Customer Reviews

Imagining the Worst: Stephen King and the Representation of Women (Contributions to the Study of Popular Culture)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

As co-editor of this collection, I feel one correction needs to be made in previous comments. No article in the book claims King wrote "Halloween" or "Friday the 13th." The article that makes reference to these works simply compares King's works to these. While I don't claim this collection is particularly impressive overall, I do know that at the time it was collected almost nothing had been said critically about King as an icon of American horror fiction. Since then, I've found my own essay grossly misrepresented in other scholarly works--I've been accused of not understanding feminism at all. Very interesting, and I suspect the author of that claim hadn't read any of my article much less any of the others. However, I do hope that feminism has developed beyond the attack-without-logic approach of previous critical generations by now and future scholars will actually read carefully the essays collected. If, after careful reading, critics disagree, I welcome the disagreements. I am not sure, more than a decade after publication, that I still agree with the "me" that wrote at that time. Still, groundbreaking is still rough work no matter how inadequate the first shovelful might be. King is an uneven author, as are his critics. Some works are worth reading, others are not. This collection is equally uneven, and both editors knew this as the volume progressed. But we accomplished what we set out to do: we opened a discussion of the critical merit of King's work. I suspect he is the Edgar Allen Poe of the twentieth century, and another hundred years will demonstrate his overall impact.

First of all, Stephen King didn't write "Holloween" (as the moron who wrote the book review spelled it) and he didn't write Friday The 13th. Did the person who wrote this book even read any of what he's wrote? Or is she just talking out her behind?

I feel that this book has been grossly misread. First I think it is necessary to note that films such as Halloween and Friday the 13th are not credited as King's work. Both films are mentioned twice, once the genre that King is a part of and again as a part of the slasher genre.

I found the works in this text to be incredibly fascinating. I did not agree with all the theories presented in all the essays, but rarely does one come across an entire book of theories that they will wholly agree with. Indeed, some seem downright absurd. But the refreshful and often insightful essays written by these authors are a welcome change from the usual high-brow rhetoric that one comes across all too often when wading through literary criticism.

The bias toward feminism is present, and it can't be denied. But as this texts is a selection of essays about women, it is not shocking to find feminist theories and ideas in the roots of these works.

Considering that the topic of women in King's work is a fascinating subject to me, perhaps that's why I found this text so intriguing. Obviously it must be read with a critical eye to avoid any misinterpretations.

It is obvious that the authors wouldn't know a King book if it fell on them. Complete and total trash, not worth the paper it's printed on.

Not EVERYman agrees with King's views of the situation. I may be in the minority, but I fully agree with the findings of these Editors, basing my full agreement on the work of James Hillman, a genuine Champion of Soul, who aptly wrote that "Hades (I add Hekate, the Mother) is not a monster; the Ego is." But, not to worry, Stephanie Queen is not mocked :).