Charlie Rhodes

**Nilloc** · September 28th, 2009

First off, sorry if this is a dumb question.

About a week ago, I finished 'Salem's Lot and I had a question about the character Charlie Rhodes (I think that's the correct spelling). Basically, what was the point of this character? I only remember him being seen about three times throughout the whole novel and I never felt as if he really added anything to the story.

All I remember him doing is: Kicking some kids off his bus, showing up at Danny Glick's funeral, and being attacked by the kid-vampires on his bus.

Am I just completley missing something here?

Perhaps Stephen King had something else in mind for the character when he began writing The Lot, but then changed his mind and gave Rhodes a much more minor role?

**Gillie** · September 29th, 2009

I loved it when he got his from the kids on the bus.

What goes around comes around.

**wally wonder** · September 29th, 2009

dunno, Nilloc, perhaps something to do w/the attitude of the time, the attitude of the town. isn't the situation w/rhodes like to many of the other interactions of the other characters? one character feels like someone dooms on him/her, gets dead, gets revenge.
how many times does that happen? seems like all the newly dead are recently wed to revenge, revenge on those who they feel took on crap on their b-day cake. no bluebird of happiness for them, no. so charlie rhodes is only one among many and perhaps that is the point? i dunno. what do you think?

**bopropadop** · September 30th, 2009

Originally Posted by Nilloc

I had a question about the character Charlie Rhodes (I think that's the correct spelling). Basically, what was the point of this character?

It didn't strike me the same way. True, he was a lesser character, but I thoroughly enjoyed his sub-story and found it appropriate that the kids came back to pay him a visit, particularly in the bus where he caused them so much angst.

**michal** · September 30th, 2009

I think the point of this character as many others in this novel was to cast a whole small-town community. After all, you could just as easily asked what is the point of characters like Shirley,the Boddin parents, Harriet and Lester Durham and numerous others. I believe it was done for style and atmosphere and Mr. King said once that he did it in two occasions - Salem's Lot and The Stand (two of my favorites actually). You can find a complete list of this book characters at http://www.stephenking.com/library/n...haracters.html and see how many of them are there.

**Breger3** · October 19th, 2009

Originally Posted by michal

I think the point of this character as many others in this novel was to cast a whole small-town community. After all, you could just as easily asked what is the point of characters like Shirley,the Boddin parents, Harriet and Lester Durham and numerous others. I believe it was done for style and atmosphere and Mr. King said once that he did it in two occasions - Salem's Lot and The Stand (two of my favorites actually). You can find a complete list of this book characters at http://www.stephenking.com/library/n...haracters.html and see how many of them are there.

I agree, and those are two of my favorites as well. I like all the "little" players, it adds more depth, makes it more real to me, and it's easier to imagine it happening in your neck of the woods.

**Aarny** · October 22nd, 2009

Just some comeuppance from the kids.

**fredo** · October 23rd, 2009

I know he made a great Vampire. A little evil to start with.

**aeroplane** · January 28th, 2010

Originally Posted by michal

I think the point of this character as many others in this novel was to cast a whole small-town community. After all, you could just as easily asked what is the point of characters like Shirley,the Boddin parents, Harriet and Lester Durham and numerous others. I believe it was done for style and atmosphere and Mr. King said once that he did it in two occasions - Salem's Lot and The Stand (two of my favorites actually). You can find a complete list of this book characters at http://www.stephenking.com/library/n...haracters.html and see how many of them are there.

I agree completely.

The entire Griffen family, Corey Bryant, the Sawyer's, Ruthie Crockett, Dud Rogers, the other priest in town (John Groggins) and Glynnis Mayberry didn't have a "point" either.

However, introducing them to the story and then stating what became of them did help to emphasize how bad things had gotten in Salem's Lot.

I suppose the only problem I had with the characters is that a few of them never had a visible outcome. We have to "assume" that a few of the characters such as Bill Norton, Tony Glick, Reggie Sawyer and Homer McCaslin's wife did end up becoming vampires. Because none of those particular characters are actually depicted as having actually died and returned as a vampire.

**tojoro** · April 13th, 2010

That seemed like an opportunity for Steve to have one of those 'EC' moments, (the 50's horror comics he loved as a kid), from a 'mind movie' standpoint, I can see that scene drawn out in panels on the pages of 'Haunt of Fear', where the bitter, mean-spirited townie gets his.
Steve also gave us a little insight into Charlie's mind, what he thought of the kids, etc.
Like other folks have said here, some characters were just quick, broad strokes to flesh out the town's population, and to show how much things were devolving in the lot.