You know how I was recently talking about running out of Stephen King books? Well, now it’s actually happened. I’m sure he’s still writing something, but there are no more plans floating around in the world for when the next one will come out. I have read an entire canon.[1] This particular book is his take on the big time travel questions, like “What would happen if you went back in time and killed Hitler?” or “What if you killed your own grandfather before he met your grandmother?”[2] or, predictably in the specific case of 11/22/63, “What if you saved Kennedy?”
Naturally, of course, the book proceeds to be only partially about that. Mostly, it’s about an (only slightly nostalgia-tinged) trip through the late ’50s and early ’60s filled with the same ratios of horrible and wonderful people that exist everywhen and with the consequences of impossible choices. What King gets right (really, what I think he always gets right and is least appreciated for) is the characters. They are always painfully honest and painfully real. Nobody, not even the wifebeater who apparently[3] shot the President, comes off as irredeemable. And nobody, not even the man who plans to give up five years of his life just on the odds that he can prevent the assassination and that doing so might make the world better, is faultless. Typing it out, that sounds trivial and necessary in any worthwhile story, but I guess I am more talking about the unflinching way he portrays the horribleness that lurks in the best people and the basic decency and love that exists in the very worst people.
What he gets wrong? I mean, obviously I’m going to trust his historical research, because I don’t have that kind of time. The other things are towards the end of the book and are pretty subjective. Also, due to their placement, they are spoilers, but I still want to talk about them, so see you in the first comment!
[1] The most trivial of internet research has revealed the preceding statements to be untrue. But after April? Nothing.
[2] Why would you do that? That’s stupid.
[3] No spoilers!
Seriously, these are pretty big spoilers. Don’t read the comment unless you mean it.
Thing 1: there are facts Jake uncovers in 2012 about Sadie’s stalking that simply don’t add up. How could anybody have been warned to watch out for the guy? Why would he have cut her without someone on the other end of the phone call? Most importantly, are these actually missteps, or are they evidence of an even stronger harmony among events than Jake ever believed? If so, he clearly didn’t notice them himself, but I’m okay with that.
Thing 2: this isn’t a misstep per se, but I have not yet decided how I feel about the very strong (and unnecessary to the achievement of an otherwise identical plot outcome) implicit endorsement of predestination. The thing is, that could be me having a fundamental disagreement with the author, or it could be intentional horror that also goes against his beliefs instead. There’s not much horror to this book, but what there is exists wholly in the earthquakes and the discordant harmonic ripples from the sky.
lalalalal squinting my eyes so I dont have to read the comment lalalalala
is it worth reading? Where on the scale is it? I’ve avoided reading it because time traveling King just… ugh. I don’t know.
It is definitely solid. I have almost no problem with the time-traveling part, I thought he handled it very well.
It was not as good as his town books (‘Salem’s Lot, It, Needful Things, Under the Dome (and The Stand, if you squint just right on the “town” part)), but as good as any of the other standalone books. I did not mind the end, but I would understand if people *did* complain about it; in any case, it was uniquely suited to tell a good story even if you didn’t like the end, ’cause, time travel works that way!
Sacrilege, I know, but I just didn’t really like Salem’s Lot. Which is weird, considering how much I like the character from that book that later shows up in DT. I honestly don’t really like most of his “Town” books. Needful Things is alright at times, I like the parts where each person gets their own “needful thing”, but I think it’s mostly just tiresome. I do love It and The Stand. Under the Dome is infuriating mostly because he writes the bad/evil characters SO WELL that it just makes me want to scream.
In the scope of things, I think I prefer his books that are less of an ensemble cast and more focusing on a few central characters. Is that the case with this book? I mean, I’ll probably read it regardless. I read The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon, for gods sake.
That actually works out well for you then, I tend to love the town-like books, and thought this one was pretty good for not being one. It definitely focuses on several main characters (probably 3-5 main, 5-10 secondary, and almost none of them omnipresent).
Screaming at the too-perfect evil people? Man do I ever understand.
The main character, at one point, recommends The Lincoln Hunters to the reader, which is an actual book and is a very quick, entertaining read.
A time travel book recommended by a character in a time travel book. So meta!
Huh, I either missed or forgot that before I finished (or spaced it because I didn’t know it was a real book). I will note it down now, though!
Pingback: Shards of Delirium » John Dies at the End