11/22/63
discussion
What did you think of the romance?
I think King should stick to mystery and thrills. If I wanted to read a love story I would have chosen one of those.There is absolutely nothing wrong with injecting a love story into a thriller (heck, that's what happens in life), but it felt like the love interest took over the book.
So, I guess you could say that I didn't think much at all of the romance other than the fact that it got in the way of what could have been a great book.
I actually thought this love story fit into the narrative quite well... George/Jake had lots of time to kill while he waited out the potential assassin... that kind of void had to be filled with something and it was obvious that Jake would not be able to cope without proper human interaction and the stress of Jake's role in a huge historic event would have encouraged an emotional overload. Sadie's back story was quite Kingesque and the ex husband definitely a chap worthy of any of King's thrillers.... The balance between "Life" in the 60 and his "duty/mission" was dealt with well... In my humble opinion.
* This was my first Stephen King novel.With all of Jake's concerns about the butterfly effect, what made him think it would be a good idea to become a teacher (where he would have a major impact on many people's lives) and also fall in love and have a relationship with Sadie? I know, I know, "you can't help who you fall in love with", but come on, wouldn't the prudent strategy be to lay low and have as little impact as possible on the world? Then again, I do understand Emma's point about "filling the void" with human interaction.
I thought the romance part was well written and worked well into the story. It was sad it did not work out but then it would not have been right. I was glad that Jake could meet Sadie in real time but it was sad that they could not be together. Oh well, it is just a story and not true.
I honestly never gave it a thought, it just seemed to fit the book. I agree with Emma, Jake had a lot of time on his hands and it would be silly to think he lived like a hermit the whole time he was in the past.
I definately think the romance added to the texture of our view of the 1960's (along with his other, more casual relationships). If he had continued to live in the cabin, and was overly concerned with the "butterfly effect", we wouldn't have gotten a real feel for 1960's society. (It might have been smarter if he had kept to himself, but the story would've really suffered!)
I personally felt that it distracted from the book and took away from the main story. I have to agree that in the amount of time he was in the past it only makes sense he'd make a new life but that wasn't what this book should have been about (in my mind)
If this book was half the amount of pages without Sadie it would have been a 5 star.
Omg this book was amazing. The romance was perfect. The ending was beautiful. My favorite book of all time.
wally wrote: "third-rate romance low-rent rendezvous. thought it was quaint, the purchase of condiments, the flight out-of-town for their rendezvous. but what the story tells the reader that the marriage bed is..."With all the other themes and symbolism in what is a Long book, not sure that King could really address the sanctity of marriage as well! This romance was part of, but not the main thrust of the story, if we should be looking at any religious theme perhaps it should be should Jake have played God in the first place...
Anyone else think this one would make a great movie?
I think it would be great!
Mickey wrote: "To my recollection (and I haven't read all of Stephen King's books, so I may be wrong), this book is unusual for King in that it focuses on a major romance. How believable did you find the budding..."I think it was lovely, it kind of kept the story real
I agree, I love his books, he is my favourite author
Steve wrote: "Anyone else think this one would make a great movie?"I don't think it would translate well to the movie medium. If you recall, didn't Jake have to re-do the entire mission 3 times? Half of the book had us somewhat rereading the same thing. That wouldn't translate well. Perhaps a TV series would be a better fit for the story. I can also see a graphic novel doing well with the multiple time jumps and the Yellow Card Man was made to be a comic character.
The romance part of the story was cringe-worthy most of the time. That's why I rated it 3 stars.
George listening to Oswald with a bowl grew tiresome. I welcomed the romance.
Deborah wrote: "I think King should stick to mystery and thrills. If I wanted to read a love story I would have chosen one of those.There is absolutely nothing wrong with injecting a love story into a thriller ..."
i admit i got a bit bored with the love story angle that took up a lot of the book. Its a not a book id ever read again due to this. A very good story but i felt it could have done with some serious editing.
I applaud King's decision to 'branch out' a bit by incorporating the love story--though I think he did so mainly to help bind together the overall story and not vice versa. He did so wonderfully. Also diggin' the references to IT, btw.
I thought it was really nice :)
Agreed. It was the best part of a really good book.
I'm curious about the people that thought the romance shouldn't have been there. What would you have had Jake/George do for 2 years while he waited to confirm Oswald acted alone and then prevented Oswald from killing JFK? That part of the book would have been pretty dull...
Loved this book, and loved the love story. It made sense in the context of the story. And, after all, Jake is human. Most of us fall in love at one time or another. :-)
I agree with you, Annette! As well, turns out he needed Sadie (and that's as close to a spoiler as I'm going to get)
Mixed feelings about the book It was way too long and I felt it could have been cut by 200 pages but the storyline was intriging
When i first picked up 11/22/63 i was so excited for a long Stephen King book that i could really sink my teeth into.When in fact i got SO bored with all the romance stuff that it has really changed my opinion of him in his newer stuff.
I personally think he could of cut out a whole middle section of the book and made it much shorter.
The romance was not bad but it isn't explicitly advertised when you first pick it up, a nice loving side line may be good as it gives jake cause to go a bit mental when his love is threatened but not screeds and screeds on it !
He dosent even get to be with her in the end which annoys me after all that too.
Stephen stick to scaring the shit out of us please !
I loved the book and the inclusion of the love story which sends a spin on Jake/George's original plans. I'd like to think that a love like that really does exist in this world. This is the best book I've read in a long time.
I think the romance was important to the book & fleshed out Jake's character/motivations well, but it never really moved me.Sadie's character was a little bland for my taste & I had a hard time believing there was real feeling there. Jake's attachment to Jodie, his relationship with his students, and his other friends all rang more true to me than the romance did.
Overall, good plot device, sub-par intrigue.
I agree that Sadie's was a little flat and unmemorable. I didn't care for her, really. But I don't think King should 'stick' to writing just horror. An author needs to branch out to keep his writing from going stale. Besides, Lisey's Story is not only terrifying, it is a fantastic love story as well.
I loved the love story and I think it added a huge element. I really like reading books that have romance from the guys point of view, which is different but every bit as relevant and true as a woman's. This book was 5 star fantastic. I also really liked under the dome on audible. I really hope he writes another one like these 2 which had a lighter horror aspect and a broader more mature story. Yes Ive read about 8 of his other books and they are also really great but these 2 seemed different, more depth and dimension.
Given the conditions of the type of time traveling he was doing, any overly close attachment to a person in the past was deadly for both.
Deborah wrote: "I think King should stick to mystery and thrills. If I wanted to read a love story I would have chosen one of those.There is absolutely nothing wrong with injecting a love story into a thriller ..."
These were actually my thoughts exactly. Don't get me wrong, it was a good read but I found myself skimming (oops) through some of the heavier lovey-dovey scenes so I could learn more about the interesting (imo) stuff.
Morgan wrote: "I am conflicted about the romance. It was not convincing enough in the beginning - it just didn't feel real. However, it was such a big part of the story and indeed it did fit in well. I found myse..."I couldn't agree more. I guess where I struggled in believing in their relationship was that she went from being totally afraid and freaked out by even the MENTION of sex because of her husband to being a complete nymphomaniac who wanted to do nothing but lay in bed doing the deed. I understand that she finally found the joy in sex, that's great and all, but I just don't think it would go from one extreme to the next quite as quickly as it did... But I went along with it for the sake of the book and because I, like many others am a die-hard Stephen King fan and would read his grocery list if I could get my hands on it. I did enjoy the book, and eventually I got over their sexcapades. I did enjoy the love story and thought it contributed to the overall story. And I too was crying by the end...
Stepheny wrote: "she went from being totally afraid and freaked out by even the MENTION of sex because of her husband to being a complete nymphomaniac"I don't see it that way. She was reluctant to share the details of how her husband *refused* to have any kind of intimacy with her. Of course, after she discovers sex (with a partner that comes from a time when women's pleasure is not a debatable topic, I might add) she awakens to it.
I think the love story is central to the book, as one of the themes is the butterfly effect, the unexpected consecuences of our actions (i.e. falling in love in the past). The way King chooses to show its intensity is building it upon both character's past life and how their union is good for each of them. They, literally, complete each other.
ROMANCE = YAWN
King generally gets a bad rap (from what I've heard and also read on this site...) that he does not do "emotion" that well, and that his characters are a bit transparent and/or one-dimensional. He seemed to do an admirable job in 11/22/63 of rendering those types of arguments moot. One man's opinion...
I think King does emotion well. I can remember plenty of times where his characters moved me. I felt empathy, anger or fear. but the intimate scenes in this novel were cringe worthy and i thought more "passion" could have been put into the task of killing Oswald. the problem, which somebody so astutely pointed out in an amazon review, is that the protagonist is so young as to not only NOT remember the kennedy assassination, but also too young to care, which definitely shows. Epping is more interested in getting in that young woman's pants than changing history forever.
I thought it worked fairly well, overall. I tend to like books that pose tough dilemmas like this--would you choose the world's safety or lose the person you love? I bawled at the end where they danced together, such a bittersweet pleasure.
Lori wrote: "which definitely shows. Epping is more interested in getting in that young woman's pants than changing history forever"i wish he had changed the title and whole point of the book to relate to this, then i would not have read it. The Kennedy assassination was almost a side story :(
@ Pickle: you hit the nail on the head. I had entertained hopes that the plot would slowly uncover something of great magnitude concerning Kennedy and/or the assassination and that the dilemma of stopping the assassination or not would be predicated on the information he found out, not on a woman he just met. I can see how the "safety of the world or your lover" can be a poignant, heartbreaking situation, but to me, it seemed like a bait and switch.
A bait switch? Ok, I'll buy that, and you make some good points. I still enjoyed the story, and thought the intimate scenes in the novel neither here nor there. A friend of mine stated that he wished the book had been 200 pages longer. I think he's on to something. All that said, I still think Epping's journey was motivated by more than desire.
It's not Kennedy's death what he wants to prevent. His friend convices him explainan the butterfly effect his death would have and sums it up as: no Vietnam war. Amberson is literally trynig to avoid the dead of thousands and the suffering of millions. And, the final nail in the coffin, the death of the janitor (at the beginning of the book, the only person ever to make him cry) after he stops his murderous father. So yes, at one point he has to choose between his soul mate and avoiding some of the worst events of the late XX Century.Yes, I also expected more story and more revelations form the Oswald-Kennedy subplot but for me the love story is so powerfull I just didn't care.
I've always seen SK as a character writer, more so than anything else. Look at his most popular books, all of them are about the characters and their relationships with each other. He looks at marriage and the parent child relationship. There's a lot of love in his writing, often it's masked and over shadowed by the idea he's horror writer.The intensity of Jake and Sadie's love for each other, and their connection and then the ultimate loss of that, is what made this book so wonderfully poignant for me.
Guess my expectations were different. I just wasn't feeling their relationship. The is the first King book I quit because I was completely and utterly bored.
I have been obsessed with the Kennedy tragedy for many years. It's why I picked up the book the day it came out, even though I rarely read King. I respect his abilities but thought of him as a horror writer, and I am primarily a mystery reader. Having recently read this book, and Joyland, my view has totally changed, but I digress.I liked the book, but not the Kennedy historical work. The Kennedy stuff was subpar, IMO. What I really enjoyed was the rich romance. It was the shining thread in this book, for me. (Please excuse the double pun - it's a habit...).
In my mind, the perfect ending would have been for him to go back and bring her back unmolested to "his place." He could leave the rest alone, but they were linked in history. Even King's ending acknowledged it. She wasn't a watershed figure, so the ultimate difference would have been very little in the grand scheme. Meanwhile, our heros would enjoy the best that life has to give.
Me gustó mucho el libro y me encantó la historia de amor de Jake/George y Sadie. Creo que tenían una relación hermosa, pero imposible, desde la mirada de Jake.El final es bello pero a la vez un poco triste.
I'm resurrecting a thread here, but I feel this is the best place to acknowledge my feelings on the topic.The cover for 11/22/63 reminds me of the original poster for James Cameron's Titanic. It's deceptive marketing at its finest. This book is not a thriller. I do not care what anyone says--if the book was truly about saving Kennedy, #1: that would have been the *real* resolution and #2: the story would have ended with Jake saving him and the ending with Sadie wouldn't be there.
This is a love story with thrilling elements. It's not a thriller. The premise of the male lead meeting the female lead has to do with time travel and saving the president. Fine, but much more of the novel would be dedicated to Kennedy and Oswald and much *less* of the novel would be dedicated to Sadie. At the very least, these two components are equal, but I think King weighed them in the other direction. This is a book about a man who goes back in time to save his country and has to give up the woman of his dreams. Nothing else.
Thank you! I commented a while ago that I thought this book employed a "bait and switch" tactic. If I knew this story was going to be a romance, I never would have picked it up.
Lori wrote: "Thank you! I commented a while ago that I thought this book employed a "bait and switch" tactic. If I knew this story was going to be a romance, I never would have picked it up."I enjoyed the novel overall, but I definitely think that some people have to have felt deceived by the marketing. I anticipated this novel and I had no clue that Sadie was even part of the story.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
At times, I liked the amount of realism he put in. Both characters were reminded and affected throughout by their past relationships- Jake/George being reminded of his alcoholic ex-wife and the adoption of the term based on Sadie's past of "having a broom between them" to signify a lack of full disclosure and intimacy. I thought the dancing as a metaphor for the work and magic required to have a good relationship was great. The small things that made the relationship implode were also very good.
I don't think King really described the feeling behind the relationship. I think he did a bang-up job on describing Jake/George's attachment to Jodie (the town). It made me pine for a small town that I was a part of, even though in reality, that never happened. King never gave Jake/George's relationship with Sadie the same emotional intensity.
What do you think?