It Book ReviewEb Book Review
E flat by Stephen King
A while ago, the bright (or white) minds who had been posted at various colleges agreed that a popular novel is no longer a popular name. Each year fewer and fewer important works are inscribed. It would be good if the author included a certain "aesthetic dignity" by making so many references and links to other earlier works of fiction - that is, he was conscious.
At least as long as these white men are alive. Obviously, readers are not supposed to appreciate the work of value, not to speak of the joy of work - no one is reading any more, the sages would say; folks are reading garbage like Danielle Steel when Bold & Beautiful isn't on TV.
Who' s work is adored by tens of thousand who? Is there any way these guys could be learning from this? That' s just not possible - the white minds mumble in agreement - that' s just not possible! You ask those who know! Authors have been criticised before - especially Twain and Dickens - and yet their work is still widely enjoyed and appreciated by whole families of consumers.
Well, I mean, I mean, people die. I mean, books don't. Nobody is concerned about the boys' association of writers who cry out words of anger from the Ivory Tower instead of assisting men to help them grasp the pleasure of literacy, comprehension and faith. Classifying it as a "horror" tale is the same as saying that "Moby Dick" is a very long handbook about whale hunting.
Though fragile and fragile, two elements that make them ideal sacrifices, kids have a power that most grownups have forfeited in the agonizing maturation phase - the power of lust. King puts it, "That's the distinction between men and boys". Throughout his entire carreer King has portrayed kids, and his kids' figures later grew older with his own kids.
Kindheit braves the times; a date can last forever, and the summer is inexhaustible. Kids also possess another priceless asset that most grown-ups try to capture, and it still trickles through their hands, like sand: getting by. Kids see the passage of it differently, not because they actually find it slower (that would indeed be a nice thing), but because they have a completely different attitude to an ordinary grown-up.
The majority of grown-ups are obliged to work and take car of their family, including their descendants. Her fantasy is clouded by the innumerable working hour, and for most she never really comes back.... the disillusions of adventure drive her further down into the dungeon of the spirit, until we eventually lose sight of the fact that she was there at all.
When they were kids, the eyes see with 20/20 serenity. It is the task of the imagination author, or the horrific author, to blow up the wall of this Tunnelblick for a little while; to offer a mighty show for the third eyel. Phantasy horn writer's mission is to make you a kid again for a while.
The majority of kids have more than a few grown-ups on a holiday their whole lives long; they have their valuable virginity, they have not been corrupted by work, tax, bill and other things that each of us has to struggle with at some point in our lives. Kids do more and see more because they can; when they finish primary and secondary education, the days belong to them.
By taking short pauses for home work and assignments, kids can play with their valuable buddies all afternoon, and sometimes the line between the actual and the imaginable becomes thin, sometimes they disappear completely. "IT " is the narrative of a group of kids who are not the most loved, powerful or intelligent; a narrative about the group of seven of our best friend who lived in Derry, Maine in 1958.
A self-proclaimed "loser" team, they meet a terrible, powerful power that lurks in their home town.... a power that feeds on anxiety and devours small kids. It is a power that grown-ups do not seem to see; a power that looks like a buffoon that holds a handful of balloons. All seven kids have one thing in common: they found IT.
You were confronted with terrorism as kids. This was their custom and they succeeded in fighting it. First is the 1958 tale, where we met the kids and first encountered IT; King effortlessly interweaves this line of times with the 1985 tale, where the grown-ups returned to Derry to fight IT, based on research on the topic and its recurring recollections.
When there is one thing that puts him above most other authors, it is certainly his great understanding of youth. It is undeniably the difficult period of adulthood - schools, tyrants, mothers, first destruction - they are all here, and the readers feel as if they were there. I was not there in 1958, but if I was, I would no doubt be one of the young ones.
It' really an amazing reading as King constructs his personalities and the way they work. Above all, however, it is a tale about boyhood and friendship: how it irreversibly connects and influences people's life. It is a survey of kids who face the weird and overcome their greatest fear: the anxiety of being alone in awe.
It' a tale of seven boyfriends, each different, each essential and essential. In the past King has proved able to produce an apocalyptic tale (The Status in 1978), but I think IT equals or even exceeds the history of the scourge. He knows the way around the corner; and has this indefinable look into the eyes, the dreary look of a kid.
What if it is the work of an "inadequate writer", a manufacturer of "Penny Dreadfuls", without any "aesthetic value" or other high-pitched gossip from those who most likely want to send Stephen King and his readership to hell because they have destroyed the picture of the "literary reader"?