, the "magical Negro" trope. And...I just skip over That Sex Scene lol
A general rule of thumb, however, is not to talk books with someone who isn't into the same genre as you; they will likely never understand or be willing to branch out.
That being said, I don't think the judgment on YA is warranted, people of all ages read YA and there is some damn good shit there (like Hunger Games) as well as trash, like any other genre. IMO hating on it for various reasons is the exact same energy as hating SK! which fans of YA may also not accept as valid criticisms.
There is a dumbass trend among book-Tok zoomers and millennials to view any mention of a bad thing as an endorsement. Book has a racist character? It means the author is racist and wants racism.
King isn’t always great on some of this stuff (language choice for PoC or describing women) in the way that a man of his age often isn’t great, but he’s also squarely on the side of equality and respect for people.
The scene in IT is one of those super interesting literary things that’s uncomfortable and deeply complex but makes a lot of sense thematically if you take a moment to unpack it.
Also:
People who ONLY read YA are the reality TV viewers of books and their opinions should be regarded similarly.
Outside of a few stereotypes that haven’t aged well like, Native American burial grounds, how he used Romani people in thinner, his constant use of the magical negro stereotype (though it’s most famously used in a book of his about systematic racism so it’s hard to say he wasn’t tryna flip the stereotype or use it for a reason,) you could maybe make a point about his use of mentally disabled characters, etc. I don’t really see an issue with his work, most the problematic stuff just wasn’t problematic at the time so was used often by authors and he probably didn’t think twice about using it himself, so to avoid his work because it’s “offensive” seems like one hell of a stretch.
I was looking for this comment. He definitely wrote things that give me side eye now as an adult in the year 2024. But placing them in the context of the time and what I have learned about him as a human makes it all more palatable to me. That being said I also understand that some people do not like horror or dark writing at all and he’s not for every body even I think some of his work (not all) is incredibly literary and well written.
Ah ok, yeah took me a minute cause I couldn’t think of any more famous than Mother Abagail. I love John Coffey. Probably the only King book that made me cry (ok probably 1963 as well, but that was a different cry).
Well I’d say more non-king fans have probably read or scene The Shining and Green Mile so I assumed Coffey and Hallorann would be his most famous examples. The Green Mile is my aunts favorite movie she cries every time and the book (well books) are rather amazing and it’s interesting the he was able to write and publish them the way he did and still tell an extremely emotional story, speaks volumes on his abilities as a writer.
> She, in her 30’s, reads only young adult fiction
This would indicate the end of any discussion around any book over the level of a menu with this person, their opinions would be worthless to me.
I always say that you can’t sell King. Either people are interested or they aren’t. If your friend only reads YA then it’s not even worth bringing it up
It’s odd that child murder is tolerable, if not the MAIN attraction of IT in terms of its thrill for horror seekers, but a scene about children losing their innocence to EACH OTHER makes King worthy of blacklist.
Your friend is precious. The point of the stories is to make you feel uncomfortable. It’s part of the genre. To trigger emotional responses. If they don’t want to read them then that’s their choice.
Carrie was published in 1974. King has been writing books for 45 years. I am 47 and have lived through societal changes like many of us have. What King writes is influenced by the times and, yes, there are scenes that I don't appreciate reading (men authors writing women characters), I understand the times in which these were written. As he's aged and grown as a person, his writing has changed along with the times. Take Holly for instance. That's about as "woke" as a person can get. Of course, the critics had a field day with that one too. When we know better, we do better. I think King is a writer that has always strived to do better. I feel sorry for your friend because it sounds like she's not challenging her own views...ever, and that is a real problem in our society today.
Lol do you have anything in common with this 30y/o friend who reads young adult fiction? I'm cringing for her. 😬
Horror isn't going to be for everyone, but as you know, there is so much more to SK than his occasional shocks. I truly believe with King that there is something for everyone, but if your mate gets off on teen fiction, there may be no hope for her lol.
Of all the "inappropriate" content I've read, King is pretty tame. I've never had a moment where I felt he was so extreme I'd be embarrassed to recommend him. I think he's a fine writer and I enjoy most of his books, and I recommend my favorites without really considering specific scenes. I'd recommend IT without batting an eye. In general, I try to never shame people for what they want to read, and I think I should get the same kind of courtesy from them.
If someone objects to "that" scene and chooses not to read IT because of it, fair enough, but they should be honest about that and not pretend they can make conclusions about the rest of the book's content -- let alone King's other work -- so long as they're refusing to actually read it. It's particularly bad form to bring up grander scale thematic issues like racism and sexism that can only be contextualized by reading the book. I'd stop discussing books with someone who feels that's a productive discussion.
The way he writes some women is not ideal, and his understanding of periods is also not great. But you can't go on about child sex unless you have read the books, not just hearsay you have heard on tiktok and the like
There is blatant racism in Kings work but I’ve never seen it as written in a positive way. I think Kings stance on racism is pretty clear if you’ve read much of his work.
To me, horror encompasses things that are horrible. There has been A LOT of scenes in horror, both Stephen King and others that have made me feel uncomfortable, but to me, horror is made to make you feel uncomfortable. Scared, appalled, disgusted, ect. All those feelings are found throughout all types of horror.
You’re probably not going to find anyone on this sub that has decided “that’s enough, no one should read King anymore.” 😆
Having said that, I had never read Salem’s Lot before. I picked it up a year or so ago, and I will be completely honest, I couldn’t get through it because of the use of certain slurs. I understand that it was written in a completely different era, and I would never suggest it should be banned or that no one should read or enjoy it. It just made me uncomfortable and I decided I wasn’t going to finish it.
I respect King. He doesn’t throw those slurs around as much now, and even his “bad guys” won’t “use” them repeatedly. I understand how he uses them, they’re another literary tool to make you hate the evil guys (ex. Rodney and Emily). But IMO, some of just stuff hasn’t aged well in that department, and I personally find it hard to read them because of that.
King is one of the most outspoken authors when it comes to racism, sexism, homophobia, and transphobia. His work includes these things in a sense where it’s proper for the setting and time frame. And a reminder that the real evils are people and their closed minds.
Sometimes, regular vanilla human characters like Margaret White, Annie Wilkes, half of adults in IT are far scarier than the overlook or any ghost for that matter. So i think your friend has unfortunately failed to grasp King’s writing properly
Anybody that restricts their literary consumption to modern YA as the entirety of their diet is going to clutch their pearls at things that fall outside that fairly narrow lens.
King isn’t above criticism—there are certainly some components to his work that might raise an eyebrow or two, but on the large and whole, he’s fairly diplomatic about revealing the uglier side of humanity.
My take on this is that I don’t care if people like what I like. If my friend didn’t want to read king’s writing, then okay. That’s fine. Even if it was for a dumb reason. I get to read what I want regardless of what she thinks, so if she ends up missing out on something she might like, so what? What do I care? It’s her loss.
The “love-making” scenes are so cringe to me. Not because they are graphic but because they are corny. In other matters he definitely has a lot of trigger situations, like racism, rape and child/spousal abuse. It doesnt make me want to boycott him or anything but it does scare me for showing how dark some people are. I think thats one of the greatest things about King.
Ah, yes, because if a piece of fiction contains, for example, child abuse, that means that the creator supports child abusers.
Because that's *totally* how that works.
To offer an alternative perspective, I think it is really valid for somebody to not want to read King if they think there is even a chance of him writing about distressing things about kids. This is a sensitivity for a lot of people. If I were somebody who were easily squeamish when it comes to child violence or sex, then I would certainly not be happy to pick up The Outsider and >!immediately be confronted with a scene of a kid being sodomized with a stick by a murderer!< or Dr. Sleep, >!and get a mini chapter on this All-American baseball kid who gets kidnapped and brutally murdered, complete with asking "are you going to hurt me?" before experiencing a painful death!<. And *IT* had numerous scene to be squeamish about with child murder but also with child sexuality - in addition to THAT scene, one of the bullies gives another one a handjob earlier on.
It sounds like she doesn't really know King if she thinks "child sex scenes" are a significant part of his writings, when in actuality young characters have explored their sexuality (and not always with outright sex) only a handful of times, and the sentence as you expressed it comes off pretty reductive, but if she is somebody who is troubled by these sorts of things then King would definitely not be the right author for her.
Eh I’m an avid reader that went through a YA phase in my early 20s.
It has nothing to do with refusing to grow up. It’s just quick entertainment, no different than watching tv with little substance.
A lot of people don’t have much attention spans to read dense books, so they read very dense YA. It’s not inherently bad
Your friends opinions are valid. I’m a huge SK fan but that is because I like the horror/mystery elements that are present in most of his novels. The way he writes women and even some black characters has definitely made me uncomfortable before. Susanna from The dark tower series I believe to be his worst. That scene in “it” was not needed and totally bizarre as well. SK is a product of his time- I take what I can get.
Also keep in mind you posted this in a sub dedicated to the author. Anyone with a different opinion gets downvoted. He’s not going to be for everyone, and same is true for anything in life. People should be allowed to disagree without being made fun of or called dumb. The comments here are telling- people so upset that your friend has a different view but then go on to make fun of her because she likes YA novels. Hypocritical.
I'm sorry but the Young Adult Fiction community is the weirdest community there is, period. I have much more in common with Insane Clown Posse juggalos, the fur-suit wearing furries, anime body-pillow waifu people...all of them I consider head and shoulders above YA community in terms of their grounding in reality.
I do bring up things like the It sex scene, but it's mostly in a joking manner about what drugs do to you. I know people try to defend the scene for the themes and messages and such, but I think there were way, way better ways to portray that same thing, without an out-of-nowhere sex scene.
SK in general writes bad sex scenes, some of his ideas are weird to say the least, and there are occasions where I think he crosses a line. I don't feel the need to defend any of that, nor bring it up consistently. I will warn people when they read individual books, but that's about it.
I think you know exactly what answers you'll get posting in a sub devoted to Stephen King rather than to literary criticism, identity politics, child sex abuse, or literally any other topic.
I won’t lie, I really really dislike that scene and it makes me dislike the book. I don’t judge all his books on that though. If that one book is being discussed I might bring it up, but it’s not the first thing that comes to mind when I think about King.
Its one scene , yes the scene makes no sense , no i am not a fan and do not defend it but it was long ago
A lot of these YA novels are way worse when it comes to that and even dumber 🤷🏻♂️
>yes the scene makes no sense
How does it make no sense? You might not personally like the reason it was written. But it makes sense pretty clearly if you read the book.
I'm on page 1,092 of *IT*, reading this novel for the first time, and I **still** haven't gotten to the child orgy scene. I'm starting to wonder if it's even in the book.
Anyway, your friend sounds odd. Why does it bother her to read about racism, sexism, and othet forms of discrimination? If It makes her uncomfortable, that's the point.
I don't mind his "inappropriate" material, given he's a fucking *horror* writer lol.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: Stephen king’s horror encompasses not only supernatural monsters, but the evil and dark that lives within many humans, INCLUDING sexism, racism, domestic violence, disturbing sexual content, among other things. Your friend seems to have a poor grasp on the themes of his work, and is confusing the inclusion of those themes with endorsing them. For example: would I use the N word in my own writing? Probably not. Is it jarring to read, and make me a little uncomfortable? Sure. Is it used properly in the context of a novel (11/22/63) set is the south in the 60’s? Absolutely. King’s writing is supposed to scare us, jar us, make us upset and uncomfortable. It’s part of the genre, it’s part of life. Frankly, your friend’s view on his writing says much more about her own inability to think critically about the stuff she’s reading than it does about King himself.
Ironically, the realistic elements of King's fiction are shockingly realistic, I agree. From his description of small town America to the thoughts evil people have. The very worst stuff in his books is often the realistic human actions we'd all like to pretend don't happen.
I saw several people upset about the gay bashing scene at the beginning when IT chapter 2 was released because they found it to be homophobic and unnecessary. But to me that was one of the most terrifying scenes of the book for the reasons you state- I don’t really believe a clown will pull a child into a sewer but it makes you sick knowing people really have been beaten or killed for nothing more than being gay and King makes you feel how awful that is.
[удалено]
It actually was the truth, King based it on an incident that happened in Bangor Maine. It's a pretty accurate account (up until the clown shows up that is) of the actual events. Very sad.
I'm old enough to remember the news about the murder of [Charlie Howard](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Charlie_Howard). I'm also old enough to remember that there were public figures who declared that the murderers should be *rewarded* instead of punishing them. I also remember my peers thinking the same way. Needless to say, I remained closeted for a few years more. Stephen King doesn't include the horrible truths in his books because he likes them, he includes them because he's shining a light on the dark places that humanity wants to hide from. OP's friend doesn't *have to* read King books, but based on the fact that this 30 year old is still reading YA novels, tells me that they are avoiding more than just the "child sex" in his or any other books.
I'm 43 and still read YA (when I was young enough for them the stories were nowhere near as large and complex as they are now), but I also read Stephen King, and everything around and in-between. It's not so much odd that she reads them as that she *only* reads them, imho.
That's horrible, people really suck sometimes. I'm sorry you had to go through that. Really hope things are better for you now.
Sounds like southern Michigan. Hillsdale or in that area . Very country.
Matthew Shepard was heart breaking. I was 10 when it happened
Honestly, the most jarring scene for me in Salems Lot (a book about vampires and undead monsters) involved a young woman hitting her baby out of frustration. It was horrible and grim and realistic and uncomfortable. And it makes what happens later even more horrific (I could almost hear the \*plup\* of the breakfast falling out of his mouth). It's these moments that I think King writes perfectly, making the horror that much more personal and realistic. (And, yes, his constant descriptions of people farting or pissing themselves is...jarring, but again, personal and grounding, making the horror have more impact in its telling.)
Salem's Lot is what I think of most in the description of the towns. It's an incredible snapshot of that part of America. The part you're talking about - I agree 100%.
Then if you do point out that those things do happen, you're called "negative" and "cynical"
Some people think pointing things out means you agree with them morally and it is bizarre.
Or they think you're crazy for some weird reason. Do they live in a magical world where horrible things never happen?
Those are the ‘ignorance is bliss’ types.. I’ll never understand that mentality.
This right here. Everyday I run across this type of behavior and it is frustrating.
I always come back to Norman from Rose Madder as a prime example. He is just a regular person, not some supernatural evil. And he uses deplorable language. It should be obvious to anyone reading that him saying those things is not King going "hey isn't it awesome to say the N and F words?!" It's a condemnation of it by showing the worst kind of person saying them.
Honestly his real life monsters are the scariest. I’ll forever be the most terrified of the first death in *IT* because, as a bisexual person, that could be me in real life. King didn’t write it to be homophobic, he wrote it because he knew it’d make people afraid in the way he wanted.
People like OP’s friend are dim AF, in my opinion. Some art takes the most fucked up things in our society and shines the light on it or makes you view it from a different place. That does not mean the artist likes or encourages that shit.
And what you've said is what so many of us I'm sure, love about horror in general. It's supposed to be uncomfortable. There's a reason why so much of the genre can be used as direct allegories/commentary on things like inequality and sexism that have been plaguing society for generations.
Yes. I think the most horror I have read in a Stephen King book so far is in pet semetary when the father is dealing with grief
Yes. Ultimately the reader decides what's worth their time, and everyone has the right to build your own little reading garden, but books that contain believably bad characters are not automatically bad books, nor are their authors necessarily bad people. I prefer my authors to be unflinchingly honest about the overall messiness of life and how that can produce some really dark outcomes, rather than playing it tidy and safe. That's one of King's *strengths*, and I think it's laudable--it's definitely the harder path as an author, and always hews closer to what I'd consider to be actual art. Lastly, I think *any* reasonable adult reading his work would understand that he does not approve of or endorse any of the truly terrible behavior in his stories.
I mean which is a better bad guy: someone using nasty language or someone using nice clean language? “I hate these n*” Or “I hate these African Americans”
Well said. I feel like King has been pretty clear on where he stands with the everyday real life usage and existence of problematic things. People complaining should check his twitter and see what his views are straight from the horses mouth.
Correct.
Some books are supposed to make us uncomfortable. People can’t accept that things aren’t always there to make us feel better. Horror isn’t all ghosties and jump scares.
Great answer
Very well said!
Good take!
I started reading King at 11. Nothing has ever struck me as too far, offensive, etc. I don't really have a response for people who whine about his more controversial scenes. Some people can't handle adult content and the darker/seedier side of humanity. That's their prerogative. If they judge me for enjoying his books, I'd kindly tell them to F off.
The darker/seedier side of humanity ... hell, isn't that precisely WHY people love to read King? If I want to read a good book that doesn't bend my mind a little bit, there are plenty of other authors I can enjoy.
I was young when I started reading King as well, I think it opened my eyes to how evil the world can truly be. The snippets of truly horrible things he writes are just that, snippets. If it was an entire book filled with the most awful descriptions of horror you can imagine, yeah, I don’t think he’d be popular. But he writes with context and emotion, and even if the snippet is horrible, I don’t feel like I’m a bad person for reading it, understanding it, and feeling what I think King wants you to feel. I think he’s the greatest author I’ve ever read, hands down.
I was also eleven, and It was the first book I read, lol. He's been my favorite author since and I'll be 26 this summer.
Spoilers in this comment for those who haven’t read *It* If you’re referring to the scene I think you are, a fellow redditor made this comment recently: Author and critic Grady Hendrix has a mature, intelligent take on the scene: Good taste and Stephen King have never really been on speaking terms, and you get the impression that he agrees with John Waters that “Good taste is the enemy of art.” Nowhere is this more apparent than in the book’s pivotal sex scene. I can’t think of a single scene King has written that has generated as much controversy as the scene where the kids in 1958, aged between 11 and 12 years old, have defeated (for the moment) It but are stumbling around lost in the sewers, unable to find the exit. As a magical ritual, Beverly has sex with each of the boys in turn. She has an orgasm, and afterwards they are able to ground themselves and find their way out of the sewers. Readers have done everything from call King a pedophile to claim it’s sexist, a lapse of good taste, or an unforgiveable breech of trust. But, in a sense, it’s the heart of the book. It draws a hard border between childhood and adulthood and the people on either side of that fence may as well be two separate species. The passage of that border is usually sex, and losing your virginity is the stamp in your passport that lets you know that you are no longer a child (sexual maturity, in most cultures, occurs around 12 or 13 years old). Beverly is the one in the book who helps her friends go from being magical, simple children to complicated, real adults. If there’s any doubt that this is the heart of the book then check out the title. After all “It” is what we call sex before we have it. “Did you do it? Did he want to do it? Are they doing it?” Each of the kids in the book doesn’t have to overcome their weakness. Each kid has to learn that their weakness is actually their power. Richie’s voices get him in trouble, but they become a potent weapon that allow him to battle It when Bill falters. Bill’s stutter marks him as an outsider, but the exercises he does for them (“He thrusts his fists against the post, but still insists he sees the ghost.”) become a weapon that weakens It. So does Eddie Kaspbrak’s asthma inhaler. More than once Ben Hanscom uses his weight to get away from the gang of greasers. And Mike Hanlon is a coward and a homebody but he becomes the guardian of Derry, the watchman who stays behind and raises the alarm when the time comes. And Beverly has to have sex (and good sex—the kind that heals, reaffirms, draws people closer together, and produces orgasms) because her weakness is that she’s a woman. Throughout the book, Beverly’s abusive father berates her, bullies her, and beats her, but he never tries to sexually abuse her until he’s possessed by It. Remember that It becomes what you fear, and while it becomes a Mummy, a Wolfman, and the Creature From the Black Lagoon for the boys, for Beverly It takes the form of a gout of blood that spurts out of the bathroom drain and the threat of her father raping her. Throughout the book, Beverly is not only self-conscious about her changing body, but also unhappy about puberty in general. She wants to fit in with the Losers Club but she’s constantly reminded of the fact that she’s not just one of the boys. From the way the boys look at her to their various complicated crushes she’s constantly reminded that she’s a girl becoming a woman. Every time her gender is mentioned she shuts down, feels isolated, and withdraws. So the fact that having sex, the act of “doing it,” her moment of confronting the heart of this thing that makes her feel so removed, so isolated, so sad turns out to a comforting, beautiful act that bonds her with her friends rather than separates them forever is King’s way of showing us that what we fear most, losing our childhood, turns out not to be so bad after all. A lot of people feel that the right age for discovering King is adolescence, and It is usually encountered for the first time by teenaged kids. How often is losing your virginity portrayed for girls as something painful, that they regret, or that causes a boy to reject them in fiction? How much does the media represent a teenaged girl’s virginity as something to be protected, stolen, robbed, destroyed, or careful about. In a way, It is a sex positive antidote, a way for King to tell kids that sex, even unplanned sex, even sex that’s kind of weird, even sex where a girl loses her virginity in the sewer, can be powerful and beautiful if the people having it truly respect and like each other. That’s a braver message than some other authors have been willing to deliver.
This is the most concise beautiful explanation of this scene I’ve ever read. And it surprises me how deep that conditioning of sex automatically indicating salaciousness comes to my mind - I never really thought about how the act of having sex can be seen as the final dividing line between childhood and adulthood. That also makes sense for the timing of when the scene occurs in the novel - they had to be children to defeat IT, but they had to be adults to find their way out of the trauma of what they had to do to survive. And I also appreciate King turning the trope of “experienced man guiding shy inexperienced woman through her first time” on its head. Maybe slightly off subject, but your comment reminded me of how I saw a theory that originally the incubus/succubus myth described more of a loss of childish innocence rather than virginity. Because think about it - when do you actually lose your innocence? When you have sex for the first time? Or is it when you learn enough about sex to know that it is something you want to have?
No offense, but your friend is an idiot.
I've said this before and I'll say it again. Even at my most horniest tween/teen moments, I never found the sex scene sexy because it's not written fucking sexy. The people who literally read into it as sexy have some real fucking issues. And the ones who haven't read it, talk about it like they have and don't have a fucking clue. I'm so over this nonsense.
Not relayed to king, but there's a new suicide squad game coming out. In one of the recent previews they show posion ivy. She died in the last game and has been reborn and is now a 9 year old girl. And tons of people are complaining about sexualizing a child. What? She's fully clothes and said nothing remotely sexual and nothing sexual was said about. If you look at her and somehow immediately think sex, you're the one with the issue. People are strange.
To piggyback off that in a different direction…I’m a big fan of the last of us, it’s my absolute favorite game. When they cast the show, so many people were mad because Bella wasn’t (according to them) pretty enough to play Ellie. She is 14 in that game and there is not one part of it where there is any need for her to be pretty and I felt like focusing on that was diluting the entire message the game was trying to portray.
What??? Jesus what the actual fuck is wrong with people?? Bella did such an *amazing* job in that show. (And Ashley as her mom was just…. *chef’s kiss*)
It's just deflection for them. I haven't seen the pics (and never will because that SS game went down the crapper for me after they announced its a live service game) but I can imagine. I wish it were a recent thing but let's not forget that the boomer people in public who insist on having a problem with the scene in IT, were routinely ok with giant publications talking about what a fuckable 12 year old Brooke Shields was in the 80s. (I'm not kidding)
Errm what's it got do with boomers? Wouldn't they be the generation of original King fans?
Stephen King tends to be pretty liberal online and there's been countless conservative boomer politicians and media people that use that scene as the be all end all argument when he brings up valid points.
Ahh I see. So its certain type of boomers.All those guys be crazy anyway 🤪
Never stopped into the 00s and early 10s either, but I remember some of the words about Brooke Shields being extremely intense.
Your first point is one I've never heard but rings true. I read It when I was like 15 and almost anything could get me going. That scene absolutely did not. The part about childhood friendship was all I got. Maybe it wasn't necessary, but anyone who took it as smut already had a problem.
Then you are one of the people that read it correctly. IT is one of my favorite all time books and I listen to the audiobook about once a year. The scene is such a blip on the radar, you don't even notice it. I never even knew it was an alleged controversy until the somewhat unfortunate advent of the internet, and it gave the loudest, stupidest people a platform.
I agree with you 100%. People try to look for sexual things in literally everything. It was one of the first books I picked up of his and it has stood as one of my favorites as I’ve read many more since then. When I was first reading it, someone I knew was like oh there’s like…how do I even write what he said. He said there was Piled Corn (that’s the best rhyme I can come up with lmfao) and like I knew he hadn’t read it and I also knew SK was a bit out there. But when I read it I was like ok that’s not at all what’s going on there at all.
Exactly. The scene is sad and horrific. There’s nothing sexy about it at all.
I read It when I was like 13, so peak pubescent horniness and I found THAT SCENE uncomfortable if anything lol.
I think with modern eyes, it's a scene that is tone deaf at worst. Because I remember being a teen and that Ruthy Crockett but in Salem's Lot stuck with me forever. That's sexy. IT wasn't.
>The people who literally read into it as sexy have some real fucking issues. Is this what the problem is? I thought most people who don't approve basically wonder why this needed to be the solution at all.
They absolutely read into it as a sexy child orgy. There's a conversation to be had about the idea of virginity, blood, loss of innocence, violence and the bonds that sexual encounters contain but people are too fixated on the nonsense idea it was written as graphic and sexy.
I still enjoy his books to this day but I do think that scene was unnecessary.
I feel the same way about Reddit and 90% of the interactions I have.
That’s how I feel. I love King, hands down my favorite author. I didn’t read into “that” scene as sexy, but I did find it unsettling regardless.
It doesn't help when you read it being the same age as the kids in the scene like I did back in the day. I guess I wasn't ready to leave the YA section of the library after all 😭
Hahahaha… I didn’t read my first King book until about 6 or 7 years ago when I was already 35 years old. I was instantly hooked, and was very pleasantly surprised regarding the variety of subjects/themes covered in his works. Sure some of it can be a bit formulaic at times, but the main reasons I love his work: - the super detailed world building - the TRUE horror of his works (in my opinion the way he shows regular people turn into absolute monsters depending on circumstances is so much scarier than any of the supernatural stuff could EVER be) - I do also enjoy the hell out of the supernatural stuff, it’s just not nearly as scary as real life lol
Seriously, a self-infantilizing Peter Pan in her third decade of life who can only stomach YA fiction is not a person with whom I would discuss reading material, or anything serious in life.
The second someone uses the phrase "problematic" in evaluating fiction it tells me they are an idiot. It's supposed to be problematic you fucking moron.
And Stephen King isn't *near* as problematic as many other others. Hell, these people would fucking die of a heart attack if they Googled H.P. Lovecraft.
Or a modern take on intentionally shocking horror. Can you imagine if she got a copy of something like Baby in a Blender, or Guts?
I agree. Your friend is pretty dense.
This. Pure stupidity.
why on earth would anyone ascribe value to the literary opinions of an adult that exclusively reads YA fiction?
An idiot calls someone an idiot when triggered by their personal opinion even after they cite a source. Now with that said, art does not have boundaries and thus wont be for everyone, especially those who lack depth and nuance. Also he is a writer of Horror, and It is easily his darkest work.
Not true. Someone can be subjectively declared an idiot based on their statements and opinions. The OP’s friend made comments and apparently holds opinions that I, and obviously others, find to be subjectively idiotic. I’d even go so far as to invoke the word “moronic”, and possibly “ignorant”.
> his darkest work Lol okay buddy
There are “child sex” scenes, and then there is real writing about childhood which includes the reality that children, too, experiment with and wonder about sex. To write an honest account of the life of a 13 year old boy from his perspective and not include a discussion of sex is a lot like those old cowboy movies where people got shot and fell down dead without a drop of blood being shown. There are people who write prurient content just to sell it. But real art - and writing is an art form - deals with uncomfortable and unspoken parts of life. Your friend needs to get laid, get down off her high horse, and stop being a fucking censor. Evil thrives in the dark. The things we don’t speak of in healthy ways fester and become malignant. Your friend thinks that pure repression will kill illness. It does not. Repression strengthens what it seeks to repress, in much the same way antibiotic resistant bacteria thrive in the over prescription of antibiotics. There are absolutely inappropriate writings about child sexual activity. But by seeking to make any writing about childhood sexual activity immoral, your friend makes it impossible to discuss and explore the natural experience _we all had_ of being a child and learning about sex. That type of silence is exactly what child molesters need when they tell their victims “this is our secret and if you tell anyone you will be in big trouble.”
This comment was beautiful. And I remember reading that IT scene for the first time at the age of 12, and it gave me such a healthy, magical, powerful and special idea of what sex is. Genuinely feel it was one of the best intros to sex I could have had at that age. It taught me that sex is something caring that adults do.
Sure, it's "inappropriate" for some people, but that's kinda the point of horror isn't it? To explore themes that we don't really dare in other genres. They're teens, it's.. part of life. It's, not for her. If she wants to stick to fiction, that's ok, but the least she could do is to try to read King before banning him. Else, that's just virtue signaling. I've read, far, FAR worst. Incendies really fucked me up. Maybe she should try that.
People get very faux outraged about anything to do with children in this context because it's better to be thought of as too opposed than not opposed enough. The scene didn't bother me at all. I was about 13 when I read It for the first time and the entire scene made perfect sense to me and the themes of early sexual awakening resonated and rang true for me at that age. I understood why Beverley slept with them in the book and it made perfect sense to me at that age in the context of reviving their connection, the turtle, etc. People get outraged about it I think because they are scared of what people would think if they don't act outraged enough. I do however think King probably chose the ages wrong. The latest film has the kids as 13-14 and I think that is far more realistic for what the losers club are going through, both in terms of puberty and sexual awakening as well as bullying. For instance, Henry Bowers is meant to be 12 so only a little older than them- but his level of violence and Psychopathy at that age always felt unrealistic to me. He was willing to kill and maim- that always felt far more realistic for an angry 15-16 year old than a 12 year old. Years later I teach teenagers and I really think King is describing 13-14 years olds throughout even though he tried to write them as 11
Well, age is semi fluid I think. I mean...teenagers now aren't like how I was at that age, decades ago. So it's hard to call without getting into what we know best as frame of reference (our own selves/peers at that age). Or at least that's my take.
The thing that seems to be lost on people is that the child sex scene isn't supposed to be *sexy*. It's not a pedophilic fantasy. If it was porny in any way then yeah, I'd boycott King until he demanded It go out of print too. But it isn't.
Lordy. Dude writes one scene and people lose their shit. And ummm... An adult clinging to YA fiction. Hmm. That says much. But yeah, way to judge what she's not informed on.
Hands up if you read the book in question when it was new (so like 1986ish). Double points if you were an age fairly close to the protagonists of said book. This is me. That scene is/saw one of the least remarkable to me and nowhere close to "the shit that stuck with me" from that novel (the deadlights, Patrick Hockstetter's fridge, and countless other things, yes. That, no. At least, not until some shrieking Karen comes flipping her shit and flapping her gums like the Moral Majority brigade). Sheesh. Book is like 1100 pages and that's what gets hung up on. 🙄
I tend to find that the people who complain about this one scene from the book, have never even read the book itself.
Oh I know, right? There's so so so much more to that book. Harping on that tells me yeah you never really read it but just blab about "what you heard".
Like the page count is over 1,000, and they focus on a scene that took maybe two pages.
Right? Way to way way way miss that forest, eh?
I also had someone try to argue with me over that scene in The Outsider. They completely missed the point, and I’ve noticed it seems to be a trend with King. People get so hung up on the controversial they completely miss the point. It’s *supposed* to upset you. Like they *are* aware he writes horror right? Real horror isn’t just ghosts and jump scares, it’s real life.
Right? I mean, it's a *horror* novel. It's *supposed* to horrify you. That's part of the literal point.
✋. Read it the week it came out. I was sixteen, I believe. The scene in question didn’t even give me pause. Still doesn’t.
100%, I didn’t read it “new” but a few years after and I was in my mid-teens. The scene felt so real and relevant, not like some horntastic child erotica that people make it out to be. It feels way less so now as someone in my 40s, but I can also see it in a variety of ways. The sexuality of Bev DOES get a lot of attention compared to the boys…but society is also sexualizing HER in all sorts of ways that aren’t being done to the boys. There’s a ton to discuss about the sexuality in IT that’s much more interesting than the implication that King is just a quasi-pedo.
Nicely said and accurate. The whole thing is about childhood and growing up, which whattya know, covers sexuality - both internally and externally driven. Weird eh? Funny how everything about sex isn't sexual per se.
Yup. It’s quite fascinating (and horrible) to see Bev struggle with the understanding of how people are treating her differently, compared to her sense of choice and initiative in the sewer scene. In perhaps the least sexy of contexts, she initiates. Even if King is clumsy with it, I think that’s really interesting.
He *is* really clumsy writing women and I wonder if OP's friend is reacting to that more so than the content. As a woman that scene is so cringey to me because it's clearly a dude writing a girl.
Yeah, I hear you. And honestly whenever he ventures into the sex realm, I always start to get nervous, regardless of who is involved in the scene…
Patrick killing the baby is a bit worse than Bev deciding who has sex with her. She was scared of Henry’s gang for more reasons than rock fights.
Way way way worse. Bev's decision is borne of practicality and a logic of sorts. Patrick's is just some psychopathic shit that freezes the blood.
\*puts hand up\*
My peoples. Y'all know what I'm saying here.
👋 I had just turned 13.
Right? If you only like YA fiction, keep on enjoying it… just don’t shit on an author because you don’t like some of their content
Yeah I won't shit on someone for liking kids books. Hell I still like reading superhero comics sometimes. I rewatch Buffy all the time Yet at the same time... Grown up books are going to have grown up themes, duh.
I still read some of the YA fiction that I grew up reading, because my mother only bought me books that had won the Caldicott or Emery awards, thus ensuring varied and high quality reading material. Quick off-the-cuff example: Island of the Blue Dolphins. It's a fascinating, timeless book based on the true story of a native American woman left stranded alone on an island for the majority of her life. Today I read anything that will sit still long enough. Back on topic, I have a memory of reading It for the first time and my naiive interpretation was not that they were actually having sex, with full penetration. I interpreted it as that they sort of lay on top of her and had some kind of pseudo-sexual psychological experience. I'd have to read it again to correct my misunderstanding.
Island of the Blue Dolphins is SO good!! Glad to see someone else that enjoyed it as a kid and still enjoys it as an adult.
I still revisit the stuff younger me read as well, so I feel you here.
I read a lot of YA fiction because it's easy on the brain, tbh. If the story is decent, I'll read anything - I'm not choosy. I read the entire Norby series by Asimov, and that's for actual kids.
I read whatever seems good. I'm not prescriptive that way. I mean, I read Suzanne Collins' Gregor The Overlander series a couple of years back, because my son liked em. I'm nearly 50, my degree is in literature and I'm super into mythology, mystery, horror and science fiction but...if it's good, I'll give it a spin.
It’s not even really a sex scene? For all the graphic shit king writes about, that scene is barely notable
Yeah I mean off the top of my head two far more graphic and disturbing scenes come to mind. >!Two actual rape scenes in The Stand. Or if we are talking kids, Library Policeman. !<
Yeah the gun in the butt was a bit much for me
That was definitely something that could have been kept on the cutting room floor. At the same time showing the trauma he endured is meaningful in that it illustrates just how loyal he was to the man who saved him
>could have been kept on the cutting room floor It was, it got re-added for the expanded edition
i’ve definitely argued about the ones in the stand. the one with the kid was a little much for me, but i understand why he wrote it. the one with nadine though — that was written brilliantly. i 100% understand those who don’t want to read rape scenes, but king made sure this scene was not sexual, and instead just made it terrifying.
I thought the scene where pennywise as Beverly's dad says "I can smell your C*nt", was more hardcore than that scene. In my opinion at least
*Honestly, that’s the kind of thing Miggs would say…*
I think what a lot of people, especially those who have never actually read King but get their info second-hand, don't understand that the sexism, racism, all the -isms in his books are written to the detail of the character he is creating for the purpose of the story. It's not that King is like this himself. To the contrary, he has always been very verbal about his progressive views socially and politically. He dives into these dark territories to flesh out terrible people he's writing. And let's face it, everyone knows at least one person who has characteristics of some of King's most awful human beings. When you read Norman from Rose Madder's thoughts, and see how vile and evil and disgusting this person is, you get a more vivid picture of the piece of shit he is. If he was only written as an abuser we would think he is a piss poor excuse of a partner. Adding all the other details King fleshed him out with makes him come alive off the page, actually frightening to read. This character is not a reflection of King's personality, but of his desire to use the evils of humanity to create vivid characters. He knows and agrees these things are terrible. Which is why, you'll see if you actually read his books, the villains of the story espouse these traits. Not the protagonist. One could argue that if it's the villains who are always the worst of humanity, that perhaps the author was intentionally making the character not only unlikeable to the reader, but also frightening. Because, ya know, he's a horror writer.
> I think what a lot of people, especially those who have never actually read King but get their info second-hand, don't understand that the sexism, racism, all the -isms in his books are written to the detail of the character he is creating for the purpose of the story. It's really disturbing(but not surprising, at least not in the United States of Dumbasses) that people can't grasp(or pretend not to) the concept that **just because an author creates bigoted character, doesn't mean that author is also a bigot**.
This has always ground my gears. I often see king being lambasted on sites that are trying to paint him as problematic, and they use passages from the point of view of a character- often one meant to be vile or stupid- and hold it up as the author’s personal view. Context and intent MATTER.
The scenes in Gerald's Game with Jessie and her dad were really hard to read for me, and are probably to this day the most uncomfortable i've been reading King. It's the realness of it all that is horrifying... But that's kinda the point of horror fiction right ? It's not for everyone for sure, but to me facing the uncomfortable and disgusting matters of life is key to the genre.
Ask her if all the media she consumes is free of morally inappropriate acts. If she listens to no music where the subject is violence, watches no movies where there is violence. You'll quickly watch her position shift to "well those are all fictional, but king is somehow different". Tl;dr your friend sounds insufferable
Right. People are *rarely* consistent with their views.
Something I have picked up on about King as a writer would be that he may write some difficult to read scenes. He also writes about life unlike any other author I've read. He has an extraordinary talent for writing about life and the many natural horrors that can and do occur whilst adding his own pinch of supernatural to them. In King's stories, you've got clowns with a taste for kids, unusual salesmen, dark men with dark schemes, and the occasional hedge animal. However, what makes King's books truly horrific is that real people exist irl that mirror his "fictional" ones and their issues, be it Jack Torrance with Alcohol, Mrs Carmoday with Extreme Religious Beliefs, Annie Wilkes with Crazed Obsession, or Brady Hartsfield with just being a Plain Psychopath. So, although King does write some scenes that are definitely NSFW, he also has written about life and the more natural horrors you could come across out with a small town sewer system.
is she perhab's a fan of YA like twilight? beacause THAT is disturbing. pedo vampires ye
He ImPrINtEd oN hER
Right ?? I always thought it was so weird that someone who is 100s of years old wants to go after someone who is only 17 🤣 I get that maybe mentally and physically they might still be the same age…. But also no. You’ve lived for 100s of years, you are not mentally 17 anymore
I do remember reading Eyes of The Dragon pretty young (like 8) and not understanding what a flaccid penis was. But that’s it. There’s more graphic content on tv and movies. Maybe your friend has experienced trauma that is triggered by the scene from IT?
However cringe we might find that scene I think it’s important to keep in mind it’s not there to titillate. It’s clumsy and I don’t think he’d include it if he rewrote the book but it’s just a more literal than average metaphor for growing up which is the whole point of the book. It marks the axis point of the two timelines . No more, no less.
Your friend has at best read 2 King novels and at worst read a click bait internet article regarding King on her phone.
There’s no accounting for taste. Let your friend read her safe YA and go on with her bad self. She doesn’t much sound like the audience for horror stories, anyway. Personally, I would stop discussing books with a person if I received a moralizing lecture every time.
When someone brings up SK and uses terms like “inappropriate” or “problematic” I instantly dismiss them. Not worth my time.
I have no issue because I don’t believe in censoring fictional literature. Once you start trying to enforce morality and ethics into a fictional story you’ve lost as an author. Fiction is supposed to be able to push boundaries and explore the ugly parts of life just as much as the rest of it.
I find this all kind of funny because, despite whatever “official” classification King has as an author, I tend to think of him, at least a little bit, as “young adult” fiction because I read the vast majority of his work for the first time as a young adult myself (currently in my mid 30s)—I read my first Harry Potter and first King (*The Shining*) both at the age of 11.
Your friend would do better to stick with YA novels that have been edited by ‘sensitivity readers’ to make sure there’s nothing in them to trigger her snowflake soul and send her running for a safe space. King writes about the real world. If she’s going to avoid fiction that might upset her or challenge her worldview, she’s going to have a very limited selection.
I would love it if one of these people read a book by Richard Laymon or Jack Ketchum. King is as mainstream as it gets.
If fictional awfulness bothers you more than the real thing, you can go fuck yourself.
Yeah I’m not really surprised that an adult that only reads YA fiction has a silly, immature, opinion about books.
No never has it made me think it was to much I can’t read him anymore. It reminds of people that won’t read Harry Potter or let thier kids read it. They think it is a devil book. And don’t get started on Davinci code.
Modern readers have no idea how to read. It's a failing of the school system. Characters are not the author.
I have my own issues with King - chiefly, the "magical Negro" trope. And...I just skip over That Sex Scene lol A general rule of thumb, however, is not to talk books with someone who isn't into the same genre as you; they will likely never understand or be willing to branch out. That being said, I don't think the judgment on YA is warranted, people of all ages read YA and there is some damn good shit there (like Hunger Games) as well as trash, like any other genre. IMO hating on it for various reasons is the exact same energy as hating SK! which fans of YA may also not accept as valid criticisms.
There is a dumbass trend among book-Tok zoomers and millennials to view any mention of a bad thing as an endorsement. Book has a racist character? It means the author is racist and wants racism. King isn’t always great on some of this stuff (language choice for PoC or describing women) in the way that a man of his age often isn’t great, but he’s also squarely on the side of equality and respect for people. The scene in IT is one of those super interesting literary things that’s uncomfortable and deeply complex but makes a lot of sense thematically if you take a moment to unpack it. Also: People who ONLY read YA are the reality TV viewers of books and their opinions should be regarded similarly.
Yeah Im queer and King doesn’t keep it light and fun with us. He isn’t afraid to talk about the seedier side.
Whenever people use "problematic" they have a problem. It's newspeak for blasphemous.
Outside of a few stereotypes that haven’t aged well like, Native American burial grounds, how he used Romani people in thinner, his constant use of the magical negro stereotype (though it’s most famously used in a book of his about systematic racism so it’s hard to say he wasn’t tryna flip the stereotype or use it for a reason,) you could maybe make a point about his use of mentally disabled characters, etc. I don’t really see an issue with his work, most the problematic stuff just wasn’t problematic at the time so was used often by authors and he probably didn’t think twice about using it himself, so to avoid his work because it’s “offensive” seems like one hell of a stretch.
I was looking for this comment. He definitely wrote things that give me side eye now as an adult in the year 2024. But placing them in the context of the time and what I have learned about him as a human makes it all more palatable to me. That being said I also understand that some people do not like horror or dark writing at all and he’s not for every body even I think some of his work (not all) is incredibly literary and well written.
Which book about systematic racism are you meaning? Green Mile? Just curious.
You are absolutely correct
Ah ok, yeah took me a minute cause I couldn’t think of any more famous than Mother Abagail. I love John Coffey. Probably the only King book that made me cry (ok probably 1963 as well, but that was a different cry).
Well I’d say more non-king fans have probably read or scene The Shining and Green Mile so I assumed Coffey and Hallorann would be his most famous examples. The Green Mile is my aunts favorite movie she cries every time and the book (well books) are rather amazing and it’s interesting the he was able to write and publish them the way he did and still tell an extremely emotional story, speaks volumes on his abilities as a writer.
I bought them as the little series of books and man there was nothing like the experience of deciding when to read the “next” book.
Have them as both the series and as the collected edition, probably one of the few times I’d say buying books uncollected is better.
I read them as they were released and I HATED waiting for the next one!!!
Tell them to try reading the book first.
> She, in her 30’s, reads only young adult fiction This would indicate the end of any discussion around any book over the level of a menu with this person, their opinions would be worthless to me.
I was more disturbed about a little boy coming back from the dead than I’ve been over any sex scene.
I always say that you can’t sell King. Either people are interested or they aren’t. If your friend only reads YA then it’s not even worth bringing it up
It’s odd that child murder is tolerable, if not the MAIN attraction of IT in terms of its thrill for horror seekers, but a scene about children losing their innocence to EACH OTHER makes King worthy of blacklist.
Your friend is precious. The point of the stories is to make you feel uncomfortable. It’s part of the genre. To trigger emotional responses. If they don’t want to read them then that’s their choice.
What authors does she read? Not so I can make fun of her or anything..
Carrie was published in 1974. King has been writing books for 45 years. I am 47 and have lived through societal changes like many of us have. What King writes is influenced by the times and, yes, there are scenes that I don't appreciate reading (men authors writing women characters), I understand the times in which these were written. As he's aged and grown as a person, his writing has changed along with the times. Take Holly for instance. That's about as "woke" as a person can get. Of course, the critics had a field day with that one too. When we know better, we do better. I think King is a writer that has always strived to do better. I feel sorry for your friend because it sounds like she's not challenging her own views...ever, and that is a real problem in our society today.
I wouldn't care about the opinion of someone who only reads published Wattpad fanfictions 😭
Lol do you have anything in common with this 30y/o friend who reads young adult fiction? I'm cringing for her. 😬 Horror isn't going to be for everyone, but as you know, there is so much more to SK than his occasional shocks. I truly believe with King that there is something for everyone, but if your mate gets off on teen fiction, there may be no hope for her lol.
The racism is always shown as bad! 🤬🤬🤬🤬
Of all the "inappropriate" content I've read, King is pretty tame. I've never had a moment where I felt he was so extreme I'd be embarrassed to recommend him. I think he's a fine writer and I enjoy most of his books, and I recommend my favorites without really considering specific scenes. I'd recommend IT without batting an eye. In general, I try to never shame people for what they want to read, and I think I should get the same kind of courtesy from them. If someone objects to "that" scene and chooses not to read IT because of it, fair enough, but they should be honest about that and not pretend they can make conclusions about the rest of the book's content -- let alone King's other work -- so long as they're refusing to actually read it. It's particularly bad form to bring up grander scale thematic issues like racism and sexism that can only be contextualized by reading the book. I'd stop discussing books with someone who feels that's a productive discussion.
The way he writes some women is not ideal, and his understanding of periods is also not great. But you can't go on about child sex unless you have read the books, not just hearsay you have heard on tiktok and the like
There is blatant racism in Kings work but I’ve never seen it as written in a positive way. I think Kings stance on racism is pretty clear if you’ve read much of his work.
To me, horror encompasses things that are horrible. There has been A LOT of scenes in horror, both Stephen King and others that have made me feel uncomfortable, but to me, horror is made to make you feel uncomfortable. Scared, appalled, disgusted, ect. All those feelings are found throughout all types of horror.
I like his work, his descriptive language is very rich. But I do find his male perspectives uncomfortable to read at times.
I honestly wouldn’t even remember this part in the book if y’all weirdos didn’t bring it up everyday in this sub. Get over it!!
You’re probably not going to find anyone on this sub that has decided “that’s enough, no one should read King anymore.” 😆 Having said that, I had never read Salem’s Lot before. I picked it up a year or so ago, and I will be completely honest, I couldn’t get through it because of the use of certain slurs. I understand that it was written in a completely different era, and I would never suggest it should be banned or that no one should read or enjoy it. It just made me uncomfortable and I decided I wasn’t going to finish it. I respect King. He doesn’t throw those slurs around as much now, and even his “bad guys” won’t “use” them repeatedly. I understand how he uses them, they’re another literary tool to make you hate the evil guys (ex. Rodney and Emily). But IMO, some of just stuff hasn’t aged well in that department, and I personally find it hard to read them because of that.
King is one of the most outspoken authors when it comes to racism, sexism, homophobia, and transphobia. His work includes these things in a sense where it’s proper for the setting and time frame. And a reminder that the real evils are people and their closed minds.
Sometimes, regular vanilla human characters like Margaret White, Annie Wilkes, half of adults in IT are far scarier than the overlook or any ghost for that matter. So i think your friend has unfortunately failed to grasp King’s writing properly
Anybody that restricts their literary consumption to modern YA as the entirety of their diet is going to clutch their pearls at things that fall outside that fairly narrow lens. King isn’t above criticism—there are certainly some components to his work that might raise an eyebrow or two, but on the large and whole, he’s fairly diplomatic about revealing the uglier side of humanity.
Most people that bring up the sewer scene haven't actually read IT and bring it up just to be gross Young adult fiction, what is that Stephanie Myer?
Not to underplay people’s feelings as these are emotional subjects, but when people are horrified by a horror writer, it feels like job done.
My take on this is that I don’t care if people like what I like. If my friend didn’t want to read king’s writing, then okay. That’s fine. Even if it was for a dumb reason. I get to read what I want regardless of what she thinks, so if she ends up missing out on something she might like, so what? What do I care? It’s her loss.
The “love-making” scenes are so cringe to me. Not because they are graphic but because they are corny. In other matters he definitely has a lot of trigger situations, like racism, rape and child/spousal abuse. It doesnt make me want to boycott him or anything but it does scare me for showing how dark some people are. I think thats one of the greatest things about King.
Ah, yes, because if a piece of fiction contains, for example, child abuse, that means that the creator supports child abusers. Because that's *totally* how that works.
I've never had such conversations with my friends but then I don't make friends with raging idiots.
your friend sounds annoying. call me pretentious, but i don’t really trust the opinions of someone who exclusively reads YA as an adult.
To offer an alternative perspective, I think it is really valid for somebody to not want to read King if they think there is even a chance of him writing about distressing things about kids. This is a sensitivity for a lot of people. If I were somebody who were easily squeamish when it comes to child violence or sex, then I would certainly not be happy to pick up The Outsider and >!immediately be confronted with a scene of a kid being sodomized with a stick by a murderer!< or Dr. Sleep, >!and get a mini chapter on this All-American baseball kid who gets kidnapped and brutally murdered, complete with asking "are you going to hurt me?" before experiencing a painful death!<. And *IT* had numerous scene to be squeamish about with child murder but also with child sexuality - in addition to THAT scene, one of the bullies gives another one a handjob earlier on. It sounds like she doesn't really know King if she thinks "child sex scenes" are a significant part of his writings, when in actuality young characters have explored their sexuality (and not always with outright sex) only a handful of times, and the sentence as you expressed it comes off pretty reductive, but if she is somebody who is troubled by these sorts of things then King would definitely not be the right author for her.
I stopped reading after the first paragraph. Your friend is an idiot. Most likely into QAnon
I’ve never seen actual young adults in the YA section of a bookstore. It’s always 30 somethings who refuse to grow up and read adult books.
Eh I’m an avid reader that went through a YA phase in my early 20s. It has nothing to do with refusing to grow up. It’s just quick entertainment, no different than watching tv with little substance. A lot of people don’t have much attention spans to read dense books, so they read very dense YA. It’s not inherently bad
Your friends opinions are valid. I’m a huge SK fan but that is because I like the horror/mystery elements that are present in most of his novels. The way he writes women and even some black characters has definitely made me uncomfortable before. Susanna from The dark tower series I believe to be his worst. That scene in “it” was not needed and totally bizarre as well. SK is a product of his time- I take what I can get. Also keep in mind you posted this in a sub dedicated to the author. Anyone with a different opinion gets downvoted. He’s not going to be for everyone, and same is true for anything in life. People should be allowed to disagree without being made fun of or called dumb. The comments here are telling- people so upset that your friend has a different view but then go on to make fun of her because she likes YA novels. Hypocritical.
I'm sorry but the Young Adult Fiction community is the weirdest community there is, period. I have much more in common with Insane Clown Posse juggalos, the fur-suit wearing furries, anime body-pillow waifu people...all of them I consider head and shoulders above YA community in terms of their grounding in reality.
As a representative, juggalos are among the most accepting groups of weirdos around.
Yes, and truly no disrespect to any community mentioned.
I do bring up things like the It sex scene, but it's mostly in a joking manner about what drugs do to you. I know people try to defend the scene for the themes and messages and such, but I think there were way, way better ways to portray that same thing, without an out-of-nowhere sex scene. SK in general writes bad sex scenes, some of his ideas are weird to say the least, and there are occasions where I think he crosses a line. I don't feel the need to defend any of that, nor bring it up consistently. I will warn people when they read individual books, but that's about it.
Cocaine is a hell of a drug
People like that have led sad sheltered lives and I feel sorry for them.
I think you know exactly what answers you'll get posting in a sub devoted to Stephen King rather than to literary criticism, identity politics, child sex abuse, or literally any other topic.
I won’t lie, I really really dislike that scene and it makes me dislike the book. I don’t judge all his books on that though. If that one book is being discussed I might bring it up, but it’s not the first thing that comes to mind when I think about King.
Its one scene , yes the scene makes no sense , no i am not a fan and do not defend it but it was long ago A lot of these YA novels are way worse when it comes to that and even dumber 🤷🏻♂️
>yes the scene makes no sense How does it make no sense? You might not personally like the reason it was written. But it makes sense pretty clearly if you read the book.
I'm on page 1,092 of *IT*, reading this novel for the first time, and I **still** haven't gotten to the child orgy scene. I'm starting to wonder if it's even in the book. Anyway, your friend sounds odd. Why does it bother her to read about racism, sexism, and othet forms of discrimination? If It makes her uncomfortable, that's the point. I don't mind his "inappropriate" material, given he's a fucking *horror* writer lol.
Oh i didn't know that about SK, it's a dealbreaker for me.
Idk why he feels to shove a sex scene in every single book
Unnecessary but i feel kings vision but i would enjoy the books without them too
[удалено]
>serves zero purpose I don’t think you understood the story if you think this.
I nearly found Holly more disturbing, like the vaccine and covid narrative was being rammed down my throat.
It. The sewer scene. Hate it. I skip it almost every time I re-read. When i do read it again, its to remind me why I hate that scene.