The Shining question

I love the fact that nearly every single King novel can be linked to the Dark Tower world. King has not only created some masterful stories but he has managed to link the majority of them to one single source or horror. Even when King is bad..... he is still very very good.

I am tired of Stephen King sequels, additions, etc. When I saw that he had released The Wind Through the Keyhole, The Dark Tower 4.5, I about barfed. Seriously, those books were awful. I managed to get to the end of them and the thought of him making more made me mad. The only reason I even cracked them open was because he had put things in them from his previous novels. I'm a fan of IT, 'Salem's Lot, Pet Sematary, etc, so when I heard parts of those novels were in the Dark Tower Series, I read the series to only face total disappointment.

Now he wants to play with some of the best characters and plots. No. It's not right. I would prefer someone making another bad movie based on his books than a sequel.

I'm cautiously looking forward to this. King went through a rough period in the last decade with some really awful books like Dreamcatcher and Lisey's Story (the first books of his I've been unable to finish), but Under the Dome and 11.22.63 were both awesome.

I've just written a post on my blog about the old 1970s blockbuster genre novels like The Exorcist and Jaws, with a particular focus on the differences between King's The Shining and Stanley Kubrick's movie version.

If you're interested you can read it here: http://halfwaytopublished.blogspot.co...

The Shining was a great book! Loved, loved, loved it. But how could this next book be a sequel if ~SPOILER~ The Overlook was destroyed? I have no doubts or true worries about this book as King always manages to pull it off and make a great book. To read about an adult Danny would be interesting especially since he was so intelligent in the book. When's the release date?

What's the point?

I loved the Shining and look forward to the new twists that Steven King might have in mind for this. It does not need vampires though. Just stick with the original genre.

A grown-up Danny Torrence who still has the power of the shining but has grown into alcoholic like his father...There's some interesting possibilities and a sequel doesn't have to be "Return to the Overlook Hotel".

i think Stephen Kings writing has changed for the better over the last 15 years. and this will be just what i want from him. i just have a feeling ...like a tingle in the back of my head, a sort of sixth sense... heh heh as for a sequel to "it" or "bag of bones" or any of his books, that would be nice,i find it strange that so many would say what should come next. i will read whatever the master needs to put to page and thank him for another great ride into the dark. but for me to suggest what he should be thinking and doing would be ridiculous.

I love anything that Stephen King has written, so I look forward to seeing where he takes Danny. His books are not for everyone, but for me, I love getting lost in his stories...

I'm pretty excited about this, he's the last person to want to eff this up!

Without a doubt, the most anticipated book (for me) in a long while...The Shining is arguably King's most popular novel, largely due to the Kubrick/Nicholson film, which pales in comparison to the novel itself. Having said that, I think it will be amazing to see what King does with an adult Danny Torrance, as he deal with his own demons of the past and present...

I hate the idea of a sequel to almost any of kings books. I enjoyed the dark tower series but this was intended to a be a series so was set up like this. Part of the joy i find in books is when you finish reading them your mind asks questions about what happended to the characters Like Danny or Mike Noonan (Bag of Bones) and you keep the story alive in your head. But when the author writes a sequel,no matter how good the author, some times i feel they just wrap everything up so tight you no longer wonder so the characters die. king should no better than to taint his classics

Perhaps the bushes that come alive will have seeds that get carried by evil birds down the mountain where they begin growing in the city. They'll circle the offices of Jack's publisher and through some telekinetic force make him/her read "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" from beginning to end ... if you know what I mean.

Even if it's not great, does it really matter? I don't think it'll colour my view of The Shining either way - of all his works, I feel that's the one that can't be bested. This could suck but really - would that diminish the accomplishments of the previous book, written decades ago? That'd be a bit weird, and probably more than a touch melodramatic. If it sucks, it sucks on its own merits, surely?

As for it being forced - I doubt that King is at the point where it really doesn't matter what he puts in; it'll sell and people will endlessly do the new stuff vs old stuff debate. At this point in his career I'd be surprised if he was writing anything that he didn't feel he wanted to. And really, not being fair to his characters? He's handled Derry pretty well through his works (it's as much a character as anything else in there) so I don't really think that he's playing unfairly with the original book's inhabitants, or that it's desperation. It's been a long time, so why not revisit the characters? Who knows, this may well just spring from a what-if scenario, rather than the IDEAS TANK EMPTY line that seems to flow through here.

(If the issue is that Danny is now a sot, I reckon that's easily explained: if you'd lived in the Overlook wouldn't you have some kind of substance abuse problem? Jesus, I'd be an oxycontin cowboy.)

I went off King for a long time - I read his stuff voraciously in my mid-teens - and then it seemed all a bit pat, not perhaps lofty enough. (Well, I WAS a Lit student so perhaps that's it.) But I came back to his stuff, newer stuff, and realised that above all he's a fun writer. Weighty? Physically, maybe, but hell - nobody's expecting him to be the Maine Montaigne. He's airport and popcorn, and while there's some great social commentary and deep-analysis food for thought, there's nothing wrong with just letting the story speak for itself. (Or jump out of the hall cupboard, more appropriately.) The point is - maybe a break does us good, with writers we're so familiar with? I was completely jack of his work and found on my return that it was a lot better than I recalled.

As an experiment, why not just read the book? Suspend all preciousness about the kid on the Big Wheel and see what kind of sketch you get? Some kids grow into jerks, some don't - given that King's his father, why not let him tell the story first?

I believe I will give this sequel the same amount of time I gave the sequel to The Talisman which is none at all. I absolutely love The Shining and don't want to ruin it for myself by risking the read of any sort of sequel. To me, like The Talisman it is a remarkable novel and needs nothing further to be done with it. Imagine The Godfather films without Part 3... leave well enough alone.

i hope it comes out soon

If anyone is interested in getting sneak peek of "Doctor Sleep", there's an excerpt in King's new short (written with Joe Hill) called "In The Tall Grass". I just started that one yesterday, and I won't read the "Doctor Sleep" excerpt until I've finished "In The Tall Grass". I can't wait to see what happens!!! Happy Reading ya'll :-)

If Danny Torrance has been rattling around in Mr. Kings mind for a few decades (which he obviously has) then I have to presume that he's got a story to tell. Some characters just don't stop being, they live on in the author's imagination and there is more of a story to be told about them. I'm willing to give Stephen King the opportunity to engage me again in the life of a man with the shine.

I would have to say that I would much prefer a prequel......the story of haunted happenings in the Overlook prior to its destruction. I have lost faith in Stephen King's writing......he hasn't scared me since the '80's (It). I love a good haunted house story (the reason why I have been obsessed with American Horror Story season 1 for the last year) and would love it if he could creep me out with a good haunted novel......my fingers are crossed.

i'm worried about the "band of vampires" idea and am seriously hoping he doesn't tie it all in to the Dark Tower as he did with Black House

like the rest of you though, i'll read it

I really don't think it's a good idea...but I guess I'll just have to read it and see.

I'd rather see a prequel with the Overlook, but that's just me. However, I loved The Shining, and wouldn't mind seeing what Danny's up to these days.

If Stephen King is writing it, there is always a good chance that it will be decent. Hopefully it will be more than decent, but good. I'd like to read it.

Rather have a sequal of It.

The first chapter is included at the end of the audio version of The Wind Through the Keyhole.

I am not sure where this can really go (Seeing how the last book ended) or how it will turn out in the end.

I'm always amazed when I see King's first name written incorrectly.

I like the idea of finding out what happened to Danny and Wendy after the Shining, but I fear that this won't be one of King's higher quality novels. I almost feels forced, in my opinion.

Wow sounds interesting...
Whether it turns out good or not The Shining will always remain the same good book it always was so there's no need to worry.

On one hand it excites me because I love it but on the other hand these things can be disastrous if not done right. I'm leaning more toward thinking it'll be awesome though as I think SK can do no wrong!


http://divaliciouzbookreviews.blogspo...

No kidding! King is hit and miss these days, but The Shining was about as perfect a horror novel as I've ever read. I know I should be cautious, but I'm mostly excited.

-Elizabeth Reuter
Author, Demon of Renaissance Drive

not really interested, but i would have loved to have read the "proper" sequel to 'Salem's Lot that he discussed in an interview in Fangoria just after The Shining was released - by "proper", I mean not in the Dark Tower books, which I cannot get into.

He hasn't written anything good since Bag of Bones. But I'm still going to read it bc I'm a King freak and The Shining is one of my all-time favorites.

Well, I'm one of those who thinks this is a bad idea.

I'd ask the Ms. Elizabeth Reuter review and rate this post being a professional author.

In On Writing King said books are like fossils, they have a pattern and design. I believe stories to be archetypes, so I'm sort of Jungian in my approach to stories. That means I'm a firm believer in character and story integrity. Is it possible for characters in a story to have integrity? The answer is that you must judge a character the same as you would a real life person. If a character's integrity isn't honored, either by making them do something out of character or against the pattern of the archetype that they are or belong to, then it ruins the story.

I always saw Danny Torrance as in line with the Loser's Club or Charlie McGee or Mark Petrie, strong children with the will to survive and triumph over their trial's and come out the stronger for it. This sequel strikes me as not playing fair with the characters.

This touches on the idea that authors are allowed a certain creative fickleness. Fickleness is something that exists in both fiction and real life, however in both cases it's a not trait that's admired very much and in any case the art of storytelling is in many ways a form of play, like a game. As in all games, there are rules to abide by in order to be successful. For the record, what do we mean when we say creative license?

As another commenter above said, it feels forced. To which I'd add it strikes more as an act of desperation than inspiration, which is what archetypes are. As for King's promises that it's a good story, C.S. Lewis once observed you shouldn't believe all an author tells you about their books. It' not that they mean to lie so much as they may not know what to make of their own work, or their craft themselves. This of course is not something you can tell the public without some disappointment so usually you just toss off a smart sounding reply that's not really an answer.

Ms. Reuter, does any of this sound plausible to you as a writer, agree or disagree? How about anyone else?

Dark House as a sequel to The Talisman was a disappointment for me. Let's hope it isnt the same here (because I will read it irregardless).

I read every horror novel Stephen King writes, so I'll check this out. My expectation will be low, however. Except for rare exceptions, he's not the writer he used to be -- The Shining being one of my all-time favorites -- and I'm so sick of vampires I don't even want to see them in a King story anymore. But because it's the master, I'll read it.