Books 6 and 7 and Sai King (Spoilers!)

[Grrl]

I loved the series, but had a bit of a problem with the author's presence in the last couple of books. When they first go to find him, I was upset because up until that point, I was really wrapped up in the story...once Sai King starts showing up, I felt like the author was calling way too much attention to the fact that this is a story. I don't like being reminded of that while I'm reading - it makes it hard for me to immerse myself fully in the world that is being created.

He talks about this in the afterword - he says he generally hates this, and finds it pretentious. I had to agree with this assessment, though I can kind of see why he did it given his explanation. But pretentiousness wasn't really my issue with his presence in the books. He wrote in On Writing that the author should not be intruding into the story - and he was talking there about dialog attribution, much more subtle stuff than what he does in The Dark Tower.

[GNTLGNT]

I appreciate and understand your viewpoint, but I was at the other end of the spectrum-I enjoyed how he deftly handled the intrusiveness of his own persona, and it didn't ruin it for me a lick-as a matter of fact, I laughed out loud at what a doofus he made himself appear to be...but that's the beauty of this board-we can agree to disagree and still enjoy the ride....

[Pucker]

From my perspective, the thing had swallowed its own tail to such an extent by the time the scribe injected himself into that I just leaned back, chuckled and kept going.

It will be interesting, one day, to see how my perspective might have changed in the interim -- it's been many, many years since I've read the saga back-to-front -- but there was a very clear line of demarcation for me (right around Topeka, as I recall) where the whole thing went from a fanciful, intriguing fantasy to an ego-centric exercise in testing the limits of convolution.

Of course, that's just me.

I'm a notrious picker of nits.

[bluesology]

I felt like the author was calling way too much attention to the fact that this is a story. I don't like being reminded of that while I'm reading - it makes it hard for me to immerse myself fully in the world that is being created.

I actually felt the complete opposite. I enjoy the notion that all of his books exist somewhere as part of some larger macroverse - with King at the center of it as an almost unknowing creative force. Also, in my opinion, it really is the best explanation as to why characters from other King books appear throughout the series.

[Dashex88]

I liked it as well, when his name first came up, i think it was in the cave with Callahan finding Salem's lot . I was like . i thought It was so out there and cool. I had absolutely no idea what was gonna happen next in the story and i like stories like that where i can never predict the plot and Stevie is really good at providing surprises like that.

[AndyDufresne]

I think that, if Sai King can (and is encouraged to, especially here on this forum) use characters from one novel in another, then I don't see a huge difference between that and using a version of himself in those novels. It wasn't as if it was a cameo or something, I think that would have been disturbing. But here, he integrates himself (and the accident) in the plot, and also paints a not so flattering light of himself. Must have been difficult to write for him.

[JohnDalglish]

the whole thing went from a fanciful, intriguing fantasy to an ego-centric exercise in testing the limits of convolution.

Of course, that's just me.

I'm a notrious picker of nits.

Hi,

Mmmm, so you are.

I disagree.

Strongly.

Long days and pleasant nights

[jellydonut25]

Spoiler heavy post, for those who haven't read the books yet.


i'm on my second read-through of the series and while I had no problem with the way King handles the character of Steven King, I do agree that the way Book 7 is written is a bit disappointing.

the story is fantastic, and possibly one of the best ever, but i'm not a huge fan of the author always butting in and saying "see this, see it well" or "i want you to look over here for a moment" or "let's not concern ourselves with that"

i've been feeling, while reading book 7, that King (the real person) holds at least one major similarity to king (the character):
the attitude, when getting to the end of "let's just finish it, already". IMHO, a few too many things are glossed over and neglected and TOLD to us rather than SHOWN to us in Book 7. there could have been another book there (sheemie's death, ted/susannah/dinky under the dogan, more with walter, etc), but it feels like King just wanted to get to the end, unfortunately.

it becomes especially exacerbating when you consider (as many do) the DT series as 'one' book...if thats the case, then he drops one of his major villain characters for over 1000 pgs before bringing him back for a handful of pages and killing him off


i love the series, but there are some definite points of frustration at times, to be sure.

[jellydonut25]

Steven King

don't know where my brain was at on this one...

[bluesology]

"Show, don't tell" is one of those classic workshop notes that everyone gets - because I think it's possible to make that criticism about just about anything. I think it's really subjective to say when you are being "told" something or if you are being "shown" something. In terms of DT7 - the scene where the group is listening to Ted's recordings and the afterword (before Roland climbs the Tower) are all I can think of as being overtly expository in its presentation. I think that the last three books - taken in whole present a satisfying and well paced ending to the saga.

And while I get the disappointment over Walter's demise, it is a pretty common narrative technique where the villain who is kind of full of him or herself finds out too late that they aren't actually as powerful as they once thought. And I would also argue that if Walter was dropped from the story for over 1000 pages, then maybe he wasn't really that major of a villain.