Searching the Sewers

No matter where you turn in media, it seems that there is no escape from the sci-fi behemoth that is Stephen King. The renowned author has been professionally creating his popular tales of both horror and sci-fi for 50 years now, and he’s still going strong.

However, in the more recent years (despite his many fans) Stephen King has been seen in a more joke-like manner. And, while we do see quite a few stories being remade or newly brought into a video medium, it’s no doubt that most see the writer as being overrated.

So, why do we continue to see these stories? Why is Stephen King still so popular after all this time? Why do we continue remaking these old stories? Let’s take a deeper look into the Stephen King appeal.

Personally speaking, I really enjoy some of King’s stories. That being said, I’d like to start with the point as to why King is indeed an overrated author.

Thinking of writing in an artistic sense, you have to find a way to hook your audience into your book. You have to provide an atmosphere and characters that contribute to the story in a way that feels whole. With King’s work, he tries to bring that element of realism that gives the story the relatability needed to keep the story in the reader’s mind.

The problem lies in the point when realism gets sucked back into fiction. Many of King’s characters are written in a way that seems like they're too hard to create that realism, reverting themselves back into that fictional stage. They seem to disconnected from the world, and from the story.

Rose Madder, King’s 1995 novel on domestic abuse, is one example of this. The book’s antagonist, Norman Daniels, is a person of power who uses his power to keep things the way he wants them to be. Yet, the character himself is written in a way that puts him into, what I like to call, the “God Zone.” This is when a character is untouchable, they cannot be stopped, they can do whatever they like and not face any consequences. Norman is a policeman who knows how to use his power to get around the law. He has gotten away with beating his wife, and as the story progresses he is able to get away with a lot, including murder. The character is emotionless, only ever conveying anger when the situation calls for it. Even when angry, however, it seems that emoting is a chore for the character. He has no discerning characteristics beside being a bad person that the reader is supposed to despise.

Another side to this character problem is Sue Snell from the novel Carrie. Sue, the second most prominent character in the story, is Carrie’s friend who joins in mocking Carrie, and spends most of the story regretting her actions. That’s where the character progression stops. Sue’s character never goes outside of feeling bad for Carrie. The point of this is to push Sue’s character as she asks her boyfriend to take Carrie to the school dance, yet even then and afterward, there’s never the expression of what Sue really feels. The character is written really blandly, seeming to only have that single character trait.

However, character writing is not the only weak point found in King’s novels. There are points where the supernatural aspects King uses seem to push a little too much, sometimes even regressing the plotline or making no sense. It seems that there is sometimes too much attention to the detail of what’s happening, and not detail to how what’s happening contributes to the story. Even in the more beloved stories, and some movies, there are points in which this happens. As a bonus, there are certain stories where the main story element is never explained (as in the novel Cell).

For example, the original TV miniseries It had plotlines that made no sense unless you had known the story. There were scenes that had made no sense and even some scenes that lead in no direction at all. With the new 2017 remake of It, we see the story progressing in a slightly different manner. It’s much easier to follow what’s happening, exposition is used to explain parts of the story and of the Pennywise character, and the movie overall has a better feel to it.

With the new It remake, The Mist TV series and the new Gerald’s Game movie on Netflix, we’re seeing new versions of the Stephen King stories that keep the author so popular. Which brings us back to the question: Why is King so popular? We can look at his works and point out flaws all day, but what makes us love the stories that we do love and keep bringing to the table?

Simply speaking, these stories give us points to think about that are very real. Now, I’m not saying that his other stories don’t do this, however it’s more about HOW the story is conveyed as opposed to how the story is MEANT to be conveyed. (Going backwards, Rose Madder is meant to convey the feeling of helplessness in an abuse victim, but the way it was actually presented was very lifeless.)

In both the new movie AND the novel, Gerald’s Game, the feeling of helplessness and dread is very apparent. It sticks around, it creates that anxious feeling, it leaves you thinking. With Under the Dome, the feeling of isolation is very present throughout the entire story. There’s no running away from problems, the fact remains that there is no way out. With stories such as It and The Dark Tower, there’s a lore that can be explored and talked about, there can be discussions as to what COULD happen.

Stories such as Hearts of Atlantis and 11/22/63, while not bad, seem to just be a little more lifeless, giving more a feeling of being an explanation of events as opposed to a story.

So, in essence, even though Stephen King is quite overrated and overhyped by fans, the reason his writing is so popular is because it gives us a basis to discuss. We can come up with story, we can talk about how we relate to the story, we can talk about ways the stories make us feel.

Stephen King is kept in the mainstream because of the way his writing makes a reader feel. Depending on what you find interesting, there’s a life out there for you to explore.