I happened to stop by this thread about Stephen King having jumped the shark. I noticed there that a fairly unanimous opinion about The Tommyknockers is that it is the scum of the earth.
Well, I read this book a while ago, and frankly speaking, I see nothing that ghastly about it. I didn’t find it particulary fascinating, but at the same time, it held my interest long enough for me to read it through to the end. Which, given the length of the darn book, is no mean accomplishment, right? It seemed fairly par for the course, standard Stephen King stuff to me.
Now, I have to admit that I’m not a fan of King’s books, and hence don’t put much thought or effort into reading them. He writes the words, I read the words, there’s a story, and at some point story ends: that’s how I approach his works. So, given my ignorance, I have a question for the SK fans who’ve really hated this particular book.
A) The main character is just so damned annoying that kept wanting him to die. There’s an old writer’s maxim that the “eight deadly words” that prove you’ve lost a reader are “I don’t care what happens to these characters”–King does it one better “I hate this character so much that I don’t want to read the book any more”
B) King’s politics overwhelm the early part of the story—and he gets the science wrong. (The whole nuclear-energy-is-bad thing. I don’t remember the details any more but regardless of one’s stance on nuclear power, apparently even the anti-nuke type cringe)
C) The pacing is off, the book is way bloated and the characters (uniformly King’s strength in other books) are either dull-and-forgettable or dull-and-obnoxious. Compare it to IT where even the minor characters are vividly portrayed and “alive”
D) The whole thing is such a blatent swipe from the movie “Quatermass and the Pit” that I’m surprised that King wasn’t sent a bill from Hammer Films for unauthorized use of their plot. Before I get jumped on, yes, I’m quite aware that there were other movies, short-stories and probably books with the same theme and they’re not all rip-offs–King goes way beyond sharing a theme, IMO.
It’s not one of my favorites. I find the whole ending rather silly. But I did enjoy the vignettes of how the townspeople used their new found genius and what they did with it.
Quick correction on point “B”. I retract the bit about King’s politics. I’ve got no idea what his politics are and assuming that what a character says is the author’s opinion is just a bad idea. That said, the dumb anti-nuke stuff still bugged me at the time.
For me at the time I first read it, it was simply the first time any King book had made me understand, really understand why an editor forcing an author to trim the fat could be a good thing. It just went on and on and on and on, and by the time the end came, it didn’t feel like an ending, it just felt like a stopping.
I found the book enthralling, though that may be because it was only my 2nd King book (the first was The Stand, which was a lot better but different enough that Tommyknockers seemed quite novel [ahem] to me). I liked the anti-nuke guy, especially because a lot of his ideas were baseless; it didn’t seem like King proselytizing so much as portraying a genuine, opinionated dude that does not necessarily posess the wisdom you might expect from a soap-boxy character in literature (in most fiction I’ve read, the righteously indignant speechy character–typically a protagonist-- usually makes the most sense). The townspeople were interesting enough (I loved the magician kid and his bro) until they began to blur together (though that of course is part of the whole schtick). I think the ending was kind of a let down, but I was convincingly creeped out as I plunged through most of the story, which had me frantically turning page after page to find out what happened next-- that’s good enough for me. I agree that tighter editing would have been nice, but it was hardly a back-breaking flaw.
But then again, I’m no fancy hi-falutin literamatoor expert, so there ya go.
It might also be so bad due to the fact that he wrote the entire thing while completely whacked out on coke and other drugs, as he himself has admitted in the great book “On Writing”. It was after this book that his family held an intervention and he decided to stop taking drugs and drinking. This might explain why some of his newer books are less popular
It needed tightening, but I liked the basic story, much of the character development, and many of the details (like the weird hot-water heater and the air pump that squealed and burned out when the saucer-thing first powered up). Could’ve been great with a good editor and a willingness to rewrite and focus it a bit.
In his earlier books, there was little apparent effort to evoke the horror. It came scuttling out of the dark recesses of your subconscious and pounced on you in the night.
In “Tommyknockers”, the horror was forced. The writing was labored and you could almost see the sweat on the pages that must have been pouring out of King’s forehead as he struggled to get this on paper. It was tedious and boring and strained.
It took me two tries to read Tommyknockers. The first try left me putting the book back on the shelf even after 200+ pages. So, “EDITOR” is the first thing that comes to my mind. About a year later I decided to give it another try, found my bookmark was still in it, picked up right from that point and loved the rest of it.
I don’t know why all the vitriol for this particular book either, though it’s not a favorite of mine. King’s surely written worse ones. (Regulators, Dark Half, I could go on) Though I don’t really like the book, I do like Gardner. I’ll go through and just re-read certain scenes, like the party where he chases Arglebargle with an umbrella. It’s like visiting with Jack Torrance’s long-lost little brother.
I watched the movie first and hated it. I figured the book wouldn’t be all that different. I ended up being pleasantly surprised in the beginning. I liked the benefits the townspeople experienced - Anderson’s book writing invention, hot water heater, etc. The storyline around her dog at the vet’s office, green light coming from its eyes, etc. All of that had me hooked. At the end, as the unearthing came close to a finish, so had I. I didn’t care about Gardener any longer, I felt it was a shit or get off the pot experience, and I ended up with hemorrhoids.
True, but in that same section of On Writing he also describes Cujo as the “one book I barely remember writing at all.” So clearly he was more doped up while writing Cujo than he was while writing The Tommyknockers, yet the former doesn’t draw the ire from fans that the latter does.
I am a big SK fan and up until that book I eagerly pounced upon every thing he’d write. Normally his writing is a little slow in the beginning as he sets up the story, but as things start happening the pace is really good.
Tommyknockers seemed to me like it took him the whole book to get started on setting up the story. It was so t-e-d-i-o-u-s.
Sort of? I thought Stand By Me was pretty similar. Same with The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile. I usually like reading the book first, but since the opportunity didn’t present itself that way, from what I saw, the entire premise seemed a bit goofy. To tell the truth, most of what I remember from the movie, is Anderson rubbing a green blinking thing, part of the ship, and simulating orgasm. Ham city.
I read a lot of King in highschool, including Tommyknockers. Maybe I need to revisit him in general, but I don’t recall this book being noticably worse than the rest of his stuff. Which, really, was never all that great to begin with. Although Danse Macabre is still an interesting read. I’ve been thinking of picking up On Writing, to see if it’s as good.
Those and the miniseries version of The Shining are widely recognized as the four that remained faithful to the original. All the others range from being generally similar (Christine) to having nothing in common except the title (Lawnmower Man).
Isn’t that the truth. There were some pretty cool ones though. I guess my problem with the book was, as mentioned before, it took SO long to get going. It was also hard for me to relate or get close to any of the chracters.
I did relate to “Monster Dugan” though, just because we are about the same size.
I love Stephen King like my dad, but he definitely has a few I will never try to make it through again. Oddly, though, this wasn’t one of them. Nothing approaching his best, but there was enough interesting stuff in it to keep me going through the whole thing. Insomnia, on the other hand… :rolleyes:
And I likeThe Dark Half & The Regulators as well. But I, ahem…havenevergottenintotheDarkTowerseries. :o I know. I suck.
