Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 97 posts

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#81

Post by coldtea »

ramblerman wrote: post #76
coldtea wrote: post #73

> I’m a recovering alcoholic, haven’t had a drink in almost 27 years OT, but what does that even mean? Recovered maybe, recovering, no. He is just someone that hasn't been an alcoholic for 2+ decades... It's like saying "I'm recovering from a broken ankle, I had my surgery in 1983 and have had no pain at all, and no fractures either, and been running ultra-marathons and doing base jumping ever since 1986".

> and been running ultra-marathons and doing base jumping ever since 1986 Your own analogy doesn't hold up because by that logic then a recovered alcoholic would be 'fit' to have a drink again

They would certainly be fit to have a drink again -- and they do just that all over the world.

It's a AA/12-step inspired prejudice that you're "always recovering" and that having the occasional drink will be fatal to regress into alcoholism. What we call an Americanism.

There are tons of people who once were alcoholics, quitted, and can enjoy a beer or glass or wine or two now and again, without becoming alcoholics again, and being able to go for weeks or months without drinking (just like any regular non-alcoholic person). It's a matter of character and willpower and life's circumstances, not some physical law or physiological necessity.

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#82

Post by bshepard »

stupidcar wrote: post #80
IIIIIIIIII wrote: post #78

I've tried to read King a few times over the years. I couldn't get over the lack of prose style and find him to be a craftsman of plots that (other) people are enthralled by, but not much of a writer. This is what happens when you're raised in your literary interests by the likes of Joyce and Proust, perhaps. If I'm a snob so be it. When I heard Harlan Ellison wrote novels in bookstore windows in a matter of days I t…

Speaking as a relative non-snob, I'm always a bit baffled when people cite Joyce like this. I mean, he clearly had an unrivalled mastery of language, but do people actually like reading prose like that? Even his supposedly more accessible stuff like Dubliners and Portrait of the Artist just seemed so dense and obtuse that while I could objectively admire the skill on display, I never once really found myself enjoying…

There is a way to find great pleasure in Joyce, it does require effort and education, but so do many other pleasures. Terence McKenna's "Surfing Finnegan's Wake" is a good way in, especially if you enjoy McKenna's weirdly-similar-to-George-Bush's voice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpeq91hK1Gk

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#83

Post by Mediterraneo10 »

stupidcar wrote: post #80
IIIIIIIIII wrote: post #78

I've tried to read King a few times over the years. I couldn't get over the lack of prose style and find him to be a craftsman of plots that (other) people are enthralled by, but not much of a writer. This is what happens when you're raised in your literary interests by the likes of Joyce and Proust, perhaps. If I'm a snob so be it. When I heard Harlan Ellison wrote novels in bookstore windows in a matter of days I t…

Speaking as a relative non-snob, I'm always a bit baffled when people cite Joyce like this. I mean, he clearly had an unrivalled mastery of language, but do people actually like reading prose like that? Even his supposedly more accessible stuff like Dubliners and Portrait of the Artist just seemed so dense and obtuse that while I could objectively admire the skill on display, I never once really found myself enjoying…

Bloomsday celebrations frequently include reading Ulysses aloud where a series of people have a go at it. They love Joyce's prose and want to share the music of it with others. It is OK if it is not your thing, but there is certainly an audience out there who sincerely love Ulysses in all its facets.

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#84

Post by Broken_Hippo »

ramblerman wrote: post #76
coldtea wrote: post #73

> I’m a recovering alcoholic, haven’t had a drink in almost 27 years OT, but what does that even mean? Recovered maybe, recovering, no. He is just someone that hasn't been an alcoholic for 2+ decades... It's like saying "I'm recovering from a broken ankle, I had my surgery in 1983 and have had no pain at all, and no fractures either, and been running ultra-marathons and doing base jumping ever since 1986".

> and been running ultra-marathons and doing base jumping ever since 1986 Your own analogy doesn't hold up because by that logic then a recovered alcoholic would be 'fit' to have a drink again

Many folks can drink again, once they've learned how to control things. That generally means a period of sobriety, though it doesn't always. There are ways to treat the underlying issues while not completely abstaining. Many folks don't get treatment for alcoholism in their early 20's, quit, and drink normally the rest of their life.

Unfortunately, many folks think that once an addict, always one. While this is true for some folks, it certainly isn't true for everyone. You really can be "fit" to drink again.

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#85

Post by MaxBarraclough »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #68
pmoriarty wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say there was no difference, just that whether you think one is better than another is not "objective" but a matter of personal preference. Clearly Dan Brown and Don DeLillo are different. They write different sorts of books that appeal to different sorts of readers. But I struggle to see how those differences make one "objectively" better than the other. If there are objective criteria by which one could ju…

There are fairly standard criteria for literary criticism that include psychological and social insight, use of vocabulary, use of advanced writing techniques, use of form, and many, many more. It is all opinion, but there’s a difference between the opinion of Alan Kay and of someone who has two days of Python and a copy of Angry Birds.

> It is all opinion, but there’s a difference between the opinion of Alan Kay and of someone who has two days of Python and a copy of Angry Birds.

I'm not sure I see your point.

We put more stock in the opinions of Alan Kay, because he has a better command of the relevant objective facts than does the newbie.

In 'pure literature', there are no such objective facts.

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#86

Post by lmm »

ahansen wrote: post #9
crooked-v wrote: post #2

I'm reminded of Lovecraft, who would use a thesaurus to pad his paid-by-the-word word counts by inserting various adjectives that sounded scary but didn't actually mean anything in context.

That's quite interesting! Does that not detract from how well his work reads, though? I suppose not by much given how popular he is.

It's a very different prose style, but it works for the stories he's telling. That he stumbled into that style by trying to pad his length is interesting, but ultimately beside the point: the resulting stories stand or fall on their merits.

(It does raise the question of to what extent good writing relates to the author trying to write well. E.g. I found the "author's preferred text" of American Gods verbose and meandering, and suspect that the original release was superior, even though Gaiman regards it as having been excessively edited for commercial reasons)

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#87

Post by saltycraig »

sudosteph wrote: post #55
kbenson wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read a few of each in High school. Koontz was fun but to me felt a bit more targeted for mass appeal (as weird as that feels to say in comparison to King). Then again, for King I was reading stuff like The Stand and The Dark Tower series, which may or may not be indicative of the rest of his work (which I mostly know through the movies made from them)?

I recommend checking out one of King's novella or short-story collections for a different perspective. Some of those are actually some of my all time favorites.

"Different Seasons" is my favourite collection, and out of the 4 total stories in it, 3 became movies (The Body became Stand By Me, Apt Pupil, and The Shawshank Redemption). Can't recommend this collection highly enough.

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#88

Post by mseebach »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #84
ramblerman wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and been running ultra-marathons and doing base jumping ever since 1986 Your own analogy doesn't hold up because by that logic then a recovered alcoholic would be 'fit' to have a drink again

Many folks can drink again, once they've learned how to control things. That generally means a period of sobriety, though it doesn't always. There are ways to treat the underlying issues while not completely abstaining. Many folks don't get treatment for alcoholism in their early 20's, quit, and drink normally the rest of their life. Unfortunately, many folks think that once an addict, always one. While this is true…

> Many folks don't get treatment for alcoholism in their early 20's, quit, and drink normally the rest of their life.

If they don't get treatment, were they ever properly diagnosed? As I understand it, "drinking (way) too much" is something a good number of people in their 20s do, then they cut down without any particular problems. That isn't alcoholism, it's just drinking too much. Even the urge to grab a glass of wine to relax, when it's just a habit, isn't an addiction.

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#89

Post by saltycraig »

benbreen wrote: post #24
dewitt wrote: post #21

> "Donna Tartt, one of the best American novelists to emerge in the last 50 years, has published just three novels since 1992. Jonathan Franzen, the only American novelist who is her equal." Pynchon. DeLillo. McCarthy. Roth... Edit: Morrison. Updike. Mailer...

Roth didn’t emerge in the last 50 years (otherwise I’d agree with you).* I’ve enjoyed books by all six but I agree with King on this one. The Goldfinch was, page for page, probably the best reading experience I’ve ever had. I adore that book. Franzen is less lovable but undeniably talented and, for me at least, more fun to read than the people who influenced him (Pynchon, DeLillo, etc) *edit: I didn’t read the quote…

The Goldfinch was fantastic, definitely in my top 5 favourite book of all time, if not top 2 along with the Empire Falls by Richard Russo and The Stand by Stephen King.

Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)

#90

Post by megaman22 »

mseebach wrote: post #88
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many folks can drink again, once they've learned how to control things. That generally means a period of sobriety, though it doesn't always. There are ways to treat the underlying issues while not completely abstaining. Many folks don't get treatment for alcoholism in their early 20's, quit, and drink normally the rest of their life. Unfortunately, many folks think that once an addict, always one. While this is true…

> Many folks don't get treatment for alcoholism in their early 20's, quit, and drink normally the rest of their life. If they don't get treatment, were they ever properly diagnosed? As I understand it, "drinking (way) too much" is something a good number of people in their 20s do, then they cut down without any particular problems. That isn't alcoholism, it's just drinking too much. Even the urge to grab a glass of w…

I would agree, but that's not how the definition works. And if you screw up and do something stupid when drunk, you end up thrown into court-ordered counseling and AA meetings, where they do their best to convince you that you are broken, must forever wear the scarlet A of alcoholism, and fight a constant battle against Demon Rum. It's a little Kafkaesque.
Post reply on HN