I don't think I'm unable to give a how-to book a perfect scoring. It just has to be a perfect how-to.

I think what I aprecciate most about King's approach here is his brutal honesty, an honesty that sometimes declares exactly what you didn't want to hear. Of course, on a matter as subjective as writing, everyone is allowed to take the advice and judgements as lightly as they wish, which is good, because otherwise I would not be writing this review. I would be crying, alone, in my bathtub. (I'm guessing that this honesty is what makes King's suspense so grilling. It's not the same to be running away from a madman than from a fucking neurotical psychopath.)

Yes, I did learn a number of things, and I had the urge to drop everything and write at several points. I would recommend reading On Writing to many burgeoning authors, although I have a faint suspicion that I didn't have any of my ideas about writing revolutionary changed for the better (it would have been super cool had it been that way.) What bothered me most about this book though, and something that nobody mentions here up to where I read, is the structure. I felt that the mixture of plot/no plot/plot was dreadful, and I honestly feel that had King thought of it, only a few more weeks of work would have made this a true masterpiece.

And no matter how much I enjoyed reading this, and although I recommend it heartily, I discovered throughout the writing of this review I have a reverse-psychology problem; probably for every time that King dictamines to scant on the adverbs, I used an adverb here. The worst part is that my pride does not allow me to erase them!