I have a few questions about the book. I read it a few weeks ago and already forgot some details.
Here are the Questions
SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Spoiler:
thank you
Under the dome Questions
I have a few questions about the book. I read it a few weeks ago and already forgot some details.
Here are the Questions
SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Spoiler:
thank you
Last edited by Odetta; 01-13-2010 at 05:47 PM. Reason: to hide spoilers sort of
whoops did that spoiler box wrong, lookout below!!
The spoiler button is the one that has the atomic radiation symbol. Click on it and write in between the bracketed sections. Then your writing will be spoilered.
Margaret Emmie Mackey Catoe, you are, have been, and always will be my soulmate, and I love you.
Con todo mi corazon, por todo de mis dias. And I always will, in this life and into the next.
August 2, 1947 - September 24, 2010
i loved this thing..... i finished it in 6 days ....and that includes being a drunk (i can't read when i have been drinking)
it was a comfort book to me ....i knew from the first 100 pages Barbie would prevail even though it was really a group effort and he was the "leader" .......the story telling was 100 mph and i love that from king ...he can drag some of his books .....but that is the editors problem.......i was happy ...plus it was a Christmas gift so i didn't spend any money on it .....although i usually go to the library anyway
I'm nonviolent with those who are nonviolent with me. But when you drop that violence on me, then you've made me go INSANE, and I'm not responsible for what I do
Malcolm X
I didn't notice that, but there was a small continuity error after...Originally Posted by mystima
Spoiler:
...when she's described as wearing jeans in one paragraph and sweat pants in another.
I also caught a small typo near the end, can't recall exactly...someone's name spelled wrong.
Ok not to be rude, I haven't read through this post yet (I intend to right after I post this...) So others may have said the same thing already. I just finished Under the Dome. And my initial reaction is that...King is telling us a bigger story. There is so much political struggling in the story - and I feel like the Dome is just a way for us to see the world on a smaller scale. What I mean by that is, global warming and the relization that we are releasing harmful chemicals into our atmosphere that wind up at the OZone layer (our personal "dome")...also how there are many dictators and rulers in the world that may not be a "good guy" - yet people will follow them.
I probably could have worded this a lot clearer, many of the struggles inside of the Dome could be real possible issues for the earth as we know it in the future, years from now.
Do you think King was trying to send a little bit of this message through the book? A little message about being more "green" maybe? He said he started to write the book a long time ago so maybe this idea hadn't been brought up then. But I felt like reading the Dome was like watching a tiny version of our population and seeing how it would cope with unreal circumstances - what would happen if a horrible person was in the office (is there already?) and what would happen if world's polution became so horrible? As far as I know...the world would be alone - without help from the outside of our atmosphere just like those in the dome were.
Ug. I feel like I'm always onto something but just can't say it.
"The wise are not wise because they make no mistakes. They are wise because they correct their mistakes as soon as they recognize them."
-Orson Scott Card
I think SK was telling us not to burn ants
No, seriously I see what you're saying
I had a tough time reading this book without thinking about the Simpson's Movie.
the donut one? I completely forget what happened. Was there a dome?
"The wise are not wise because they make no mistakes. They are wise because they correct their mistakes as soon as they recognize them."
-Orson Scott Card
- I think I even saw it in theaters, how sad.
"The wise are not wise because they make no mistakes. They are wise because they correct their mistakes as soon as they recognize them."
-Orson Scott Card
Yep, that's EXACTLY what I think.Check this thread for the discussion on that: http://www.thedarktower.org/palaver/...ead.php?t=9080
Feel free to discuss it further here as well.
Yeah. Homer pollutes the lake with Pig Crap, so the EPA lowers an impenetrable dome over Springfield. The whole town goes crazy...
hm. King said he had the idea for a really long time, but I guess that sounds pretty similar. (minus the pig crap, cartoons, and the lowering of the dome by the EPA). That's funny that I can't remember anything about the dome though, or anything about the movie really besides spider pig and the pink donut (and a bart simpson penis?)
"The wise are not wise because they make no mistakes. They are wise because they correct their mistakes as soon as they recognize them."
-Orson Scott Card
big jim is such a dickhead
I have many leather bound books.
I'm kind of a big deal.
Changing the plans that I’ve been setting on, I’m scared by the way that my life is getting gone
King can produce a partial manuscript for this story from the early 80's I think. This would predate the Simpsons in every way possible.
The kindness of close friends is like a warm blanket
i don't see how he could have stolen it from the simpsons. in order to produce a story of that magnitude, he would of needed a bit more time than two years to think up, perfect, and write a story like UTD.
I have many leather bound books.
I'm kind of a big deal.
Changing the plans that I’ve been setting on, I’m scared by the way that my life is getting gone
I was in no way saying or trying to insinuate that there was any plagiarism of ideas between the two stories. I read the afterword by King, too.
I think it would be incredibly naive, as well as utterly ridiculous, to infer that any idea out there is a pristine and self encompassed entity.
However, I did find it hard to read UTD without thinking about the Simpson's movie and envisioning Moe running around somewhere under the dome with a traffic cone on his head. The thought tickled me.
They are clearly two different stories; with two obvious inceptions and differing story lines. But the similarity of external circumstance present in both stories did make it difficult, in my mind, to read it without being reminded of the other; especially when you consider both King and the Simpson's relative impact and proliferation throughout popular culture. Stephen King has even been on the Simpsons (which is not to say that some sort of nefarious purpose or idea stealing happened at that time, but to emphasize my point about popular culture sharing common threads).
I don't think it is in any way unusual to see similarities between the two stories. Or that it's wrong to have a little fun wondering about two imaginary worlds colliding. Even if it is, sometimes, a little distracting.
Too bad the Simpson's movie has already been done. It would have been great to see the Simpson's movie done as a parody of under the dome.
Sloth Love Chunk
Just finished this and WOW loved it!!! Have to admit I didn't really care for Duma Key, so I was trepedatious about UtD, but...did I say WOW already?
1morerobot - LOVE your cast. I couldn't help but make Big Jim into Boss Hogg from the original Dukes of Hazzard in my head
LOVE the idea that the cycle is beginning again - it's not that far off of 28 years.
Aaaaand...love reading all the other "19"s that I missed - but I got one that no one else did - the hardback mass market edition has 1072 pages (to the story part, not counting the author's note) 1+0+7+2 = 19. I turned right to the end upon getting the book to see how many pages it had and was SO STOKED to see 1072.
i think you meant 10+7+2
I have many leather bound books.
I'm kind of a big deal.
Changing the plans that I’ve been setting on, I’m scared by the way that my life is getting gone
Yeah, that tooi think you meant 10+7+2It's ok, I is a homskoolin' parent!!
As for your first sentence, I don't see what's "rude" about your post, since it's just your opinions, and isn't aimed at anyone.
As for your last sentence, I think you said it, although spending a bit more time polishing your language might help.
In between -from reviews and discussion of UTD that I've read here and elsewhere- I think that's what I've derived from these: King has set up a microcosm he's using to compose a parable of what's wrong with the U.S. / The World.
I haven't read UTD yet, and from what I've read about it have no current plans to acquire it. SK is at his best when he is writing STORY as ENTERTAINMENT. This book appears to verge into the area of political proselytizing (even in my reading posts by people who liked the book).
My opinion is that King (for his own purposes, and I don't question those) has reworked elements of Tommyknockers, The Stand, and several other books to write "What's Wrong With America" in fictional form.
To date, The Stand has been his best single-volume work, and DT his overall tour de force. UTD isn't in the same league, even from reading it at second-hand.
I think this might just be the one story King's been telling us since he started and by started I don't mean this book.As for your first sentence, I don't see what's "rude" about your post, since it's just your opinions, and isn't aimed at anyone.
As for your last sentence, I think you said it, although spending a bit more time polishing your language might help.
In between -from reviews and discussion of UTD that I've read here and elsewhere- I think that's what I've derived from these: King has set up a microcosm he's using to compose a parable of what's wrong with the U.S. / The World.
I haven't read UTD yet, and from what I've read about it have no current plans to acquire it. SK is at his best when he is writing STORY as ENTERTAINMENT. This book appears to verge into the area of political proselytizing (even in my reading posts by people who liked the book).
My opinion is that King (for his own purposes, and I don't question those) has reworked elements of Tommyknockers, The Stand, and several other books to write "What's Wrong With America" in fictional form.
To date, The Stand has been his best single-volume work, and DT his overall tour de force. UTD isn't in the same league, even from reading it at second-hand.
I really loved Under the Dome even though I could find a lot of things to criticize about it. King has a number of books where the major plot element is shrouded in mystery and where he doesn't hand you all the answers. Most of the time that works fine for me but I can totally see why someone would be frustrated at the end of the book. I half expected everyone to die and there to be no explanation whatsoever. The thin information about leatherheads and the purpose of the dome didn't thrill me, but at least it was something. The part that seems most up for critique are the recycled archetypes, but after reading forty or more novels from the same person, it's almost unavoidable to draw character parallels. I kept seeing Barbie as Stu from the Stand and for some reason Buster from Needful Things kept coming to mind for Jim. There were a lot more but those two kept coming back to me as I read it. At least it was all brought together with a great story that never slowed down, that really made up for the King archetype overkill.
Spoiler:
Maybe I am just seeing things, but I found that all very interesting; reading latter-day King (and re-reading earlier stuff) is always fun when keeping TDT fresh in the mind.
I thought it was funny how Private Ames uses "y'all" in reference to Ollie in the book, since it is a contraction of "you all", and Ollie is just one person. I'm from Louisiana so it just seemed strange to me. I loved the book though...great story. It was a nice change from what I am used to reading.
"Mouth full of dirt, your name is removed from the registry. Saint Peter greets, with empty eyes, then turns and locks the gate."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
