Irrelevant details vs the white room

[horrorotic]

I recently tried to start reading a King novel. I was a big fan of his 70's-80's work before he became more and more self indulgent and editors feared to lop off so much as a word of his rambling.

In this one, the book opens describing the town...50 pages, and no I am not kidding, we are still in the town, every character, every building they are in and every detail of their lives. Who is related to who, who had an affair, who is doing drugs,...

There is too much and not enough, but when reading I would rather not enough. If we're speaking stories here, I'd rather have the couple go from the bed to having sex in a chair and think...wait, did they say there was a chair there? Then two paragraphs describing the chair.

In the example of a room, a vague description is fine, we've all been in rooms, we're all in one now. Unless a detail is relevant to the story or defines the character(a lot of awards on the wall, or expensive art) what's the point?

Less is more

 

[Rustyoznail]

I recently tried to start reading a King novel. I was a big fan of his 70's-80's work before he became more and more self indulgent and editors feared to lop off so much as a word of his rambling.
.
.
.
Less is more

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks he lost the plot. 11.22.63 had so much promise but it got bogged in tedious details and an ending I'd be ashamed to put my name (real or otherwise) to.

 

[KeithD]

I'm probably the only one who's never read a Stephen King book (or seen a movie taken from any of his books).

 

[QuillPig]

I'm probably the only one who's never read a Stephen King book

Nope.

(or seen a movie taken from any of his books).

Maybe. I've only seen one. Although I understand the movie version of The Shining is more Kubrick than King.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Nope.



Maybe. I've only seen one. Although I understand the movie version of The Shining is more Kubrick than King.

King didn't like Kubrick's movie version, mainly the way he internalised Jack's demons and changed the ending. The recent Doctor Sleep movie did a nice job of blending the two - a fan boy's homage to Kubrick and respectful to King's book ending of The Shining.

 

[SimonDoom]

I'm probably the only one who's never read a Stephen King book (or seen a movie taken from any of his books).

That is truly amazing. I don't know how it's possible to have lived through American culture in the last four decades and to have completely missed Stephen King. I've read a lot of his work and seen a lot of the movies based on his books.

His short story collections are good. You get a flavor of the King style without having to wade through an entire novel. Night Shift, in particular, has some great short horror stories.

Agree completely with what some others, however, have said. King for a long time has had no discipline as an author. I think the fault, though, lies less with excess detail than with bloated, wandering plots. 11/22/63 was just ridiculous. It could have been half as long and twice as good.

 

[KeithD]

That is truly amazing. I don't know how it's possible to have lived through American culture in the last four decades and to have completely missed Stephen King. I've read a lot of his work and seen a lot of the movies based on his books.

I was an Army brat and my own career was in a foreign service. Half of my first fifty years were lived outside the United States. I didn't live through American culture in the last four decades--just in the last two. And I don't read the type of works King writes or go to the type of movies that his works feed. Not having been in the American culture, eras like "Where's the beef?" completely passed me by. I don't regret that. Whenever I've returned to American culture, I've found to be very insular.

 

[horrorotic]

That is truly amazing. I don't know how it's possible to have lived through American culture in the last four decades and to have completely missed Stephen King. I've read a lot of his work and seen a lot of the movies based on his books.

His short story collections are good. You get a flavor of the King style without having to wade through an entire novel. Night Shift, in particular, has some great short horror stories.

Agree completely with what some others, however, have said. King for a long time has had no discipline as an author. I think the fault, though, lies less with excess detail than with bloated, wandering plots. 11/22/63 was just ridiculous. It could have been half as long and twice as good.

If you're not a horror fan you're not going to read a King novel so I don't think its that amazing.

Movie wise would be a little more surprising as Schindler's List is pretty much a must watch, but its not horror.

 

[horrorotic]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks he lost the plot. 11.22.63 had so much promise but it got bogged in tedious details and an ending I'd be ashamed to put my name (real or otherwise) to.

I gave up on him after Insomnia, which could be the cure for said disease. I tried to come back to him later on, but made the mistake of picking up Desolation, which was godawful by anyone's standards let alone his.

The book I mentioned earlier is Black House co-written with under rated Peter Straub and a sequel to their earlier collaboration Talisman which was great. So I figured with PS writing half of it, I'd deal with it.

But King had the opening and I gave up.

Even Pet Sematary which many consider his most frightening and disturbing work-he claims that as well-has a section where the MC goes into this dream'/fantasy about how his son who had just been killed life would have turned out and it goes on and on and on...a speed bump in the middle of what is really an incredible book.

But the guy has sold what, a billion books and countless movies so I guess we should all hope to 'decline' like that

 

[KeithD]

Movie wise would be a little more surprising as Schindler's List is pretty much a must watch, but its not horror.

Now that I'm fully retired and have a NetFlix account, I'm going back and seeing movies I missed in the past. Again, I had a career overseas that told me going into a large dark room with rows of seats behind me wasn't a good survival technique, not to mention that cinemas where I lived were few and far between and didn't get an American movie in for years after it launched. I worked on such movies as The Deer Hunter, and still didn't see the finished product for more than a decade after it was released.

You hit my own nail with the comment that not all of us are interested in reading (or seeing) horror or science fiction. I'm not. It's probably the same with Schindler's List. With what I've seen and worked with in the world (I once had to take a bus and pull Palestinians with U.S. government connections out of a Lebanese refugee camp that we knew the Israelis were going to bomb the stuffing out of the next day--and they did, including some families who refused to get on the bus), I'm not keen on watching even great movies of that sort of subject.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Movie wise would be a little more surprising as Schindler's List is pretty much a must watch, but its not horror.

No connection with Stephen King. It was directed by Stephen Spielberg.

 

[horrorotic]

No connection with Stephen King. It was directed by Stephen Spielberg.

Yeah...I got it confused with Shawshank redemption. I also don't run to google like most people, I tend to rely on memory, which isn't perfect, but I still use it rather than search engines.

 

[KeithD]

I haven't seen either one of them. I have never had to gather experiences like that vicariously through movies or books.

 

[QuillPig]

That is truly amazing. I don't know how it's possible to have lived through American culture in the last four decades and to have completely missed Stephen King.

I'm both a materialist and kind of a snob. I don't read or watch much fiction with supernatural elements. And I generally dislike mainstream American pop culture produced during my own lifetime. It all went wrong around the start of the Reagan era and got worse in the 21st century.

There are exceptions to the above.

I might enjoy Stephen King if I read him, but books are a big investment of time. There's too much that interests me more--most of which I'll never have time to read.

Oh, and I'd forgotten that The Shawshank Redemption was based on a King book. I did see and enjoy that film, so I guess that makes two for me.

 

[horrorotic]

I haven't seen either one of them. I have never had to gather experiences like that vicariously through movies or books.

Fiction loses its shine if real life experience taints the topic, there are things I won't read because past events make it difficult and we're supposed to read for fun, so why do that to yourself? I don't see reading or watching certain things as some type of badge of honor we need to earn to impress people.

 

[Aerolineas]

'We had sex'

A short story by Carol (not her real name)

Chapter One

Harv and I had sex, it was during my 'safe' period. He pounded me really hard, bareback, and doggie style without touching me. I didn't myself touch either. He came and stayed inside me for a while. I like it hard, and sometimes I like not coming too.

The End

Well, now, 47 words ... I seem to be 702 short ... Hmmm ... Maybe add 17 mor chapters?

 

[Hypoxia]

Well, now, 47 words ... I seem to be 702 short ... Hmmm ... Maybe add 17 mor chapters?

You are 703 words short. Append "It's sure fun." to the end and you'll only need 15 more equivalent chapters, as our esteemed author Ogg writes. Discipline is required. Or write 125 variations of Hemingway's minimalist tragic masterpiece: "For sale. Baby shoes. Never worn." Maybe stuff like: "For sale. X-large ribbed condoms. Unused."

 

[gunhilltrain]

That is truly amazing. I don't know how it's possible to have lived through American culture in the last four decades and to have completely missed Stephen King. I've read a lot of his work and seen a lot of the movies based on his books.

His short story collections are good. You get a flavor of the King style without having to wade through an entire novel. Night Shift, in particular, has some great short horror stories.

Agree completely with what some others, however, have said. King for a long time has had no discipline as an author. I think the fault, though, lies less with excess detail than with bloated, wandering plots. 11/22/63 was just ridiculous. It could have been half as long and twice as good.

King reached the point of success where his editors were afraid to cut his work. I guess they figured it would sell regardless of what he wrote. Like an extended version of The Stand - my God, what more did it need?

Misery was perhaps his tightest, most compact work (not including short stories). And it avoided the supernatural entirely in favor of psychological tension.

 

[AlexBailey]

I've been thinking about Bob Dylan a lot lately. His imagery caught my attention as a kid. His words can create full landscapes and detailed faces in my imagination:

'Twas in another lifetime, one of toil and blood
When blackness was a virtue the road was full of mud
I came in from the wilderness, a creature void of form
"Come in," she said, "I'll give you shelter from the storm"...



...I've heard newborn babies wailin' like a mournin' dove
And old men with broken teeth stranded without love
Do I understand your question, man, is it hopeless and forlorn?
"Come in," she said, "I'll give you shelter from the storm"




Is that white room?

 

[ElectricBlue]

The title on this thread keeps reactivating an ear worm:

'In a white room with black curtains at the station ...'

Cream with your coffee, Sam?

 

[gunhilltrain]

The title on this thread keeps reactivating an ear worm:

'In a white room with black curtains at the station ...'

I used a few lines from that song in a story recently. (Yes, by Cream.) I like the "restless Diesels (locomotives)" too, but I don't know why the starlings are tired. And what does "the shadows run from themselves" mean? (The narrator is looking at his own shadow following him as he moves?)

 

[mfan2112]

I am finding myself lately adding in a bunch of what at the moment might be useless details, but later on some of those bits find a use.

Then later in the editing process, I trim out some of the detritus and clean it up. Easier to delete later versus expanding on something that needs more clarity.

But everyone is different in how they write.

 

[Aerolineas]

Be careful not to make those 'details' too specific.

My story was rejected because of its setting...

The note was polite. It starts with boilerplate recognizing my effort and regretting how the policy affects my story, and that it is a business decision, not a judgment based on the quality of the work but: "we don’t accept stories that specifically identify people, places, or businesses by name or that could be reasonably construed to identify specific people, places, or businesses." (my bold)

I think the disclaimer explains the issue pretty well ...

The following is a work of fiction, not a biography. The events described did not happen to the author or anyone else she, any collaborators, or beta readers know. The setting is a fictional winery in a unique place that no longer exists, a collateral casualty of the events of 09-11-01. Except for Pelee Island, all of the islands mentioned were part of Colonel Blanchard’s original land grant confirmed by the treaty of Ghent.

They were ‘traded’ to Canada (Great Britain) in 1864, with only the sovereign rights to the land being exchanged. During prohibition, the winemaking industry was developed and it became a popular tourist destination in the 1950s. That business declined in the 1980s and was finally extinguished by new travel restrictions. Most of the old wineries are now Provencial Preserves. All of the characters in this story are over 17 years of age.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Be careful not to make those 'details' too specific.

My story was rejected because of its setting...

The note was polite. It starts with boilerplate recognizing my effort and regretting how the policy affects my story, and that it is a business decision, not a judgment based on the quality of the work but: "we don’t accept stories that specifically identify people, places, or businesses by name or that could be reasonably construed to identify specific people, places, or businesses." (my bold)

I think the disclaimer explains the issue pretty well ...

The following is a work of fiction, not a biography. The events described did not happen to the author or anyone else she, any collaborators, or beta readers know. The setting is a fictional winery in a unique place that no longer exists, a collateral casualty of the events of 09-11-01. Except for Pelee Island, all of the islands mentioned were part of Colonel Blanchard’s original land grant confirmed by the treaty of Ghent.

They were ‘traded’ to Canada (Great Britain) in 1864, with only the sovereign rights to the land being exchanged. During prohibition, the winemaking industry was developed and it became a popular tourist destination in the 1950s. That business declined in the 1980s and was finally extinguished by new travel restrictions. Most of the old wineries are now Provencial Preserves. All of the characters in this story are over 17 years of age.

Interesting that the site rejected your story for that reason. It seems to be without question that everything mentioned in fiction is, well, fictitious without needing a disclaimer. I have used the names of real bars, restaurants, high schools, colleges, and so forth without ever being called out of in. There is one site that is completely oblivious to any of that. There is another site that is kind of picky, and made me remove a reference (by a Jewish woman) to the Jewishness of Norman Mailer. I thought her comment was really on point - and pretty funny too - but they worried that it might be construed as politically incorrect perhaps.

 

[Hypoxia]

"we don’t accept stories that specifically identify people, places, or businesses by name or that could be reasonably construed to identify specific people, places, or businesses." (my bold)

"Specific places" is rather vague. 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington D.C. is a pretty specific place. So with my mentions of San Francisco 'places' like Fisherman's Wharf or Ghirardelli Square, even naming a prominent eatery at the former (but saying nothing bad about it) while only alluding to a restaurant in the latter as being up the southeast stairs. Similarly, I may refer to the only bookstore in Old Bisbee AZ but not name it.

So I play with names. If I call a neurotic US film director Allen Wood, do I identify a specific person? If I mention a McFood outlet or the DeFex delivery service, have I outed a business? Can I have an auto exec work for Fard?

I seem to get away with invoking the Cliff House (recently closed) and its nearby Camera Obscura and Mechanical Music Museum in a period piece. Can I slam firms that are now bankrupt and closed? Is it open season on Woolworth's?