|
chernobyl kinsman posted:thats actually not quite my argument but ok. tell me why I'm wrong, and why she's a good character. what nuance or depth am I missing that I didn't address here: 1) your argument is that she “solely exists to [antagonize the protagonists]” which is facile and childish. you arent missing nuance or depth, youre demanding it. 2) the “deeply-held liberal conviction that right wingers act only out of some admixture of ignorance, hypocrisy, and sheer conscious malevolence” is actually reality and not contrived storytelling at all.
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:15 |
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:I'm a leftist youre a retard (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
shes a good character because she gets the plot going without being a plot device. her actions make sense given the kind of person she is portrayed as, and people react to her realistically. characters dont need more than that to be good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:If you're so raw about liberals writing conservative villains in a way that gets your Murdochs in a bunch might I suggest the works of successful conservative horror writer Ann Coulter? I value my sleep
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 00:50
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:1) your argument is that she “solely exists to [antagonize the protagonists]” which is facile and childish. you arent missing nuance or depth, youre demanding it. No, it isn't. Read this post again: chernobyl kinsman posted:she exists solely to a) generate some conflict in the grocery store, which is fine, and b) to build up a tribalistic sense of hatred in the audience which is then released in the cathartic moment of her death, which is less fine. my argument is also, as i have repeatedly said now, that she's boring because she has no depth (because she's an extreme projection of what king/liberals hate and fear about the religious right). if i'm wrong, tell me why. e: scary ghost dog posted:2) the “deeply-held liberal conviction that right wingers act only out of some admixture of ignorance, hypocrisy, and sheer conscious malevolence” is actually reality and not contrived storytelling at all. sad! chernobyl kinsman fucked around with this message at 01:21 on Sep 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:I'm a leftist I say again, may I invite you to the freeper thread so that it can disabuse you of this quaint notion that these people don't exist
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:king doesnt write conservative characters that are in any way lifelike or compelling, he writes conservative characters that embody and reinforce liberals' worst fever dreams about conservatives, like this guy's Maybe you forget conservatives cheerleading wars, celebrating the murder of Trayvon Martin, condoning nazi rallies under the pretense of free speech, or any of the thousand other atrocities that have come to define conservatism in 2018. Most conservatives aren't malicious, just ill informed and harmless! But their worst are kept in check by a thin membrane of repercussion and social accountability. But once that's stripped away? Red dawn fantasies or biblical end times are tough sells, but "I feared for my safety" will justify homicide pretty much anywhere in America. Once you make it acceptable to be awful, whose extreme is more prepared to be awful? The concealed carrier who clicks "BLACK CRIME" tags on Breitbart or like, a random Bernie supporter?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 17:39
|
|
|
Hey thread, what's u..... oh. Well, I finished my re-read of The Stand, and I loved it. Glen Bateman laughing in Flagg's face is one of my favorite moments, the way he's able to so quickly infuriate Flagg into killing him instead of making an example of him, because he was just humiliating the poo poo out of him... 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
just as a general rhetorical tip, when the criticism being leveled is "this is not good writing because it's just using naked tribalism to produce a sense of catharsis at the moment when the dehumanized Other is finally murdered", then "ya but my tribe is actually better" is not an especially compelling retort in the absence of anyone pointing out how I'm wrong about Carmody lacking depth and instead just being a lazy collection of religious-political signposts designed to mark her out as Bad I'm just gonna call it a day. even if right wingers are all bloodthirsty nazis irl, creating a character who has no complexity beyond being the platonic form of Evil Religious Woman is b o r i n g
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 18:28
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:just as a general rhetorical tip, when the criticism being leveled is "this is not good writing because it's just using naked tribalism to produce a sense of catharsis at the moment when the dehumanized Other is finally murdered", then "ya but my tribe is actually better" is not an especially compelling retort Obsessives are boring, but drat triggered snowflakes are SO MUCH WORSE.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:just as a general rhetorical tip, when the criticism being leveled is "this is not good writing because it's just using naked tribalism to produce a sense of catharsis at the moment when the dehumanized Other is finally murdered", then "ya but my tribe is actually better" is not an especially compelling retort It's not a "we better" as much as "they are uniquely awful in a way unrepresented anywhere else in the political or social spectrum. " But back to the Mist, she wasn't really there to "be a character" as much as to represent dangerous, fearful atavistic worship. The fact that that maps almost 1:1 to a US political faction is secondary to any political bent you're ascribing to King (or the thread. )
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
moths posted:But back to the Mist, she wasn't really there to "be a character" as much as to represent dangerous, fearful atavistic worship. I don't disagree, but that makes her an example of bad writing. It is possible to craft a character who both represents that and is a compelling figure in her own right. She should "be a character" because she is a character Also I'm not 'ascribing' poo poo to king, dog, he's a quite vocal democrat
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 18:45
|
|
|
So we get it. You didn't like the character and found her one dimensional. Most people here were fine with her, including myself. Next subject?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:just as a general rhetorical tip, when the criticism being leveled is "this is not good writing because it's just using naked tribalism to produce a sense of catharsis at the moment when the dehumanized Other is finally murdered", then "ya but my tribe is actually better" is not an especially compelling retort This is ridiculous. The mist was published in 1980. In 1976 most of the Christian right had supported Carter for being a born again Christian, and evangelical Christians were more closely associated with southern Democrats than Republicans. Here's an article from June 1980 still talking about evangelicals supporting Reagan as a possibility (as opposed to an obvious thing): https://www.csmonitor.com/1980/0625/062555.html Not to mention that King himself has written several times about how he became more liberal over time. You are taking the current obvious association of the Christian right with republicans and of King with liberals and pushing that back in history. It makes about as much sense as thinking that Dead Zone was a comment on 2016 republicans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 04:28
|
|
|
you guys are all talking about the movie carmody.....in the book shes a weird backwoods maine bloodline tracksuit lady. her bible quotes are the same kind of apocalyptic but her tone is less reverent, its a much more nuanced and interesting character in the details......the movie one is good because marcia gay harden owns the role.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 05:45
|
|
|
shes owns an antique shop where she sells off old family heirlooms, thats her backstory. shes been quietly stewing in misery over her total failure to justify her bloodline until the apocalypse happens and she figures its her destiny to lead. pretty interesting imo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 05:47
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:This is ridiculous. The mist was published in 1980. In 1976 most of the Christian right had supported Carter for being a born again Christian, and evangelical Christians were more closely associated with southern Democrats than Republicans. Here's an article from June 1980 still talking about evangelicals supporting Reagan as a possibility (as opposed to an obvious thing): any coherent evaluation of the Christian right's role in politics in the 1970s will show their support for Carter to be largely an anomaly, bracketed on either side with evangelical support for right-wing politicians. you're implying that they voted carter into office and then remained, i guess liberal? or apolitical at best? until reagan's election, which is not true. here's a fuller retrospective of their role: quote:The brief resurgence of progressive evangelicalism in the mid-1970s helped propel Carter to the White House. But almost immediately another group of evangelicals, who eventually coalesced into a movement known as the Religious Right, began agitating to deny Carter, their fellow evangelical, a second term. emphasis mine. you're forgetting that evangelicals, mobilized by figures like Falwell, helped push the democrats to defeat in the 1978 midterm elections. by the time King is writing the Mist they're clearly not on the side of the angels, and haven't been for some time. joepinetree posted:Not to mention that King himself has written several times about how he became more liberal over time. while this is true, i'm not aware of anything to suggest that king was ever not liberal; afaik he's a lifelong democrat, so i'm not really sure how this is relevant. scary ghost dog posted:shes owns an antique shop where she sells off old family heirlooms, thats her backstory. shes been quietly stewing in misery over her total failure to justify her bloodline until the apocalypse happens and she figures its her destiny to lead. pretty interesting imo. see this is better, this is good imo
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
book carmody would still be better if, like movie carmody, there were more hints that she's completely right and only the sin-laden atheistic souls of the grocery store survivors kept them from seeing that
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 05:59
|
|
|
moths posted:Maybe you forget conservatives cheerleading wars, celebrating the murder of Trayvon Martin, condoning nazi rallies under the pretense of free speech, or any of the thousand other atrocities that have come to define conservatism in 2018. Actually it's leftists that are bad, see: gulags, Venezuela and antifa.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 06:18
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:any coherent evaluation of the Christian right's role in politics in the 1970s will show their support for Carter to be largely an anomaly, bracketed on either side with evangelical support for right-wing politicians. you're implying that they voted carter into office and then remained, i guess liberal? or apolitical at best? until reagan's election, which is not true. here's a fuller retrospective of their role: You cherry-picked a sentence out of an article that clearly does not support your claim. Moral Majority wasn't even founded until 1979, and by far the region with the most evangelicals was the south, still mostly democratic at that point. Pat Robertson endorsed Carter. Billy Graham was close friends with LBJ, and evangelicals hated Goldwater. The emergence of evangelicals as a reliably republican voter group is directly tied to the success of the southern strategy. The idea that a character in a book that came out in 1980 was about political tribalism is absurd and ahistoric. The idea that this was a democrat intentionally trying to stereotype and mock republicans when 1980 was the first time there was something like an explicit evangelical political group tied to republicans is you trying to project the current balance of power and the certainty of equating one with the other. In the late 70s republicans had greater trust in science than democrats, so the idea that he was writing this because his liberal reader base would automatically associate Carmody with the opposite side is obviously nonsense http://www.asanet.org/sites/default/files/savvy/images/journals/docs/pdf/asr/Apr12ASRFeature.pdf And what is particularly puzzling about the insistence in this is that it's not like King hasn't written about religion extensively. The Stand is his "tale of Dark Christianity," he claims that the part about the pastor in Revival is semi-autobiographical, and so on. And the obvious explanation here isn't that King is some uber-democrat trying to make fun of conservatives by making the religious figure a loon. As King has said many times in interviews: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/stephen-king-the-rolling-stone-interview-191529/ quote:My view is that organized religion is a very dangerous tool that’s been misused by a lot of people. I grew up in a Methodist church, and we went to services every Sunday and to Bible school in the summer. We didn’t have a choice. We just did it. So all that stuff about childhood religion in Revival is basically autobiographical. But as a kid, I had doubts. When I went to Methodist youth fellowship, we were taught that the Catholics were all going to go to hell because they worship idols. So right there, I’m saying to myself, “Catholics are going to go to hell, but my aunt Molly married a Catholic and she converted and she’s got 11 kids and they’re all pretty nice and one of them’s my good friend – they’re all going to go to hell?” I’m thinking to myself, “This is bullshit.” And if that’s bullshit, how much of the rest of it is bullshit? So, once again, the idea that he made Carmody the way she was because he was trying to make fun of conservatives as a tribal liberal in 1980 is ridiculous. I mean, you want to think that, go right ahead, because it is so absurd that it's not worth spending any more time on this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 08:27
|
|
|
Mrs. Carmody Did Nothing Wrong
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
Finished The Long Walk and really really loving enjoyed it. When I was a kid I had read a ton of Stephen King but never that one. Absolutely amazing book.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 03:06
|
|
|
Flaggy posted:Finished The Long Walk and really really loving enjoyed it. When I was a kid I had read a ton of Stephen King but never that one. Absolutely amazing book. Yea it really is great. Still holding out hope they make it a movie some day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 15:16
|
|
|
Long Walk and Running Man are still my all-time favourite SK books. Both of them I had to read in single sittings. Literally couldn't stop and put the book down until I was done. A properly done Running Man or Long Walk would be great movies. The only issues I can think of off hand would be the ending of Running Man, and showing pre-teens being graphically gunned down by US soldiers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
I feel like there's been buzz about a Long Walk film forever, but someone did make this rad animation with embarrassingly bad voice acting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 02:21
|
|
|
I started my first Stephen King novel last week and I want all these hicks to die slow and painful deaths, especially Junior. Barbie is a-OK. e: This is Under the Dome.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
buglord posted:I started my first Stephen King novel last week and I want all these hicks to die slow and painful deaths, especially Junior. Barbie is a-OK. I've read almost everything but that (started it) The TV show just sort of came along and whisked away my hope of enjoying it
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
How in the hell do you choose Under The Dome as your first King book? Did you find it left on your porch or something?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
buglord posted:I started my first Stephen King novel last week and I want all these hicks to die slow and painful deaths, especially Junior. Barbie is a-OK. i have bad news.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
All the regular Stephen King novels sound like they take place in some lame dark castle or something. A modern city being covered in a dome randomly felt like it would be a unique story. Also I'm just barely starting to read fiction recreationaly. I read a ton of nonfiction. So yeah this book has a lot riding on it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
Inspector 34 posted:How in the hell do you choose Under The Dome as your first King book? Did you find it left on your porch or something? Geez they're probably getting a visit from the library policeman next 
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
buglord posted:All the regular Stephen King novels sound like they take place in some lame dark castle or something. A modern city being covered in a dome randomly felt like it would be a unique story. Also I'm just barely starting to read fiction recreationaly. I read a ton of nonfiction. youll be frustrated by how fictional it is but imo its the best allegory hes written.....if u want a good stephen king story that doesnt have a lame setting like a dark castle try out: firestarter, apt pupil, or misery
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
buglord posted:All the regular Stephen King novels sound like they take place in some lame dark castle or something. A modern city being covered in a dome randomly felt like it would be a unique story. Also I'm just barely starting to read fiction recreationaly. I read a ton of nonfiction. Don't let that one turn you off of King. He's got a ton of different works. I liked Under the Dome, but it did drag a bit. If you're looking for a small town that gets hosed up, and UtD doesn't do it for you, try Salem's Lot or The Tommyknockers. Both excellent books about a town that get rocked to hell and back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
buglord posted:All the regular Stephen King novels sound like they take place in some lame dark castle or something. A modern city being covered in a dome randomly felt like it would be a unique story. Also I'm just barely starting to read fiction recreationaly. I read a ton of nonfiction. Along with the King recommendations people are making, his short story/novella collections are pretty much all worth reading. Different Seasons is a really good one, and 3 of the 4 stories in it are in grounded, real world settings. If you don't like castles, I will recommend against reading Eyes of the Dragon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Geez they're probably getting a visit from the library policeman next Yeah I maybe came across a little harsher than I intended. I was mostly surprised a person ended up with UTD when there are so, so many iconic books to choose from. Just kinda weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
under the dome was fine
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Geez they're probably getting a visit from the library  "poleethman"Overwatch Porn posted:under the dome was fine Sure, until you get to that godawful ending.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2018 01:58
|
|
|
under the dome is okay until it becomes pretty bad, and then its pretty bad until it becomes terrible
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2018 03:08
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:youll be frustrated by how fictional it is but imo its the best allegory hes written.....if u want a good stephen king story that doesnt have a lame setting like a dark castle try out: firestarter, apt pupil, or misery There's a lot of King books without a "lovely setting". Geez, that's the least of his issues as a writer. Chrsitine, Cujo, The Stand, Dead Zone, The Mist, Shawshank, 11/23/63, Long Walk, IT, Pet Semetary, Joyland, Delores Claiborne...none of these suffer from the setting at all. Come to think of it, I'd say he's rather GOOD at establishing a setting for the most part.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:15 |
|
|
I'm just trying to think of a book of his that actually is set in a 'dark castle' and drawing a blank, apart from Eyes of the Dragon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2018 12:08
|
|
