Had the strangest dream this morning, there on the sofa. I dreamt that my wife never existed (it wasn't a specific thought, it was more like I went along a different course in my life - stay tuned and I'll explain), and that I had been married to my ex-girlfriend (who wasn't exactly my ex-girlfriend from real life and - well, like a million years ago now it seems). And this girl and I had a baby together. And for some reason, she flaked out and I ended up with the little kid. We were living at the apartment I grew up on Valhalla Drive. With my mom. It was a strange dream. The details are fuzzy, but the emotion was sad, and confused.
I suppose it was another anxiety dream of some sort. Especially because, when it woke me up, I wasn't sure where I was or even who I was for certain. It didn't help matters that I was sleeping on the sofa downstairs, with the TV still going quietly to itself, and all the lights on. And sunlight streaming through the downstairs window. Semi-unfamiliar surroundings, you see. Not what I would have expected, seeing as it was 7:45 in the AM.
So I got up and went up to the church house to do some cleaning, as I had promised a week or so back. And then I came home, and since I'd already been industrious this day, I decided to keep it up and rake up some of the leaves on the back lawn. Good thing too, as underneath the pile left when my wife and her nice friend did it a few weeks back (before that good first snow) was turning sickly yellow.
And then I came in, took a shower (I needed it) and here I sit, blathering on about my day so far. I should knock it off and get to the review (which I wrote previously and just haven't gotten around to posting yet). This was actually the book I saved to read around Halloween time. I read it the week of Halloween, and wrote the bulk of the review shortly afterward. But things kept me busy and I haven't posted it up till now.
So here it is already. Hope your day is a good one.
 |
| 1979 hard cover of The Dead Zone. / Source: Amazon.com |
The Dead Zone, by Stephen King
From the book’s cover:
John Smith awakens from an interminable coma with an accursed power-the power to see the future and the terrible fate awaiting mankind in...the dead zone.
Synopsis:
John Smith has an accident while out skating on the ice as a kid. Little does he know that this is a catalyst that will change his entire life. An innate ability to see into past and future - the second sight, some would call it - resides within him, and this accident is the key that will someday put him on that cliched "path of destiny."
Smith has another accident in his twenties, and this one causes him to be in a coma for four and a half years. He emerges from the coma with his "second sight" has gone from occasional intuition to full-blown extra-sensory perception. When he touches the attending nurse, he knows that her son's pending medical procedure on his eyes will turn out ok. When he touches his doctor, he knows that the man's mother did not die during the Nazi occupation of Poland in World War II, but instead is living in California.
And it gets worse. One day, John Smith shakes hands with a crooked politician, and his life will never be the same. He sees the man's future intertwined with that of the fate of millions. Horrible war, massive death, and only Smith can stop it. It poses an old question: if you knew that a bad man - the oft used example being Adolf Hitler - would do the things he eventually did, would you have the courage to risk your life to stop him? And could you kill him, knowing that he had not done the terrible things you have seen in his future? At least not yet.
 |
| The author, Stephen King. / Source: Examiner.com |
What I liked about it:
The research in this one is good. Set in the late 1970s (the same period in which King wrote it), the footwork is clear here. The Dead Zone has a lot of connection to the immediate past, present and near future (of the time, that is). The days of Watergate, the issues that swirled through American politics at that time, and the feeling of authenticity is there. Of course, that is easy enough when you are writing in your own time and people read it thirty years later.
But even still, it seems that King did his homework. For example, as compared to Carrie, which was written five years prior (and happens to be the last Stephen King book I reviewed, and so is easy to contrast with in my memory) The Dead Zone is in many ways superior. Then again, you might say this is somewhat subjective, as some of King's better early works also came in that intervening five year period, such as Salem's Lot, The Shining, and The Stand. I guess what I'm getting at is that when The Dead Zone and Carrie are compared side by side, you can see the growth he made as a writer in those years.
My last point would be that I find the whole idea of addressing such a question as what a person would do if they could predict a leader's horrible actions that led to untold destruction and death to be pretty cool. And King did it with style. The way Smith's touch seems to draw from the person and affect them in a mirror way to how Smith is affected when he sees into them... spooky. The Dead Zone is not as much a "horror" tale as some of King's other works, per-se. The subject matter is more mature, but there is less random violence and gore than some of his other writings. The book is almost what modern readers might call a "thriller."
The intro to the TV series based on King's novel.
What I didn’t like about it:
Well, I know it is thinly veiled irony, but the name choice of "John Smith" is a bit off-key. You can say what you like, but to me, I found it so bland as to be almost a place-holder, at first. But let me make it clear, this is just my take on it, and is not a matter of any great concern. Just a small thing I felt early on when reading the book. It doesn't hurt the story, but it made it seem a bit silly in the beginning. Yes, you could say I am making mountains of mole-hills, but let me assure you that it was only a passing annoyance. After the first third of the book - especially after our protagonist is in his car accident - the name stops being noticeable for its banality.
The only other significant gripe I had concerned Smith's relationship with Sara, his would-be girlfriend when he gets in his accident. The two were close to having a romantic tryst before Johnny's car accident, and then after he wakes up, she has moved on and is married and has a son. And then they go and have a very brief affair. It's not gratuitous, but the fact that King included it was not good for me. I don't know.
I guess I could change this by saying that what I saw when King put this whole affair with Sara thing into the story was that he might someday shake hands with Sara's husband, who is a nice guy, and discover that he is the one who will cause the coming cataclysm. That would be a tough situation. Not only the stuff that King already addresses in the book would be there, but then his feelings for Sara, her feelings for him, the husband... And how often do nice characters end up being the ones who start World War III, huh? That would be an interesting plot twist.
I'm not saying the book didn't work as it was written. The ending, which I'll save for those willing to read the book or cheat by looking it up on Wikipedia, works out just fine. It solves the moral question and saves the day (now you knew the day would be saved, didn't you?). But the foreshadowing could have gone a different way, and I wouldn't have minded being right on it. Then again, I don't mind being right all that often. Call me a snob. Go ahead, I don't mind. I've been called worse.
 |
| Christopher Walken played John Smith in the 1983 film adaptation of the novel. Maybe I might watch that one, if Walken was in it. / Source: StyleForum.net |
What I learned, if anything:
Not particularly applicable in this case. More praise for King, more comments on how much I have to learn before I feel adequate as a writer of my own merit. You know the drill, if you've read my stuff before.
Oh, one aside on this point. It is always nice for me, as a historian, to read a perspective on a time period from someone who is writing about it while being "in the moment." King is writing about his day, and the angle you get on it from reading The Dead Zone is good. You can write about the past and do a good job, you can research the heck out of it and sound convincing, but unless you write what you know, and then get the chance to review it at some future date, you can't always perfectly reproduce a period of time so distinctly. That's my take on it.
Recommendation:
This is recommended reading for those who think King is too much of a "horror" writer. As I mentioned, it lacks some of his other works' gruesomeness. Sure, it has mature material, but it is pretty tame when compared to some other things I've read from him. And thought provoking too. How would you handle being able to see things that others didn't, and what would it make you do?
Learn more about The Dead Zone, by Stephen King, on Amazon.com
The parting comment:
 |
| Source: LolSnaps.com |
A biology teacher without a sense of humor. Now that's a contradiction in terms if I ever heard it. I'd have given a bonus point for creativity.
A two-for on parting comments today.
No comments:
Post a Comment
We're pleased to receive your comments, but the author does check submissions before attaching them to the blog. See, it's only theoretically a free country in here...