Spark of Inspiration – The Gunslinger

This isn’t going to be so much of a look at the first novel of The Dark Tower series, The Gunslinger. Instead I’m going to get a little more personal about it. I think its safe to say that The Gunslinger really changed me as a writer.

First a quick examination of the novel. This series of stories were written by Stephan King when he was young, around 19 or so. As he points out in his new introduction, there was a zeal to the writing that he doesn’t have in his prose any more. But there is also a lot of stuff a young writer does that just doesn’t add to the story. In 2002 King went back to the work and did some editing and modifying to allow this book to feel more at home in his seven book epic. Reading this version, I have to say it is a smoother read and flows a bit better with the rest of the series. But I grew up with old version, over-elaborate prose and all.

I remember someone recommending the book to me, but I don’t remember who. It was in high school, I wanna say sophomore year or so. I knew King more from the movies based on his work, but I believe I read Cujo and maybe It. Anyway, I thought I knew what I was in for, but man was I blown away.

Here was a world that combined so many disparate elements and yet it all worked. Your main character was a cowboy, cool as the devil and twice as dangerous. He’s travelling across a world that hints at apocalypse. We see ruined machines, and technology. But the people all seem to have stepped out of the 1800’s. They talk funny, a kind of mix between olde west and a formal speech you’d find in a medieval film from the 50’s. Roland, our gunslinger has flashback to his youth, where the cowboys live in castles. There’s a strong sense of the feudal in these memories. The gunslingers world is filled with perils including demons, wizards, mutants and strange technology. Finally there is Jake, a young boy who is pulled into the Gunslinger’s world from ours. When he describes his home we recognize it immediately as a modern city street.

I’d never read a book like it, and the setting and characters just clicked with me. I picked up the rest of the series (up to the third book at the time) and was hooked. This was a classic adventure story with our heroes on the quest, travelling the land and facing all kinds of characters.

Let’s get back to The Gunslinger. Up to the point of reading that book, Tolkien heavily influenced my writing. Lord of the Rings was a focal point as a writer. I loved the depth, the characters and the adventure. All my writing was based around this basic fantasy model. But when I read The Gunslinger I realized that fantasy was just that – fantastic. You could do anything with the characters and world, and if you did it right it would all flow together creating something unique and powerful. C.S. Lewis did something similar with his Chronicles of Narnia, but this being Stephan King was a darker more cynical world – one that H.P. Lovecraft would appreciate. That darkness was what really got to me. There is a melancholy to the series, a tale of endings, which really hits home to me.

I didn’t immediately begin writing fiction in the style of The Dark Tower, I was too in awe of it. But it opened my eyes, and The Gunslinger in particular. It feels more dreamlike than the following books. It ebbs and flows in ways that make sense on a primal level. Even the overwrought prose of the original version adds to this, seeming to create an off kilter feeling. That’s what got me – the feeling of being in a dream. I love dreams and writing and stories that are immersed in them. This was the first book I read that came anywhere close to matching that feel, and while I’ve explored more examples since then, I keep coming back to this book.

It wasn’t till nearly five or six years later that I used The Dark Tower as one of my main influences on my first novel. That story was influenced by so many things spanning Japanese anime to the action film Ronin that it’s kinda funny to read now. But that wide swath of influences and the dark nature of the story is definitely based in The Gunslinger. I even tried a version of the ending of that novel with my main character – having her face a nemesis and receive a revelation at the same time. I read it now and its clunky and not effective at all. But I can see the seeds of the inspiration there.

My dark fantasy fiction has not strayed much since. When I do delve back in, I find elements of King’s work in mine, as well as influences by film maker David Lynch and of course Lovecraft. But I think my characters have gotten a lot better and I’ve created a plot that is more fluid and less locked into its influences than the original. Maybe one day I’ll fee comfortable enough with one of the tales to unleash it on an unwitting public (as Dr. Forrester would say). But for now those dark tales remain mine to polish. I love them, but they aren’t ready yet. But each time I revisit my world it gets a little better.

And so thank you Mr. King for creating a fascinating story and providing a spark of inspiration for my fantasy writing, taking me into a direction I never thought possible and allowing me to see possibilities in my fiction.

Do you have a book or film that really triggered a direction or change in your writing? Do your early attempts to matching it show how much you’ve grown as a writer? Have you read The Gunslinger?

A Different Track – Firestarter

Picked up Stephen King’s “Firestarter” for the first time. I’ve been doing my best over the years to read more of his older work, and I’ve found much of it very entertaining and some of it top notch stuff (“Salem’s Lot” was excellent). “Firestarter” has a lot of good things going for it, and I can recommend it as an above average work by the author.

What I found most interesting is that the novel really isn’t a horror story. It reminded me much more of something you’d find on “The X-files”. It follows a father and daughter on the run from a shadowy government agency that will stop at nothing to obtain them. The father has the ability to psychically persuade people to do his bidding, even going so far as to blind them by telling them “You’re blind”. This ability comes at a cost, doing damage to his brain with each use.

His daughter, Charlie, is more powerful, with the ability to start fires with her mind as well as move objects and even limited telepathy. But she’s only six and can barely control her powers. It becomes obvious early on that the government agents are really after Charlie, because of her potential. The kicker is that Charlie’s parents were both drugged in college by this same agency to test a chemical that would heighten brain activity. Once the scientists realized that not only had this change become permanent, but that it affected the parents genetic code – they see a million uses for this drug as a tool for national security.

The novel was written in the late 70’s and you can feel the disillusion with the government seeping out of every pore in the book. Watergate is mentioned numerous times, and one of the main villains, Rainbird, is a seriously deranged veteran of the Vietnam war. It puts a definite time stamp on the book, but one that could easily be moved to the conspiracy crazed days of the mid and late 90’s or the post 911 world. How eager would any government be to find a way to use these gifts to defend or attack as needed?

Not too long ago I listened to a pod cast that discussed how both the US and USSR experimented with mental abilities during the cold war. According to some, the USSR actually got a few telepaths and precogs to work for them. You can see how an interesting story can develop. I wonder how much of this research came up when King did his work on the book “Carrie”.

It reminded me how much my novels and stories are affected by the times in which they were written. My third novel dealt with virtual reality. Remember when that was all the rage in the late 90’s? Yeah me too. If I ever revisit that novel, I’m gonna have to update that part a bit, along with the references to dial up modems.

Ever read “Firestarter”? What did you think of it? Have you ever read a story that seemed very influenced by the time period it was written and wondered how it would have worked if it was written later or earlier? Have you found a past work you’ve written affected by the times it was written during?

A bit of Inspiration – On Writing

Sometimes we just need a mentor’s kind words to get us going back on track again. And it can pay to have that mentor in a handy dandy book form. One of my mentors is Stephen King. Now I know it may be a bit cliché now, but I’ll tell you what, the man can write and he has millions of readers. You could do worse than study his style and his technique. You should also pick up his view of writing in his book conveniently called “On Writing”.

The first part of the book is something of a biography that gives you an interesting portrait of the man. It covers what he feels are some of his influences and some of the events that shaped the kind of writer he is. It also covers the details of his attempts to crack into the world of publishing and his following success. He gets into his drug addition and his battle to free himself from it. He also talks about the accident that nearly took his life. Frankly it’s pretty straightforward and clear cut, not coming across as indulgent but as a way to give advice about being a writer and telling a good story.

After that he gets into the nuts and bolts of the process itself. He recommends books to use (Strunk and White’s Elements of Style) and gets into his process for creating a story and revising it. Like most writers, he’ll tell you to find your own way of doing things, but he does provide some hard and fast rules that I found very useful. One was to step away from your first draft for a while (a month if you can help it) and come back with a more subjective mind. It does work wonders, you see issues with greater clarity and you also have forgotten some of the really good stuff you put in there.

I see “On Writing” come up quite a bit as a book that most writers recommend to other writers, and I agree. Its like having the man right there helping you along and providing his advice in simple clear terms. King gets to the point and keeps it short. If you’ve never given the book a read, give it a try. Even if you don’t like his advice on writing, his biography is interesting enough to make it worth checking out.

Have you ever read “On Writing”? What did you think of it? Do you have a favorite book or essay from an author about writing? Do you read it from time to time to get you energized about writing?

A Whole Book about Walking – The Long Walk

In some ways Stephen King is a polarizing figure among book readers and writers. Some feel he is completely commercial and writes to please the masses. Others find his work to be among the best of modern storytelling. I dislike extremes, but I have to admit, Stephen King is a very good writer. Nearly every book I’ve read by him, I’ve enjoyed on some level. Some of them are better than others, but most of them keep you reading until the end.

While King is known for his horror work, he’s written plenty of other things. Some of the best adaptation of King’s work to screen come from his non-horror offerings: “Stand by Me” (based of “The Body”), “The Shawshank Redemption”, and “The Green Mile”. In fact one of the books I recommend to King neophytes is “Different Seasons” a combination of four short stories that don’t really have much to do with the supernatural.

My sister recommended “The Long Walk” to me, saying it was another one of King’s different tales. I knew little about it, other than it was written by King when he was using the Richard Bachman pseudonym. The introduction to the book explains King’s view of Bachman and about the alter ego’s untimely death. King says of Bachman “…he’s not a very nice guy.”

What is very interesting about this book is that it shouldn’t work. It has two things going against it. First off, it’s bleak. There is very little humor here and what there is black as the depths of space and nearly as cold. The setting is harsh, grim future – a true dystopia. The tone is hard and unforgiving and it doesn’t let up, not even at the end.

The second strike against it is the subject matter. The basic plot is a publicized game. It seems to be the only game in this future U.S. One hundred teenage boys start walking from a point in Maine heading south. They can not stop, they can not drop below four miles per hour. If they do either, they are warned. After three warnings they are shot. The winner of the game is awarded a fabulous prize. All you have to do is survive.

That’s it. You start off with the main character and follow him all the way through The Long Walk until his end. There is nothing else going on, you don’t get to see anything outside of what the main character experiences, and so you don’t get much background as to why the game was created, how it is promoted and televised, and why anyone would want to participate in such a thing in the first place. You only know that it’s happening and that you are trapped with the main character as it happens.

The thing is, the book works very well. There are two key reasons for this. For me the most important element is the set up. If the first couple chapters don’t grab the reader then they are not going to stay with the book for the long haul. King creates an interesting character with Garraty Davis. He’s someone we can all relate to in a way. If you’ve ever been a teenager then you understand some of what Garraty is going though. You wanna seem smarter than you are. You feel invincible one level and very self conscious on another. You do things on impulse with much though for future consequences. You have something to prove but don’t know what it might be or who you want to prove it to. In a way he reminds me of some of the better drawn teen protagonists of Japanese animation or video games.

Most readers will understand Garraty and as King slowly feeds you more information about the game and what’s happening, your curiosity grows. Garraty obviously knows some things, but his mind isn’t focused on them, instead elements of the game and the dystopian future come out in conversation and internal monologue.

This is the second key to the book. There are elements that are hinted at from the beginning. Why is Garraty involved in the Long Walk? Who is “The Major” and why is he in charge of The Long Walk? Why do some of the boys act the way they do? Each of these points perks your interest and keeps you reading. Garraty finds some of these answers, the readers may have to glean others from Garraty’s reactions and dialogue. Some are never fully revealed. Then of course there are other questions that arise as the book unfolds.

King handles it all very well, and kept me reading even when I questioning the point of the book. It’s so grim and dower, and yet there was something going on at its core, a cold nugget of truth that seemed to elude me. The book made me think, and for most of us writers, if you can get your readers to interact with the book and think about after they’ve shut it – you’ve succeeded. I definitely recommend this for anyone in the mood for something a little different from King, and not afraid to take The Long Walk.

What did you think of “The Long Walk”? You think King is over-rated? Ever read a book that didn’t seem like it should work but because of the writer’s skill, it did?

Killing the "nice guy" - Skeleton Crew: The Mist

It was interesting to read some of Stephen King's older short stories. For one thing, you got a glimpse of his style back in the mid 80's, when King was literally the King of horror. The stories in "Skeleton Crew" range from the 70's and go right up to 1985, when the book was first published. It contains an interesting collection of stories including the reliable monster under the bed tales, a twisted sci-fi romp, a meditation on death and a couple of poems. The mix of stories is solid and keeps you interested in seeing where he's going to go next.

One story in particular made me laugh, only because it was featured in a "Mystery Science Theater" film. It's the tale of a toy monkey that causes death each time he clashes his cymbals. King's story is pretty good, but the movie version is hilarious, and not on purpose. The movie was called "Merlin's Mystical Shop of Magical Wonders" and the monkey story is only part of the fun found within. I found a few of the tales in Skeleton Crew" to feel a bit stretched ("Gramma" feeling way too long for it's simple story), but I could also see hints of King's less horrific side (something that he let shine in his later work and in "Different Seasons").

Probably the best story of the bunch was the first, a novella called "The Mist". Recently this story was made into a feature film, and I can see its appeal. (Just warning you, there are going to be some serious spoilers here). The story starts with a family of three (Mom, Dad and son) enjoying a day in their house by the lake. Dad and son go for a quick trip to the market, and see some strange mist rolling across the lake as they leave. Upon reaching the store, the mist catches up and suddenly it becomes very obvious that the mist has brought something with it. Anyone venturing outside into the mist is immediately set upon by horrible creatures who want to do nothing more but messily devour humans. Dad and son are trapped in the supermarket with several other people. Panic sets in. Can they escape and if they do, is there any way out of the mist?

King does a great job of setting up our family, and putting the main characters into danger. The threat is real, random and vicious. The monsters can't be reasoned with, and are nearly invincible (it reminded me quite a bit of "Jurassic Park" in that respect). In addition to the creatures outside, there is simmering tension within. A highly unstable woman is convinced that the only way to stop the mist is to engage in human sacrifice. Yeah, real nice lady. It becomes important for the father and son to leave before the supermarket becomes a bloodbath. Allied with our main characters is a lowly checkout clerk named Ollie Weeks.

King goes out of his way to make us like Weeks. He is a nice enough guy (especially compared to the manager of the supermarket), but is described as a bit of a softy. When things start to go downhill, Weeks steps up. He is the voice of reason in the supermarket. He calms people down and gets everyone thinking clearly. He's not the leader of the group, but he offers advice and is rarely proven wrong. In addition it turns out that Weeks is the best shot of the group, and ends up with the only pistol the people in the market have access to. The little pudgy man becomes the key defender and hero of the group.

In a way it's obvious that Weeks has to go down. This is a horror story after all, and you can't have a knight in shining armor in a horror story: the readers won't feel any fear. King takes out some minor characters in quick and brutal ways, so we begin to doubt Weeks' role. But when he kills a creature with a well-placed shot, we breathe a sigh of relief. Even when the crazy woman has gathered disciples to her and is hunting down the little boy for their sacrifice it is Weeks to does what no one else can - he kills the ranting woman with the pistol. He saves the leads, but in that moment he dooms himself. He's killed another human, just like the monsters outside. On the flip side, the crazy woman was just as dangerous as the monsters, and so it fits that Weeks is able to stop both of them.

A small group makes a run for the lead character's car. They are attacked on the way and it's brutal. Weeks makes it to the car door and is very suddenly and swiftly killed. It happens so quickly that I found myself re-reading the sentence again. In a way it's King showing two things. First, he doesn't want Weeks to suffer, so his death is quick and final. Second, he wants to up the danger for our leads. Weeks is the brave knight and with him gone, do the heroes have a chance? The story ends on an ambiguous note, with the mist already covering much of Maine and our group still driving south hoping to find an end to it and a reprieve from the monsters.

Does the set up, execution and death of Ollie Weeks seem a bit technical? It does, but the story is told in such a way that you don't really notice it, and even if you do, it's still effective. I liked Weeks quite a bit and felt bad enough about his sudden death to go back and reread that sentence. It was only from the technical point of view that I was able to see his place in the narrative. In the depths of the story he works perfectly and if I had read the story in one sitting (possible for a faster reader than me), I'm guessing it works great.

A character like this is very important in horror fiction, or anywhere where thrills and suspense need to be generated. The key is to make the character believable, likable and set them up as an innocent, or heroic figure. Then at a key moment, you kill them off. If you do this right, the reader is going to gasp and feel "If the writer can kill off the 'nice guy', what hope the leads have?" Then you've got them where you want them.

Can you think of any other effective 'nice guy' characters? What did you think of "The Mist" in either the novel or movie form? Have you read an a non-effective use of the 'nice guy'? Why didn't it work?

The Tarot of Terror - Danse Macabre

I recently finished Stephen King's book about horror in film, television and novels; Danse Macabre. it was a great read and filled with some interesting perspectives from a man who's changed the world of horror fiction (it's hard to deny his influence even if you don't enjoy his stories).

One of the points that King brings up in the book is that there are essentially four types of horror stories or combinations of those types. They are: the unknown thing, the vampire, the changeling and the ghost story. His examples of these stories (in novel form) are as follows - The unknown thing: Frankenstein, The Vampire: Dracula, The changeling: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, the ghost story: The Turn of the Screw. He then goes on to show how many horror films, television series and novels fit into these types. Now the book is a bit dated - the version I have shows a copy write date of 1983.

So I went ahead and put some of my favorite horror stories into these types...
Pickman's Model - The unknown thing
The Blair Witch Project - The Unknown Thing/The Ghost story
Perfect Blue - The Changeling
Audition - The Changeling
Cabal - The Changeling/The unknown thing
Salem's Lot - The Vampire
Lost Highway - The Changeling

Three of my favorite TV series incorporated all of these stories into their mix: Buffy the Vampire Slayer, The X-files, Boogiepop Phantom.

I began to wonder if horror stories could be so easily confined so easily to these types. Did Mr. King hit the nail on the head, or did he miss something? In a way its interesting to be able to categorize the stories, but at the same time it seems confining. One of the things I love about all types of fantasy fiction is the ability to unleash the imagination. Any type of categories seems to be constrictive. At the same time King has not let these ideas hold him back. His "Dark Tower" has plenty of great fantastic moments.

What do you think? Are there any horror stories that don't fit these categories? Do they constrict horror writers?