Sarah’s review of 11/22/63 > Likes and Comments

How unfortunate that this is your first try at Stephen King! It's not representative of his work in general, so don't let it stop you from reading his other stuff if you are so inclined.

Sarah, thank you so much for your in-depth review. I came across this book because I enjoy time travel/alternative histories but was hesitant to read it because it's written by King. I don't like horror and intense violence in my entertainment so I started reading a few reviews to see if this book would appeal to me. I'll be skipping it! I would have enjoyed seeing how someone my age would have adjusted to living life in another time period but it looks like this novel doesn't really address that. Or I would have liked to have seen the moral implications of killing someone to prevent another murder, altering history, predestination vs free choice, etc. but it seems King didn't really go into that either!

Was Lion's Blood full of gratuitous violence or should I give that book a try?

Thanks again for the review!
Cassandra

I really enjoyed this book. So it's interesting to read your review of it. Totally agree with you on one point, that there should have been some thinking about alternate ways to stop Oswald, rather that killing him.

personally, having lived through that time, one of the last things i want to read about AGAIN, is the virulent, prevalent racism of those years, tyvm. there's enough of it left here in the south to nauseate me plenty.

Great review. And let me start by saying I read this book before I read ANY reviews. Since reading the book I've read reviews and yours' sums up my opinion exactly, that I couldn't be bothered to write up because the book itself took up so much of my time already. Also, this was the first book I read by King as well. I don't think I'll be reading any more of his. I expected there to be horror in it, but I also thought there would be suspense that got my heart pumping, fear that kept me reading. Like most Koontz novels. But no, this book by King was just boring. I'm writing a book about the past based on my grandmothers experiences during the bombing of Pearl Harbor, and Japanese internment camps. If you're going to write a story about what it's like in the past (when it comes to racism that American society was rife with) you have to go there. You can't just ignore it, which is what I felt King did in this book.

this book was long enough - even if he'd left out lots of it (all the Russian and spy stuff!), it wasn't meant to be a book exploring the fascinating world of time travel (things to enjoy and marvel at in “long ago” as well as things to mourn and miss from the future) - nor was it meant to be a book bemoaning the fate of blacks and women in the past. Those issues were touched on - but any more and the focus of the book would have been changed. Yes, he saw lots of racism, I'm sure, but if he kept commenting on the segregation on busses and at lunch counters, or how poorly women were treated in marriages or judged in general for their actions, then the focus of Oswald and Kennedy would have been lost. As for how else to stop Oswald - if it'd been a conspiracy theory, then having Oswald hurt or unable to be on the 6th floor that day would have not done anything other than allow those conspiring to plant another shooter. Once he established Oswald was working alone – and once he recovered from being hurt – there was no other choice but to kill him.

What book did you read? He certainly made remarks about the pervasive racism, sexism, etc. He mentioned to Sadie how the future is great and that there is an African-American president--something you apparently missed. I finished the book and certainly didn't feel I was missing lots of 1950's exposition. I got a very good sense of the era. I was amused/disappointed by the fact that no one in the book realized that Oswald would die regardless of what happened, so who cares if he dies a little earlier. In fact, my complaint wasn't that he should have looked for non-lethal solutions, but that he should just kill the man as soon as possible.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I agree with everything you said. (I didn't have the patience to elaborate in my own review.) I think maybe the reason Jake didn't notice the sexism of the 50s/60s because he himself was a bit of a misogynist. Several times I felt that his feelings towards Sadie and how he had to "protect" her were a bit of bullshit.

Yeah, I got the impression Jake kind of liked living in a pre-feminist-movement U.S. Remember when he saw those restrooms labeled "Men" and "Girls" and thought gleefully about how much that would've bothered his ex?

The point about the rotary phone especially stuck out--my parents still had one when I was growing up in the 1990s.

Wow. I couldn't disagree more with your review. Its not a "horror" book. It's not even remotely related to horror in any way shape or form. A couple of violent scenes does not a horror book make. I breezed through the book and although it's long...something that's never bothered me in a book....it went fast. There was only one stretch that I thought dragged - when he was surveilling Oswald. I think it's funny that you didn't think he was descriptive enough in painting a picture of the era. That's pretty much all he did for substantial sections of the story and I thought he did it effectively. Anyone can nitpick. I'm sorry that the main character wasn't as repulsed by the smoking as you would have been but...oh well. If by multiple people cut their throat you mean two...then yes, I guess you're correct. However you failed to connect that to the major theme that runs through the story.

I dunno. I see this often in that for some reason people seen to have some preconceived prejudice against King.

If you want a good non-horror time travel book, try Timeline by Michael Crichton. If you want to read a non-horror King, try his collection of novellas entitled Different Seasons (specifically the first two, Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption and The Body--both of which were turned in excellent movies).

Thank you for your review. I was glad to hear what happened in the rest of the book after I stopped reading because I couldn't stand the characters and boredom any more. You have a great way of putting exactly what was wrong with that novel. Also thanks for the reviews, I've been craving good time-travel/ alternate history.

Your review was damn fine reading. Thanks for taking the time.

If you found this book to be a "horror" book, Crichton's Timeline probably won't be much better.

Love your review but also liked the book. Your points are all valid and sum up how I feel about most recent SK that I've attempted. I recognized the cheesiness inherent in this book but this time it didn't bother me as much. Maybe because of the subject or maybe because of the time travel aspect.

I gave up after 50 pages and after having read your review I don't have a single regret. I think you said it all and said it more eloquently than King ever could have. Some of my friends loved this book and I feel a bit bad for hating it without giving it more of a chance, but the last three King novels I tried aggravated and frustrated me to the extent where I kept swearing off him. And yet, here I tried again, hoping the others were a temporary glitch. Nope, King just sucks. Hate to say it, but I think he's getting paid by the word and phoning it in.

No one needs to know about your dislike of the book!!! Gawd, you are a bore!

Worth wrote: "No one needs to know about your dislike of the book!!! Gawd, you are a bore!" While I disagree with Sarah Kathryn, it is a review, and you are the person who chose to read it.

And, in case you were wondering, a review is written to tell others why they may or may not like a certain book.

Jonathan wrote: "Worth wrote: "No one needs to know about your dislike of the book!!! Gawd, you are a bore!" While I disagree with Sarah Kathryn, it is a review, and you are the person who chose to read it.

And, ..."

Thank you.

Worth wrote: "No one needs to know about your dislike of the book!!! Gawd, you are a bore!"

If you don't need to know, then why are you reading her review? Gawd, you are an asshole!

Ok, I may have overreacted a bit! Its because I have just finished the book and I was so extremely impressed by it...and then, god knows why, I decided to read the reviews. All I saw was negative stuff, which kinda pissed me off! Just look at this review - its almost as long as the book itself!WTH???

Come on now, the book is over 800 pages; there's a lot to say about it. Plus, this is a book site, where talking about books is kind of the point. I understand if you don't want to read criticism of something you loved right after finishing, but show some respect for other members of the community, whose reviews you can choose to read or not.

Worth wrote: "Ok, I may have overreacted a bit! Its because I have just finished the book and I was so extremely impressed by it...and then, god knows why, I decided to read the reviews. All I saw was negative s..."
5
to read
5
3
5
5
5
4
5
2

Those are the reviews you will see on the main page of this book. That means you had to look for negative reviews if "All I saw was negative stuff, which kinda pissed me off!" As for "Just look at this review - its almost as long as the book itself!WTH???", you read an 800 page book and have a problem with a 2 page review?

I like to read bad reviews of books that I liked, as long as they are intelligent comments and show me that the person knows what he/she writes about. I believe that the beauty of art (not only books) is that we all have different tastes. How boring would this be if every single human being liked the exact same books for the exact same reasons?

By "bad reviews" I meant negative, not that they are badly written.

You're right on the button here Sarah. Go through all this boredom, waiting for the payout to see what has happened as a result of his actions, only to discover the character just wasted like 11 years of his life for nothing... alright perfect.

Griffinstein wrote: "You're right on the button here Sarah. Go through all this boredom, waiting for the payout to see what has happened as a result of his actions, only to discover the character just wasted like 11 ye..."
You didn't think that was a possibility, that he would waste five (not eleven) years of his life? They discussed it in the beginning: if it turns out bad, just reset everything. And it turned out bad.

Jonathan wrote: "You didn't think that was a possibility, that he would waste five (not eleven) years of his life? They discussed it in the beginning: if it turns out bad, just reset everything. And it turned out bad.
"

Ah sorry, you are correct 5 years. Of course it was a possibility, but by pay off I mean, to see what King thought the world would look like, had JFK not been killed. Maybe had he found out that JFK turned the cold war hot and the whole world was destroyed by nuclear war, or something. Not some cop out, that ultimately left me completely unsatisfied. That plus the the rest of the book being so sub-par (I never want to read another thing to do with full root beer), dear me I really didn't like it.

Griffinstein wrote: "Jonathan wrote: "You didn't think that was a possibility, that he would waste five (not eleven) years of his life? They discussed it in the beginning: if it turns out bad, just reset everything. An..."
Yeah, the lack of pay-off is the only thing that irked me. But it's King: he doesn't have the best endings (look at The Dark Tower as an example). But I think if he did use the ending you proposed, too many people would accuse him of stealing from The New Twilight Zone.

Jonathan wrote: "But I think if he did use the ending you proposed, too many people would accuse him of stealing from The New Twilight Zone"

Yeah, the ending of Dark Tower... deary me. But aye, it's just an example, I'm not paid to write this stuff! Lets see... maybe JFK goes on to do something that everyone hates him for, and present day alternate history sees him as a villain, who knows. But yeah, you get the point.

You made so many well thought out observations! Could've have said it better. Great job!

The main character's anachronisms and the repetitive language are precisely why I gave up on this book. I wanted to enjoy it, but Jake was so obviously the voice of its Baby-Boomer author that I couldn't focus on the story any more.

Thanks for a great review. I had a lot of problems with this book, but the main one was the premise that comparatively small human actions could set off a chain reaction of earthquakes etc. How on earth was that supposed to work?

Lian wrote: "Thanks for a great review. I had a lot of problems with this book, but the main one was the premise that comparatively small human actions could set off a chain reaction of earthquakes etc. How on ..." It's because Jake ripped open the threads of time. JFK was supposed to die, the janitor's father was supposed to kill his family, and the girl in the wheelchair was supposed to be crippled.

While it may not be the best ending, it fits in well with the contexts of the book. Time is "obdurate", so changing a significant event would wreak havoc.

Appalling review, your crying out to be offended here, if he glossed over the segregation in America at the time its because he expects his readers to know their own history. You conveniently left out the dialogue where Epping tells Sadie that there will be a black president and that things will change for the better. Did you have a problem with the damning way he portrayed the bigoted seedy city of Dallas? Or the stereotype Italian mobsters? The father who murders his entire family with a sledgehammer? No you bash him for mentioning that Jack Ruby (Jewish) owned a strip club, if you knew anything about the JFK assassination you would know that this bit of info is relevant. Yes there are Jewish gangsters, no its not casual racism or anti semitisim to include Jewish gangsters in your book. I have no problems with you hating the book, some of your points on his writing are valid but to dismiss him as a "casual racist" is pretty awful, terrible review

Over all I thought the book was great. It was descriptive: descriptive enough to make me stay awake at night with a bad case of the creeps after Jake's encounter with some scary feelings in Derry. The book also gave me a a feel for the emotional connection between Jake and Sadie. As you said he didn't use to many descriptive words, but he painted the picture through their actions and feelings in an adequate way. The scenes that took place in Derry were some of the best in the book were some of the best in the book and that I have ever read, but they seemed unneeded to the plot with such excess.
Some parts were very confusing such as the whispers about kids and clowns, but they were little shout-outs to his other writings. I found this out by reading other reviews on the sight, as this is my first king novel as well. None of the issues about racism and stereotypes or the issues of adjustment bother me in this book. I think this is because as a younger reader I have no personal experience to things like clouds reeking of cigarettes floating in restaurants for example so when there is no mention of these issues I take no notice because that is how it has always been for me.

11/22/63 is not a horror book.

BAAA HA HA HA HA! THANK YOU - you hit on all of the problems I had with this mess of a book. Killed it.

I thought this book was very interesting and had a lot of what if plot twists in it,kept me on my toes

Great review! Agree with all your points.

I persevered to the end but it was a hell of a long trip to reach the conclusion that time travel is a bad idea and it messes stuff up.

I feel dumber for having read this review.
What kind of idiot thinks this is a horror novel?

Read Needful Things - much better

I really enjoyed the book, but this was a good review that brought up some issues that I hadn't really thought about, particularly regarding some of the issues adjusting to the 1950s/60s that the character would have been likely to have.

I nodded along to your entire review, especially the parts about the random natural disasters being tied to human events and lack of awareness about people other than non-white males. It seems like he threw the comments about the colored bathroom and the girdle as a cheap appeal to readers with civil rights awareness. One of the things that I casually noticed is that King likes to point out homely women. If a woman character only showed up for a sentence, it seemed as though her level of unattractiveness would seem to come up.

Great review! I thought the same way, and I couldn't believe how stupid Jake was about so many things. He nodded obediently when his friend told him to sit back and observe, not to get involved with people in the past on a personal level, so without a second thought he started a romantic relationship...among so many other personal involvements! And I just don't see singing Honky Tonk Woman by mistake, and using disco slang. The guy was a teacher, and I didn't notice him using any slang at all otherwise.
Just because Sadie was upset about the Cuban Missile Crisis was no reason for him to tell his whole story just to comfort her. She'd get over it fast enough on her own.
You're right about the prejudice, the general attitude to women, and the other things he accepts so easily. His idea about bringing Sadie to the future for plastic surgery was ludicrous! And it was inconceivable to me that he wouldn't have done a bit of reading up on that period of American history before he went. He went about everything in such a disorganized way, doing everything pretty much on the impulse of the moment.
JFK wasn't really that great a president...he got highly romanticized after his death. I believe he and brother Robert were thinking of setting up a Mafia hit on Castro, for one thing.
Anyway, I haven't read the book for a long time and I can't remember all my issues with it. I mostly wanted to say I thought your review was one of the best ones here!

I disliked this book for pretty much all of the reasons you list here! Great review!

But I don't remember a topiary! LOL the topiary was in The Shining! Was there one here, too?

I see a few commenters defending the book's civil rights awareness by pointing out the one scene where Jake tells Sadie we have a black President in 2011. I found that scene appalling, and very telling of Jake's casual sexism. Sadie asks him to tell her one good thing about the future, and he's stumped?? How about men and women don't have to sneak to a hotel to sleep together without losing their jobs? Women don't have to quit work when they're pregnant? I mean, it's a woman asking him! He couldn't think of any of those things??

The issue of why he had to kill Oswald WAS touched on, obliquely. Jake asked his elderly neighbor at the rehab center if he thought a bad guy would always be bad, or if stopping him just once would be enough to set him on another path.

Sorry, Nadine. A fictional scene with a line spoken by a fictional character in a work of fiction, albeit with some real characters and events sprinkled throughout, cannot be "appalling" except from some silly PC point of view. It's fiction, yeah?

I agree with you!!! This review is perfect

I agree with your review

Thank you so much for this review. Since finishing this book today I've been reading reviews/discussions about it online and been flabbergasted with the glowing reviews. While I admit I didn't dislike this book as much as you did (I liked the parts where there was actual plot, but I am a sucker for time travel so that might be why) I have no idea if I read the same book as the people who loved it. I agree with almost everything you’ve written.

Jake seemed to have no concept of how fundamentally flawed the world back then was in regards to racism and sexism. I just felt the undercurrent of indifference throughout the book - he just didn’t care enough. Yes, he did talk about it a few times, but he never seemed to really comment on the pervasiveness of it and I felt King added those parts just so he wouldn’t get accused of exactly this. I know talking about social inequality wasn’t what the book was about (as other commenters have pointed out) but the book wasn’t about the atmosphere of Derry or the plays in Jodie or the multitude of random things King spent pages and pages talking about either!

The worst example of this for me was when Sadie asks him how the world is different in the future and he says not much is different. Maybe not for you Jake, but 50 years in the future would be an entirely different world for her, a woman!