JUST READ THE LIBRARY POLICEMAN...
Okay, i put off reading this story for a long time because i was so busy reading all of the DT books and their cousins, and now i'm almost wishing i had never read it. don't get me wrong, it was a great story, fun and scary, but there was this one part that i'm having a problem with. when little sam gets raped. i'm not even sure why but this offended me in a way that stephen king has never done before. did this bother anyone else?
I think that the sexual abuse of a child offends ALL "right-thinking" people. I also was upset by this, but I saw it as an integral part of the story--that's what made Sam who he was and what caused his vulnerability. The fact that you were "offended in a way Stephen King has never done before" testifies to his ability to "get" to the reader.
John
i hate this story. i hate this story so much. i hate this story on every single solitary level of the tower. there is nothing in this story that i like. i don't even read four past midnight anymore because this story is in the book. i have the other stories on audiobook and listen to them but not this one.
i don't read stories about this subject and i was so wounded by what happened to sam. so very wounded. . . .
Whoa.Originally Posted by turtlesong
Okay...I haven't read the story myself, but isn't that kind of an extreme reaction, to not read the whole book because of one story you didn't like?
If I'd used that logic I would have stopped reading ANYTHING by Stephen King after familiarizing myself with Thinner, because I really didn't like that....
I didn't like reading that scene, I knew it was coming, but it was still difficult to read. But, I don't really think any subject should be taboo in literature - these things happen, in real life, and while I don't agree with people sensationalising it I also don't agree with people ignoring it - both things are equally harmful.
However, I didn't really think it was necessary to the story to go to such an extreme to explain why adult Sam was so traumatised. Even abuse that didn't escalate into rape would have been enough.
I know someone who completely stopped reading King after reading The Library Policeman.Whoa.
Okay...I haven't read the story myself, but isn't that kind of an extreme reaction, to not read the whole book because of one story you didn't like?
If I'd used that logic I would have stopped reading ANYTHING by Stephen King after familiarizing myself with Thinner, because I really didn't like that....
It'll take a lot more than words and guns,
A whole lot more than riches and muscle.
The hands of the many must join as one.
And together we'll cross the river.
Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
It was very disturbing. Isn't that what SK was trying to do? Disturb the reader so that they would understand what the character was going through?
IMO, the fact that we as readers found it disgusting and disturbing proves that SK did his job well.
Life is a garden...dig it!
wow, i'm a little relieved to find i wasn't the only one to have a problem with it. i agree that nothing should be off limits in writing, what one finds offensive another finds solace. i just had to speak up simply because i have been reading king since i was a teen and i have endured every abuse and horrible death, namely of children, with a sense that in it all there was a purpose. when roland let jake fall i knew that even though i wanted to scream, this was the only way to show how roland would sacrifice anyone or anything to get to the tower. in other words, i can take a death, but this was so much more. i think the worst part was that it was told through the eyes of sam.
Not at all, mungojerrie (Meow?).
BTW, might want to put spoiler tags around that DT spoiler.
It'll take a lot more than words and guns,
A whole lot more than riches and muscle.
The hands of the many must join as one.
And together we'll cross the river.
Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
Josiah Bartlett on The West Wing said something similar to that, which I liked (I usually like what he says and don't know why I haven't gotten into that series religiously).
Someone was complaining to him about this director's films that had "gratuitous" violence and sex, and this guy believed that it was contributing to the decay of American mores by sensationalizing such, and inspiring real people to emulate the characters in the films.
Bartlett said the real problem with the films wasn't that they had gratuitous violence and sex, but because the films themselves were rotten--he pointed out that there can be good-quality films that nevertheless have violence and/or sex to that degree, but this director's films stunk. But people kept going to see them anyway BECAUSE of the violence and sex they had to offer (in other words, that kind of sensationalism is what was making the films money), and THAT was the real issue that needed to be addressed.
Anyway, back on topic....
@Woofer: Well, some people are like that. I'm glad I'm letting less and less fiction fare offend me, though, because I would have missed out on a LOT of greatness if I only focused on King's profanity, or sexual references (which sometimes don't even seem to merit being present), to say nothing of the violence in a lot of his works (and the meanness of some of the characters)....
Those things used to bother me (and the meanness still does), but I'm able to make myself understand that it's part of the story he wants to tell, and so am able to plow through it. I don't like EVERYTHING he's written, and I don't have to. But I'm glad I haven't missed out on the many works of his that I DO like.
Hmmm, I never watched The West Wing...I may have to give it a try
/off topic replyishness
J and Y (and others), I understand your points. I, personally, have no trouble with this particular work, but I do not dismiss anyone who does. I had many an earnest conversation with my friend regarding why that scene was critical to the novel, and he, in turn, explained why it ruined King for him. We must all try to remember that taste is individual and each of us brings a different background to the books we read. It is presumptuous of us to assume that because something did not affect us that strongly that no one else should be affected either.
It'll take a lot more than words and guns,
A whole lot more than riches and muscle.
The hands of the many must join as one.
And together we'll cross the river.
Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
I didn't have a problem with it in that I couldn't read it again, infact it was my favourite story from the collection. I just didn't see why it was necessary for Sam to be raped to make the point - he was already utterly traumatised through the pursuit alone.
I'm not dismissing anyone either, and I've probably done likewise for other authors (I can't say for sure because I don't know what I'm missing). Everyone likes what they like.
I'm just saying that, since I know better, I personally (can't tell others what to do) would give it a try once, at least. If I don't like it then that's fine, but it has happened in the past that I've ended up liking something I didn't think I would.
Anyway, I don't think that what happened with this particular person has happened with me--there was a time I was really into Neil Simon plays, for example, and some of the scripts he wrote I HATED, but it didn't turn me off to Neil Simon himself for good. And Stephen King is such an eclectic writer that it just seems a shame to turn off him because of one thing he wrote (as I said before, I was turned off him from Thinner, and am glad I was turned on to him again).
Again, not trying to tell anyone else what to do, or to judge, I just think it's kind of a shame....
I do also. I read the book when it first came out and have read it many times since. I saw nothing in it that was not necessary to the story. THough I think that if the story shocks or elicits any reaction other than boredom in you King would be greatly pleased.
Couldn't have said it better.
You may like it, you may hate it--but to be boring is the cardinal sin.
Oh he read it all the way through. He just made a decision not to read King anymore after reading that story. It's not a decision I agree with, but I respect it because it is his choice.
It'll take a lot more than words and guns,
A whole lot more than riches and muscle.
The hands of the many must join as one.
And together we'll cross the river.
Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
Whoa.
Okay...I haven't read the story myself, but isn't that kind of an extreme reaction, to not read the whole book because of one story you didn't like?
If I'd used that logic I would have stopped reading ANYTHING by Stephen King after familiarizing myself with Thinner, because I really didn't like that....
i think it's because of my background. i had read the sun dog first (i tend to read his short stories and novellas out of order, and i thought - oooooo a doggie story) and so the library policeman was actually the last story for me. and yes, king probably handled it brilliantly but i couldn't finish the story because once i got to that point that was it for me. it was over and i had nightmares for weeks.
i've got the langoliers and secret window, secret garden on audio. now if the sun dog would just get released on audio i'd have everything from that book. but no, i can't pick it up. even that makes me shake. but it's still a first edition, and it's still in my collection.
Whoa.
Okay...I haven't read the story myself, but isn't that kind of an extreme reaction, to not read the whole book because of one story you didn't like?
If I'd used that logic I would have stopped reading ANYTHING by Stephen King after familiarizing myself with Thinner, because I really didn't like that....
i think it's because of my background. i had read the sun dog first (i tend to read his short stories and novellas out of order, and i thought - oooooo a doggie story
i've got the langoliers and secret window, secret garden on audio. now if the sun dog would just get released on audio i'd have everything from that book. but no, i can't pick it up. even that makes me shake. but it's still a first edition, and it's still in my collection.
It'll take a lot more than words and guns,
A whole lot more than riches and muscle.
The hands of the many must join as one.
And together we'll cross the river.
Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
i think if a story can offend u on an intellectual level that means its well written, i think that apt pupil is a far more offensive and subtle story about the corruption of a child than the library policeman
if the worlds gonna end then let's get it over with, i got shit to do
There is really no comparison between The Library Policeman and The Apt Pupil. (Spoilers for The Apt Pupil)Spoiler:
And while I understand what you are saying about "if a story can offend you on an intellectual level...", that is only true if it is a good story. There's plenty of bad porn out there offending people left and right, but that doesn't make any of it well written.
It'll take a lot more than words and guns,
A whole lot more than riches and muscle.
The hands of the many must join as one.
And together we'll cross the river.
Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
no i mean if the ideas a story shows are what you find offensive, not the content, then that means its well written, and i think that apt pupil is about outside corruption, yeah todd approached dussander but it was with a sense of misplaced curiosity, dussander made a monster out of todd so that he could have someone he could relate to, that to me is outside corruption
if the worlds gonna end then let's get it over with, i got shit to do
Hrm, again there are plenty of stories with offensive ideas, and the stories just plain suck. It's the well written ones that get our attention precisely because they are well written, not because their ideas are offensive or controversial (The Da Vinci Code aside).
I think we'll have to disagree on The Apt Pupil.Spoiler:
It'll take a lot more than words and guns,
A whole lot more than riches and muscle.
The hands of the many must join as one.
And together we'll cross the river.
Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
