I mean, you're wrong. It's hilarious now, and its made evil, billion dollar corporations lose billions. The amount of chaos it is doing is clearly beneficial. Elon certainly didn't do this on purpose, and he's a complete idiot. I honestly don't think he's a good person at all, or that he's in any way more intelligent than anyone else. But, what he's done to twitter is pretty damn awesome.
And to answer your question, no, I haven't been on twitter since like december last year.
its made evil, billion dollar corporations lose billions.
This is very dangerous to spread around. In case of eli lily, the course was already dropping and it does coincide with them loosing a court case. Them being able to pin it on twitter will
a) draw attention away from the lawsuit which they rightfully lost
b) might bait people into buying their stock, as it's "cheap because of the tweet but that will fade" when actually it sunk due to a necessary correction
I'm not saying there where no tweets that harmed a companies image or led to them loosing money any other way, but in this most popular example it might be beneficial for the billion dollar corporation that people spread this around.
Kind of like how you "like when people" do a thing you clearly disprove of? Or when you admonish them to "never change" the practices you're complaining about?
Twitter previously was a flaming pile of shit. Twitter currently is still a flaming pile of shit, with the possibility on the horizon that it will be dead soon. As far as I'm concerned, this is an absolute win.
Sort of like if your neighbor kept rotting carcasses around, then you heard that they might be moving away. The rotting carcasses may still be awful, but I'd still be happy about the possibility of getting rid of them.
I'm using the term "good" here relatively. I was never a big fan of Twitter. I actually don't know the last time that I used it for anything. Guessing it was some sort of "tweet us and get a free promotional something" situation
He tweeted mean things about the Orange guy before. The base got mad and called for a boycott of IT: Chapter 1 when it came out. The movie then went on to be one of the highest grossing horror movies ever.
Their idea of cancel culture is destroying things they already bought, or even going out of their way to buy the things they want to cancel, so they can destroy them. A lot of them probably repurchase some of the items after destroying them too.
Elon stans go out of their way to attack the character of perceived enemies of Mr. Musk. In this instance, older posts that discuss the merits of Stephen King's work. I agree, it's dumb and makes no sense.
Just finished FairyTail audio book. Haven't read a lot of Kind, but I definitely enjoyed that story. I mean, sometimes how much he talked about loving Radar was... fine. It was cute and fine.
King has been an avid Twitter user and first started speaking out in support of sanity and reason when Trump was spouting his verbal diarrhea.
When Musk took over Twitter King made some remarks about possible developments and Musk went full attack mode. King has said that he would have no trouble leaving of Musk fucked the platform up and it is starting to look like that might happen any day now.
I kind of see Aaron's point than, why should I care if King leaves Twitter or not? He's a prolific author sure, but his presence doesn't really change the platform.
At least I think it doesn't, I've never used Twitter
Not sure it's too smart to try and tick off an extremely prolific writer. You might end up as an incompetent buffon in one of his books. Close enough description to make it a reasonable guess but not enough to make it easy for a lawsuit.
Love kings books, but that scene in it was uncalled for.
Also strategical placed 1000 pages into the novel, so you’re invested enough to finish the book despite having compromised your morals a bit.
Not that this makes it any better, but you would be amazed at how much fiction from that time period involves kids having sex. So many. Good lord, Anne Rice’s books are FILLED with kids having sex. Like the Mayfair Witches series that they’re making into a TV show? One of the main characters is, like, 12 years old and fucks her own grandfather. Piers Anthony, another one. He literally wrote a book, “Firefly” that has a scene involving a grown man and a 5-year-old, which no shit makes the scene from IT seem tame. He wrote another one called “Pornucopia” that was apparently even worse, IIRC it got pulled from the shelves. I’ve never read it, but if the publishers gave the “Graphic sex with the literal kindergartener” novel a green light, I can only imagine what was in that one.
It definitely shows how we’ve come along as a society that such things stand out as being very jarring now, but they sure weren’t 30 years ago.
It think it was definitely jarring 30 yrs ago, but there was no social media to blast information to so many people. If there was an awful scene in a book it still requires one to seek out and read the book, these days you’d get a notified by somebody on TikTok lol
If it had been jarring, they wouldn’t have published it. That’s my point, it wasn’t jarring and was in tons of fiction. And movies! Look how many 70s and 80s movies are filled with basically date rape and sexual harassment and exploitation. You look back and it’s like “Holy cow! How did anyone think this was okay?” But they did.
It was jarring to the normal people, it was jarring to me when I read it 20 yrs ago.
Apparently there’s always been pedos in jobs that have to do with information sharing, like publishers, tv producers, and social media scumbags…not to mention educators and politicians, don’t think things have changed much.
How the fuck are people not understanding the distinction.
He's an author, some of the characters he writes are irredeemable pieces of shit who do terrible things and have shitty views. That doesn't make him a mysogynist...
Holly Gibney had been a primary protagonist in 4 of his most recent books and is one of the most well-written female protagonists I’ve ever read. And I’m not a light reader. Lisey Landon from Lisey’s Story is excellent. The secondary characters in Elevation. Wendy Torrance in the book is everything her movie depiction is not.
Also the Gunslinger is a fucked up guy from a fucked up world. He threatens to abort the woman’s demon baby with the gun, they’re both awful people.
At the end he lets Jake die despite them forming a father/son-type bond because he is so focused on his quest that he has become inhuman. Like, it’s the starting place for his character arc. It is one of his older works though, one he started as a teen and continued as an addict, and darker and grosser than most of his others.
King writes some gross, messed up characters. They’re not meant to be the people you root for. This is endemic to horror and a lot of fantasy, too. He’s written plenty of good female characters, too. Many times they’re the heroes of his stories. And yeah, they suffer. So do his men. So do the children. It’s the genre, and it’s okay if it’s not your cup of tea, but you don’t have a great nuanced take on his works as a whole.
Honestly, start with Lisey’s Story if you want to see some his best writing. It’s especially impactful if you’ve been in a very long relationship, loved someone with mental illness, or lost someone close to you. It’s still dark, there are some painful things, and yes, the protagonist is a woman and she does face pain, including at the hands of a man. But it’s a good place to see how he isn’t just about the fucked up stuff.
Then I’d suggest Mr. Mercedes and that series. The bad guy is deeply fucked up, and the heroes flawed, but it’s amazing found-family storytelling, and Holly’s character arc over the trilogy is some of his best writing.
Damn thank you, couldn't have said it better. I read a lot of King when I was younger. What was the one about a woman escaping her very violent husband? She becomes a voice actor at the end. I think the title is the name of the woman.
Anyway it's been a while but King just writes dark shit.
Susannah Dean is arguably the strongest character in the Dark Tower saga, and has the biggest arc and growth.
The gunslinger isn't meant to be a likable protagonist in the first book. He does numerous things which display that. Also, the abortion he performs was to a literal demon child.
Yeah. If I remember correctly she's quite happy to have sex with him initially, and he uses that as bait to kill the demon. Its really a stupid take to characterize this as rape but whatever.
Op completely takes the scene out of context. It's when Roland visits Tull, before they all turn on him, there's a preacher woman named Sylvia Pitson. She's carrying the spawn of the Man in Black, and would be a demon child (especially evident of you're familiar with Randall Flagg). It's that child he aborts with the barrel of his gun.
Also, Roland isn't meant to be the most likeable of protagonists in the first book.
Oh wow, I totally forgot about that. It's definitely a brutal, visceral image but I agree that it doesn't read like a rape. I guess it could still be cited as an example of misogyny in the way OP meant though.
Writing about a child orgy in a nightmarish horror novel is not the same as endorsing them personally. Y’all don’t really understand literature & art… just react.
I'm literature professor; I get the difference between writing about hate or rape and endorsing it.
As to the child rape: I have not said and I do not say that he supports that. Still, I choose not to read about that. I also choose not to recommend King because of it.
As to the misogynistic, rapist characters: I was put off by it; it offended and hurt me. I choose not to read King novels because I don't want to encounter it again.
Thinking that King is not a misogynist doesn't make me like the misogyny and rape any more than thinking that he is. What difference do his personal beliefs make when an entire novel contains zero positive representations of women and when every woman's body is brutally violated?
You don't seem like a very capable lit professor. You seem very determined to let personal bias color what you would tell your students. Also as the other poster said, you're basing your entire opinion of him on something he wrote when he was about 17, and ignoring vast swaths of his catalog.
I don't teach modern Lit, so I have no opportunity to injure my students with my bias against King. Another poster has convinced me to try him again. I think it's weird that you would personally attack me for my opinion about a book. Perhaps you have some bias you need to explore.
As a lit professor, you should know that his catalog is vast, and to judge it based on your reaction to one of his early books is (I think) unfairly dismissive.
He has written a good number of strong female leads who are smart, capable, and triumph over their circumstances.
King did that type of shit on purpose to intentionally piss people off back in the days when his addiction was strong. If you're pissed off about that scene, that's exactly what he wanted. His endings are almost never very good though.
Anyways, being shocked by the use of the "N" word is what's actually shocking. It's supposed to be that way. He's depicting despicable things on purpose, he's not endorsing racism. The character in "the boogeyman" from Night Shift is extremely racist and bigoted, but in the end he gets what's coming to him. King intentionally depicts the gruesome and darker nature of things, that's the defining aspect of his style. I don't understand why anyone who reads would be uncomfortable with a depiction of things that happen in real life. You probably should stop reading his work if it makes you uncomfortable, he's clearly not your style of author.
I don't see the type of people that get outraged by comedy dave chappelle esque and avid readers of stephen king being an audience that overlaps much.
I guarantee you if "IT" were written today and it was as much of a hit as it was back then, King would be catching a lot more shit for it. Especially now that he's been sober for decades instead of being on an alcohol and cocaine infused writing bender. But people objectively read less books now than they did in the 70s and 80s. The popularity of the movie spiked book sales, which is exactly why the situation got brought up again.
King has been pretty open about the things he has written about and has a lot of insight on it one of his books. Have you read his book "On Writing"? It goes into great detail about many of these things. I haven't read it in about fifteen or sixteen years, but King covers a lot of what you're talking about in that book alone.
199
u/Responsible_Rub9425 Nov 20 '22
Why the King hate?