Grading: IT

[Aaron]

http://www.thedarktower.org/gallery/data/510/medium/It_face.jpg
IT
Viking, 1986


Round 2, Group II

Grading for this Book is Closed

Strength of Plot:
2.870588235 (Graded A)

Character Development:
2.929411765 (Graded A)

Quality of Ending:
2.576470588 (Graded B+)

Overall Average Grade:
2.792156863 (Graded A)

Combined Round 1 & 2 scores:
7.487809036

[Tiffany]

I said B, A, A.

I gave the B only because parts of the book weren't enough to keep my totally engrossed. It's not that often that my mind starts to wander while reading.

[Jean]

A, A, and A!!!!!! If there was any better grade, I would have given it.

[Rjeso]

faaaaaavorite.... :wub:

[mae]

Never Read. Yet. :(

[jayson]

Straight A's. This is one of the books against which I judge all other King.

[alinda]

All A's here too. GREAT book!!!

[obscurejude]

Straight A's. My favorite Stephen King story and the canon by which all others are measured. This book is sheer genius and really conveys the depth of King's imaginary prowess. I had no choice, but to go every place this book was willing to take me. I've never read anything like it.

[Brice]

Straight A's. My favorite Stephen King story and the canon by which all others are measured. This book is sheer genius and really conveys the depth of King's imaginary prowess. I had no choice, but to go every place this book was willing to take me. I've never read anything like it.


:unsure:

The sewer??? :scared:

[obscurejude]

Straight A's. My favorite Stephen King story and the canon by which all others are measured. This book is sheer genius and really conveys the depth of King's imaginary prowess. I had no choice, but to go every place this book was willing to take me. I've never read anything like it.


:unsure:

The sewer??? :scared:

Of course. I was held captive by this book. Its the only way to explain being able to endure Stanley's death or the gang bang.

[Sam]

A's across the board! This is a momumentous tale worthy of the stories of Odysseus, Beowulf, and any other epic in the history of writing.

[Heather19]

All A's, and if I could have given it more I would have. Hands down this is my favorite book of all time. It doesn't get any better than this.

[sarah]

love all around for me except for the gang bang. Maybe I need another reread but for some reason I just can't get past that part.

This and The Stand are neck and neck outside of The Dark Tower for me.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

All A's, this book has the best character development of any novel I have ever read. I felt like I knew these characters by the end. I was so in love with these characters that what Maerlyn mentions above, didnt even bother me, in fact it seemed almost the only way to unify the group in that perfect way. I mean, its not as if Beverly was not a willing participant. And they were all in love with her, and her with them so completely that at the time I read it, (admittedly very young) it almost seemed natural.

Pablo, Dont waste time reading anything else until you have read this book!

[jayson]

Pablo, Dont waste time reading anything else until you have read this book!

I concur completely. Reading and especially ranking any other King without having read It is fundamentally flawed. It is the epitome of what King is capable of and I cannot help but judge every other one of his books against it.

[ManOfWesternesse]

Straight A's from me as well. A really great Book.

[Unfound One]

All A's.
Sheer brilliance, this book is.

[mae]

Pablo, Dont waste time reading anything else until you have read this book!

I concur completely. Reading and especially ranking any other King without having read It is fundamentally flawed. It is the epitome of what King is capable of and I cannot help but judge every other one of his books against it.

I surely will, no doubt.

But that's flawed logic, ranking all books against another. Each should be rated on its own merit and nothing else, in my opinion.

[obscurejude]

Pablo, Dont waste time reading anything else until you have read this book!

I concur completely. Reading and especially ranking any other King without having read It is fundamentally flawed. It is the epitome of what King is capable of and I cannot help but judge every other one of his books against it.

I surely will, no doubt.

But that's flawed logic, ranking all books against another. Each should be rated on its own merit and nothing else, in my opinion.

Actually the guy who invented logic would disagree with you. Aristotle poses Oedipus Rex as the perfected form of tragedy in order to discuss the topics in his Poetics. Offering an example of your premise in order to objectify your opinions and respond to rebuttal is a key aspect of inductive logic.

[sarah]

You know I haven't had a reread this book in four years. :O

I think it is time to add it to the list.

[Hannah]

don't forget to mark spoilers, please.

[Hannah]

Pablo, Dont waste time reading anything else until you have read this book!

I concur completely. Reading and especially ranking any other King without having read It is fundamentally flawed. It is the epitome of what King is capable of and I cannot help but judge every other one of his books against it.

I surely will, no doubt.

But that's flawed logic, ranking all books against another. Each should be rated on its own merit and nothing else, in my opinion.

Actually the guy who invented logic would disagree with you. Aristotle poses Oedipus Rex as the perfected form of tragedy in order to discuss the topics in his Poetics. Offering an example of your premise in order to objectify your opinions and respond to rebuttal is a key aspect of inductive logic.

Not trying to be picky here, but Aristotle did not invent logic. He fathered Aristotelian logic. While he may have made popular that particular act of logical discourse and argument, logic was practiced by other cultures as well. Pablo's contention that a book should be rated on its own merits is not illogical. In fact, I would say that this topic could even be a completely new thread, as the subject may be interesting to a lot of people.

[jayson]

Pablo's contention that a book should be rated on its own merits is not illogical. In fact, I would say that this topic could even be a completely new thread, as the subject may be interesting to a lot of people.

I'd be interested in that discussion. I'm not sure I'd categorize Pablo's method as illogical either, but I'm also not sure when judging something on its own merit we aren't, at least subconsciously, still judging against something else.

Let's take "character development" for example. When we judge this, there still must exist somewhere in our minds an example of what good character development looks like even if we aren't consciously thinking "are the characters developed as well as they are in It?" Does that make sense? What I'm trying to say is that criteria don't just arise arbitrarily from the Prim.

[obscurejude]

Pablo, Dont waste time reading anything else until you have read this book!

I concur completely. Reading and especially ranking any other King without having read It is fundamentally flawed. It is the epitome of what King is capable of and I cannot help but judge every other one of his books against it.

I surely will, no doubt.

But that's flawed logic, ranking all books against another. Each should be rated on its own merit and nothing else, in my opinion.

Actually the guy who invented logic would disagree with you. Aristotle poses Oedipus Rex as the perfected form of tragedy in order to discuss the topics in his Poetics. Offering an example of your premise in order to objectify your opinions and respond to rebuttal is a key aspect of inductive logic.

Not trying to be picky here, but Aristotle did not invent logic. He fathered Aristotelian logic. While he may have made popular that particular act of logical discourse and argument, logic was practiced by other cultures as well. Pablo's contention that a book should be rated on its own merits is not illogical. In fact, I would say that this topic could even be a completely new thread, as the subject may be interesting to a lot of people.

Logic was practiced by other cultures? I never thought of that. Other philosophers besides Aristotle? Never thought of that either. :doh:

[jayson]

One of the earliest examples I know of is the tetralemma, a feature of Indian formal logic that arose from a portion of the Rigveda.

[Hannah]

Pablo, Dont waste time reading anything else until you have read this book!

I concur completely. Reading and especially ranking any other King without having read It is fundamentally flawed. It is the epitome of what King is capable of and I cannot help but judge every other one of his books against it.

I surely will, no doubt.

But that's flawed logic, ranking all books against another. Each should be rated on its own merit and nothing else, in my opinion.

Actually the guy who invented logic would disagree with you. Aristotle poses Oedipus Rex as the perfected form of tragedy in order to discuss the topics in his Poetics. Offering an example of your premise in order to objectify your opinions and respond to rebuttal is a key aspect of inductive logic.

Not trying to be picky here, but Aristotle did not invent logic. He fathered Aristotelian logic. While he may have made popular that particular act of logical discourse and argument, logic was practiced by other cultures as well. Pablo's contention that a book should be rated on its own merits is not illogical. In fact, I would say that this topic could even be a completely new thread, as the subject may be interesting to a lot of people.

Logic was practiced by other cultures? I never thought of that. Other philosophers besides Aristotle? Never thought of that either. :doh:

:idea: Well of course since Aristotle invented logic those other cultures must have practiced after he invented it.

:rolleyes:

[ksmithcats]

Obviously one of the top books SK has written in a career of wonderful books. Gave the ending a B, however, because though I was satisfied with the denoument, I was disappointed just a bit in the climax.

[Melike]

All A's, and one of the first King books I had read.

[Django]

AAA

[Daghain]

Sorry, I'm going to blow the curve here. Straight B's, and that was being generous.

[Patrick]

Someday I'll read this book...

[B Rag]

B, A, B.

[Aaron]

Wow, Dags. You didnt think that it deserved an A in at least the Character Development area?

:nope:

:P

[Darkthoughts]

Straight A's...this book blows me away no matter how many times I read it.

[Jean]

Wow, Dags. You didnt think that it deserved an A in at least the Character Development area?

:nope:

:P
Bears are very surprised, too.

[obscurejude]

Pablo, Dont waste time reading anything else until you have read this book!

I concur completely. Reading and especially ranking any other King without having read It is fundamentally flawed. It is the epitome of what King is capable of and I cannot help but judge every other one of his books against it.

I surely will, no doubt.

But that's flawed logic, ranking all books against another. Each should be rated on its own merit and nothing else, in my opinion.

Actually the guy who invented logic would disagree with you. Aristotle poses Oedipus Rex as the perfected form of tragedy in order to discuss the topics in his Poetics. Offering an example of your premise in order to objectify your opinions and respond to rebuttal is a key aspect of inductive logic.

Not trying to be picky here, but Aristotle did not invent logic. He fathered Aristotelian logic. While he may have made popular that particular act of logical discourse and argument, logic was practiced by other cultures as well. Pablo's contention that a book should be rated on its own merits is not illogical. In fact, I would say that this topic could even be a completely new thread, as the subject may be interesting to a lot of people.

Logic was practiced by other cultures? I never thought of that. Other philosophers besides Aristotle? Never thought of that either. :doh:

:idea: Well of course since Aristotle invented logic those other cultures must have practiced after he invented it.

:rolleyes:

Hannah,

My response to Pablo was half joking. I'm kind of biased when it comes to Aristotle if you haven't noticed, though I'm sure you have since you're a nit picker. :)

Socrates actually invented formal logic, though its debatable since he never wrote anything down. If we take the early Plato to be Socrates, then works like Ion are good examples.

Aristotle didn't invent a particular logic by his namesake. Because of his differing epistemological approach, he perfected inductive logic because of his emphasis on knowledge that is arrived at aesthetically through the senses (empiricism). Thomas Aquinas is perhaps his best disciple in this regard and his Summa Theologicae is basically an ode to Aristotle's logic as well as all the works of the late medieval scholastics.

Pablo has good points and I'm sorry if anyone took me the wrong way. He said that Jayson was illogical and my point is that he wasn't. It might be a different approach than Pablo's, and there remain merits to both, but it isn't necessarily wrong by being different.

Basically, I should have used a smiley so it would have been more obvious that I was sort of joking. :grouphug:

I argue a lot about Aristotle in school because he's out of favor in many regards and sometimes its hard to turn the switch off. Forgive me if it came across in any negative way.

[Yunsung]

A, A, B. It's a kick-ass book, and from me that's a kick-ass grade.

[obscurejude]

A, A, B. It's a kick-ass book, and from me that's a kick-ass grade.

What brought the ending down to a B? Just curious.

[idk, my bff jill?]

Straight A's.

Simply magnificent.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I think that on rereading, The ending for It was better. Once I saw how the turtle could fit in with the DT world.