Tag: stephen king (Page 2 of 2)

Some Things to Remember When Rejection Gets Us Down

March 21, 2016 / Kyle A. Massa

Pencil Eraser

I don’t mean to sound morose or anything, but writing and rejection might as well be the same word. Writejection? Yeah, that’s it.

It’s hard not to get discouraged. It’s hard to work on a manuscript for months or in some cases years, only to have an agent send back a form rejection without even really reading it.

But that’s alright. In fact, we shouldn’t let writejection get us down. We should use it to do better.

Point A: writers need to write a lot of crap before writing anything worth publishing. I’ve literally never heard of anyone publishing their first attempt at a novel. Even an author’s debut novel isn’t really their first; they’ve probably written a bunch more before that one that just weren’t good enough for anyone to read. For context, Stephen King wrote about five novels that didn’t get published before Carrie and Brandon Sanderson wrote around ten before Elantris, his first wide release. That’s the hard truth of writing: the first manuscripts we write are practice, and nothing more.

But that’s okay. No one uses everything they write. Many writers write entire backstories for their characters, or subplots that never go anywhere, or just cool little scenes that are fun, but don’t really move the plot forward. Writing is just like any skill: it’s the work that people don’t see that makes it great.

And another thing to remember about work from pro writers: they write gross first drafts, too. It doesn’t matter who writes them—they are, by their very nature, gross. But remember, we never see first drafts from pro authors. We only read the finished product, which has gone through countless iterations. If you don’t believe me, believe Ernest Hemingway, who said, “I rewrote the ending of Farewell to Arms, the last page of it, 39 times before I was satisfied.”

But here’s maybe the most important rule of all: even the best writers have been rejected just as much as we have.

This all might sound terribly daunting, and I suppose it is. But don’t let it get you down. I mean, if you really want to be a writer, would you want it to be easy? It wouldn’t be worth anything if it was. We have to work hard, we have to write every day, we have to earn those rejections before we can really get anywhere. And that’s how it should be. That’s how we know that what we’re doing is really worth doing.

So when we’re just collecting rejections, there’s only one thing we can do. Today, let’s write something better than we wrote yesterday.

Is Peter Straub’s “Ghost Story” a Horror Classic?

July 7, 2014 / Kyle A. Massa

Image courtesy www.thegeekgirlproject.com.

“What’s the worst thing you’ve ever done?”

(Don’t worry. You don’t really need to tell me. I’d prefer not to have a list of foul deeds in the comments box.)

But it does make you think, doesn’t it? It’s a suitably haunting question for a novel entitled Ghost Story, and it is one of the central questions at the heart of Peter Straub’s magnum opus.

How bad is your worst? And what if your worst came back to haunt you?

You might recognize Mr. Straub’s name from his collaborations with Stephen King; namely, 1984’s The Talisman and the 2001 sequel Black House.

This one, however, is all Straub.

First published in 1979, Ghost Story follows four older men residing in the seemingly innocuous town of Milburn, New York. After a terrible accident(?) in their youth, these older men (collectively dubbed “The Chowder Society”), are haunted by the malevolent manifestations of their past.

Upon beginning the novel, I was first struck by Straub’s writing ability. Though perhaps not the expert plotter that King is (more on that later), Straub’s prose strikes me as more sophisticated, and his scares are nearly as good. Many consider Ghost Story his crowning achievement, and I can see why. Simply put, it’s undeniably creepy. The titular ghost stories raise goosebumps on your neck and make it difficult to fall asleep.

Thankfully, Straub relies on atmosphere and subtlety to frighten the reader rather than on gore and semi-pornography. I always appreciate this sort of take on the genre, because oftentimes the latter is merely shocking, not horrifying. Ghost Story’s horror is the kind that sneaks up on you in a dark hallway, not the kind that jumps out at you right away, naked and anally mutilated (sorry Human Centipede).

Another strength of the novel is its characterization. There are numerous townspeople in Milburn, and Straub carefully developes each one. When these characters die (and, spoiler, a bunch of them do), we feel even more terror because it seems like it’s happening to real people. Furthermore, most of these characters are easy to relate to, so we can’t help but put ourselves in their shoes. When we do that, the real terror starts to set in.

Of course, nothing is perfect, and Ghost Story is not without shortcomings. While the seemingly unrelated elements of the first half come together nicely, I feel that the narrative looses a bit of steam by the end. There are too many repeated scenes of people being murdered and townsfolk seeing apparitions. Also, there are far too many confrontations with the ghosts that end without a payoff. Generally speaking, some events in the middle narrative seem to lack forward motion.

In addition, a few of the characters’ deaths rub me the wrong way. I won’t say who, but two central characters die in the middle and later stages of the book, yet we do not actually read their deaths. Straub brings us to the literal moment before they die, then pulls us away before we actually see it. I’m not expecting a shower of gore here. It just feels a bit cheap to me, like watching a movie and realizing that a vital scene has been cut. Show, don’t tell. Right?

Despite these flaws, the narrative recovers gracefully by the end. The climax is certainly climactic, and I like the bookend structure of the prologue and epilogue. By the time you reach the end, the stalled points in the narrative and the shoddy character deaths can more or less be forgiven.

…

Ghost Story is a high-quality tale that provides plentiful scares. I wouldn’t go so far as to call it one of the greatest horror novels of all time–but it’s definitely a fine read.

Rating: 7/10

…

P.S.: Has anyone see the 1981 film adaptation of the same name? Please feel free to comment and let me know if it’s worth watching!

“Pet Sematary” Review

September 15, 2013 / Kyle A. Massa

Image courtesy toomuchhorrorfiction.blogspot.com

What is the most frightening book Stephen King has ever written?

According to the man himself, it’s Pet Sematary. I picked it up for exactly this reason, having never seen the movie and having only the foggiest idea of the plot. I wouldn’t say it’s King’s scariest work, not compared to the short story Children of the Corn, for instance. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t a good read, and that definitely doesn’t mean that it’s not scary.

Pet Sematary starts innocently enough with a family named the Creeds moving into a new house in Ludlow, Maine. They’re a typical suburban family, with a father (Louis), mother (Rachel), daughter (Ellie), son (Gage), and cat (Winston Churchill, better known as Church). The Creeds’ house is located right beside a busy highway, but they don’t think much of it. Louis quickly becomes friends with old gentleman neighbor Jud Crandal, who’s lived in Ludlow for all his life. Just when everything seems to be going well, Church is run over by a truck on the highway. Jud offers to help Louis bury the cat in the Pet Sematary behind the Creeds’ house, and then the impossible happens––Church returns, alive and well…or so it seems.

Pet Sematary is undoubtedly frightening. It starts out slowly, builds well, and ends in a disturbing, terrible, shocking coda. King creates a story that is not only horrifying, but deeply tragic. When Gage dies, I found myself close to tears. You want things to be alright in the end. You want Gage to come back and be fine. But that never happens, and it makes the book all the more heartbreaking.

The pacing is admittedly slow toward the beginning. I know I had a hard time getting into it at first, but patience pays off with this book. The deliberate pace helps to make the rest of the story even more shocking, and the mundanity of the first half provides a strong counterpoint to the supernatural elements of the second half. It’s sad to see such an ordinary, likable family destroyed so utterly. But of course, it wouldn’t be much of a book without that.

The best (and scariest) part of Pet Sematary is what is left unexplained. I’m talking about the Wendigo, and the nature of the Sematary itself. Louis sees some giant creature roaming the woods, but we don’t know if this is the thing that rules the burial ground, or if it’s the thing that comes back instead of Gage, or something else entirely. It’s this ambiguity that truly makes the book spooky. King doesn’t give us too much. He gives us just enough.

…

Pet Sematary is a creepy, atmospheric tale about the consequences of death. While it does drag at times, the slow pacing is mostly an asset rather than a detriment.

Rating: 9/10

P.S.: I just watched the movie…the book is better.

Another Book Review

June 7, 2012 / Kyle A. Massa

‘Why so soon?’ you may be asking. I might ask myself the same question. Truth is, I’ve been reading my brains out because my summer job hasn’t started yet, and I haven’t had much else to do besides read and write this dandy blog here. Oh well…you can never read too many books!

Today I’ll give my review of Stephen King’s The Gunslinger. For those of you who have kept up on my blog (so rare are you that you might be eligible for the endangered species list), you know that I have already blogged about The Gunslinger.

Well, I’m going to do it again. If I may quote Judas Priest, “you’ve got another thing comin’.”

(Oh, and like last time’s blog, there are spoilers. Read on if you dare!)

The best part of The Gunslinger had to be the setting. I think ‘ingenius’ is the best word to describe it. A brilliant combination of fantasy staples (the ‘High Speech’ and the ‘Chosen One’ character) and horror tropes (the zombie-ish Slow Mutants and the quasi-post-apocalyptic terrain) really help to make the story feel fresh, even after twenty years of development in both genres (remember, The Gunslinger was first published in 1982). Furthermore, I loved the little connections between Roland’s world and our world. I felt that this connection furthered the realism even more, to the point where it seemed like I was reading a historical fiction rather than a novel.

And now the criticism. Sometimes I found myself thinking, ‘Ok, Stephen, we get it, Roland is enigmatic. But for god sakes, can he at least try to show some emotion?’ Sometimes I felt like he was just too flat, particularly because there didn’t seem to be an compelling motivation to visit The Dark Tower. I’m sure we’ll find out later in the series, but in this volume, it seemed like Roland had to find the man in black and get to The Dark Tower just because that’s what the story called for, and not really for any deeper reason.

This next part isn’t necessarily a criticism (or a compliment, for that matter), but I found The Gunslinger to be very tragic. Just when I was beginning to like Ally…bam, bullet to the face. Just when I was beginning like Jake Chambers…wham, hundred foot plunge off a mountain. But to be fair, the story is supposed to be sad, Roland is a loner, and I’m certain King meant for the deaths to jerk some tears. He has a knack for really delving into characters that he’s just going to kill off in a few pages anyway, just so that you really feel the deaths. Very smart writing, if you ask me. But sad. Very sad.

…

Overall, an excellent introduction to a new world. Though a little sparse on characterization, the book more than makes up for it with vivd imagery and an innovative vision.

Rating: 8.5/10

…

P.S.: Just bought The Drawing of the Three today (that’s the sequel to The Gunslinger). Big thanks to the Barnes and Noble in Union Square. Four floors, are you kidding me!? Anyway, liftoff should commence on that baby soon enough. At the rate I’ve been reading, I should finish up in, oh, I dunno, maybe a few minutes…?

The Gunslinger: Yet Another Reason Why I Want To Be Stephen King

May 31, 2012 / Kyle A. Massa

I just started reading The Gunslinger by Stephen King today. First impression: very, very, very interesting. I know that most fantasy books have reviews on them that say something like: “This book is unlike anything you’ve ever read.” All due respect to those books, The Gunslinger really is unlike anything you’ve ever read.

The story begins with Roland Deschain, a character chiefly based on Clint Eastwood’s classic “Man With No Name.” Roland explores a vast desert world in pursuit of the enigmatic Man In Black, a sorcerer who has a talent for evil. Along the way he meets a man with a talking raven and a man risen from the dead, among other fascinating characters.

Already I’m beginning to see some interesting similarities between Roland’s world and ours. For example, at the first saloon he stops in, the patrons are sining along to “Hey Jude” on the piano. It’s little details like this that make The Gunslinger special. Often in literature, it seems that authors like to write little nods and homages to other works of literature. King does the opposite, writing in homages to real life. I think this really helps to set the world up as a different (yet not entirely distant) place.

Can’t wait to read the rest. Yet another classic by one of my favorite authors. Keep ’em coming, Steve!