Horror Aficionados discussion

667 views
Novels > The Stand: Which Version is Better?

Comments Showing 1-34 of 34 (34 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Grant (new)

Grant Palmquist | 13 comments For those of you who've read both, I'm curious which version of the Stand is better--edited or unedited?


message 2: by Gatorman (new)

Gatorman | 8318 comments I've read both, and IMO, the unabridged version is the best. King's vision as it was intended to be.


message 3: by Lori (new)

Lori (barfield) | 1692 comments Can i get an AMEN? Damn Gatorman you are all kinds of right today! LOL


message 4: by Gatorman (new)

Gatorman | 8318 comments Thanks, Lori, and it's Monday, too!


message 5: by Tressa (new)

Tressa  (moanalisa) | 19935 comments I don't remember the differences I read both so long ago.


message 6: by Meghan (new)

Meghan Doidge The more words the better (limited to this fantastic book)! Have you all been reading the comic as well?


message 7: by Nigel (new)

Nigel S. | 9 comments Throwing in my 2 cents, I'd say the unabridged is better. There's an entire subplot about a character named 'The Kid" that you never even get a whiff of in the edited version. It's a huge book anyway, whats a few hundred more pages? :)


message 8: by Jason (new)

Jason (darkfiction) | 3233 comments I've only read the unabridged version. I would have to say, though, that it's better because there's something like 400 pages restored in it. I can't imagine this book without them.


message 9: by Amanda (new)

Amanda Lyons (amandamlyons) Exactly Jason I've actually avoided the abridged version for fear it would be mangled compared to the unabridged version.

Meghan I read the first book of the comic and stopped because it didn't do the book justice in my mind.


message 10: by Kurt (new)

Kurt Reichenbaugh (kurtreichenbaugh) | 122 comments Okay, I'll probably get flamed for it, but I like the original (shorter) version more than the updated unabridged version. My reason: it was the 3rd book by King I'd read (after Carrie and Salem's Lot) and it was just out in paperback and I couldn't put it down. Maybe if I'd read the long version first. Also didn't really get into the "updates" attempted to reconcile the later decade of publication.


message 11: by Nicolas (new)

Nicolas (nicko1984) | 29 comments I've read only the full version and I liked it very much and it was also the first novel from King I read. The details were perfect and the level of stress at times was amazing and thrilling - you don't even feel the +1000 pages.


message 12: by Amanda (new)

Amanda Lyons (amandamlyons) I think back to some of the less plot centered bits at times too like when Tom and Nick get stuck in the barn during a tornado. The level of tension there was great.


message 13: by Meghan (new)

Meghan Doidge Amanda wrote: "Exactly Jason I've actually avoided the abridged version for fear it would be mangled compared to the unabridged version.

Meghan I read the first book of the comic and stopped because it didn't d..."


What I liked about the comic was seeing the images coming to life... some characteristics I really agreed with and some not... was not a fan of the early renderings of Fannie... bit it was fun to reread the book in bite size pieces, savouring it, instead of just devouring as I always seem to when I read.


message 14: by Aloha (new)

Aloha | 4052 comments What? You're discussing The Stand and Maciek is not here? He loves the unabridged version, which I think he read in 1 hour.


message 15: by jb (new)

jb Byrkit (jbbyrkit) | 2035 comments I just bought The Stand. It will be a awhile before I read it but based on this post I bought the uncut version!


message 16: by Maciek (new)

Maciek (pan_maciej) | 327 comments Aloha wrote: "What? You're discussing The Stand and Maciek is not here? He loves the unabridged version, which I think he read in 1 hour."

It was, in fact, 15 minutes on my morning commute, the same one on which I've read The Lord of The Rings because the red light was long. I also personally abriged the book for a shorter commute but I've heard that this version is out of print now.


message 17: by Aloha (new)

Aloha | 4052 comments You probably read The Stand in the time it took you to pick your nose at the traffic light.


message 18: by Maciek (new)

Maciek (pan_maciej) | 327 comments No, that was when I wrote it. That's why the flu plays a major role in the book.


message 19: by Aloha (new)

Aloha | 4052 comments That sticky residue between the page covers was probably a sale gimmick.


message 20: by Maciek (new)

Maciek (pan_maciej) | 327 comments Exactly! Not that anyone had anything to do with it, most certainly not me.


message 21: by Todd (new)

Todd Russell (toddrussell) | 118 comments I read The Stand when it first came out and haven't read the unabridged version. I am curious about what was cut out though. Someday, someday...


message 22: by Will (new)

Will Errickson (wille) I read the original long before the unedited version was published. When that version came out, I skimmed through it, and didn't really like how it now ended. Seemed like a cliche - "He's not really DEAD!"


message 23: by Tressa (new)

Tressa  (moanalisa) | 19935 comments Maybe there's a devoted King fan somewhere who has a site that details what was cut from the original?


message 24: by Gatorman (new)

Gatorman | 8318 comments Will wrote: "I read the original long before the unedited version was published. When that version came out, I skimmed through it, and didn't really like how it now ended. Seemed like a cliche - "He's not reall..."

Will, it's not a cliche because it fits in with where King takes the character in the Dark Tower series. Don't know if you've read any of those books.


message 25: by Will (new)

Will Errickson (wille) Ah, okay. I tried reading the first book in that series but wasn't into it at all. Now, I know people who've read the whole thing half a dozen times but know nothing of his horror works... which depresses the hell out of me, for some reason.


message 26: by Laura (new)

Laura (LovelyLaura) | 5 comments Unabridged is the only way to go.


message 27: by Gatorman (new)

Gatorman | 8318 comments Will wrote: "Ah, okay. I tried reading the first book in that series but wasn't into it at all. Now, I know people who've read the whole thing half a dozen times but know nothing of his horror works... which de..."

I agree, that is sad. Probably because the Dark Tower is much more fantasy and some of those fans aren't into the horror stuff.


message 28: by Aloha (new)

Aloha | 4052 comments And I'm a little fantasy, a little scifi, and a little horror, plus all the other stuff thrown in. Too bad I only have one short little life to devote to them all, and I'm doing that poorly. I've given up trying to be a specialist.


message 29: by Michelle (new)

Michelle Scott (michellescottfiction) | 7 comments I think it may depend on how 'into' the book you are. When I read the abridged edition, I was so immersed in King's world that I didn't want to leave. But not everyone may feel that way. I haven't read the unabridged edition yet, but I may have to give it a try.


sonny (no longer in use) (satyrica) | 226 comments what a waste of time, needed about at least 500 pages cut.


message 31: by Gregor (new)

Gregor Xane (gregorxane) | 420 comments The unabridged version was hard to get through. I should have read the abridged version. I'd likely have a higher opinion of the work.


message 32: by Amanda (new)

Amanda Lyons (amandamlyons) I've only read the Complete and Uncut version I can't imagine reading the edited version.


message 33: by Char (new)

Char  | 13891 comments Mod
I've read both and I enjoyed the uncut version the most. King may be verbose, but his characters are so human and I enjoy them so much, that I don't care.


message 34: by Squire (last edited Oct 03, 2013 12:31AM) (new)

Squire (srboone) | 814 comments The original (unabridged) is my 2nd favorite King book. The Complete and Uncut (expanded) version is my least favorite King book.

The 1978 original (which is the standard that the term "unabridged" is based on in relation to the work--unless they are to be considered two seprate works--since it was published first) is a tighter, more focused morality tale. The stuff that was restored and the new scenes King added, while giving it an epic feel, just weigh the story down. I liked some of the material about Frannie Goldsmith (they make her a more sympahtetic character); but the ending cheapens the sacrifice made by Larry, Glen and Ralph and the chapter with the Kid just added an unnnecessary gag reflex.

I understand that it supposedly fits into the DT cycle of stories a little better now, but in Wizard & Glass, Roalnd's ka-tet finds itself in Captain Tripps-ravaged Topeka in 1986, not 1996--which should not have happened since W&G was penned AFTER The Stand was revised and if the C&UV is now the version he wants people to read (which I assume he does since the original is OOP).

The C&UV is what made me lose interest in reading King books for a long time. I went from a Constant Reader to a Sporadic Reader becaue of this vanity project. (I have since become a Constant Reader again--thanks to stunning masterpieces like From a Buick 8, Lisey's Story, and The Colorado Kid.)


back to top