Skimom, I'm curious but after re-reading it a couple months ago, I honestly can't think of anything overly dirty, dark or gross about The Regulators that stands out when compared to other SK books. Yeah it was gritty and there was a lot of violence but I can't think of many of his books that don't have some of that.
.
I wouldn't presume to answer for anyone else ... and I think you may rest assured that
Skimom will answer for herself, but for my money, what is "dirty, dark and gross" about
The Regulators has nothing to do with anything that happens in the actual story.
The Regulators is about what we perceive.
That is why it takes place somewhere we are expected to recognize.
That is why it posits serenity in that place . . . and why the word "why" is in this sentence three times.
That is why, when things start to go wrong -- and keep going wrong -- most of the people who inhabit this "wrong" place will not admit that anything at all is (or could ever be) wrong.
I don't like this story.
I mean . . . I like it for how it teaches me about stories . .. what they can do . . . and how what they can do influences how I think about things that go beyond the stories, themselves.
But I don't like what happens in this story.
It's wrong.
And not wrong the way Pennywise . . . or Flagg . . . or ... even that overblown Crimson King himself is wrong.
It's wrong in a more fundamental way; a way that we should more readily recognize .. . but don't.
Most people on this forum would not argue with the fact that Mr. King is a genius.
But I wonder -- so I do -- how many of us could articulate clearly, why we say it is so.
I can't.
And this story is a good example of why I can't.