STEPHEN KING

THE NON-FICTION

R OCKY W OOD

AND

J USTIN B ROOKS

CEMETERY DANCE PUBLICATIONS

Baltimore

2011

Copyright © 2011 by

Rocky Wood and Justin Brooks

My Little Serrated Security Blanket © by Stephen King was first

published in the December 1995 issue of Outside Magazine.

Cemetery Dance Publications Digital Edition 2011

ISBN 978-1-58767-246-0

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any

means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and

retrieval system, without permission in writing from the author, or his agent, except by a reviewer

who may quote brief passages in a critical article or review to be printed in a magazine or

newspaper, or electronically transmitted on radio or television.

Dust Jacket Art: © 2011 by Alan M. Clark

Dust Jacket Design: Gail Cross

Lettered Edition Frontis Artwork © 2011 by Alex McVey

Typesetting and Design: Bill Walker

Printed in the United States of America

Cemetery Dance Publications

132-B Industry Lane

Unit 7

Forest Hill, Maryland 21050

http://www.cemeterydance.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Argument

A Note About King Resources

Early Columns—King’s Garbage Truck

Danse Macabre, On Writing

Baseball—Faithful; Head Down and the Red Sox Obsession

Opinion—The Craft of Writing

Author’s Notes and Introductions to His Own Work

Later Columns—The Pop of King

Introducing the Work of Others

Book Reviews

Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns

Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television

Opinion—Venturing into Politics

Miscellany

My Little Serrated Security Blanket by Stephen King

King’s Unpublished Non-Fiction

Addendum

A Final Argument

Footnotes

Bibliography and Index

Acknowledgements, Dedication and About the Authors

ARGUMENT: A GUIDE TO

KING’S NON-FICTION

Fiction, after all, is lies and more lies...which is why the Puritans could never really get

behind it and go with the flow. In a work of fiction, if you get stuck you can always make

something up or back up a few pages and change something around. With nonfiction, there’s all

that bothersome business of making sure your facts are straight, that the dates jibe, that the names

are spelled right....

—From Danse Macabre.

In the Afterword to the original version of The Dark Tower—The Gunslinger Stephen King

revealed the genesis of a term that would feature in his epic Dark Tower Cycle: “I believe that I

probably owe readers who have come this far with me some sort of synopsis (“the argument”, those

great old romantic poets would have called it) of what is to come....” He later presented such an

Argument in each of the second, third and fourth volumes of the Cycle, as a summary of the action in

the saga to date. For Wolves of the Calla (the fifth book) he presented a new title, The Final

Argument, without indicating why he considered it unnecessary to present such reviews for the last

two installments, The Song of Susannah and The Dark Tower.

Using King’s definition—‘synopsis’—here is our Argument.

Stephen King, the world’s most popular author, and an acknowledged expert on the craft of

fiction writing, had this to say in the Forenote to his study of horror, Danse Macabre:

“Fiction, after all, is lies and more lies...which is why the Puritans could never really get behind

it and go with the flow. In a work of fiction, if you get stuck you can always make something up or

back up a few pages and change something around. With nonfiction, there’s all that bothersome

business of making sure your facts are straight, that the dates jibe, that the names are spelled right....”

This is exactly what the authors have tried to achieve with this volume—total accuracy.

Wherever possible we used original sources in developing this work, finding and reading the

original material (rather than transcriptions), preferably and in almost every case in the context of the

complete publication in which it appeared. As a result we have been able to correct previous errors

of fact, including incorrect citations such as pagination, date of publication and in some cases even

the publication name and name of the piece! While this was a lengthy, time-consuming and sometimes

expensive task, it was ultimately rewarding. Any errors in this volume should be our own and not that

of previous researchers or sources, although we take care to note such sources and credit them for

original material, or that we were unable to otherwise confirm.

In considering the mass of King’s non-fiction writings we were cognizant that Stephen King:

The Non-Fiction would be the first significant review dedicated to this area of the master author’s

canon. 1 Rocky Wood had already published an extensive review of King’s unpublished fiction,

Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished2; and an encyclopedic 6000+ page reference work

covering all King’s fiction, published or not3. Justin Brooks was also able to cite most of the material

covered in this book in his Stephen King: A Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most Popular

Author4, although that volume had a cut-off date of 31 December 2005. Further material came to light

after that manuscript was submitted and is included here (for instance Band Uniforms).

We understood that most fans and readers knew King had written three non-fiction books and

may have noticed his introductions and author’s notes to his own works; but also that few knew of his

hundreds of columns, articles, book reviews and criticism. With over 590 pieces of non-fiction in our

research files, and dozens of those unknown or little known to the King community and to his broader

fan base, it was instantly clear that such a volume would benefit both present and future academia,

King researchers and readers.

In the process of our research we were able to uncover quite a number of pieces of non-fiction

previously unknown to the King community. This was achieved through a number of different research

methods including: reviewing the entire microfiche file of The Maine Campus (the University of

Maine at Orono student newspaper) during the period King attended; an in-depth review of the files

of the Bangor Daily News (King’s ‘local’ newspaper, for which he has written numerous articles and

letters to the editor); two research trips to Maine, including visits to Durham, Lisbon Falls, Augusta,

Bangor and Rockland; the valued assistance of King’s office (even they lack some of the works; we

were proud to be able to provide a number to expand their files); and the assistance of King

researchers, super-collectors and collectors worldwide.

Among the pieces reviewed in detail for the first time here are:

* From King’s high school days, as sports reporter for the Lisbon Enterprise- Progno For

Tourney Go: Steve Thinks Chances Slim and Tit For Tat At Tourney: Lisbon High Hot And

Cold (these are additional to similar pieces King describes in On Writing)

* A non-fiction piece from his high school newspaper, The Drum— Band Uniforms

* A 1967 column in The Maine Campus supporting US troops in Vietnam

* From The Maine Campus— a review of the Spring 1969 issue of Ubris ( Ubris is the Best

Ever); an amazing movie review (‘No Vietnamese Ever Called Me Nigger’); and a number of

letters to the editor

* 23 unpublished pieces of non-fiction, including Culch and Your Kind of Place

* Previously unknown letters to the editor

* Introductions to the work of other authors; and book reviews published in unusual venues

* Comprehensive reviews of King’s non-fiction in the Bangor Daily News and other Maine

newspapers, some of it quite controversial

* King’s early baseball writing, mostly published in Maine newspapers

Every known piece of King’s published and unpublished non-fiction work is covered here. We have

divided this huge number of works into a series of chapters organized by subject matter, and most of

those are then presented in chronological order. This will allow readers to get a strong feel for

King’s opinions on a particular subject and their evolution. We also indicate how a reader might

obtain a copy of each piece and how difficult a task that might be.

We have split the chapters between ‘Major’ Non-Fiction and more ‘Minor’ works. These are the

groupings you will find in this book:

King’s Major Non-Fiction:

Early Columns—King’s Garbage Truck

Danse Macabre, On Writing

Baseball—Faithful; Head Down and the Red Sox Obsession

Opinion—The Craft of Writing

Author’s Notes and Introductions to His Own Work

Later Columns—The Pop of King

King’s Minor Non-Fiction:

Introducing the Work of Others

Book Reviews

Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns

Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television

Opinion—Venturing into Politics

Miscellany

Following these chapters is a special section covering King’s Unpublished Non-Fiction ; and a

Bibliography listing of all King’s non-fiction (with detailed citations).

Stephen King is one of the most successful authors of all time in terms of sales and readership.

As the years have passed his work has progressed in literary opinion and the author has begun to

receive acknowledgement for the high quality of his writing as well as the sheer power of his stories.

Even the august magazine The New Yorker has taken to regularly publishing King’s stories. But until

recently most awards have come from within the Horror, science-fiction and Fantasy literary

communities and recognition from one’s own peers is likely to have brought King a certain degree of

satisfaction, considering his early roots as a hard-core fan and consumer of these genres.

The Bram Stoker Awards have been awarded since 1987 by members of the Horror Writers

Association. King has won Best Novel for Misery (in a tie with McCammon’s epic, Swan Song), The

Green Mile and Bag of Bones; Best Fiction Collection for Four Past Midnight; Best Long Fiction

for Lunch at the Gotham Café; and Best Non-Fiction for On Writing. He has been nominated a

further 18 times. In 2003 the Association awarded him its Lifetime Achievement Award.

The World Fantasy Awards are nominated by members of the World Fantasy Convention and

selected by a panel of judges to acknowledge excellence in fantasy writing and art. King has won the

Convention Award and the Short Fiction Award, for The Man in the Black Suit.

The British Fantasy Society has awarded King the August Derleth Award for Best Novel in

1983 ( Cujo), 1987 ( It), 1999 ( Bag of Bones) and 2005 ( The Dark Tower ); Best Short Story for The

Breathing Method in 1983; and a Special Award in 1981.

Stepping outside genre to more mainstream awards even an O. Henry has been awarded to King.

The O. Henry Awards are an annual collection of the year’s best stories published in American and

Canadian magazines and written by American or Canadian authors. King won first prize (in other

words judged to have been the best story written by a North American and published in a North

American magazine) in 1996 for The Man in the Black Suit. In doing so he joined William Faulkner,

Irwin Shaw, Truman Capote, John Cheever, John Updike, Joyce Carol Oates, Bernard Malamud, Saul

Bellow and Alice Walker as winners of the year’s best stand-alone story.

Even greater recognition was accorded King in September 2003, when the National Book

Foundation announced it would award him its 2003 Medal for Distinguished Contribution to

American Letters. King delivered the keynote address at the Awards Dinner to some 1000 authors,

editors, publishers and friends of the book industry. Previous recipients of the Medal include Saul

Bellow, Studs Terkel, John Updike, Ray Bradbury, Arthur Miller and Philip Roth.

In giving the award the Foundation said, “Stephen King’s writing is securely rooted in the great

American tradition that glorifies spirit-of-place and the abiding power of narrative. He crafts stylish,

mind-bending page-turners that contain profound moral truths—some beautiful, some harrowing—

about our inner lives. This Award commemorates Mr. King’s well-earned place of distinction in the

wide world of readers and booklovers of all ages.” King said, “This is probably the most exciting

thing to happen to me in my career as a writer since the sale of my first book in 1973.” Amusingly

enough, King and John Grisham once purchased their own tickets to the annual National Book

Awards presentation by the Foundation, King telling TheNew York Times somewhat tongue-in-cheek,

“… that was the only way we were going to get in the door.”

Of course, all these rewards largely recognize King’s fiction. Outside the genre, King’s On

Writing appears to have become a standard text and has received wide praise. His and O’Nan’s

Faithful, detailing the incredible 2004 Boston Red Sox season, appears to be well regarded by

baseball fans. Then there’s Danse Macabre, initially not as well received in the horror community as

one might expect, this volume is now regarded as a classic text. While many wish King would update

it he has consistently refused to do so, considering it ‘too much work’.

Yet, even these are only the volumes of dedicated non-fiction. As related earlier there are

around 590 more individual pieces, ranging from lengthy and very important essays to notes of little

more than one or two sentences—yet somehow this facet of King’s work has received little attention.

Undoubtedly this is partly due to his success as a writer of fiction— his non-fiction being not so much

a mirror image as a backing to his fictional mirror. On the other hand it is his ‘brand name’ that has

allowed the publication of the vast majority of this non-fiction, as editors sought King’s opinion and

the value of his name to promote their magazines and books.

When King writes non-fiction it is generally for a very specific reason. In his fiction the muse

must strike, generally as a result of a ‘What If’ scenario combining two unusual factors, before King

will launch into a short story, novella or novel. We sometimes see these lightning strikes of

inspiration in his non-fiction but most often he is addressing a specific issue—in his columns (at the

University of Maine; more recently in Entertainment Weekly; and a lesser known series in Adelina);

his book reviews; his political opinion pieces; his familiar communications with ‘Constant Readers’

in his own books; his passion for and accurate musings about baseball; the act and craft of writing and

the genres he works in, or delights in reading; and his opinion pieces about popular culture.

The power of King’s non-fiction canon is not to be underestimated. Noted King expert Stephen

Spignesi had this to say of King’s essay for Nightmares in the Sky, encapsulating perfectly a key

reason why King’s non-fiction is so powerful: ‘[It] is more evidence that Stephen King may

justifiably be considered a thinker first and a writer second. King may not like such a distinction, but

this essay is proof of a powerful mind, one that is constantly deliberating, analyzing, thinking, and that

such reflection persists whether he chooses to write his thoughts down or not.’5

A reader wanting to secure and read all these pieces will find the task requires a lot of

dedication, patience and not inconsiderable sums of money. Many were published in very obscure

locations indeed (King is a true agnostic when it comes to venues for publication and deliberately

supports small publications by providing pieces to them), often in low print runs; or in newspapers,

programs or other publications that are quickly discarded by readers. Also, as King was an

‘unknown’ before the mid-1970s, many of his early pieces exist today in single original copies. There

are a small number of published works of which no known copy, in published or manuscript form,

exists and others that are so difficult to find as to be effectively unobtainable—even the author

himself and his office do not have copies!

There are also twenty-four identified unpublished non-fiction works, a handful of which may be

read if a reader/researcher has the right contacts.

So, we invite you to dive into the World of Stephen King—the Non-Fiction. As you finish your

tour, in closing the Unpublished Non-Fiction chapter, we summarize with what we regard as the core

theme of this body of work—but that, of course, is your reward. We’ll see you there—at the clearing

at the end of this particular path!

A Note About King Resources

In the following chapters we offer advice on accessing the various pieces covered. In many

cases we refer to King resellers, or resources. Among those operating at the time of writing, and of

sound repute, are:

* Betts Bookstore in Bangor, Maine; the longest established King specialist. Website:

www.bettsbooks.com Email: Bettsbooks@msn.com eBay name: PA-22-108

* Overlook Connection Bookstore and Press. Offering thousands of King collectibles since

1987. Website: www.overlookconnection.com

Email: overlookcn@aol.com

* Chaos-Consultants are experts in hard-to-find King items, including magazines. Wherever you

are on the web just search for ‘chaos-consultants’

* Hutch’s Rare Books, specializing in Stephen King.

Website:www.marketworks.com/StoreFrontProfiles/

default.aspx?sfid=30007

* James Beach sells rare Stephen King appearances, focusing on short fiction and non-fiction in

periodicals and anthologies. See:

http://search.ebaycom/_W0QQsassZjaybeehorror

* Critical Path Fine Books, King specialists. Email: cblakey@kc.rr.com Website:

http://home.kc.rr.com/criticalpath/index.htm

* Camelot Books. Website: http://www.camelotbooks.com/

* Mark V Ziesing, Bookseller. Website: http://www.ziesingbooks.com/

*

Barry

R

Levin

science-fiction

and

Fantasy

Literature.

Website:

http://www.raresf.com/bhome.html

* Bad Moon Books. Website: www.badmoonbooks.com/home.php

* Jim Orbaugh Bookseller, at www.abebooks.com

* L W Currey, Inc. Website: http://www.lwcurrey.com/home.php

* Very Fine Books. Website: www.veryfinebooks.com/

EARLY COLUMNS—

KING’S GARBAGE TRUCK

“In the early 1800’s a whole sect of Shakers, a rather strange religious persuasion at best,

disappeared from their village (Jeremiah’s Lot) in Vermont. The town remains uninhabited to this

day. On the night before one of my high school friends died in a car accident I dreamed of a

hideous man with a scarred face hanging from a black gibbet against a green sky. The incident

sticks in my mind because the hanged man was wearing a card around his neck bearing this

friend’s name. I woke with a sweaty premonition that on the night before I kicked off I would

dream the dream again, only this time the card would bear my name.”

—From King’s Garbage Truck for December 18, 1969.

Stephen King attended the University of Maine at Orono (UMO) from the Fall of 1966,

graduating with a Bachelor of Science degree in English and teacher’s certification on 5 June 1970.

Apart from gaining the degree and certificate King met his future wife Tabitha Spruce on campus and

was exposed to a cultural and literary milieu, and faculty members who both encouraged and

believed in him.

In the latter part of his time at UMO he wrote a series of columns for the campus newspaper,

under the title King’s Garbage Truck . He also wrote a number of individual non-fiction pieces,

letters to the editor, and a serialized satirical Western, Slade6 for the newspaper, The Maine Campus

(published as The Maine Summer Campus or The Summer Campus during the long break between

academic years). The non-fiction pieces and letters, some of which were ‘rediscovered’ in research

for this book by Rocky Wood, are covered here, in our chapters indicated in parentheses, and are:

* Opinion, November 16, 1967 ( Opinion— Venturing into Politics)

* From the Nitty-Gritty, February 22, 1968 ( Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns)

* Lurching Charm, January 16, 1969 ( Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns)

* Ubris is the Best Ever, April 17, 1969 ( Book Reviews)

* No Vietnamese Ever Called Me Nigger, October 23, 1969 ( Opinion—Radio, Music, Film

and Television)

* King Cat, December 11, 1969 ( Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns)

* Cancelled Stamp, February 5, 1970 ( Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns)

* A Possible Fairy Tale, May 8, 1970 ( Opinion— Venturing into Politics)

* Someone Shouted J’accuse, July 2, 1970 ( Miscellany)

* More Truck, November 5, 1970 (covered in this chapter)

* Toothy Trauma, January 7, 1971 ( Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns)

The forty-six King’s Garbage Truck columns ran from February 20, 1969 to May 21, 1970 (one was

reprinted). We speculate that King became involved in penning the columns after writing a Letter to

the Editor published in The Maine Campus for January 16, 1969 (titled ‘Lurching Charm’ by a sub-

editor), which is covered in some depth in our Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns chapter. The

‘Editorial editors’ of the newspaper (there’s a clumsy term for you) responded in print—‘Dear Mr.

King—we sincerely believe you’re nuts, NUTS!!! However, we can use people like you. Could you

please stop into our office (106 Lord Hall) any time you have time and are any where ( sic) near the

place?’ The editor of The Maine Campus at the time was Marcia Due (and the Editorial Editor Tom

Atwell). Perhaps they convinced King to attempt a regular column, considering the first Garbage

Truck appeared only five weeks later?

As to an origin for the column’s title, in a new Introduction for the 1999 Pocket Books edition

of Carrie King says: “I had written a column (‘King’s Garbage Truck,’ it was called—the editor-in-

chief’s name for it, not mine) in the college paper for two or three years....” Presumably then, the title

was Ms. Due’s idea. In this same Introduction King describes his columns as “slaphappy,

sarcastic”—this will often prove out as we undertake our review. However, we will also find some

very serious matters discussed, in very serious tones and some interesting, even surprising, opinion

pieces.

King expert George Beahm quotes an unnamed ‘staffer’ on the paper as saying this of the

columnist: ‘King was always late. We would be pulling our hair out at deadline. With five minutes or

so to go, Steve would come in and sit down at the typewriter and produce two flawless pages of

copy. ’7

These columns are important as they shine a light on the young Stephen King, the man and the

writer; remind us of student life on a campus in the heady days of the late 1960s; provide a view of

his social awakening; and an early helping of his literary, movie, television and musical tastes.

Another King expert, Stephen Spignesi says King’s ‘narrative voice in the “Garbage Truck” columns

is incredibly mature, insightful, and confident, at a time when King was just a twenty-two-year-old

college student writing a column in a campus newspaper while also juggling classes and all the other

responsibilities...of university life.’

In 1990 The Maine Campus planned to reprint the Garbage Truck columns as a separate book,

claiming they held copyright. King’s office demurred and King’s legal representatives wrote to the

proposed book’s editor, stating that King ‘feels embarrassed by these early columns and considers

them juvenilia...[He] has a faithful readership which expects the high caliber of literary materials

customarily handwritten ( sic) by him.... The material you want to reprint is not up to this standard.’

Having originally intended to take King on legally, reason prevailed when the newspaper (and, one

presumes, the University administration) decided to let the issue lie. 8

We review each of these columns in chronological order. Correct pagination for each piece was

confirmed by Rocky Wood during a trip to UMO’s Fogler Library in October 2005 (a number of

previous sources listed incorrect pagination for certain columns) and these are included in Justin

Brooks’ Stephen King: A Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most Popular Author 9. All of the

columns may be copied from microfiche at the Fogler (someone with more interest in personal gain

than history apparently stole the Library’s original copies10) and this chapter was compiled from

original microfiche printouts.

February 20, 1969. The first Garbage Truck appeared in Volume LXXII, Number 18 of The

Maine Campus under the byline that would be used for all these pieces, ‘Steve King’. ‘The Goddard

College dancers, seven students from a small liberal arts school in Vermont, put on a program called

Why We Dance last Sunday night in Hauck Auditorium.’ These are the opening lines of King’s

Garbage Truck columns. It is not nearly as memorable as say, ‘The man in black fled across the

desert and the gunslinger followed.’ Still, a beginning, and in these columns we will recognize King’s

voice and high quality of prose, particularly for a twenty-one year old. He reviews the dance group’s

performance, which ‘ranged from the very good to the astonishingly awful’; and put in a plug for an

upcoming auditorium showing of the movie Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte. In the latter section King

pans the ‘smarty pants ABC censors who would probably like to see Halloween outlawed’ and

praises the movie’s star, Bette Davis.

February 27, 1969. This week’s installment provides an effusively supportive review of Franco

Zeffirelli’s 1968 movie Romeo and Juliet, starring Leonard Whiting (‘makes a fine Romeo, young,

strong as a Missouri bull, not always too bright, or even particularly co-ordinated’) and Olivia

Hussey (‘merely perfect’)11. King opens, ‘You really have to feel sorry for William Shakespeare.

He’s been the victim of his own publicity men’, complaining that despite the fact he wrote about the

same old things (‘sex, murder, love, honor, draft-dodgers, kings, commoners, fat men, skinny men,

idiots and saints’) his work is so over-analyzed that a ‘student tends to approach him the way

porcupines make love—very cautiously.’ Zeffirelli, on the other hand, ‘puts back all the juice that the

critics, the writers, and (alas!) the teachers try so hard to take out’ of the master storyteller (keep ‘in

mind that Shakespeare was an Elizabethan writing for and about real flesh-and-blood people’,

despite ‘the half-comprehensible Elizabethan jargon that is just more trouble than it’s worth,’ King

opines).

March 6, 1969. In this column King delivers a satirical set of suggested game shows for the

‘Geritol-drinking, Lawrence Welk-watching Americans over thirty’ he claims are hungering for

‘cheapie game shows of their own’ to match the TV networks then current obsession for under-30

shows such as The Dating Game. Among his suggestions are The Middle-Aged Game (contestants try

to tie their shoelaces without bending their knees and prizes include a trip to ‘the Betty Crocker bake-

off’); The Brutality Game (‘forty Chicago policemen against a happy studio audience full of pacifists,

hippies, college professors’), hosted by ‘Dick Daley’, still Chicago mayor the year following the

riotous Democratic Convention of 1968; The Divorce Game (‘hosted by Zsa Zsa Gabor’); The Wife-

Swapping Game (‘a weekly mass orgy...opportunity for audience participation there’); ‘And finally

the living end— The Burial Game...hosted by Vincent Price.’ Rather sophomoric humor but

entertaining nonetheless. Collings12 suggests this column ‘reads almost like an early sketch of ideas

for’ The Running Man, in which ‘the true villain is the Network’ but that seems a stretch.

March 13, 1969. Still in a satiric mood, King launches a defense of mediocrity (!) claiming it

has been given a bad name and there is a ‘Plot afoot’ to do away with it. ‘In view of this grave

emergency I am hereby taking it upon myself to declare National Mediocrity Week’, he writes, asking

all to ‘do your part to help give mediocrity a good name.’ Among King’s recommendations to assist is

attending the cinema to see ‘ Born Wild, from American-International, those fun-loving guys that

brought you Attack of the Giant Leeches, Dementia 13, and The Young Animals .’ King would speak

with admiration of this production house and their product in both Danse Macabre and On Writing.

Having given the game away by stating Born Wild ‘is pretty good’ with ‘a refreshingly honest eye’ he

goes on to recommend Tammy Wynette’s new album, Stand By Your Man (‘You’ll like it. You’ll

probably hate yourself, but you’ll like it.’); and ‘now that your mind is hopelessly rotted...a mediocre

novel... Boys and Girls Together by William Goldman.’ A fine novelist, dual Academy Award

recipient Goldman is one of the great post-war screenwriters, responsible for Butch Cassidy and the

Sundance Kid, All the President’s Men , A Bridge Too Far , The Ghost and the Darkness, The

Princess Bride (from his own novel) and The General’s Daughter. He has also penned a remarkable

three screenplays of King novels— Misery, Hearts in Atlantis and Dreamcatcher.

This technique of reviewing movies, music and books together (as well as with television)

would repeat itself throughout King’s career, most notably in The Pop of King columns in the

Entertainment Weekly of the early- to mid- 2000s. His wide knowledge of all these forms of

entertainment would feature in (indeed trademark, along with the ubiquitous use of brand name) his

fiction forever.

March 20, 1969. This week King plays the nostalgia card, asking readers if they remember not

silly things (‘how to factor a quadratic’) but ‘important things—like for instance, what was playing

the first time you took a girl out on a real bona-fide date....’ Instantly, we see the King who captured

our imaginations in such classic tales as The Body and It—invoking visceral memories of our (in this

case his generation’s) childhood, as he remembers, among others, American Bandstand (‘when the

girls wore bobby-sox and danced with each other’); and ‘ At the Hop by Danny and the Juniors (I

kissed my first not-aunt-or-mother female while that song was on the radio—she had beautiful blonde

hair and M&Ms on her chin. She was nine and I was ten).’ ‘Those were the days’ when you had to

have a Davy Crockett hat, a waffle ball and a hula-hoop (‘I think the bitterest moment of my tenth year

came when my hula-hoop rolled out into the street and got squashed by an unfeeling oil-truck’), King

says, ‘You must be able to remember the things that turned you on back in the good old days before

pot...and Jimmi ( sic) Hendrix.’ He then called for those with such memories to send them to him care

of the newspaper.

March 27, 1969. From this issue of The Maine Campus David Bright13 had been elected editor

(according to the paper ‘a formal orgy was held in celebration’). King would create an eponymous

journalist character for The Dead Zone and The Tommyknockers as a nod to his former colleague.

The previous week had been ‘very good’, according to King: ‘It restores your faith in human nature to

realize how many people remember Chubby Checker, the Dovells and Annette Funicello....’ he says,

referring to his request in the previous week’s column for nostalgic memories from his readers.

Among those he received were of music, lyrics, ‘groovy clothes’ (‘crinoline petticoats...saddle

shoes’), radio serials and Saturday matinee movies. Of particular interest to King fans is this: ‘Or, as

Miss Smith says, “…best of all, those old horror programs you were sometimes allowed to listen to

[on the radio].” Can you remember the sound of the creaking door that started Inner Sanctum? I Love

A Mystery? Or how about that graveyard voice that told you you were about to listen to “another story

calculated to keep you in... Suspense!”’ King would revisit this point in the elegiac chapter, Radio

and the Set of Reality, of his non-fiction study of horror, Danse Macabre. This column concludes,

‘Somehow everything seems to get just a little dirtier and more selfish as we get older. It’s good to

remember other times, once in a while.’ Classic King (both Collings14 and Spignesi15 relate this last directly to King’s novel It).

April 10, 1969. Having started the previous column (a fortnight earlier) with, ‘This was a pretty

good week’, this piece begins, ‘You say it’s been a bad week?’ If so, Doctor King prescribes a new

movie, where ‘everybody hates everybody’, The Lions in Winter ( sic, in fact ‘Lion’). Of this now

classic movie, starring Peter O’Toole, Katharine Hepburn and Anthony Hopkins 16 in but his third

movie role, King says, ‘The dialogue is lusciously biting, and the acting is poisonously perfect.’

While stating the ‘cast do excellent justice to James Goldman’s juicy screenplay’ he says it ‘peters

out without resolution and seems rather pointless’, saying it is not as good as ‘Zifferilli’s ( sic) Romeo

and Juliet’, or Rachael, Rachael, two other nominees that year for the ‘annual tool’s clambake, the

Academy Awards’. 17 He also recommends The Riot, a prison movie from Frank Elli’s book, which

King had read, saying it was ‘a tough, hard novel and a good one’. Although Gene Hackman had a

role King preferred ‘the inmates better. They just stood around and looked like inmates’, whereas

King felt Hackman was simply reprising his role in Bonnie and Clyde.

King makes a number of errors of fact in these columns, some minor, some not. In this case

minor—the movie was actually titled Riot, although the novel was indeed The Riot; he misidentifies

the key character as Cully Bristow, rather than Briston; and another movie as I Was A Fugitive From

the Chain Gang, rather than I Am A Fugitive etc. This is excusable if we consider that King’s role at

the time was to pass his UMO courses and entertain his readers, rather than act as researcher for

Leonard Maltin. So as not to distract readers we will keep the balance of such errors to the footnotes!

April 17, 1969. The previous weekend King had been in New York City, ‘courtesy of United

Artists’ who’d invited writers from ‘perhaps forty college publications’ to visit the city and see two

of their new offerings, Popi and If It’s Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium . He notes this was his first

visit to ‘Fun City’ in four years, ‘and it’s a strange scene for a country boy who grew up in a small

Maine town where there are more graveyards than people.’18 Of the movies he says, ‘They both

almost work. Almost.’ Popi is said to be the better of the two, starring Alan Arkin (‘probably the best

American actor now working’), although King finds it lacking (‘the disquieting moral of the story

seems to be that poverty and squalor can be fun’). Of It’s Tuesday etc. King says it ‘is a sleazy little

farce...It has its moments, but too damn few of them.’ We guess the kind people at United Artists did

not invite the humble Maine Campus correspondent back!

Gotham did not come off well either: ‘As for New York City itself, well, as New Yorkers

would undoubtedly say about Orono, it’s a nice place to visit, but I’d think I’d go crazy if I had to live

there...You can get seven TV channels, but the air smells bad. At the risk of sounding hopelessly

rustic, I like it better up here.’

King’s Ubris is the Best Ever was also published in this edition (see the Book Reviews

chapter).

April 24, 1969. In this column King revisits his invention, the Nitty Gritty Up Tight Society for a

Campus with More Cools, of which he had now risen to ‘President Emeritus’. This ‘group’ had first

appeared in his 22 February 1968 letter to The Maine Campus, From the Nitty-Gritty (see our

Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns chapter), when King was but ‘Secretary’. Back in satiric style

King claims the group now demands, among other things, courses on such minority areas as plumbing,

‘Mandarin Fingernail Growing, and an eight-week seminar on Why Macy’s Doesn’t Tell Gimbles’;

‘birth control vending machines in every dorm’; ‘a full-time limousine service on duty at all the girl’s

dorms’; the closing of the bookstore; and—the ‘nitty gritty’—the abolition of the University. On this

point, ‘we realize this sounds a little sweeping at first’, the NGUTSCMC argues, ‘there could be no

student strikes if there was no university’ and so, if abolished, no one would have to worry about it,

including the fact that it ‘is a contributing cause of inflation, air pollution and eye disease.’

May 1, 1969. Interesting biographical information comes to light in this column, in which King

talks about the liveliness of the poetry scene at UMO. He claims to have been lucky to attend a

Contemporary Poetry course during the ’68 Fall semester—lucky to have been taught by Burton

Hatlen and Jim Bishop (‘a couple of the brightest men the English department here has’) and ‘because

it was an opportunity to read poetry by a group of writers who aren’t dust yet.’ King said the course

was a real ‘learning experience’, compared to the normal ‘confusing welter of requirements, survey

courses, and plain old tommyrot....’ Of the poets read in the course King says ‘one of the best’ is Ron

Lowenstein, ‘a juicy poet, real and alive, with guts and energy enough to be optimistic in a society

that may not deserve such feelings’ and recommends his upcoming reading at the Union.

King has published a small amount of poetry19 (as has Tabitha King, most in their university

years) but perhaps the greatest discovery in this milieu was his future wife. Hatlen (a noted King

critic) and Bishop also strongly encouraged King’s writing, for which we are all eternally grateful.

May 8, 1969. This column begins in classic horror tones, ‘Want me to tell you a bad thing?’ He

sees students and faculty on campuses worldwide devoid of purpose, many of them under excessive

stress (‘Some riot. Most don’t. We just get a little more desperate’). He is haunted after seeing a girl

at dinner burst into tears and run from the room, then ‘everyone started talking again’ and someone

grabbed her dessert. But it’s not the ‘pressure-cooker’ that scares King, it’s the fear that the ‘effect

doesn’t stop with graduation.’ He then lampoons ‘Sally Socialite’, a girl who will marry, have three

kids and join the suburban grind (‘one morning she will wake up forty, wondering whether she did it

all on her own’); and ‘Henry Harried’, the studious type who will end up in a profession and ‘have

his first mild heart-attack at thirty-seven.’ The sudden realization of a teenager or twenty-something

that the future may not be the stuff of dreams is not original by any means, but we see it here strike

King with some force.

In a reflection of his lifelong fascination with the man in a high place with a gun (appearing in

fiction in one instance as Cain Rose Up, first published in the UMO magazine, Ubris for Spring,

1968) he speculates on how one might handle this angst: ‘Maybe you get loaded on Thursday

afternoon. You might develop a decided hostility in class. You might drop out. You might even start

looking at the Stevens Hall tower and wondering—just wondering, mind you—how nice it might be

to climb up there and pick a few people off.’ But, if you are like our columnist, you put on Dylan,

singing Ballad of a Thin Man and listen closely.

May 15, 1969. In this powerful column King reports his thoughts and reactions during a campus

anti-Vietnam War march, which took place on May 8 (the march is covered extensively in this issue

of The Maine Campus). Among other marchers is the aforementioned Campus editor, David Bright

(he also spoke at the following rally). King’s first word is ‘Ugly’ and that word is repeated four more

times (it is literally the last word), each time in larger and bolder print. There was much antagonism

towards the marchers (from townsfolk, fraternity members and other students20) and King reports,

‘Somebody belts me in the gut. It surprises me more than hurts me. I want to weep. I wonder what is

happening to me.’ The most powerful section of this column reads: ‘[The march] halts. There is a

brief confrontation. I don’t know what is said. All I see are fraternity sweatshirts. Behind them I see

Gestapo figures burning books and Jews. I do not see political belief. I see only a terrible amoral

castration.’ Before the final ‘Ugly’ King writes (Constant Readers will recognize a biblical name,

also a real small town in Maine, which now represents a lost place of light and legend): ‘A uniform

means training in the art of murder. Will my son have to kill somebody in the name of national pride?

It is a sentimental thought, perhaps; there may still be balm in Gilead. But somebody punched me in

the belly....’

Clearly, the socially conscious, liberal King has now emerged, if utilizing the flowery prose of

an undergrad (compare these and later sentiments with King’s Opinion column in the 16 November

1967 issue of this same newspaper21). Of course, his Hearts in Atlantis novella springs from this

very period.

May 22, 1969. One of the least important of these columns, this is an (admitted) diatribe against

a student nominee for the Board of Trustees of the University of Maine. King’s objection to the

nomination relates to the particular gentleman’s refusal to accept the result of not one, but two votes

at a meeting of the campus Coalition for Peace in Viet Nam. Threatening to withdraw from the

Coalition the offender managed to overturn the majority vote on the third attempt, which King saw as

‘blackmail of the most vulgar sort. ’22 We also learn that another march (‘the orderly march’) was

held on May 15th, with King in attendance.

June 12, 1969. Taking the beginning of summer as key to a lighter tone King gives a preview of

the ‘coming attractions, here are some of the things you can look forward to—or not look forward to

—in the Garbage Truck this summer....’ These were to include a ‘review of the new Johnny Cash

show. An article on what the Fogler Library has in the way of pornography—and it has a plenty good

supply’, movie reviews, ‘an article on the controversial direction pop music is heading in, a direction

pointed out pretty clearly by the Beatles’ and other groups.

June 20, 1969. During the summer months the university newspaper was re-titled The Maine

Summer Campus, and subsequent Garbage Truck columns up to, and including, 8 August 1969

appeared under this masthead.

In this first of the summer break columns King returns to satiric mode, claiming to deal in a Dear

Abby manner with letters sent to him by certain women (‘When girls look at some male faces they

wonder about motel rates. When they look at my face, they wonder how much I charge for

consultation.’) While marginally funny, and other than as example of the dry humor for which the man

is known, this piece adds little to our understanding of King or his work.

June 27, 1969. In this column King suggests beating the summer heat by turning on a fan, getting

a cold drink (‘lemonade, or even better, a nice cold Bud’), waiting for the afternoon thunderstorm and

then diving into one of four books he recommends. Three of these are important to a study of King

— The Dead Beat by Robert Bloch (King would dedicate Danse Macabre to this outstanding writer,

and pen what was effectively an obituary on his death23); The Shrinking Man by Richard Matheson

(this is one of the ten important horror books from the period 1950-80 King covers in Danse

Macabre); and, wait for it... Dracula (selling at the time in a Dell paperback for the princely sum of

75 cents). Of this last (and only a half dozen years before King’s homage, ‘Salem’s Lot would hit the

bookstores) he writes: ‘This book still remains the piece to read if you go for this sort of thing. One

might go so far as to call it a monster piece.’ The remaining book was The Coffin Things by Michael

Avallone (‘the summit of Mr. Avallone’s rather checkered career as a hack writer for the paperback

market.’)

The prescient of Garbage Truck’s readers may have sensed in this column a trend in King’s

reading interests. It closes in what would become classic King style when addressing his ‘Constant

Readers’: ‘So now you know how to beat the heat. Curl up beside your favorite headstone and cool it.

Just get home before dark.’

July 4, 1969. On 12 June King had promised a column on the ‘controversial direction pop music

is heading in’ and he delivers here, crediting the Beatles (‘only spottily good musical artists’) for

having ‘changed it all’—‘They have revolutionized hair styles, yanked the average girl’s hem-line up

a foot since 1957, become a moving symbol in the new drug culture, and have even been part of the

wedge that has been breaking ground for a new morality that would have seemed science-fictiony ten

years ago.’ King argues that ‘only recently’ had the Fab Four ‘begun to revolutionize their own field

—pop music’, re-introducing the blues-rock beat from the original rock-and-roll and evolving to

more interesting lyrics (‘obviously John Lennon is as mad as hell’). In the process of making his

argument he reveals an extensive and incisive knowledge of 60’s rock, ranging through its trends and

both its popular and more obscure bands and byways.

Here we see King in a mode he would follow for the next three plus decades—interested in,

analyzing and delivering pop culture. He ends, ‘Rock has come back home, and maybe this time it

really has grown up.’

July 11, 1969. When talking about inspiration for his tales King often mentions the ‘What if’

factor—‘A lady under the canopy was on her cell phone and the doorman was getting someone a cab.

I thought, what if she got this message on her cell phone that she could not deny and she had to attack

everyone she saw—and she started with the doorman, she ripped his throat out’24, was the inspiration

for Cell, for example. And there it was, plain as day in the hectic, wonderful heyday of change we

now view with such nostalgia—‘The man’s name is Neil Armstrong. If all goes well, by the end of

this month he and Buzz Aldrin will have walked where no man has walked before—on the surface of

the moon...But what if—/ And right here, a voice from the attic of my mind speaks up.’

In classic King fiction style he relates his ‘what if’ was ‘a strange dream’ he’d had: ‘I was

sitting in my living-room in this dream, smoking a cigarette, drinking a beer...and watching the first

live TV transmission from Apollo 11.../ Then it all changes. Fear grips me. Fear is reflected in the

faces of the men out there, beyond the point where anyone can possibly offer succor. All rationalism

is gone from that face. Only madness is left. And I know—somehow I know—what it is they fear in

this dream. Not little green men. A huge tideless wind has swept down on them and their puny ship, a

cyclopean gale from no place that is sweeping them in to the gaping, germless maw of deep space

itself.../ This is where the dream ends. I wake up....’

King puts this fear down as the same as those living in the time of Columbus—fear of the

unknown, but ‘… I only hope there is nothing waiting for us in the dark.’ For forty years King has

taken his ‘what ifs’, his dreams, and individual visions and used them as inspiration to build a mighty

catalog of fictions, for which we say thankya.

July 18, 1969. The Nitty Gritty Society (see the column for April 24, 1969) returns in this piece,

to hand ‘out its awards for the coolest movies of the last twenty-five years’ or so. This is a favorite

pastime in King’s non-fiction (see our chapter, Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television for

more examples). The Gritty Awards (or ‘Gritties’) include: ‘ Best line delivered by a male actor:’ a

tie between Mickey Rooney in The Last Mile, for “Looks like I just shot a priest”; and Warren Beatty

in Bonnie and Clyde after knocking back Faye Dunaway’s advances: “I don’t like boys, if that’s what

you think!” The same award for female actors: “Is something the matter, John?” by Marla English to

Lon Chaney, Jr., in The Werewolf, as he begins the change.

Now the sarcasm really cuts in—Donald O’Connor for Best Actor in the Francis the Talking

Mule movies; Barbara Stanwyck as Best Actress for her ability to fall downstairs in every picture

she ever made; and Elizabeth Taylor for ‘ Most Nauseating Actress’, she looks like ‘she just crawled

back in to the land of the living after spending two weeks with a sex-crazed python’ (no Michael

Jackson jokes please!). For King and Dark Tower fans this entry will hold great interest: ‘ Best Lousy

Movie: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (1967)25, mostly for Clint Eastwood’s cigar, which would

have given a lesser man cancer of the lip two Italian Westerns before. Also for director Sergio

Leone, who has a talent for finding more ugly extras than anyone on the face of the earth—and zeroing

his wide-screen lens in on their beard-speckled faces for long, loving, drooly close-ups.’

On the ‘serious side’ the ten best movies of the period were, in the opinion of the Nitty Grittys:

Romeo and Juliet26, Point Blank, The Hustler, Psycho (‘Hitchcock’s best comedy of terrors’), TheLast Mile, Picnic27, Rebel Without a Cause, High Noon and Mildred Pierce. After listing these nine King left the tenth to the reader, suggesting they drop him a line—‘We’ll do a column on it. Might be

interesting.’

July 25, 1969. Freshman Orientation reminds King of his own first days at UMO (in 1966),

although he now feels ‘like a dinosaur—a large hairy dinosaur that may have out-lived its time’. He

recalls, ‘There I was, all alone in Room 203 of Gannett Hall, clean-shaven, neatly dressed, as green

as apples in August...I was sure my roommate would turn out to be a freako, or even worse,

hopelessly more With It than I...Those were the days, all right. You could wake up in the morning

without having your mouth taste like the bottom of a birdcage....’ and continues to reminisce on the

lost days of respect for convention, along with the misconceptions of freshmen. ‘I remember my first

date up here. I shaved three times in twenty minutes, and that was just to call her up and ask her.’

August 1, 1969. Uniquely for Garbage Truck this column was reprinted in the newspaper (in

that case reverting to the academic year title of The Maine Campus), in the September 25, 1969

issue.

The column features a diatribe against the Pope (Paul VI) and, at first glance, birth control. King

says the Pope is the last person on earth he would want to be (he could even stand being Richard

Nixon—which, considering King’s withering opinion of that particular President is saying something

—as ‘anyone who eats meatloaf with catsup every Thursday night can’t have too much on his mind.’)

According to King’s Methodist turned campus liberal worldview, ‘Nobody likes the Pope; not even

his own priests like him much.../ ...the main reason I’d hate to be Pope isn’t because he’s unpopular.

It’s because I think he’s probably right. I think birth control demeans the act of sex and makes it

fundamentally purposeless. Sterilized sex is a little like jumping in your car...and driving like hell in

neutral....’ Leaving religion aside King questions the ‘moral unfairness’ of who exactly is using the

pill—not poor women with large families, but the middle-class—he goes on to agree (tongue

possibly, but not obviously, in cheek) with Norman Mailer (‘a writer for who I have a great deal of

respect’) who is for legalized, no-holds barred abortion but not birth control. King appears to argue

this is a matter of morality—‘In the last analysis, it seems to me that birth control is a little gutless.

Babies are serious business. It doesn’t seem right to laugh them away with a little round plastic case.

So, if the population must be controlled, it seems to me that legal murder—abortion—is the only

really moral way it can be done. If nothing else, it would force the person involved to come to a

serious decision about birth control—and death control.’ It is probably columns like this that have

made King determined not to allow reprints of the Garbage Truck columns for a wider audience.

This one is a hot potato, and can be read from different perspectives, making it dangerous, especially

in today’s America—near fatally divided as it is on ethical fault-lines, abortion the San Andreas of

them all.

August 8, 1969. The previous weekend King had read his columns in previous issues of the

Campus and formed the view some ‘of the stuff is good; some bad; a great deal seems to be rather

indifferent’, but notes he has been gratified by the general response—‘so many people seem to like

the column.’ He then decides to thank people he owes ‘an awful lot to’ for ‘things in general.’ These

include Maureen Babicki (King’s high school girlfriend—‘the most beautiful girl in the world’);

‘Carroll F. Terrell of the English department, who is an excellent critic’; Caroline Dodge, ‘who

turned me on to Tolkien’ (Dark Tower fans say thankya to Caroline); James Bishop of the English

Department (‘the most human and the most vital faculty member I have ever met’), and of whom he

argues proves ‘something good could come out of Old Town’ (also Tabitha King’s home); Dave

Bright (‘with whom I may some day share a cell in Leavenworth’—Bright announced at one anti-war

rally he’d rather serve there than in Vietnam); and Burt Hatlen (‘who challenges the intellect with

strength, vigor, and enthusiasm’). He closes, ‘Somebody told me the other day that he found this

column interesting but overly cynical. Well, I never meant it to be overly cynical—anyone who likes

the Pope can’t be all bad—right? If it has seemed that way, I’m sorry. I’ve got lots of reasons to be

anything but cynical. You just read through a lot of them.’

September 18, 1969. King returns after a six-week break with a light-hearted piece addressed

to that year’s freshman intake and which is one of the least important here. King advises that students

are now out on their own, in a position to test their judgment and about to suffer the stresses of

campus life, as a result of which they will likely change greatly. The following week’s column was a

reprint of the August 1st piece.

October 3, 1969. This week King explores campus student groups, finding members of All-

Maine Women, when ‘en masse’, to be ‘a little frightening’, projecting as they did ‘an aggressive air

of equal parts Colgate toothpaste, Ban Roll-On Deodorant, chewing-gum-flavored self-righteousness,

and a kind of hysterical virginity....’ Among other groups King says SDS 28 has ‘an air of jovial

insanity’; The Maine Outing Club ‘exudes brawn and clean-living charm’; the ‘sole purpose of Maine

Masque’ was to protect itself from the Campus drama critic and his ‘mad tirades’. King’s ‘pet

peeves’ though are the administration-oriented groups such as the Senior Skulls. Fraternities would

have been included in this list had not King noted an attempt to shed ‘the I-Am-Superior-To-The-

Rest-Of-You-Slobs image’. Condemning elitism in no uncertain terms King writes, ‘But it’s a shame

—a dirty, bitter shame—that the All-Maine Women, Senior Skulls and the rest, have won their

tawdry symbols in such a mean and pointless way, that they feel compelled to wear them, and that the

prize has proved so ultimately meaningless.’ One suspects the older, wiser King is quite a bit more

tolerant, or at least understanding of difference; this column reflects the ‘outsider’ in the young King

and, perhaps, his background as a hard-scrabble rural boy, making good against the odds while

observing the ‘born-to-rule’ mentality of these particular campus elites.

October 9, 1969. King reviews the seminal movie Easy Rider here, correctly identifying that,

‘It states a purely American situation in purely American terms. And, for me, at least, the most

startling thing about the picture was the way it points up the gap between generations in America

today.’ Like many movies that challenge and change mass-thinking Easy Rider is not as easily viewed

today as by those living the societal context it portrayed but it has not dated in quite the way other

controversial movies like Kramer vs. Kramer have. King says of the sudden intrusion of a drug

culture into mainstream American movies that the most shocking aspect is not the drugs, but the fact

that in the movie ‘drugs are as much a part of life as cigarettes, the automobile, and the corner

drugstore. If you aren’t into the drug scene, this calm acceptance comes as a neck-snapping surprise.

Nobody preaches drugs in Easy Rider, drugs are just there. And the inevitable conclusion is that they

are here to stay.’ Prescient, huh?

King also argues the violence in the movie is but a result of highly realistic clashes of culture:

‘The resultant tension and impending violence, the sense of total alienation between young and old, is

familiar to any young person who wears longer hair or sports a beard.’29 He opines that the movie

presents sex as being ‘all over the place’ and ‘free’, meaning the cultural clash here is when Dennis

Hopper and Peter Fonda’s characters find it unusual to pay for the pleasure when ‘everyone else is

giving it away....’

King felt, ‘Most adults aren’t going to like Easy Rider...And the kids aren’t going to be able to

understand their reaction.’ King says one character, eleven years from seeing the actor play his own

Jack Torrance on screen, is ‘… played with magnificent verve by Jack Nicholson…’ Considering

King’s unique view, originally an observer of American culture, then as reflector of it in his fiction,

and finally as creator, this is a very important column and it is a great loss it has not received wider

circulation.

October 16, 1969. 30 Here King returns to his October 3rd theme of campus life, claiming that,

apart from the aforementioned SDS, the Student Action Corps and the Student Senate (very active in

anti-War politics at the time and sponsors of the previous day’s Moratorium), ‘this is a pretty

apathetic campus.’ King tells his presumed apathetic readers that while they’ve been watching TV a

picket-line has been operating at a local market, trying to get California grapes off the shelves, in

support of striking grape-pickers in that state. Another example of King’s growing social

enlightenment, the column cogently argues for improved conditions for the largely Mexican-American

workers who performed such labor, in poor conditions on extremely low wages. King asks students

to sacrifice but one-and-a-half hours of their time two nights a week to the cause. Piqued, King claims

(probably another example of why he does not want these columns reprinted) that both the store

owner and those customers who cross the picket line ‘look like fat cats’ and that customers who shop

there ‘make somebody hungry every time they buy a steak or a frozen dinner or even a pack of

cigarettes, you wonder if they’re evil, pig-headed, or just plain stupid.’ For such a logical thinker,

this last appears to be a major lapse.

October 23, 1969. For the only time in one of these columns King writes of one of his great

passions, baseball (other such works are included in our Baseball chapter). This loving testimony

(‘Baseball’s a groove’) ends with King describing a sign he’d seen in the fourth game of the World

Series, reading ‘WHEEEEEEEEE!! It’s the same way I feel when I have a slice of Mom’s apple pie

with milk, or listen to little kids say the Pledge of Allegiance. It’s part of tradition. It’s something in

this dirty old world that’s just good.’ The piece celebrates the New York Mets victory in the Series

(King claiming to have been a fan since the club’s inauguration—not surprising as he was later a

card-carrying New York Yankees hater) and perhaps the best part is King’s hilarious evaluation of

events from the bumbling on-field career of Marvelous Marv Throneberry, a Mets first baseman

during the club’s initial wilderness years (according to King, he once ran from home directly to third

base on an easy triple and was called out for leaving the baseline).

Ki ng’s No Vietnamese Ever Called Me Nigger was also published in the Moratorium

supplement of this edition (see our Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television chapter).

October 30, 1969. The Nitty Grittys return here (see the 24 April 1969 and 18 July 1969

columns), worried about how quiet the campus had become. To their knowledge no one had been

pelted, no angry delegations had descended on the bookstore and the Maine football team had even

won some games! As ‘we of the Nitty Gritty, etc do not plan to stand by and watch peace creep

insidiously’ over the campus, they have ideas, ‘which you must promise not to breathe to a soul.’ The

new Dean, ‘consistently fair’ and with ‘an active interest in student affairs and problems’ must go—

driven out by an Olive Bomb, the explosion of which would pelt him with ripe olives and drive him

to a mental breakdown, allowing the return of the previous Dean, ‘who was immune not only to

coated olives, but to sour grapes as well.’ Next on the list is the newspaper’s editor, David Bright,

apparently planning a reversion to conservative values who, it was planned, would be locked up with

the editorial writer and cartoonist of the Bangor Daily News31 (thus curing ‘him of his nasty

tendencies’). The English Department, for planning a ‘POETRY!!’ festival; and the University

President are also targeted in this satirical piece.

November 7, 1969. 32 In this early role of music critic, King reviews his ‘best albums of the

year’: a tie between Dylan’s Nashville Skyline and Abbey Road by the Beatles (their best ‘since

Sergeant Pepper, which was probably the greatest rock (?) album ever cut’). His best singles are:

The Ballad of John and Yoko (by the Beatles—‘a fabulous look into the turmoiled mind of John

Lennon, and his own brilliant riposte at those who condemn his rather strange relationship with Yoko

Ono’); Simon and Garfunkel’s The Boxer; Sugar Sugar by the Archies (‘Okay...it may even be a ( sic)

baby-bopper stuff. But what’s wrong with that? You just have to dig it’); and Creedence Clearwater

Revival’s Green River (‘the strongest piece of bayou rock they’ve ever done’). The worst albums

and singles are also panned.

November 13, 1969. King starts this column stating that no one likes the cops—from the New

Left, through the Supreme Court to average Joes with parking tickets. So, who does: ‘Well, I do.’

King expresses his frustrations with the New Left’s portrayal of all cops as ‘pigs’ and their defense

even of those who shoot them. He then makes a cogent case that they are grossly underpaid and have

to work dealing with such appalling things as ‘pre-teen girls who have been raped, mothers who have

beaten their babies to death...covering maimed and burst bodies after traffic accidents’ and so on. In

this ‘dirty old world’, while the New Left ‘exist with their heads in the rosy clouds of Marxism,

socialism, liberalism, urban reform, social reform, world reform, and spiritual reform, the cop has

got...to make sure the rest of us aren’t robbed, raped, kidnapped, conned or killed.’ He then

recognizes there are bad cops (for instance, ‘in Alabama, where some...black people (and whites,

too) have been beat on’). ‘The wonder is there aren’t more bad ones.’ Closing, he says: ‘Okay, that’s

it. But the next time you open your mouth to talk about pigs, you better have a specific one in mind and

stop making these stupid and ugly generalizations.’ Here we see the thinking King telling it like it is—

despite likely disagreement from many of his radicalized readers.

This piece was reprinted as The Black Cat column in the Rockland, Maine Rockland Courier-

Gazette for November 22, 1969, along with a letter from a fellow UMO student, William A.

Philbrook. In a letter to the editor published in The Maine Campus for December 11, 1969 and

headed King Cat, King took great exception to what he regarded as misrepresentation of his views by

Philbrook (for full detail, see our Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns chapter). Rocky Wood

secured a copy of this reprint from the Rockland Public Library’s microfilm files in September 2005.

Before that the date of publication was unknown in the King community and copies had never

circulated. Those interested in securing a copy may visit the Public Library, which currently does not

charge for printing from the microfilm.

December 4, 1969. Back in satiric mode King recognizes that while everyone thinks the world

is in trouble—each for different reasons, ‘It’s a little bit frightening to wake up in the middle of the

night and realize that you may be the only one on earth’ to know why—in this case, because nobody is

drinking water. The substances they do drink (a range of brand-names; the ‘Commies are drinking

vodka’) are damaging their urinary tracts and therefore, ‘Let’s ban everything but good old American

down-home water!’ If President Nixon and other power brokers and celebrities could be induced to

drink plain water they might end up embracing—‘So let’s get together right now. Remember: / Today

the urinary tracts—tomorrow the world!’ Little more need be said.

December 11, 1969. This column presents King’s ‘first annual’ trivia contest, ‘because

absolutely nobody asked for it,’ and offers as first prize a tour of Veazie (a town bordering Orono and

likely the model for the Cleaves Mills of The Dead Zone), ending ‘at my apartment, where I will

regale you with anecdotes out of my colorful past’ and, as second prize, a ‘hamburger with me at

Farnsworth’s Cafe’ (this Orono fixture, still under Farnsworth family management and serving value-

for-money burgers, is now Pat’s Pizza). The questions matter little here (except they were serious and

not jocular) excepting one: ‘What was The Fugitive’s real name?’ King clearly enjoyed and retained

his interest in this classic TV series, as he wrote the Introduction to The Fugitive Recaptured: The

30th Anniversary Companion to the Television Classic.33

This edition also carried King’s letter to the editor, King Cat, mentioned earlier in relation to a

reprint of his November 13, 1969 column in a small-town newspaper ‘down-state’.

December 18, 1969. In this column King delves into what was once known as Fortean

phenomena34—unexplained incidents. Among these are disappearances—Judge Crater from a New

York City street35 and Ambrose Bierce (author of The Devil’s Dictionary ) in Mexico; a rain of frogs

(the feature of King’s short story Rainy Season); UFOs (see Dreamcatcher); telekinesis ( Carrie);

and ghosts. Odd though these may be, King argues that ‘it’s probably nonsense’ (although he goes on

to indicate he doesn’t really believe that) but this is not the real significance of this piece.

In one of the most important Garbage Truck paragraphs to the study of King we read the

following:

“In the early 1800’s a whole sect of Shakers, a rather strange religious persuasion at best,

disappeared from their village (Jeremiah’s Lot) in Vermont. The town remains uninhabited to this

day. On the night before one of my high school friends died in a car accident I dreamed of a hideous

man with a scarred face hanging from a black gibbet against a green sky. The incident sticks in my

mind because the hanged man was wearing a card around his neck bearing this friend’s name. I woke

with a sweaty premonition that on the night before I kicked off I would dream the dream again, only

this time the card would bear my name.”

First, this is obviously a precursor to the novel ’Salem’s Lot and its related story Jerusalem’s

Lot (in the short story the entire population of the town disappeared; in the novel the town was

abandoned after an infestation of vampires). Also, in the novel, we read that all the residents of

Momson, Vermont disappeared in the summer of 1923—in early drafts of the novel the town infested

by vampires was actually Momson, Maine. Clearly this concept fascinated King but research turns up

no actual story or even urban legend relating to a Jeremiah’s Lot, although there are plenty of

disappearing population stories—real, hoaxes and fictional—in US records.

Second, the dream. In Danse Macabre King has this to say of a dream he later used in a famous

scene (or, as we shall learn, two): ‘… the most vivid dream I can recall came to me when I was

about eight. In this dream I saw the body of a hanged man dangling from the arm of a scaffold on a

hill. Rooks perched on the shoulders of the corpse, and behind it was a noxious green sky, boiling

with clouds. This corpse bore a sign: ROBERT BURNS. But when the wind caused the corpse to turn

in the air, I saw that it was my face—rotted and picked by the birds, but obviously mine. And then the

corpse opened its eyes and looked at me...Sixteen years later, I was able to use the dream as one of

the central images in my novel Salem’s Lot. I just changed the name of the corpse to Hubie Marsten.’

Followers of the Dark Tower Cycle will also recognize in the first part of this dream the hanging of

Hax, the traitorous cook in The Gunslinger, meaning King has actually mined the one dream at least

twice.

Compellingly written, in the style readers worldwide would come to know, it would be of value

to fans and researchers everywhere should King allow this column to be reprinted at some point.

January 8, 1970. ‘So there are your 60’s. / Put ’em in the memory books, folks. They’re all

gone. But it was some kind of decade, while it lasted.’ King says if you try ‘very, very hard’ you can

probably remember ‘what you looked like and thought like and dressed like in 1960’: he ‘was a

thirteen-year-old kid running around with a flat-top haircut.’ Our favorite author had spent his

‘decade ending holiday at a dance in my home town’, where a friend suggested a time traveler from

1960 would be shocked at the decadence of the later time, and the change that had been wrought in

that short period.

King claims the three landmark movies of the 60’s to have been The Wild Bunch, Bonnie and

Clyde and The Graduate; notes the movies had introduced the new rating system of G, M, R and X ‘to

cope with the problems of a new sexual expression’; and points out that, ‘isolated from our disturbing

times’ many movies, books (such as Portnoy’s Complaint ) and much art ‘contain many indicators of

a culture that is going insane.’

January 15, 1970. The front cover of this edition is the famous ‘public service poster from the

makers of The Maine Campus’36 of a long-haired, crazed-looking King, brandishing a shotgun over

the demand, ‘Study, Dammit!!’

The column inside continues in a surreal vein, with King offering his ‘last Will and Testament’

(dating it ‘this 12th day of January, 1970’ he describes himself as ‘having no debts outstanding, never

having been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor, a resident of Durham, Maine, and freeholder in

that Town, registered voter’, etc. and signs it ‘Stephen E. King’ with a cross for ‘His Mark’). In full

voice he leaves the University English Department his assurance of a recommendation ‘should It

decide to move to another school’ and says he is grateful that ‘It managed to stay out of my way so

successfully.’ He leaves his ‘reams of yellow journalism’ to TheMaine Campus; to friend Flip

Thompson his car (‘which he has pushed many times’); and so on through a range of friends,

celebrities and even the despised (at the time) Bangor Daily News (to whom ‘I bequeath my

landlady’)! How about this clearly satiric line: ‘To Norman Mailer, Phillip Roth, and John Updike, I

bequeath the hope they will eventually learn to write like me.’

February 5, 1970. King returns to a critique of then current television (an almost eternal theme

for the man, who seems to devour American culture) saying it ‘is more hideous than ever…’ One

bright spot was the ABC Movie of the Week (ABC would be the network to carry most made-for-TV

King movies and mini-series), including The Immortal, ‘the best science-fiction drama I have ever

seen on television.’ Of the better shows King likes Mannix, ‘ Gunsmoke continues good, and

Raymond Burr as Ironside is often superb.’ Panned shows include Bewitched and The Flying Nun.

‘Television is a marvelous invention—its potential is endless, the possibilities fascinating. But it is

wet and sick and fat.’

This edition also carried King’s letter to the editor, Cancelled Stamp (for more detail see our

Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns chapter), which refers to the front cover poster of the man

himself in the previous week’s issue.

February 12, 1970. ‘It just makes me feel angry and sick.’ What does? King is furious in this

column about what he sees as hypocritical criticisms of his generation, such as of their long hair:

‘Can you imagine a country supposedly based on freedom of expression telling people they can’t

grow hair on their head or their face? Since when have we descended to the point we care more about

what people look like than what they think....’ he writes and uses Albert Einstein, Abe Lincoln and

David Ben Gurion as examples of those who would be replaced by the likes of James Earl Ray, Lee

Harvey Oswald, Eichmann and George Rockwell in such circumstances. He pans then President

Nixon’s ‘silent majority’ (some of the criticism here is over the top, perhaps another example of why

King does not allow reproduction of these columns). He points out the absurdity of a society that is

high on booze but bans drugs; and one that virtually lionizes gun-based violence but finds sex and

nudity obscene.

Frustrated, King concludes, ‘At a time when society needs its young more than ever before—the

new ideas, the new life-styles, the fresh approach—this same society seems hysterically bent on

perpetuating its own mordant mould. I don’t understand. But I do know this bull won’t go down with

me.’ King was right—his generation did usher in a new liberal social attitude and America did need

it. What King later saw as that same generation’s long-term failings comes in for explicit criticism in

hi s Why We’re in Vietnam short story from the Hearts in Atlantis collection. The great divide

between social mores continues in America today—under the crass but somehow accurate term,

‘Culture Wars’.

February 19, 1970. In this piece King is encouraging students to attend the free weekly horror

movies on campus. Interestingly he tells us that the previous Sunday37 he’d seen Dracula, with Bela

Lugosi38: ‘I was delighted...I’d never seen the film, but now I can understand why it has spawned so

many imitations.’ He recommends the upcoming Frankenstein (with Boris Karloff); Charles Laughton

i n The Hunchback of Notre Dame; The Pit and the Pendulum (‘this free-wheeling adaptation of

Poe’s story is probably better than any ever done’)39; and The Haunting, ‘to my mind one of the most

frightening (and artful) movies ever made.’

King had previously enjoyed showings of The Sand Pebbles with Steve McQueen, Rosemary’s

Baby and Psycho. He also suggests further themes to the powers determining which movies would

appear—‘some of the old gangster films, Cagney, Edward G. Robinson, Fred McMurray—or the

classic Westerns like High Noon and Shane. I’ve even got guts enough to suggest an Audie Murphy

festival....’

February 26, 1970. Staying with the silver screen this week King recommends George Kennedy

(‘a fine and honest actor’) in Tick…Tick…Tick, showing at the Brewer Cinema. For some reason he

states Robert Duvall plays a role as Kennedy’s ex-deputy, although research shows he did not appear

(he also misspells Fredric March’s first name, understandably as Frederic; and the movie is normally

listed as tick…tick...tick). He says the movie ‘treats some of the problems of white-black relations in

the south with clarity and humanity’, and calls it ‘part of a dying breed—just a plain old good movie.’

March 19, 1970. This column is unique in that King reprints a letter he’d written (most likely to

his long-time girlfriend, Maureen Babicki, as it begins ‘Dear Maureen’) on February 16, 1969 (‘the

day of The Big Snowstorm’) but never posted (‘I don’t mail about 90% of my correspondence, which

is probably just as well’). As there’d also been a huge snowstorm the previous Sunday, he thought it

fitting. King says he hates snow and winter, ‘but something like this just overwhelms you, makes you

love it...maybe every snow-hater harbors a secret love for big blizzards.’ This scenario would appear

in King’s storytelling—most particularly in Storm of the Century, The Reach and one of his most

famous novels. King also writes, ‘…in my head which is always filled with middling-strange

thoughts’; and, in evocative description, of the isolation and slow death suffered by an imaginary

group snowed-in on campus (resonating with imagery that would later appear in the aforementioned

novel, The Shining); and this: ‘In a lot of my writing I’ve been worried about the morbid, about

Things that Lurk. Maybe those things—my big snowstorm, for instance—are only part of an urge to

externalize the internal monster in us all.’ An important column to King research, this is one that could

certainly do with a wider circulation.

March 26, 1970. This column deals with what is now the arcane campus education structure of

the time—King says he’s out of touch having ‘been student teaching for the last eight weeks’ but has

opinions of his own. Pressure is on he says (as a result of a moratorium) but not to destroy the current

University structure or to ‘headhunt’ for individual faculty victims, nor to wreck specific colleges, but

to find ways ‘to make the University better.’ His ‘particular hobby-horse is the question of

requirements’ and he calls for the axing of ‘this particular form of campus insanity’ and goes on to

explain his reasoning, which is of little interest here.

April 9, 1970. In one of the least important of these pieces King wonders what would happen if

campus personalities replaced stars on certain TV programs, which would then be moved to Orono.

April 16, 1970. Here King tells of his change from Republican supporter (he says that in May of

196940 he was ‘fully behind Richard Nixon’) to Independent—‘I have not disowned the Republican

Party, but last fall since it seemed that the Republican Party had disowned me, I recanted and

registered in my home town as an Independent. This may seem like a small step to you, but to

establishment pro-American me, it was a major step. I have always been a conservative and I remain

conservative but my, how like a radical that makes a person seem in the America of 1970...How did I

become a scummy radical bastard? Well, I started out with the belief that America was and should

again be a country of individuals, a country where one isn’t the lonliest ( sic) number but the most

important. This doesn’t seem like a radical idea—it is the basis of the Declaration of Independence,

the Constitution, and even the Articles of Confederation—but in 1970 it seems to make you a scummy

radical bastard.’

King argues this means ‘you can’t accept the draft...that you use whatever stimulants amuse

you...you must read, live and decide on all questions of morality without the benefit’ of a list of

community organizations such as ‘B’Nai B’Rith, the Daughters of the American Revolution, the

Catholic Church....’ He says America could be a good country again when ‘we realize that the real

American Way (if there ever was such a thing) is to think and feel for yourself, not to leave it up to

some juiceless fool in Washington.’ King here reflects the old-style Yankee Republicanism in which

he was raised; and notes both the solidity of his core values, and the move toward the different

political accommodation he found necessary to his adult life.

April 30, 1970. In a fluffy and now largely irrelevant piece King talks about the American

‘sport’ of girl watching, gives some tips and a basic rating system. It seems this week, in one of his

last columns, King had run out of much to say.

May 7, 1970. In the penultimate regular column King writes, ‘Well, this is almost it—the

garbage truck is almost out of gas. / Barring accident, death, or insanity, I expect to graduate in a few

weeks.’ King relates some of the political events of his childhood—the ‘constant, vague anxiety about

the Russians’; the 1956 Hungarian revolt against Communism; Sputnik; and the Francis Gary

Powers/U2 affair, along with his unquestioning pro-American approach to them, that is until he found

his Government lying to him over Powers (‘I can remember being angry at my country’) and began to

consider how he could ‘detect the lie’ if offered by government or politician, yet ‘I love my country

as much as anyone else. Love, by the way, is exactly the right word here; because it seems more and

more that this is an irrational feeling which flies in the face of all logic and sense.’

King claims here of Sputnik, ‘I was waiting in the barber shop to get a haircut when that

happened.’ Later, in Danse Macabre, he would relate being in a movie theatre at the time. One

wonders which is correct while excusing one of America’s great writers of fiction from fictionalizing

his own memories, most likely without realizing it, from time to time.

A special edition of The Maine Campus, dated May 8, 1970 and titled The Paper, carried a

satirical piece by King under the title, A Possible Fairy Tale. 41

May 21, 1970. This column, the last to appear as King’s Garbage Truck, is the only one King

has given permission to be reprinted outside The Maine/Summer Campus, for its appearance in

Maine, the University of Maine alumni magazine (Fall, 1989).

King announces his upcoming graduation (and ‘birth into the real world’). At the time he

weighed 207 pounds, was 6 foot 3 inches tall (‘I didn’t know they piled it that high, either!’) and had

a ‘hairy’ complexion. His favorite films of the time were They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? , Bonnie

and Clyde, M*A*S*H, The Wild Angels, Attack of the Giant Leeches and The Ballad of Cable

Hogue; his favorite group, Creedence Clearwater Revival; and his most hated groups Blood, Sweat

and Tears, along with Chicago. Under ‘Future prospects’ we read, ‘This boy shows evidences of

some talent, although at this point it is impossible to tell if he is just a flash in the pan or if he has real

possibilities. It seems obvious he has learned a great deal at the University of Maine at Orono,

although a great deal has contributed to a lessening of idealistic fervor rather than a heightening of

that characteristic.’

King leaves the ‘general body politic’ and his readers alike with this advice: ‘No.1 Live peace.

/ No.2 Love a neighbor today. / No.3 If the establishment doesn’t like it, then screw ‘em. / Take care

of yourselves, friends.’

More Truck—November 5, 1970.

The title of this guest column references the original King’s Garbage Truck columns covered

above. Unimportant other than for its existence as reprise, King argues here that UMO students need

to start ‘changing the campus image’ from that of drug-taking radicals to one representing the vast

majority of the real student body, who were largely nothing of the sort, or risk ‘economic and social

strangulation’ by the angry voters of Maine’s ‘middle- and working-class’ (who fund the University

of Maine system through their taxes).

This piece may also be copied from the microfiche files of UMO’s Fogler Library.

So there it is, an eclectic collection of views from the young King, showing a growing strength

as a writer and a strong foretaste of the themes that would fill out his non-fiction in the coming

decades.

DANSE MACABRE, ON WRITING

I recognize terror as the finest emotion and so I will try to terrorize the reader. But if I find

that I cannot terrify, I will try to horrify, and if I find that I cannot horrify, I’ll go for the gross-

out. I’m not proud.

—From Danse Macabre.

King has written two volumes of non-fiction— Danse Macabre and On Writing—and co-

authored another, on the Boston Red Sox’s victorious 2004 season, Faithful. Writing an entire non-

fiction book is a lengthy task and is very different from fiction. King notes in Danse Macabre: ‘With

nonfiction, there’s all that bothersome business of making sure your facts are straight, that the dates

jibe, that the names are spelled right....” Indeed! Let’s look at these two books and The Fright Report

(only part of which was merged into Danse Macabre).

Danse Macabre (1981)

I am a writer by trade, which means that the most interesting things that have happened to me

have happened in my dreams.

King details the genesis of Danse Macabre in the original Forenote to the volume. In November

1978 he received a call from Bill Thompson, the editor who ‘discovered’ him for Doubleday (they

worked together on the five novels from Carrie to The Stand). King left Doubleday as a result of

commercial policies toward their authors and Thompson had also moved—to become senior editor at

Everest House. Thompson proposed a book about the ‘entire horror phenomenon’ but this was

quickly watered down to the previous thirty years. King says, ‘All this is by way of acknowledging

Bill Thompson, who created the concept of this book. The idea was and is a good one. If you like the

book that follows, thank Bill, who thought it up. If you don’t, blame the author, who screwed it up.’

In an aside, King tells of getting drunk with Thompson in a New York Irish pub in 1978.

Noticing a sign saying the Earlybird Happy Hour was 8-10 am, King asked the barkeep who would

wander in looking for a drink at that time. The reply: ‘College boys...like you.’ King must really enjoy

that story as he repeats it (with minor variations) in sub-section 32 of the C.V. section of On Writing,

written a full two decades later!

Also in the Forenote, written at the family’s lake home in Center Lovell, Maine, King says the

book is to be ‘my Final Statement on the clockwork of the horror tale.’

Everest House first published the volume (its rarely used full title is Stephen King’s Danse

Macabre) in a 1981 hardback edition (a signed limited edition of only 250 and a signed lettered

edition of 15 were also released). It would be Everest’s only King publication and the last of the six

books Thompson edited for King. It was later released in a Book-of-the-Month Club edition; a

simultaneous UK hardback and paperback (McDonald Futura, 1981); and US paperback (Berkley

Books, 1982). Like a number of King’s early works it is not yet available in audio book format

(perhaps because it would best be narrated by King who, as a result of not wanting the heavy work

load of updating the content, may find the whole idea unacceptable).

The Berkley mass-market paperback edition (first published in December 1983) was the first to

include King’s Forenote to the Paperback Edition. In this the author explains he’d asked, in the first

Forenote, for anyone who noted errors in the original edition to send them in. King’s then agent Kirby

McCauley suggested Dennis Etchison (whose The Dark Country King praises highly in this second

Forenote), an expert on the arcane aspects of horror, could assist with corrections. King forwarded

Etchison his file of ‘you fucked up’ letters and he assisted King to make the later editions ‘rather

more accurate in a number of respects’.

The title Danse Macabre apparently derives from the French ‘La Danse Macabre’ (‘Dance of

Death’ in English), a late-medieval allegory for the universality of death. Various depictions (such as

Holbein’s series, The Dance of Death) show a skeleton, representing death, leading people from all

levels of society—emperors to paupers—and all age groups, to the grave.

King provides an interesting dedication to the volume: ‘It’s easy enough—perhaps too easy—to

memorialize the dead. This book is for six great writers who are still alive. Robert Bloch / Jorge Luis

Borges / Ray Bradbury / Frank Belknap Long / Donald Wandrei and Manly Wade Wellman. Enter,

Stranger, at your Riske: Here there be Tygers. ’

Of course, even a casual reader will know of Robert Bloch (author of the novel, Psycho and

many superb short stories42), Jorge Luis Borges (a leading exponent of magical realism) and the

incomparable Ray Bradbury, more of whom later. The latter three names will be less known by the

average reader. Long was a friend of Lovecraft, a writer of both superior Lovecraftian works and

science-fiction; Wandrei was a founder of Arkham House, dedicated to preserving and publishing

Lovecraftian fiction; and Wellman wrote in a full range of genres, including science-fiction and

fantasy (King even donated one of his notebooks to an auction to assist Wellman’s widow—it

contained the unpublished partial story Keyholes43).

King says the book is ‘intended to be an informal overview of where the horror genre has been

over the last thirty years, and not an autobiography of yours truly.’ That would have to wait for the

opening section of On Writing. In the late 1970s King was arguing, ‘The autobiography of a father,

writer, and ex-high school teacher would make dull reading indeed. I am a writer by trade, which

means that the most interesting things that have happened to me have happened in my dreams.’ Of

course, by the end of the century, King’s life and career made interesting reading on any number of

levels and choosing to deliver some autobiography (if couched in the dry terms of a ‘Curriculum

Vitae’) showed how much more King understood of himself and was willing to share. There has been

little biography of King, and he is known to oppose the very concept. It is our opinion that the best

person to write a King biography would be King himself, and let’s leave that subject right there!

In opening the book we are delivered of an autobiographical incident, with a ten-year-old

Durham schoolboy and his friends in a movie theatre being given the shocking news that the Russians

had launched Sputnik44. In this chapter, October 4, 1957, and an Invitation to Dance the author

posits a core question facing the horror genre and presented to its practitioners: ‘Why do you want to

make up horrible things when there is so much real horror in the world?’ The reasoned response:

‘The answer seems to be that we make up horrors to help us cope with the real ones.’ That is, at

times, horror is catharsis, or at least an analyst’s couch for the masses. Interestingly, while King is

dealing with the fantastic here (monsters, the supernatural and all the trappings), as his career has

developed the most shocking views have been the portrayal of the all too real horrors of life—

domestic violence ( Dolores Claiborne, Rose Madder), child abuse ( Gerald’s Game ), murder ( Bag

of Bones), injustice ( The Green Mile), alcoholism ( The Shining).

Early on King develops one of the two main Arguments of this book, summarized in perhaps his

best-known quote, which appears as the beginning of this chapter. ‘The closest I want to come to

definition or rationalization is to suggest that the genre exists on three more or less separate levels,

each one a little less fine than the one before it.’ He tells us of the three: ‘The finest emotion is

terror...,’ in which the imagination alone is stimulated (using The Monkey’s Paw as example); the

‘horror comics of the fifties still sum up for me the epitome of horror, that emotion of fear that

underlies terror, an emotion which is slightly less fine, because it is not entirely of the mind....”,

normally inviting a physical reaction (E.C. comics exemplifying this level); and ‘…the third level—

that of revulsion’ (King uses Foul Play, a story from The Crypt of Terror to demonstrate).

The conclusion of this Argument, according to King: ‘So, terror on top, horror below it, and

lowest of all, the gag reflex of revulsion. My own philosophy as a sometime writer of horror fiction

is to recognize these distinctions because they are sometimes useful, but to avoid any preference for

one over the other on the grounds that one effect is somehow better than another. The problem with

definitions is that they have a way of turning into critical tools—and this sort of criticism, which I

would call criticism-by-rote, seems to be needlessly restricting and even dangerous. I recognize

terror as the finest emotion and so I will try to terrorize the reader. But if I find that I cannot

terrify, I will try to horrify, and if I find that I cannot horrify, I’ll go for the gross-out. I’m not

proud. ’ Putting this quote into the original context tends to make the whole thing a touch more

intellectual and a lot less cardboard cutout horror writer, wouldn’t you agree?

The second Argument is that there are three major archetypes in modern horror fiction; and that

they arose from but three novels. In the Tales of the Tarot chapter King cogently analyses Robert

Louis Stevenson’s Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde45, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, and Frankenstein46 by Mary Shelley: ‘… these three are something special. They stand at the foundation of a huge skyscraper of

books and films—those twentieth-century gothics which have become known as ‘the modern horror

story’. More than that, at the center of each stands (or slouches) a monster that has come to join and

enlarge what Burt Hatlen47 calls ‘the myth-pool’—that body of fictive literature in which all of us,

even the nonreaders and those who do not go to the films, have communally bathed. Like an almost

perfect Tarot hand representing our lusher concepts of evil, they can be neatly laid out: the Vampire,

the Werewolf, and the Thing Without a Name.’

King, having chosen to develop the theory that most modern horror extends from one of the three

great archetypes48 established in the 19th century, then excludes the Ghost from his analysis, with

reason. He says ‘the Ghost is an archetype which spreads across too broad an area to be limited to a

single novel, no matter how great. The archetype of the Ghost is, after all, the Mississippi of

supernatural fiction....” Later, he describes the Ghost as the ‘fourth archetype’ in discussing Straub’s

Ghost Story.

Concluding this Argument King tells us: ‘It would be ridiculous for me to suggest that all modern

horror fiction, both in print and in celluloid, can be boiled down to these three archetypes. It would

simplify things enormously, but it would be a false simplification, even with the Tarot card of the

Ghost thrown in for good measure. It doesn’t end with the Thing, the Vampire, and the Werewolf;

there are other bogeys out there in the shadows as well. But these three account for a large bloc of

modern horror fiction.’

King’s analysis is reasoned, arguing that filmmakers constantly return to these three monsters,

probably because they really are archetypes—for instance, Norman Bates is but another form of

Werewolf, George Romero’s zombies are Vampires in another guise (cannibals rather than blood-

drinkers); and the Thing in the 1951 movie is exactly that.

In discussing the three novels King makes this broader point: ‘What the would-be writer of

“serious fiction” seems to forget is that novels are engines, just as cars are engines; a Rolls-Royce

without an engine might as well be the world’s most luxurious begonia pot, and a novel in which

there is no story becomes nothing but a curiosity, a little mental game. Novels are engines, and

whatever we might say about these three, their creators stoked them with enough inventions to run

each fast and hot and clean.’ We might say that about the vast majority of King’s novels—from the

Rolls-Royce of The Stand, through to the 1958 Plymouth Fury (and do you think King used that model

by accident?) of Christine.

In section three of the Horror Fiction chapter King discusses another archetype, ‘another of

those springs that feed the myth-pool’, the Bad Place. He argues that haunted houses (the natural

habitat of the Ghost) are but part of this wider archetype. Readers should take the time to read this

section if only for King’s entertaining description of the house in Durham, and the events surrounding

he and his friends entering it, that formed the basis of the Marsten House in Salem’s Lot . King is

something of a master of this archetype, having introduced us to other Bad Places such as the Stanley

Hotel in The Shining and the Pet Sematary.

Despite his claim not to be writing autobiography as such King does not let down those

interested more in the author than the product. In a chapter amusingly titled An Annoying

Autobiographical Pause, King recalls the first time he publicly told the story that most attribute as

inspiration for The Body. Making it clear he does not recall the events himself (what he is recalling is

his mother’s story) we learn that, aged just four, another child had been run over by a slow-moving

freight train while playing with or near King (‘years later, my mother told me they had picked up the

pieces in a wicker basket’). The point of this tale is that as soon as King had repeated it while

answering a question the audience, and even a fellow panelist, began attributing King’s desire to

write horror fiction with this single event. King goes on to deny this simplistic interpretation outright.

He does agree that the writer’s past and experiences serve as grist for the mill, as well he might,

considering how autobiographic some of his fiction is. King relates one dream that he later used in a

famous scene (or, as we shall learn, two): ‘… the most vivid dream I can recall came to me when I

was about eight. In this dream I saw the body of a hanged man dangling from the arm of a scaffold on

a hill. Rooks perched on the shoulders of the corpse, and behind it was a noxious green sky, boiling

with clouds. This corpse bore a sign: ROBERT BURNS. But when the wind caused the corpse to turn

in the air, I saw that it was my face—rotted and picked by the birds, but obviously mine. And then the

corpse opened its eyes and looked at me...Sixteen years later, I was able to use the dream as one of

the central images in my novel Salem’s Lot. I just changed the name of the corpse to Hubie Marsten.’

Followers of the Dark Tower Cycle will recognize in the first part of this dream the hanging of

Hax, the traitorous cook in The Gunslinger, meaning King has actually mined the one dream at least

twice. 49

Another of the personal King tales that is now well known was first revealed in Danse

Macabre. Telling a little of the history of his maternal grandparents and his mother he comes to his

father—Don King, who skipped out on the family when our hero was but two. In 1959 or 1960 Steve

and his adopted brother David discovered their father’s effects in an attic above their aunt and

uncle’s garage, across a field from their own home in Durham. Among the boxes was a stash of old

horror fiction novels and collections (‘the pick of the litter was an H. P. Lovecraft collection’),

King’s first taste of serious horror writing (in comparison to comics or B-movies). He writes, ‘…

that book, courtesy of my departed father, was my first taste of a world that went deeper than B-

pictures...or...boy’s fiction....’ And the rest is history.

In one revelatory paragraph King explains why speculative fiction normally lags in sales (with

King one of the few exceptions): ‘I think that only people who have worked in the field for some time

truly understand how fragile this stuff really is, and what an amazing commitment it imposes on the

reader or viewer of intellect and maturity. When Coleridge spoke of “the suspension of disbelief” in

his essay on imaginative poetry, I believe he knew that disbelief is not like a balloon, which may be

suspended in the air with a minimum of effort; it is like a lead weight, which has to be hoisted with a

clean jerk and held up by main force. Disbelief isn’t light; it’s heavy. The difference in sales between

Arthur Hailey and H.P. Lovecraft may exist because everyone believes in cars and banks, but it takes

a sophisticated and muscular intellectual act to believe, even for a little while in

Nyarlathotep...whenever I run into someone who expresses a feeling along the lines of, “I don’t read

fantasy or go to any of those movies; none of it’s real,” I feel a kind of sympathy. They simply can’t

lift the weight of fantasy. The muscles of the imagination have grown too weak.’

In his chapter on American horror movies King briefly notes, ‘In AIP’s The Pit and the

Pendulum we see another facet of the bad death—perhaps the absolute worst. Vincent Price and his

cohorts break into a tomb...they discover the lady, his late wife, has indeed been buried alive....’ In

On Writing King would say of this movie, ‘It might have been the last really great studio horror

picture before George Romero’s ferocious indie The Night of the Living Dead came along and

changed everything forever.’ And, he would tell of his ‘novelization’ of that very movie while at

elementary school, which also turned out to be his first best seller.

In the chapter The Modern American Horror Movie—Text and Subtext King makes cogent

arguments that many horror movies of the fifties, sixties and seventies were socio-political in nature;

and that many others reach deep-seated personal fears of taboos crossed. In one section King writes

of the ‘techno-horror’ films of the sixties and seventies, such as ‘ The China Syndrome, a horror

movie which synthesizes all three of these major technological fears: fears of radiation, fears for the

ecology, fears of machinery gone out of control, run wild.’ While changing times have eliminated

nuclear effects as inspiration for horror, two and a half decades after King wrote these words fear of

medical disaster, plague and the like (inspired by the AIDS epidemic and genetic advances) has

stepped in to take the mantle.

In his fiction King has returned over and again to one of these fears—one that, while not

exclusively his domain, is certainly a signature theme—the fear of machinery or technology out of

control. From The Mangler to The Stand, The Tommyknockers and Trucks King returns regularly to

this well. In fact the one movie he directed, Maximum Overdrive, is from this very source.

Still on movies King makes one very interesting comment about the director of a cult movie,

Duel: ‘...perhaps not Spielberg’s best work—that must almost certainly wait for the eighties and

nineties....’ How prescient is that? And while still on the subject of the silver screen King devotes an

entire chapter to a loving review of bad horror movies, The Horror Movie as Junk Food; and does

the same for the small screen in The Glass Teat, or, This Monster Was Brought to You by

Gainesburgers.

Discussing phobic pressure points in horror King writes: ‘‘Death,’” the boy Mark Petrie thinks

at one point in Salem’s Lot, ‘is when the monsters get you.’ And if I had to restrict everything I have

ever said or written about the horror genre to that one statement (and many critics would say I should

have done, ha-ha), it would be that one.’”

The core of the book is Horror Fiction, where King discusses ten books from the period 1950-

1980 ‘that seem representative of everything in the genre that is fine: the horror story as both

literature and entertainment, a living part of twentieth-century literature, and worthy successors to

such books as Frankenstein, Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, Dracula, and Chalmers’s The King in Yellow.

They are books and stories which seem to me to fulfill the primary duty of literature—to tell the truth

about ourselves by telling lies about people who never existed.’

The ten are: Ghost Story by Peter Straub (later King’s collaborator on The Talisman and Black

House) ; The House Next Door by Anne Rivers Siddons; The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley

Jackson; Rosemary’s Baby by Ira Levin; The Body Snatchers by Jack Finney; Something Wicked

This Way Comes by Ray Bradbury50; The Shrinking Man by Richard Matheson; The Doll Who Ate

His Mother by Ramsey Campbell; The Fog by James Herbert; and Strange Wine, a Harlan Ellison

collection. Hard as it was for King to limit himself to but ten books from those three decades it would

be fascinating to know what ten books he might choose as representatives of the quarter century since.

At one point in Danse Macabre he does offer this: ‘… it seems to me that it [ The Haunting of Hill

House] and James’s The Turn of the Screw are the only two great novels of the supernatural in the

last hundred years (although we might add two long novellas: Machen’s ‘The Great God Pan’ and

Lovecraft’s ‘At the Mountains of Madness’).’

A quarter century ago, when Danse Macabre was written, King said: ‘I’ve purposely avoided

writing a novel with a 1960’s time setting because all of that seems...very distant to me now—almost

as if it happened to another person.’ Of course, by 1999 the author had transported himself back to the

restless campus years of his youth and delivered the compelling, funny and revealing novella Hearts

in Atlantis.

King makes a number of points about fiction in general. He takes them up again and again in his

non-fiction and interviews. The base view never changes: story is paramount. At one point here we

read: ‘My own belief about fiction, long and deeply held, is that story must be paramount over all

other considerations in fiction; that story defines fiction, and that all other considerations—theme,

mood, tone, symbol, style, even characterization—are expendable.’ We’ll read much more along this

line in On Writing. At another point: ‘Fiction is the truth inside the lie, and in the tale of horror as in

any other tale, the same rule applies now as when Aristophanes told his horror tale of the frogs:

morality is telling the truth as your heart knows it. When asked if he was not ashamed of the rawness

and sordidness of his turn-of-the-century novel McTeague, Frank Norris replied: “Why should I be? I

did not lie. I did not truckle. I told them the truth.”’51

The book concludes with two interesting appendices. One covers King’s Top 100

Fantasy/Horror Films of 1950-1980 (his absolute favorites are indicated); and the other his Top 100

Fantasy/Horror Books of the same period (for this King indicates those he considers ‘important’).

Many fans have made a point of trying to see and read each item on the two lists and others wish King

would update them in some form.

Danse Macabre is certainly important—as an original work about the horror genre. Although

not couched in academic-speak there is no doubt this review by one of the genre’s leading exponents

will serve for decades as an important reference work.

Michele Slung (whose 1991 anthology I Shudder at Your Touch: 22 Tales of Sex and Horror is

the only mass-market book to carry King’s The Revelations of ‘Becka Paulson) reviewed Danse

Macabre for The New York Times 52, as ‘a one-man flea market of opinions and ideas, [it] will certainly be a treat for those avid readers of horror, fantasy and science-fiction who like nothing

better than to sit around, after a George Romero double-feature followed by a late-night rerun of ‘The

Twilight Zone’, and recall the great days of E.C. Comics. However, for those who have little interest

in accompanying Mr. King on a highly discursive ramble through byways lined with other people’s

monsters and mad scientists, this book may prove both boring and baffling, a trick instead of a treat.’

Perhaps feeling she should look down, high browed upon this best-selling upstart, she continued, ‘…

we are exposed to thousands of Kingian pronouncements; there is nothing that doesn’t elicit an

opinion from him—or a definitive statement.’ And: ‘Mr. King’s class-clown mannerisms—his

fascination with nose picking and clogged pores, his fondness for words such as puke, yuch and dreck

—are partly a defense mechanism, I believe. He has serious thoughts and ambitions and wants to be

taken seriously; at the same time, he’s a little bit jumpy about it.’

On the other hand Wiater, Golden and Wagner say the book ‘… remains an affectionate yet

perceptive look at how horror in the mass media and the arts has affected our popular culture in

general—and one little boy from Maine in particular.’53 Spignesi says, ‘It is also an astute

sociocultural commentary; a discerning look at what these tales of grue and dread mean to the body

politic; and why enjoying being frightened has been a constant throughout sentient civilization.’54

Collings concurs: ‘As criticism, Danse Macabre is valuable and entertaining; as a reflection of

King’s beliefs, it brilliantly illuminates his own writing.’55 Danse Macabre won the Non-Fiction

Hugo Award in 198256 and the equivalent Locus Award in the same year57.

When writing Danse Macabre King incorporated some previously published material. These

are:

Portions of The Fright Report (reviewed later in this chapter); The Doll Who Ate His Mother58

(originally published in Whispers for October 1978), in the Horror Fiction chapter; Imagery and the

Third Eye (originally published in The Writer for October 1980; reprinted in Maine Alumnus; and

editions of The Writer’s Handbook ), in The Last Waltz chapter; material from his lengthy

Introduction to Night Shift; and from his Introduction to Frankenstein, Dracula, Dr Jekyll and Mr

Hyde (an omnibus edition released by NAL in 1978).

This book has generated sixteen separately excerpted pieces, often published as if they were

original articles (in some cases the origin was noted). These are:

Why We Crave Horror Movies, first published in Playboy for January 1981 and in the following

books: The St. Martin’s Guide to Writing (2nd to 7th editions, 1998-2004); Literature: The Human

Experience, Shorter Fifth Edition with Essays (1992); Common Culture: Reading and Writing

About American Popular Culture (1st to 4th Editions, 1995-2003); The Bedford Guide for College

Writers (5th to 7th editions, 1999-2005); The Longwood Reader (4th to 6th editions, 1999-2005);

The Prose Reader: Essays for Thinking, Reading, and Writing (5th to 7th editions, 1999-2004); The

Simon and Schuster Short Prose Reader (2nd to 4th editions, 1999-2005); The Short Prose Reader

(9th and 10th editions, 2000-2002); Mirror on America: Short Essays and Images from Popular

Culture (2nd and 3rd editions, 2003-2006); and The Sundance Reader (4th edition, 2005); along

with ‘Instructor’s Editions’ for some of these textbooks.

Notes on Horror, published in Quest for June 1981. A piece titled Danse Macabre in Book

Digest for September 1981. The Healthy Power of a Good Scream in Self for September 1981. The

Sorry State of TV Shows: You Gotta Put on the Gruesome Mask and Go Booga-Booga in TV Guide

for December 1981—in this case the excerpt is of heavily edited passages from The Glass Teat

chapter.

Last Waltz: Horror and Morality, Horror and Magic in 1983/1984 Fiction Writer’s Market

(1983). A section titled Stephen King in The Open Door: When Writers First Learned to Read

(1989, 1992) excerpts the section in which King discusses finding his father’s old fantasy/science-

fiction books. In 1990 the Friends of the San Francisco Library excerpted the book for a fund-raising

broadsheet, as Danse Macabre.

Invasion of the Bodysnatchers in “They’re Here…”: Invasion of the Bodysnatchers: A Tribute

(1999). An untitled excerpt appeared in My Favorite Horror Story (2000), introducing Robert

Bloch’s story Sweets to the Sweet. Horror Fiction: FromDanse Macabre (2000) in the Book-of-

the-Month Club collection, Secret Windows . And, My Creature from the Black Lagoon in The

McGraw Hill Reader: Issues Across the Disciplines (8th Edition, 2003).

The last four examples to date all appear as an Introduction to The Stephen King Horror Library

editions of books reviewed by King in the Horror Fiction chapter. The remaining six books of the ten

King analyzed may appear in these editions at some point. The four are: Rosemary’s Baby by Ira

Levin (2003), The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson (2003), Ghost Story by Peter Straub

(2003) and The House Next Door by Anne Rivers Siddons (2004).

The Fright Report (January 1978)

Dying is when the monster gets you.

The Fright Report was originally published in the men’s magazine, Oui for January 1978. Large

portions, but by no means all of it appear in section four of the An Annoying Autobiographical Pause

chapter of Danse Macabre.

King recalls ‘the first movie I can remember seeing as a kid’— The Creature From the Black

Lagoon, at a drive in—‘And this four-year-old Steve King thinks that this is, undeniably, what dying

is like. Death is when the creature from the black lagoon dams up the exit. Dying is when the monster

gets you.’

King has us consider, ‘What makes a horror writer? Nobody really knows. We know that writers

of counterfeit horrors are always with us—the people who are in it for a buck and nothing more—and

that there are great writers who seem to have one great scream in them and no more. But the real

writer of horror never seems to exhaust his store of insecurities or his backlog of fears: the real

writer of horror is a man or woman living in constant, deadly terror, and readers always seem to be

able to recognize and respond to this.’ The balance of the article is substantively material covered in

Danse Macabre, although it is interesting to read King’s 1978 take of Salem’s Lot as a novel about

‘paranoia, the prevailing spirit of the past four years’, as the Watergate scandal and its aftermath

rolled across the American psyche.

Oui is ‘collectable’ as a men’s magazine and copies appear on the secondhand market, although

this edition less rarely. The piece was also reprinted in Chernobog, a horror “fanzine”, Number 18,

sometime in the late 1980s. That special issue was dedicated to King but neither the authors nor any

of our contacts have been able to unearth a copy.

On Writing (2000)

What follows is an attempt to put down, briefly and simply, how I came to the craft, what I

know about it now, and how it’s done. It’s about the day job; it’s about the language.

On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft was first published in October 2000 by Simon & Schuster’s

Scribner imprint, as part of a three book contract that also included Bag of Bones and Hearts in

Atlantis (the publisher secured three of King’s masterworks in that one contract). King’s longtime

British publisher, Hodder & Stoughton simultaneously released the UK edition. It was first released

in paperback in 2001 by Pocket Books (US) and NEL (UK).

The first UK mass-market paperback edition contained Jumper by Garrett Addams, the 12-page

story that won the United Kingdom On Writing competition run by Hodder and The Observer

newspaper. King picked the winner.

Readers may not have noticed this Author’s Note , buried on the copyright page: ‘Unless

otherwise attributed, all prose examples, both good and evil, were composed by the author.’

King explains in the First Foreword that fellow author and Rock Bottom Remainders59 band

member Amy Tan gave him the courage to write the book, which he dedicates to her: ‘One night...I

asked Amy if there was any one question she was never asked during the Q-and-A that follows almost

every writer’s talk—that question you never get to answer when you’re standing in front of a group of

author-struck fans and pretending you don’t put your pants on one leg at a time like everyone else.

Amy paused, thinking it over very carefully, and then said: “No one ever asks about the language.” I

owe an immense debt of gratitude to her for saying that. I had been playing with the idea of writing a

little book about writing for a year or more at that time, but had held back because I didn’t trust my

own motivations— why did I want to write about writing? What made me think I had anything worth

saying?...What follows is an attempt to put down, briefly and simply, how I came to the craft, what I

know about it now, and how it’s done. It’s about the day job; it’s about the language.’

In fact, the book was almost never written for two other reasons. King’s near death on 19 June

1999, the day after he wrote the first few pages of the On Writing section, is obviously one. In section

6 of the On Living section King explains the other: ‘That was because I’d put it aside in February or

March of 1998, not sure how to continue, or if I should continue at all. Writing fiction was almost as

much fun as it had ever been, but every word of the nonfiction book was a kind of torture. It was the

first book I had put aside uncompleted since The Stand, and On Writing spent a lot longer in the desk

drawer.’ It was not until the fateful month of June 1999 that its creator decided to breathe life again

into the moribund manuscript.

In the Second Foreword King writes the book is short (imagine the irony of King being

criticized for writing a short book) ‘… because most books about writing are filled with bullshit.

Fiction writers, present company included, don’t understand very much about what they do...One

notable exception to the bullshit rule is The Elements of Style, by William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White.

There is little or no detectable bullshit in that book. (Of course it’s short; at eighty-five pages it’s

much shorter than this one.) I’ll tell you right now that every aspiring writer should read The

Elements of Style. Rule 17 in the chapter titled Principles of Composition is “Omit needless words.”

I will try to do that here.’ King refers to the same rule late in the Tales of the Tarot chapter of Danse

Macabre: ‘In that indispensable little handbook by William Strunk and E. B. White, The Elements of

Style, the thirteenth rule for good composition reads simply: “Omit needless words.’’’ Why the

discrepancy? In 1979, the Third Edition of The Elements of Style was released, with the addition of

four new rules!

The only instance of a Third Foreword to a King book is really a form of dedication to his

longtime editor: ‘One rule of the road not directly stated elsewhere in this book: “The editor is

always right.” The corollary is that no writer will take all of his or her editor’s advice; for all have

sinned and fallen short of editorial perfection. Put another way, to write is human, to edit is divine.

Chuck Verrill edited this book, as he has so many of my novels. And as usual, Chuck, you were

divine.’

Moving to the main book, we find it is split into a series of sections— C.V. (a series of

autobiographical vignettes, mostly from his youth; although King argues it is more an ‘attempt to show

how one writer was formed’); What Writing Is (‘Telepathy, of course.’); Toolbox (using his

grandfather’s massive carpentry toolbox as analogy for the writer’s toolbox of skills and knowledge);

On Writing (only 93 pages of advice—no bullshit here; needless words omitted!); On Living: A

Postscript (the brief tale of King’s near-death experience on a lonely Maine road and the loving

support given by wife Tabitha and his children during the long road to recovery); And Furthermore,

Part I: Door Shut, Door Open (an example of King’s editing style, using a selection from 1408); And

Furthermore, Part II: A Booklist (a list of the best books King had read in the three to four years

prior to completing On Writing).

Among the interesting stories and revelations in the C.V. section are tales of King’s first writing

efforts, for his mother; the high school newspaper, The Drum60 and King’s satire of it, The Village

Vomit; the infamous criticism of Hermon, Maine (rubbed in); meeting his wife, Tabitha; and the death

of his mother, from cancer. King’s tale of his addiction to alcohol and drugs and the intervention

group Tabitha formed (leading to his sobriety) is revelatory and brave. At his mother’s funeral: ‘I

gave the eulogy. I think I did a pretty good job, considering how drunk I was.’

A significant part of C.V. deals with King’s involvement with his local newspaper (as a result of

the infamous Village Vomit incident). Our Miscellany chapter provides more detail about these

articles and our resultant discovery of three previously unknown pieces. At this point in On Writing

King makes an error that members of the Lisbon Historical Society have asked we correct. The editor

of The Enterprise was John Gould, of whom King writes: ‘Gould—not the well-known New England

humorist or the novelist who wrote The Greenleaf Fires but a relation of both, I think....’ In fact John

Gould was that New England humorist (he also wrote a column for The Christian Science Monitor

over a period of fifty years), but not the novelist, John A. Gould. It is not commonly known that this

section of C.V. is a nearly direct lift from King’s 1986 piece, Everything You Need to Know About

Writing Successfully—in Ten Minutes (see our chapter, Opinion— The Craft of Writing). King

incorrectly identifies the newspaper in On Writing as the Weekly Enterprise , but correctly in the

earlier piece as The Enterprise. Of further interest is that Gould wrote a column for the Lisbon High

School newspaper, The Drum, during the period when two first met. The short Guest Column

appeared in the December 20, 1963 issue, in which King is credited as ‘News Editor’.

The Toolbox section covers some of the areas King considers important to good writing—

vocabulary (‘the basic rule of vocabulary is use the first word that comes to your mind, if it is

appropriate and colorful’); grammar (‘you should avoid the passive tense’ is the advice before a

full-scale rant against this offence; and ‘the adverb is not your friend...I believe the road to hell is

paved with adverbs’); dialogue attribution (‘to write adverbs is human, to write he said or she said is

divine’); and the paragraph (‘I would argue that the paragraph, not the sentence, is the basic unit of

writing’).

In the preface to the On Writing section King says: ‘I am approaching the heart of this book with

two theses, both simple. The first is that good writing consists of mastering the fundamentals

(vocabulary, grammar, the elements of style) and then filling the third level of your toolbox with the

right instruments. The second is that while it is impossible to make a competent writer out of a bad

writer, and while it is equally impossible to make a great writer out of a good one, it is possible, with

lots of hard work, dedication, and timely help, to make a good writer out of a merely competent one’;

‘What follows is everything I know about how to write good fiction’ (not a bad offer to the reader,

that); and ‘If you want to be a writer, you must do two things above all others: read a lot and write a

lot. There’s no way around these two things that I’m aware of, no shortcut.’

In the body of this section King deals with a large range of matters: writing schedules (his own

as example); the personal space in which to write; setting goals; the lack of importance of plot (‘In my

view, stories and novels consist of three parts: narration...description...and dialogue....’; ‘Plot is, I

think, the good writer’s last resort and the dullard’s first choice’; ‘Story is honorable and trustworthy;

plot is shifty’; and ‘I want you to understand that my basic belief about the making of stories is that

they pretty much make themselves. The job of the writer is to give them a place to grow....’); his

manner of constructing a story (‘The situation comes first. The characters—always flat and

unfeatured, to begin with—come next. Once these things are fixed in my mind, I begin to narrate’);

description ( less is more); dialogue (‘the key to writing good dialogue is honesty’); building

characters (‘I think the best stories always end up being about the people rather than the event, which

is to say character-driven’); symbolism and theme; revision (here King proves yet again just what a

craftsman he is); resonance; pace; back story; and research.

Also, in this section King reminds us of the key themes in his fictive body of work: ‘I don’t

believe any novelist, even one who’s written forty-plus books, has too many thematic concerns; I

have many interests, but only a few that are deep enough to power novels. These deep interests (I

won’t quite call them obsessions) include how difficult it is—perhaps impossible!—to close

Pandora’s technobox once it’s open ( The Stand, The Tommyknockers, Firestarter ); the question of

why, if there is a God, such terrible things happen ( The Stand, Desperation, The Green Mile); the

thin line between reality and fantasy ( The Dark Half, Bag of Bones, The Drawing of the Three); and

most of all, the terrible attraction violence sometimes has for fundamentally good people ( The

Shining, The Dark Half). I’ve also written again and again about the fundamental differences

between children and adults, and about the healing power of the human imagination.’

In one aside King tells of writing a novel (‘my dirty little secret’) while at university— Sword in

the Darkness. Although the novel has never been published, King allowed an entire chapter to

emerge into the light of day three-and-a-half decades later!61 In another King says his mother ‘may

have farmed my brother and me out to one of her sisters for awhile because she was economically or

emotionally unable to cope with us for a time’. This is confirmed by one of Ruth Pillsbury King’s

sisters: ‘ “My husband and I took Steve in when he was two,” said Ethelyn Flaws, Steve’s aunt who

lived in Durham at the time. Ruth “would have felt badly if she would have had to put him in a home.

My older sister, Molly, took in David. We took them for a year until Ruth got back on her feet.”’62

On Writing won the Non-Fiction Bram Stoker Award in 2000 63 and the Locus Non-Fiction

Award in 2001. With good reason, it has become a best seller well outside the King and horror

communities, as current and putative writers devour King’s practical advice, presented in plain and

entertaining terms. It is also available as an audio book, read by the master himself. We highly

recommend this to readers—listening to King telling stories about his life is well worth the admission

(for instance his babysitter story is pure gold—‘In many ways, Eula-Beulah prepared me for literary

criticism. After having a two-hundred-pound babysitter fart on your face and yell Pow! , The Village

Voice holds few terrors.’)

Poet, novelist, biographer and critic Jay Parini was less than polite about On Writing in a

review for The Guardian (UK)64: ‘King has nothing much to say about writing that isn’t obvious.

King is infinitely better at writing than talking about writing, though fans will doubtless find moments

of interest here, especially when he talks about his own extraordinary writing habits. The best part of

the book remains his account of how writing—and the primitive urge to write—saved his life after

the accident. It’s a bizarre and absorbing story, told brilliantly by one of the great storytellers of our

time.’

Publisher’s Weekly said: ‘While some of his guidance is not exactly revolutionary (he

recommends The Elements of Style as a must-have reference), other revelations that vindicate authors

of popular fiction, like himself, as writers, such as his preference for stressing character and situation

over plot, are engrossing.’

Three excerpts from the book were released before the official publication date:

Selections from On Writing was published online on 15 December 1999. A 14-page piece, it

was composed of unrevised excerpts and was available for a $1, $5, or $10 donation to the Literacy

Partners program.

On Impact appeared in The New Yorker for June 2000. It contained revised excerpts from the

book, especially from the On Living: A Postscript section; and was reprinted in The Best American

Essays, 2001.

Stephen King On How to Write appeared in Bottom Line/Personal, Volume 23, Number 11

published on 1 June 2000.

As with Danse Macabre there have been numerous excerpts from On Writing published. The

fourteen post-publication excerpts to date are:

The Early Years... i n Life: The Observer Magazine (a UK newspaper supplement) for 17

September 2000; The Accident, in the same magazine for 24 September 2000; and the final part in the

magazine, How to Write, in the 1 October 2000 edition.

Attention Zestful Writers in the National Post (a Toronto, Canada newspaper) for October

2000. Before He Was Stephen King in Reader’s Digest for January 2001. It is interesting that, and

noting an excerpt from an interview with King65, this is the only time King’s work has appeared in

Reader’s Digest. This may well be a result of King’s opposition to his fiction being abridged in any

written form.

Getting Back to Work in Writer’s Yearbook 2001 ; How to Write 10 Pages a Day in Writer’s

Digest for April, 2001; Plotting Gets You Nowhere in The Writer for January 2002; From On

Writing in White Lines: Writers on Cocaine (2002); a different article also under the title From On

Writing in Guys Write for Guys Read (2005); On Reading and Writing in Strategies for College

Writing: A Rhetorical Reader, Second Edition (2003); A Ten-Minute Writing Lesson in Writing for

Teens for October 2005; Stephen King’s Library in The Stephen King Desk Calendar 2006; and

simply On Writing in The New Millennium Reader (4th Edition, 2006).

Hardcover US and UK editions of On Writing asked for entries to a Short Story Competition

(‘in the spirit of Stephen King’). The competition is long closed but budding writers (ignoring the

original deadline) apparently still want to submit. King’s official website has this to say about the

matter in the FAQ section: ‘Sorry, but we are no longer accepting submissions for the writing

exercise given in On Writing. We have asked that the offer to make submissions through the web site

be deleted from future printings. When he came up with that idea, I don’t think Stephen was thinking

about the fact that someone would months or years later read his offer and want to participate.’ There

are also constant requests on the website’s message board for tips about writing and the like. The

web site moderator is fortunate in being able to recommend On Writing as a resource.

How likely is it that King will complete another volume of non-fiction? In truth it is most

unlikely. He has indicated on many occasions that he views lengthy non-fiction as hard work and not

nearly as fulfilling as fiction. Perhaps he will resort again to the virtual blogging format of Faithful;

or, perhaps (we can only wish) to a full-scale autobiography? At least we do know that he will

continue to deliver short non-fiction in significant quantities and for the foreseeable future.

BASEBALL—FAITHFUL; HEAD DOWN AND THE RED SOX OBSESSION

These are the faces of children who have not yet been told the dream is usually just on loan,

there to be looked at and lived in and enjoyed only for a short, dust-golden time—the years when

you come back from the field, sit on the back step and pour the sand out of your sneakers before

going in barefoot to eat your supper.

—From Diamonds Are Forever

.

King’s love of baseball and of the Boston-based Red Sox major league team goes back to his

childhood (the Sox are New England’s only Major League Baseball franchise, and are physically

located closer to Maine than any other such team). His passion for the game and his team seems only

to have accelerated over the years (the first recorded piece of dedicated baseball writing was his

King’s Garbage Truck column for October 23, 1969), as this chapter clearly demonstrates. As is

often the case with King parts of his ‘real life’ leak into his fiction and this is very much the case with

both the Sox and baseball. They are referred to in many of his novels and short stories66 and a real

Boston relief pitcher carries talismanic qualities for Trisha McFarland, the lead character in King’s

1999 novel The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon.

Further proving his love of the game, the only piece of non-fiction King has included in one of

his mainstream collections is a baseball essay, Head Down (reviewed later in this chapter), which

appears in Nightmares & Dreamscapes . The same volume includes one of the few King poems

published in such a collection— Brooklyn August, a wistful and elegiac homage to the Brooklyn

Dodgers’ last season in New York.

We’ll start with the major work—King’s book-length collaboration with Stewart O’Nan

covering the extraordinary 2004 Boston Red Sox—and continue with his broader baseball writings,

covering the Red Sox, the New York Yankees, Little League and broader musings on America’s

national pastime.

Faithful: Two Diehard Boston Red Sox Fans Chronicle the 2004 Season (2004, 2005)

Scribner published Faithful, by Stephen King and Stewart O’Nan, in hardcover on 2 December

200467 (the audiobook had been released the previous day). The paperback edition, including

additional material by both King and O’Nan was released in August 2005. Weidenfeld & Nicolson

published a UK hardcover in January 2005 (this is surely a rare event in publishing—a hardcover

baseball book for the UK market!)

The 2005 paperback features an index, a new essay by O’Nan and a reprint of King’s It’s Weird

But True: The Gloom is Gone in Mudville, which had first been published in The New York Times

for April 3, 2005 (that piece is reviewed separately, at the end of this chapter).

The unique background to the book’s creation and the partnership between King and O’Nan

(King had previously delivered professional collaborative prose with one other author, Peter

Straub68) is described here by O’Nan from an interview with King chronicler, Hans-Ake Lilja:

‘Steve and I have been going to games together for years. We e-mail and talk about the team all the

time, and last year in August when the team got hot, Steve decided we should keep a log of our

reactions to their games. This spring, when the season was about to start, my agent asked if I wanted

to write a book about the Red Sox (every year he asks me this, but this year I’d just finished a novel

and finally had the time). I said I’d write it only if Steve could be my co-author. Steve was busy, but

said he’d try to contribute as much as he could. And once the season got going, his natural love for the

game kicked in and he couldn’t stay away.’69

Apart from being a Red Sox fan Stewart O’Nan is an engineer turned novelist ( Snow Angels,

The Speed Queen70 and The Night Country among others). His A Prayer for the Dying won the 1999

International Horror Guild Award for Best Novel.

O’Nan wrote the larger portion of the book (in word count at least). Readers can identify which

author is writing as King’s contributions are in bold font, O’Nan’s in normal font (there are also

numerous e-mail exchanges with King identified as ‘SK’). They have very different styles as writers

and different views of life as a fan, as noted by many reviewers (see below). This lends the book a

slight anarchic flavor but the two men’s love of the Red Sox baseball (and writing) comes through in

spades. Of course, the amazingly unlikely events portrayed have their own roller-coaster effect. Just

as King had chosen the year his son Owen played for the West Bangor Little League All-Star team,

who made it all the way to the Regional Finals, to write of Little League baseball, the year he agreed

to write a chronicle of his beloved Red Sox they were able to break an 86-year fabled drought and

win the World Series. Coincidence?

At www.bookreporter.com the reviewer observes: ‘The style has been compared with that of a

broadcast team, with O’Nan doing the play-by-play, and King the color commentary. It works quite

well. On occasion, they share a dialogue with their readers.’ In a review for CNN Todd Leopold

observed, ‘... King is the emotional hand wringer; O’Nan the slightly more controlled detail man.’

Frank Mosher of The Boston Globe blurbs the paperback edition with: ‘ Faithful isn’t just about the

Red Sox. It’s also about family, friendship, and what it truly means to be a baseball fan and to be—

well, faithful, come hell or high water...The season was full of priceless moments, and King and

O’Nan catch nearly all of them in amber.’

In 2005 a new literary award was introduced in the United States—the Quill Awards (or

‘Quills’). Created by Reed Business Information (owners of Publisher’s Weekly ) these combine

nominations from booksellers nationwide with consumer voting. Faithful won the inaugural award

for Sports book ( Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince was the overall Book of the Year).

As readers can easily secure a copy of Faithful we will limit our review to selected choices

from King’s entries in the book that any reader (even one with no interest in baseball) should be

aware of:

* ‘Oh well. I used to joke, you know, about having a tombstone that read: STEPHEN KING with

the dates, and then, below that, a single sock, and below that: NOT IN MY LIFETIME. And

below that: NOT IN YOURS, EITHER. Not a bad tagline, huh?’ (March 17th)

* King’s interesting philosophical take on addiction (April 4th) in which he states he became a

Red Sox junkie in 1967 and pans the Curse of the Bambino as ‘the bullshit creation of one

talented and ambitious sportswriter’; and of fan superstition (April 23rd)

* The Sox-Yankees rivalry (April 18 th)71—‘… baseball is a game of history....” In this section,

virtually an essay, King mentions his friend, ‘the late Stephen Jay Gould, who somehow

managed to root for both teams (maybe in the end that was what killed him, not the cancer)’72

* ‘Here’s what I understand about hockey: Bulky men wearing helmets and carrying sticks in

their gauntleted hands skate around for a while on my TV; then some guy comes on and sells

trucks. Sometimes chicks come on and sell beer.’ (Footnote to May 13th)

* His first visit to Fenway was ‘at the age of eleven or twelve, on an afternoon when the Tigers

were their opponents and Al Kaline was still playing for them....’ (May 21st); or more

specifically ‘since my first one in 1959’ (June 9th)73

* The dour and pessimistic nature of New Englanders (July 13th)

* ‘Boston sportswriters are for the most part mangy, dis-tempered, sunstruck dogs that can do

nothing but bite and bite and bite.’ (August 6th)

* King loses faith for the first time this season—‘It can be done but I doubt it can be done by this

team.’ (August 7th)

* King refers to visiting (without naming) ‘old friends (he’s the physician’s assistant who has

helped me with medical stuff in a dozen books, most notably The Stand and Pet Sematary, she’s

a retired nurse)’. These are Russ and Florence Dorr74 (August 12th)

* The stress around the decision to throw out the first pitch at Fenway for the movie Fever Pitch

(September 4th and 5th)

* 3-0 down in the ALCS: ‘We tell ourselves the impossible can start tonight.’ (October 17th)

* ‘… eventually the Red Sox did what no team has ever done before, which is to come back

from a 3-0 deficit to tie a postseason best-of-seven series...Ruth King’s boy is going to New

York City.’ (October 20th)

* ‘We’re going to the World Series. It starts in Boston. And it matters. It’s part of American life,

and that matters a lot.’ (October 21st)

* ‘He was awesome last night.’ (October 25th). If you don’t know who ‘he’ is you must read the

entry!

* At 3-0 up in the World Series King can smell land, ‘Not just any land, either, but the sweet

Promised Land I’ve been dreaming of ever since my Uncle Oren bought me my first Red Sox cap

and stuck it on my head in the summer of 1954. “There, Stevie,” he said, blowing the scent of

Naragansett beer into the face of the big-eyed seven-year-old looking up at him. “They ain’t

much, but they’re the best we got.”’ (October 26th)

* ‘At last!’: the headline from King’s local paper the morning after the Red Sox finally won it

all. King’s grandson Ethan asked his father, ‘Is this a dream or are we living real life?’ To King

the answer, ‘it seems to me this morning, is both.’ (October 28th).

There has been one excerpt of King’s work from the book printed to date, as a promotional device,

when Boston magazine printed The Comeback in December 2004. An excerpt (King’s entire entry for

5 March; along with O’Nan’s for the previous day) also appeared at:

www.bookreporter.com/reviews2/0743267524-excerpt.asp .

Faithful is dedicated, ‘For Victoria Snelgrove, / Red Sox fan’. Boston police accidentally killed

Snelgrove, a 21-year-old college student. She and thousands of others were celebrating the Red Sox’s

Game Seven ALCS victory when a pepper spray projectile struck her in a near-rioutous crowd

outside Fenway Park; she died in hospital the next day. Boston player Trot Nixon is reported to have

said he would trade the win over the Yankees to have her back.

Red Sox and other Baseball Writing

Of course Faithful was not King’s first work detailing his life-long obsession with the Red Sox

and baseball in general. Most likely his first published piece on baseball was a King’s Garbage

Truck column published on October 23, 1969 (see our Early Columns—King’s Garbage Truck

chapter). Following is a series of prose pieces in newspapers, magazines and books over a period of

two decades.

Red Sox Fan Crows About Team, But May Have to Eat Chicken (May 17-18, 1986)

This article appeared in the ‘Guest Column’ section of the Bangor Daily News Maine Weekend

newspaper for May 17-18, 1986.

King opens, ‘I go back a lot of years—almost 20 of them—with Bob Haskell of the NEWS staff

(I was a UMO campus columnist who worked for both Bob and David Bright)...But since I go back

with the Red Sox 30 years or so (I was a Dodger fan until they deserted Flatbush for L.A.), I just can’t

resist twitting him a little about his column (BDN, April 8) following the opening day game...I also

want to offer him a small wager...In your column, Bob, you predicted the Red Sox would be out of

contention for the AL East pennant by Flag Day, June 14. While I love you too much to see you eat

real crow...I propose that one of us eat symbolic crow on the lawn of the Bangor Daily News offices

on July 1 of this year.’ King’s suggestion was a chicken dinner, ‘but one more thing. / The loser has to

eat it in his underwear.’ King is confident Haskell won’t take up the wager, but a final Editor’s Note

reads: ‘Bob “Bucky Dent” Haskell accepts novelist King’s challenge.’

King also relates that ‘only weeks before I had, for the first time in my life, invested...in a

season’s ticket for a seat as close to the first-base bag as the security forces allow....’ The reason he

gave for this ‘investment’ was his prediction the Red Sox would finish second in the AL East (to the

‘hated Yankees’). In fact, both King and Haskell were conservative (we will see below that King

becomes much more accurate in future years)—the Red Sox won the division, beat the California

Angels in the American League playoffs and went on to narrowly lose the World Series, to the New

York Mets.

Copies of Bangor Daily News articles (there are many more in this chapter) may be secured

from the microfiche files at the Fogler Library of the University of Maine at Orono (at no charge, if

you actually visit), from the newspaper direct (at a significant fee), and from visiting the Maine State

Library in Augusta.

King Awaits His Chicken and Haskell Should Shop for Shorts (23 May 1986)

This article appeared as a ‘Guest Column’ on the Editorial page of the Bangor Daily News for

May 23, 1986. In it King tells of an imaginary conversation with a ‘Smitty’ (supposed friend of Bob

Haskell—see the entry above for Red Sox Fan Crows About Team, But May Have to Eat Chicken ),

in which King is needled into extending the deadline for the Red Sox ‘to swoon—which they will not

do—and another couple of weeks for Bob to save his pants,’ until July 1. Apart from the banter the

column contains little of note other than a couple of personal points and one showing King’s

committed fan hatred of a previous high-riding Sox team’s nemesis: ‘In my book, Bucky Dent is the

worst of the worst, the lowest of the low. The serpent that crawled into the Garden of Eden and the

one that crawled into Fenway Park on October 2nd, 1978, and managed to hit a cheap popfly home

run that kept the Red Sox out of the playoffs look about the same to me.’75

King writes: ‘I don’t worry about calls I don’t know about, but I can no more listen to a phone

that’s ringing than I can look at a crooked picture hanging on the wall.’ King once said that his über-

character, Roland Deschain, was the sort of man who would straighten crooked pictures on hotel

room walls (a habit he seems to have picked up from his creator, which won’t surprise readers of the

later Dark Tower novels). In a second personal note King purports outrage when ‘Smitty’ calls him

‘Stevie’: ‘ “Don’t call me Stevie!” I shrieked. “I hate it when people call me Stevie!” ’

The reference to ‘shorts’ in the headline refers to the continuation of King’s supposed rant:

‘ “And tell Bob I think he’d look good in some of those Calvin Klein’s, or maybe some of those

Dior bikini briefs! Tell him red! Like his face is gonna be!” ’ All this, of course, refers to the loser

of the wager having to eat a chicken dinner on the newspaper’s lawn, in their underwear.

In fact the banter between King and Haskell created more than just a few columns. King expert

Tyson Blue reports: ‘As the season stretched on, the Red Sox maintained their lead. Haskell

maintained his confidence in an editorial entitled “The time is nearing for Stephen King to get out his

boxer shorts.” Deciding that some good could come from letting BDN readers in on the action,

Haskell then allowed people to place their own bets on the outcome of the race, charging a minimum

of two dollars to take part, said money to be donated to the Jimmy Fund, a longtime New England-

based charity favored by the Red Sox, and devoted to research to prevent cancer in young people.’76

According to Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter for August 1986 the promotion raised

$2,250 for the Jimmy Fund (the issue prints a photo of King feeding the ‘proverbial crow’ to

Haskell).

Red Sox Stretch Out to the World Series (12 September 1986)

This article appeared in the Bangor Daily News for September 12, 1986. King begins by

chronicling the Red Sox season, Bob Haskell’s disastrous prediction about the Red Sox and his

subsequent bet with King (see the two articles directly above). He reports that on ‘July 3: Haskell

eats symbolic crow in front of the Bangor Civic Center, technically fulfilling the bet by coming

decked out in Yankee pinstripe underwear (which actually looks more like what Grandma might wear

on an evening when she’s unhappy with Grandpa). Stephen King, your humble correspondent, dressed

to the nines in his tuxedo (which still almost fits), watches with supreme happiness. As a baseball

fan, this is the best day of his life...Haskell declares the Sox will fade and the Yankees will triumph.’

(Neither performed as Haskell predicted).

In possibly his own worst baseball prediction King looks forward to the playoffs—suggesting

the Sox would beat the Angels in seven (they did); but meet the Chicago Cubs in the World Series

(they did not). ‘If they face the Mets, however, it will be more fun than a free trip to Disneyland: You

can relax in front of your TV and watch the Shea boys go down in four straight...The Mets are ripe,

fat, and as ready to pick as an October apple in Washington County.’ Oh dear, as we will discover in

How Much Am I Hurting? below. According to an Editor’s Note: ‘Stephen King loves baseball. (He

also writes novels.)’

’86 Was Just the Ticket (October 6, 1986)

This article first appeared in the Boston Globe for October 6, 1986, in a lift-out ‘Special

Section’ titled Literati on the Red Sox. Other writers in the section included George F. Will, John

Updike, Robert Parker, David Halberstam and Doris Kearns Goodwin. The lift-out celebrated the

Red Sox entering the play-offs against the California Angels (their first such progression since 1975).

The Sox would go on to defeat the Angels 4-3 but fall to the New York Mets in the World Series,

also in the seventh and final possible game.

The subtitle of King’s contribution, written before the first playoff pitch, was ‘Wrong formula,

right result’. He opens by telling the tale of requesting season tickets at Fenway Park through his

Boston limo driver, Dan Casey77 the previous December based on his feeling that the late-season

surge by the 1985 Sox heralded ‘some rocking and reeling’ the following year. Despite odds-makers

consigning the Sox to a likely ‘one place out of the cellar’ King expected them to finish five games

behind the Yankees on the back of their pitching, which ‘had a chance to be not fair, or “pretty good,”

but really good for the first time since dinosaurs walked the earth—or, at least, since Babe Ruth

swapped his red hose for a pair of pinstripes.’ Briefly reviewing the season’s performance and the

Red Sox’s strengths and weaknesses he writes, ‘I was glad I was around to dig’ the season when,

against those apparent odds, the Sox had topped the Yankees and won the Division.

Original newspaper appearances of King’s fiction and non-fiction are generally very difficult to

come by, as few people keep newspapers. This item is something of an exception because of its

baseball collectable value and perhaps because other well-known writers were included. However,

copies come to market rarely. Microfiche copies of The Boston Globe can be secured at certain

libraries.

The easiest access point for readers will be its reprint as ’86 Was Just the Ticket: Right

Formula, Wrong Result in The Red Sox Reader: 30 Years of Musings on Baseball’s Most Amusing

Team, edited by Dan Riley.

The Opera Ain’t Over… (October 14, 1986)

This article appeared in the Bangor Daily News for October 14, 1986. Here we find King

writing he is ashamed of himself for giving up on the Red Sox the previous Sunday: ‘For the first time

in my life I gave up on ‘em.’ Despite telling his children a game is never over ‘until the fat lady sings’

King found himself giving up on the televised Sox and returning to a book with one out in the bottom

of the ninth inning, while son Owen kept the faith. Ultimately they rallied and went on to win the

game. King says Owen reminded him that the fat lady ‘classic response’ was in fact a truism; and that

another old saw was also true—‘you’re never too old to learn.’ The piece is charming in that it

mostly deals with the two Kings’ reactions to the events unfolding on the television and the bonds

between father and son secured by their love of the game, and team.

In giving his reasons for the lapse into a lack of faith King relates the horrors visited upon the

Red Sox of 1967, 1975 and 1978. Of the latter year’s Bucky Dent homer he says, ‘I was teaching at

UMO that year, and I left a note on my office door that said: “All classes cancelled for the rest of the

week. I’m having a fugue.” It was no joke; that game cast a pall not over my autumn but my entire

year.’

‘How Much am I Hurting?’ (1-2 November 1986)

This article first appeared in the Bangor Daily News Maine Weekend for November 1-2, 1986

(note that the quotation marks appear in the original headline). King begins with a baseball saying: ‘It

hurts more to lose than it feels good to win’ and goes on to describe how much he’s hurting over

Boston’s losing the seventh and deciding game of the World Series to the New York Mets. He

reminds readers how close the Red Sox came to the holy grail: ‘The Sox twice came within a strike

of winning Game 6 and couldn’t do it’; and ‘They led 3-0 in Game 7, then trailed 6-5 with a man on

second and couldn’t get him across.’ Yet, he is a gracious losing fan, noting the team probably should

never have made as much from the season and did so on ‘guts’ and ‘the equivalent of Tinkerbelle’s

magic dust’ before succumbing. ‘My God, what a year! / Thanks, guys. / Thanks a million.’

Of how many men the Sox left on base during the Series King writes: ‘(I dunno if it was a record

or not, but as the venerable Case78 would have said, you could look it up)’. This is apparently a

favorite quote, as King reused it often in Faithful.

A Look at the Red Sox on the Edge of ’87 (March 28-29, 1987)

This article first appeared in the Bangor Daily News for March 28-29, 1987; and was reprinted

i n Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter for July 1987. The News says, ‘King’s articles on

these pages during the last baseball season were roundly enjoyed’ by its readers and: ‘Today’s

article proves he has lost nothing off his fastball.’

King is concerned the team’s near-success in 1986 has bred ‘a combination of arrogance and

touchiness’ in the face of what he sees as near certain disaster: ‘How many futile grabs at the golden

ring does it take before the team doing the grabbing starts to believe it will always be futile to make

that grab more than a token effort.’ He sees off-season salary disputes leading to disaffection among

the players; uses the ‘great white whale’ analogy that would later reappear in 1999’s Fenway and the

Great White Whale (see below); and claims the word ‘LOSER’ is pasted all over the 1987 Sox. His

final prediction: Red Sox for fourth in their division and again he was close to accurate with the Sox

actually falling to fifth that season.

Following the Sox—in the C-C-C-Cold (May 4, 1988)

This article first appeared in the Bangor Daily News “Midweek Edition” for May 4, 1988 (the

subheading on the second of two pages is King reports: Red Sox have clout). King says it was his

wife Tabitha’s idea to spend April 16 to 24 following the Red Sox, mostly because it was their son

Owen’s spring vacation. ‘She knows the only fan in the house more ardent than I am is my son

Owen....’ The Kings intended to see three games against the Rangers at Fenway, three in Detroit and a

further three in Milwaukee. ‘How was it? Well, brothers and sisters it was c-c-c-cold’, as a result of

the weather the Kings saw only five of the scheduled games. Most of the article is reserved for praise

of the team’s early-season pitching. King feels their ‘prospects look good’ and fearlessly predicts

they will win the American League East that year, as they did. We will see King get his predictions

exactly right in both of the following years as well (in 1988 they went on to lose the American League

Championship Series to the Oakland Athletics 4-0).

Red Sox Put Fans Through Yearly Ordeal (4 October 1988)

This article first appeared in the national newspaper USA Today for October 4, 1988 (the

headline on the second of two pages reads Red Sox Fans Hope For Best, Ready For Worst ).

Somehow, this article became known in the King community as Why Red Sox Fans Believe.79

Previewing his team’s playoff chances against Oakland King begins by claiming, ‘All Red Sox

fans are insane. That is the key to understanding the mystery of Boston’s long-term case of Baseball

Disease (medical name: fenway infectus)...We are lunatics. / And we have good reason to be the way

we are.’ He goes on to describe a throwing error that cost the Red Sox a game and his resultant ‘cry

that woke the whole house. At the time I believed this to be a cry of surprise and outrage. After a

good deal more thought...I have decided it was actually a cry of satisfaction—the sort of cry to which

only the utterly unbalanced can give voice.’ Reiterating the sad history of Red Sox near misses he

writes: ‘For this is the way it must be, the lunatic fan inside claims with utter assurance.’

King wonders why the Red Sox have the ‘loser image’ in baseball, even over teams that have

not even made it to a World Series for many more years. Yet, these teams ‘do not raise one’s hopes to

such horrendous lengths as the Red Sox do on a more-or-less regular basis.’ Only the Sox, apparently,

give ‘perfectly good, perfectly logical reasons to hope’ before collapsing to the inevitable tragic

opposition homer, or home team wild pitch, or fielding error. ‘In a way, being a Red Sox fan is like

being Charlie Brown when Lucy offers to hold the football. You know she is going to pull it up at the

last moment because she always pulls it up at the last moment...And yet she smiles sweetly and talks

you into it...and you are doomed to do it again...and again...and again.’ (King uses this analogy often

when writing of his favored team.) Concluding, he argues that the BoSox cannot possibly beat

Oakland but advances various tactics designed to set up a meeting with and victory over the New

York Mets: ‘You’d have to be a lunatic to believe any of those things could happen. / And so, of

course, I believe them all.’ (He was right—the Red Sox were swept by Oakland).

Copies of USA Today on microfiche will be available at selected major libraries. The actual

newspaper comes to auction, or becomes available through secondhand sellers, only rarely.

Red Sox Fan Happy With Third (April 5, 1989)

This article first appeared in the Bangor Daily News “Midweek Edition” for April 5, 1989 and

is subtitled (on the second of two pages) King not counting on another Bosox pennant this year. In a

very interesting note leading this article the newspaper’s editors state of King, ‘He claims he owes a

debt of thanks to his son Owen, another baseball fan extraordinaire, for helping to prepare this year’s

Mid-week essay.’ Owen King is now an accomplished short story writer. 80

King writes that there would be two premieres on 10 April—the movie Pet Sematary, ‘for the

first time in its completely finished form’, showing to 370 invited guests at the Bangor Mall cinema;

and the ‘somewhat less finished 1989 Red Sox will play their first home game’. He continues in

humorous vein, contrasting the film and the team, their similarities (‘costly to produce’) and

differences (one is ‘supposed to be a horror show’, the other ‘a baseball team’). This year he predicts

the Red Sox will finish third in their division (as indeed they did, King once again proving his

baseball pedigree) and gives a detailed reasoning. He also says this of Boston sportswriters (who

would also come in for a panning in Faithful): they ‘have been eating their own young for decades

now. I don’t have the slightest idea what prompts such perverse cannibalism, but it exists.’

A Fan’s Thoughts on the Red Sox (April 9, 1990)

This article first appeared in the Bangor Daily News for April 9, 1990. The author is described

as ‘a horror fiction writer whose fanaticism for the Red Sox may seem appropriate to most sports

fans’ (some horribly mangled English there).

We learn the source of King’s proposed tombstone, as provided in a slightly different form in his

March 17th Faithful entry (noted earlier). Referring to the events of 1986, ‘when the Boston Red Sox

once more managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, a Boston radio talk show host ordered

and paid for his own tombstone. He wanted his name, the dates of his birth and death, and the

following inscription: NOT IN MY LIFETIME. Red Sox fans, he told his listeners, would

understand.’

King then claims to have vilified all other Boston sporting teams, ‘and the day I go down to

Foxboro to watch the Patriots will be the day it rains chocolate drops.’ Entitled to change his opinion

as he is, King by the early 2000s was actually attending Patriots home games, yet there are no known

reports of such Fortean weather events as raining chocolate!

The main point of the article though is his predictions about the Sox and their likely performance

in the 1990 season, which he rates as, ‘Pretty good, actually’; and a short comment on the previous

year (‘No one player cost the Red Sox the divisional title in 1989. If there was a villain, it was bad

luck....”). King concludes, ‘The Red Sox will finish the 1990 season in first place, a game-and-a-half

ahead of Baltimore and three ahead of Toronto. / Postseason, you say? We’ll burn that bridge when

we come to it.’ For those interested King was right (again)—the Sox did finish first in their division

but, as in 1988, lost the ALCS 4-0 to the Oakland Athletics.

Head Down (April 16, 1990)

Head Down first appeared as one of ‘The Sporting Scene’ columns for The New Yorker , in the

April 16, 1990 edition. The original title of this essay (as indicated on the manuscript at the Fogler

Library) was ‘The Boys of Summer’.

It represents the only piece of non-fiction King has chosen to publish in one of his mass-market

collections, in this case Nightmares & Dreamscapes (1993). In the Introduction to that volume King

says he’d included it after a great deal of thought as, ‘I probably worked harder on it than anything

else I’ve written over the last fifteen years.’ In the Notes to the same book he writes that his link with

the Bangor West All-Star team at the time of its championship run was ‘either luck or pure fate...I

tend toward the higher power thesis, but in either case I was only there because my son was on the

team.’ On the point of ‘fate’, King’s second decision to commit to diarizing a baseball team’s

‘season’ would be that of the magical 2004 Boston Red Sox, in Faithful. Fate?

King also says in the Nightmares & Dreamscapes Notes that ‘Chip McGrath of The New Yorker

coaxed the best nonfiction writing of my life out of me.’ Staying in baseball mode, the work following

Head Down in Nightmares & Dreamscapes is King’s elegiac poem Brooklyn August. Apart from the

three dedicated volumes this is one of King’s lengthiest non-fiction works at 38 pages in the first

edition hardcover.

The piece has also been reprinted in The Best American Sports Writing, 1991; and Baseball: A

Literary Anthology, (2002). We agree with King—it does represent one of his best non-fiction pieces

and we recommend you take a few minutes out now (yes, now) to enjoy it.

Now you’ve read Head Down we can keep our review short. As you discovered, ‘Head down’

was a coaching call at batting practice for members of the Bangor West Side team in Little League

play. The team included King’s son Owen (at twelve already six-foot-two inches tall, ‘two hundred

or so pounds’, ‘broad-shouldered and heavily built, like his old man’). King follows the fortunes of

the team as they first win their half of the Maine District 3 Little League (with a three-run, two-out,

two-strike shot in the bottom of the last inning), then the District championship itself. This qualifies

them to play in the 1989 Maine State Little League Championship Tournament in Old Town (Tabitha

King’s hometown), ‘where bigger and better teams from the more heavily populated regions

downstate will probably blow them out’. We learn that ‘a local writer of some repute...tossed out the

obligatory first pitch (it sailed all the way to the backstop)....’ and West Bangor makes the final,

against favorites York. On the ropes in extra innings, and almost in the manner of high fiction, West

Bangor wins that game on the back of another three-run homer and are crowned Maine State

champions. In a brief closing note King relates the team that finally stopped West Bangor did so in the

second round of the Eastern Regional championships.

King moves from a deep understanding of baseball, what it is to be young and playing the sport,

through some philosophical views of the game and its impact, and on to powerful sports reporting

(for those who don’t know the result of the games the usual King suspense is in play, helped not a

little by the amazing twists and turns of the team’s season). This is a purist’s tale first—one for those

with a love of sport at least. But it is also a very strong piece of prose —Chip McGrath did his job,

as had the boys of West Bangor and their coaches. King often claims of his fiction to be simply

recording a pre-existing tale for his readers—in the case of this piece we can say he unearthed a real

story —that of the magic boys of summer.

One of the young players, Matt Kinney81, would go on to be drafted by the Boston Red Sox

organization (in 1995, and traded away three years later); and a Major League baseball career as

pitcher for the Minnesota Twins (2000 and 2002), Milwaukee Brewers (2003-4), Kansas City Royals

(2004) and San Francisco Giants (2005). However, he spent much of this time in the minor leagues,

playing 103 MLB games over the five seasons and owning a 19-27 record with a 5.29 ERA as of the

end of the 2005 season.

Sadly the son of Bangor West head coach Dave Mansfield, Shawn aged only 14, ‘died after a

long fight with cerebral palsy before he had a chance to play America’s pastime’ 82. The Kings

donated the $1.2 million with which the City of Bangor built the Shawn T. Mansfield Stadium on

Thirteenth Street (effectively a street away from the King’s Bangor home). The Stadium, opened in

1991, is ‘one of the finest baseball fields in Maine’, home field for Bangor West, and has hosted

tournaments right up to the Senior League World Series.

The New Yorker is an iconic publication and many libraries will archive it in some form.

Original copies of this edition appear irregularly at King resellers and other used magazine and

Internet sources. Both The Best American Sports Writing, 1991 and Baseball: A Literary Anthology

appear regularly at used book sources.

Red Sox Head for Home; One Team’s Baseball Psychology (September 12, 1990)

This guest column first appeared in the Bangor Daily News for September 12, 1990. In

considering what makes one team succeed in the last weeks of a baseball season (particularly those

driving for a pennant or a playoff spot) and others simply fade, King believes the key factor is ‘team

will’, itself ‘inextricably bound up’ with ‘home team psyche’. He uses a recent series in Toronto,

which he attended and where the Red Sox won three of a four game set, as example. Toronto was the

major challenger to the Red Sox in the AL. East in these last weeks of the season and King (after

waxing lyrically about Toronto’s Skydome and analyzing the upcoming stretch games) correctly

predicted Boston would win the pennant (maintaining his prediction the previous April in A Fan’s

Thoughts on the Red Sox, reviewed above).

Perfect Games, Shared Memories (Fall 1991)

This piece first appeared in the Official World Series Souvenir Scorebook—1991 Fall Classic .

Perhaps the easiest access point for fans is its reprint as Epilogue: Perfect Games, Shared Memories

i n World Series: An Opinionated Chronicle of the Fall Classic—100 Years , by Joseph Wallace

(2003), an oversized hardcover.

King tells the very personal story of ‘two boys, both nine years old, and two baseball games—

World Series games.’ The first, ‘Stevie, was nine in 1956. He and his brother were raised by a

mother who never had the benefit of a support group, a day care center, or an Equal Rights Law, yet

managed to raise Stevie and his older brother pretty well. / In the mid-1950s Stevie was a Dodgers

fan because his mother was...(King mentions his mother ran ‘the mangler’ on a laundry crew in

Stratford, Connecticut).../ Children inherit their parents’ sports and political affiliations, so Stevie

rooted for the Dodgers and the Republicans, and hated the Yankees and the Democrats. Then, one

magic day in the fall of 1956, all that changed.’

King relates how ‘Stevie’ came home to watch his Dodgers play in the World Series, and found

himself rooting for the Yankees’ pitcher, Don Larsen, who threw a perfect game! He watched alone

(‘There is no Dad in this picture, although it’s Dad’s who are the keepers of this particular tradition;

Dad stepped out when Stevie was two’) but discussed the magic with his mother, and brother David,

that evening.

‘Now let 30 years pass in a flash. It is 1986, and this time the nine-year-old’s name is Owen. He

has come to Fenway Park to see his first-ever World Series game...There is a Dad in this picture, and

although Owen’s no little kid anymore he holds his father’s hand very tightly. As pointed out, kids get

their baseball and political allegiances from their parents. This makes Owen a passionate Democrat

and an even more passionate Red Sox fan.’ The Sox lose and, as they leave, Owen ‘begins to cry. /

The father puts an arm around him and thinks: That’s all right. If you’re going to be a Red Sox fan,

they won’t be the last tears you’ll cry...and there are worse things to cry over than baseball heroes

who are toppled for only an evening. Caring enough to cry...that’s not such a bad thing, even if

it’s just a baseball game you’re crying over. ’

King closes, ‘It’s that giving—that passing on—I love most about baseball in general and the

World Series in particular. I really believe that any World Series game a man or woman can watch

with their nine-year-old sons or daughters is a perfect game.’

Here we see that King, the one who takes us directly to the great memories of our lives in a

flash; this essay clearly deserves broader circulation, particularly to King fans. Copies of both

appearances are fairly easy to obtain through eBay, baseball collectable sources and other

secondhand dealers.

Diamonds are Forever (May 1994)

This photo-essay first appeared in the ‘Camera at Work’ segment of Life magazine for May 1994

(photo-essays are a rare King foray—another notable example is the book Nightmares in the Sky,

covered in our Miscellany chapter). Of the pictures King writes, ‘Harry Connolly’s photographs

reflect this world [Little League baseball] beautifully, achieving their own balance between clarity

and mystery, and holding our eye through an entire cycle of images.’

This relatively short piece (the text is spread over five pages, among eight photographs) is

typical King—an elegy to childhood, in this case childhood sports, and its simpler worldview. In

lines that recall one of King’s great fictional strengths, thrusting us back instantly to our own

childhood he writes, ‘These are the faces of children who have not yet been told the dream is usually

just on loan, there to be looked at and lived in and enjoyed only for a short, dust-golden time—the

years when you come back from the field, sit on the back step and pour the sand out of your sneakers

before going in barefoot to eat your supper.’

King mentions that he coached Little League in 1989 (see Head Down above); and writes with

insight of the ‘Darwinian creed of natural selection’ that operates in American sport so that the base

of ‘the rawest amateurs—the kids in other words’ supports a rapidly declining number of players as

age increases until only the pros remain.

Life magazine itself is collectable and copies may be found at the usual used magazine sources.

This piece was revised for its appearance as Introduction to Heading Home: Growing Up in

Baseball published in 1995. Copies of the book can be found at the usual secondhand bookseller

sources.

Curses! (September 1998)

This article appeared in Yankees Magazine for September 1998 and deals with the Yankees-

Red Sox rivalry (King would briefly return to this matter six years later in his Faithful April 18th

entry). The piece contains more specific detail than many of King’s baseball pieces, and is also a

touch more balanced (probably as a result of its intended publication venue). For instance, “Against

the Yankees...the Red Sox usually play badly when the chips are down....’ King’s version of the 1978

cancelled classes tale here reads, ‘I was teaching creative writing at the University of Maine, and I’ll

never forget the date. If Harry Frazee sold his team’s soul on December 26, 1919—the day the Babe

Ruth deal was finalized—then on October 2, 1978, Satan came riding into Fenway Park to reclaim his

own. / I couldn’t get down to the Fens in person, but I cancelled all my classes—the only time in my

career as a teacher I ever did such a thing—and hunkered down in front of the TV in my living room

to watch.’ And, after describing the loss that broke New Englanders’ hearts (again): ‘The following

day I posted a note on my office door in the University of Maine English Department. OFFICE

HOURS CANCELLED DUE TO DEPRESSION is what I wrote on it, and it was true.’

Mostly dealing with that 1978 one-game playoff King ends the piece by stating the 1998 version

of the longtime Sox-Yankees rivalry is ‘for real.’ The magazine is not easy to find but does appear

from time to time on eBay. As it is also a baseball collectable readers should be able to find copies

at used magazine resellers and baseball memorabilia sources.

Stephen King (1999)

This piece appeared in Fenway: A Biography in Words and Pictures , edited by Dan

Shaughnessy and Stan Grossfeld (1999, 2000). Recalling his first time at Fenway King writes: ‘I was

twelve years old. We went down from Maine with my cousin, who had his driver’s license...The Red

Sox were playing the Tigers. It was either 1959 or ’60. 83 Ted Williams was still playing...The game

was an official game, but it was called after six innings because of rain...What I remember was

coming up the runway and out into the park and just being flattened by the beauty of it, by the green.

And the day was gray, but the grass was the greenest green I’d ever seen—and I was a country boy.’

He also says his uncle ‘hated’ Ted Williams and was therefore ‘a real Red Sox fan’ (heavy irony).

Copies of the book are easily secured from secondhand sources.

This article gives valuable insight to King’s early fandom—he never saw the Sox lose live after

that first game for many years; he would travel down to Fenway from UMO regularly; and again

mentions cancelling classes after the 1978 playoff game—‘It’s the only time I ever did that. Through

hangovers, sexual obsessions, and everything else, that was the one time I cancelled anything.’

Finally, the piece is a short appreciation of Fenway Park itself and for that well worth the trouble of

tracking down.

Fenway and the Great White Whale (1999)

This essay appeared in the 1999 MLB All-Star Program, commemorating that year’s All-Star

game, played at the Boston Red Sox home ground, Fenway Park. King’s contribution was included in

a section titled ‘Baseball in Boston’. The initial heading reads, ‘The author, a dyed-in-the-wool Red

Sox fan, has spent a lifetime hoping for a Boston World Series title.’ At the end of this slightly over

two-page piece King thanks ‘Dan Shaughnessy, whose book At Fenway was invaluable in the

preparation of this article.’

King’s opening line is a minor classic: ‘I’ve got a theory about Herman Melville’s classic novel

Moby-Dick that you’ll never come across in a college lit text. I believe that Captain Ahab, the crazed

New Englander in charge of the Pequod, was doomed to spend his life chasing a white whale

because the Red Sox hadn’t been invented yet.’ He continues, arguing Ahab could have sat in the

bleachers, ‘looking, as Red Sox fans have looked all my life, for a World Series flag rippling proudly

in the breeze.’

He says he’s been a fan of the team since the late 50’s and early 60’s, a member of what Dan

Shaughnessy calls the ‘Red Sox Nation’. King talks of that group’s ‘Zeitgeist’, which cannot be

understood by fans of other clubs that do not have a ‘welter of gruesome memories’ (he then proceeds

to list many, in gory detail) to live with. In recounting Dent’s heartbreaking 1978 homer in the one-

game playoff at Fenway King says, ‘I was teaching at the University of Maine at that time, and

cancelled my classes—a thing I’d not done even when suffering a case of double bronchitis—so I

could stay home and watch the game.’ Later, as King sat stunned in front of a turned off TV with son

Owen sleeping in his arms, wife Tabitha looked in and asked, “Why are you just sitting there?”—‘I

remembering thinking Owen was the lucky one; Owen had slept through the whole damned thing.’ He

also tells us he was listening to his car radio after midnight on the 1986 night when Buckner famously

fumbled the routine grounder that has gone down in legend.

He closes, ‘Rooting for the Yankees is like rooting for Microsoft. At Fenway, we come to chase

the whale. / The big one. / The white one.’

This program surfaces regularly, as it is a baseball collectable. Keep an eye on eBay, or contact

secondhand King dealers and baseball memorabilia sources to secure a copy.

Stephen King (2003)

This short piece (five paragraphs) appeared in Spring Training: Baseball’s Early Season ,

edited by Dan Shaughnessy and Stan Grossfeld (2003). While short it will be of interest to King fans

as he talks about the intimate atmosphere of spring training for the Red Sox in Florida and relates a

few anecdotes, such as with Sox catcher Jason Varitek in 2001: ‘“Hey, Mr. King, how are you

feeling?” And that meant a lot. He knew who I was, but even more, he knew that I had been through a

hard time.’ Just one year before Stuart O’Nan would talk King into Faithful he writes: ‘I’d like to do

a book about the Red Sox after I retire. I’d like to take a year, from the beginning of spring training,

and just sort of follow them for the whole year and write a book about it.’

This book is widely available from the usual secondhand bookseller sources.

It’s Weird But True: The Gloom is Gone in Mudville (April 3, 2005)

This piece first appeared in The New York Times for April 3, 2005 and was reprinted in the

Scribner paperback edition of Faithful published in August 2005. Written from the March 16, 2005

spring training ‘World Series rematch’ between the Red Sox and the St. Louis Cardinals the article is

mostly a rear-vision celebration of the season before. King says Sox supporters have not come to

gloat over their opponent’s fans but more to celebrate ‘the dreamlike, four-game spurt that got their

team to the Series in the first place.’ (Of course that was over the hated Yankees—see Faithful at the

beginning of this chapter). He finds the spontaneous good cheer at the game to be most unlike normal

Sox fans: ‘All that happiness eventually gets on my nerves. Weird but true.’

He tells us that despite being asked ‘The Question’ by reporters he has ‘cunningly’ decided to

‘answer it here and get paid for it. The Question...is whether the Red Sox, having finally won the

World Series after eighty-six years of trying, are now “just another team.” If they have, by winning,

ceased to matter.’ His answers: to fans who can only root for underdog teams ‘I bequeath the Chicago

Cubs’; but for long-term New England Sox tragics, ‘we’re just hoping that 2004 isn’t an aberration, a

once-in-a-lifetime blink. We’re hoping it’s the start of a dynasty.’ Yet, according to some: ‘…

whatever will we do now that Lucy has finally relented and let us kick the football? Now that we

have lost our identity as the Great American Almost, we are surely condemned to wander in an

existential wilderness....’ King describes this view as ‘horsefeathers...People who see nobility in

rooting for the Team That Never Wins have never understood most of us have no choice; we were

just born under a bad sign and got what we got.’

Meeting a couple of Yankee fans after the game who bait King with claims he should enjoy it

while he can, as it will never happen again in his lifetime, he thinks: ‘So this is how Yankee fans

sound when they start the season feeling nervous. And I also reflect on the fact that, in the twenty-first

century, the New York Yankees have yet to win a World Series. This cannot be said of the Boston

Red Sox.’

And that, surely, is the perfect way to end our tour of King’s baseball writing, with the Red Sox

tragic content in supporting ‘just another team.’

OPINION—

THE CRAFT OF WRITING

Being a brand name is all right. Trying to be a writer, trying to fill the blank sheet in an

honorable and truthful way, is better.

—From On Becoming A Brand Name

King has been writing about writing for over thirty years—the first piece covered in this chapter

appeared in 1973, before his first novel. A large number of his non-fiction articles (and a notable

amount of his fiction itself) relates to writers, writing and related matters, which is not surprising if

we consider that in many ways writing (or at least storytelling) is Stephen King. His major

contribution to this subject is, of course, On Writing, which is covered in a separate chapter. Here

we address shorter pieces that deal specifically with the craft of writing.

The Horror Market Writer and the Ten Bears (November 1973)

This article first appeared in Writer’s Digest for November 1973 (six months before Carrie

was published!) It is most easily accessed via its reprint as The Horror Market Writer and the Ten

Bears: A True Story in Secret Windows: Essays and Fiction on the Craft of Writing (2000), a

Book-of-the-Month compilation of King writings. 84 This book can generally be obtained from King

dealers and the secondhand book market.

King answers the question he would be asked thousands of times in coming years—‘Where do

you get your ideas?’ with the answer his ‘ salable ideas’ come from his nightmares, not dreams but

‘the ones that hide just beyond the doorway that separates the conscious from the unconscious.’ In

other words, ‘a good assumption to begin with is what scares you will scare someone else.’ Rather

than calling these fears ‘phobias’ King prefers Joseph Stefano’s 85 term ‘bears’ and proceeds to list

them as: fear of ‘the dark...squishy things...deformity...snakes...rats...closed-in places...insects

(especially spiders, flies, beetles)...death...others (paranoia)’ and ‘fear for someone else’.

He provides examples of how he’s used these fears in his tales (combining fear of the dark and

fear for someone in The Boogeyman; fear of rats in a tale he describes but does not name

— Graveyard Shift); and how others had done the same (for instance George Langelaan86 with The

Fly, the basis of a movie franchise). King also argues that horror writers should take the effect (the

fear) and work the plot out from there. He says to the likely criticism that there are no werewolves,

vampires or even mummies on the list that his ‘humble advice is to leave these bears to their well-

deserved rest. They’ve been done to death.’ A much more successful King (remember his first novel

has been accepted but not yet released at this point) would of course deliver the first two of these

monsters later in his career.

The balance of the article largely describes the market for horror (at the time)—‘it’s mainly in

the men’s magazines’, and also gives advice for selling horror to these and other outlets.

In addition to Secret Windows the piece has been reprinted as Horror Stories and the Ten

Bears in Fiction Writers Market, edited by John Brady and Jean M. Fredette (1981); as The Horror

Writer and the Ten Bears: Foreword in Kingdom of Fear: The World of Stephen King, edited by

Tim Underwood and Chuck Miller (1986); under the original title in both The Writer’s Digest Guide

to Good Writing, edited by Thomas Clark, Bruce Woods, Peter Blocksom, & Angela Terez (1994);

and Popular Fiction: An Anthology, edited by Gary Hoppenstand (1998).

Writing a First Novel (June 1975)

This piece first appeared in The Writer for June 1975, as part of a ‘Special Feature’— Writing a

First Novel (Part IV). That month five writers provided their contributions for the overall article. It

was excerpted as In the Beginning… in the same magazine for April 1987.

The article’s importance comes as much from the time at which it was written (only a year after

Carrie was published, before the film of that novel began to turn King into a household name, and

probably just before the paperback was released) as for its content. King notes that the hardcover

edition of his first novel ‘didn’t get within hailing distance of anyone’s best-seller list’ and as far as

major magazines and newspapers were concerned ‘it didn’t exist at all.’

His advice for first time novelists is to write not with the bestseller lists or even publication in

mind: ‘Write it for yourself. It’s the only way you can come out of one of the world’s most grueling

projects still able to face rejection with your equanimity still intact.’ King says writers need to

understand what they are getting into when attempting a novel, which will ‘call for tremendous

expenditures of mental and spiritual energy on your part, and you will never have a good perspective

on what you’ve done; it’s impossible to be objective about your own creative work.’ On the subject

of rejections he advises, ‘If you still think the novel is good but you can’t get it published as it stands,

you must rewrite...And if you decide a novel is beyond repair, you must put it away in a desk

drawer.’

Of his own early attempts: ‘ Carrie was my first published novel, but not really my first novel;

my first three books were stillborn. I tried to tell myself some radical rewriting would bring them

back to life. It’s not true, and cold sober I recognize that fact and abide by it. And even a dead novel

can provide a writer with valuable experience to take on to the next one.’ He continues with other

practical advice, such as ‘Read everything that interests you even remotely’; and ‘Other than writing

to please yourself, I’d advocate only one [rule]: write every day.’

As many writers retain this magazine, copies tend to surface with King resellers fairly regularly,

although the 1987 issue is much less available than the original appearance.

Booze and the Writer (October 1978)

This piece appeared in Writer’s Digest for October 1978 as part of a broader article in which

many writers ‘speak candidly on Drinking and the Writing Life’, including Michael Crichton, Daphne

DuMaurier, John Jakes, Norman Mailer, James A. Michener, Irving Wallace, Joseph Wambaugh and

Herman Wouk.

The magazine presented each writer with four formula areas for response. King’s, early in his

career and well before he ‘got sober’, are of some interest. Drinking habits: ‘Somewhere in the

middle ground between medium and heavy. Beer. A lot of beer.’ Hangouts: ‘I drink mostly at home.’

Drinking companions: ‘I like to drink alone...Otherwise, I like to go drinking with my editor, Bill

Thompson.’ On Writing and Drinking: ‘Yes, there’s an affinity between drinking and writing. You can

see the connection in the lives of Hemingway, Dylan Thomas and...Faulkner...I like to write when I’m

drunk. I’ve never had any particular problem writing that way, although I never wrote anything that

was worth a dime while under the influence of pot or any of the hallucinogenics...Writers who drink

constantly do not last long, but a writer who drinks carefully is probably a better writer.’ (After

becoming sober King would have the different view of a reformed alcoholic, as noted in On

Writing. 87)

As many writers retain this magazine, copies tend to surface with King resellers fairly regularly.

The Writing Life: An Interview with Myself (January 1979)

This piece appeared in Writer’s Digest for January 1979. The Writing Life was a section of the

magazine and King’s entry, sub-titled An Interview With Myself was the lead sub-section that month.

This is an important work, with King writing about himself, his fears and his work relatively early in

his stellar career, yet is often missed by King researchers.

In the article King answers these self-posed questions, ‘Why do you write about such horrible

things?’: ‘I’m promising to make you a child again...the best I can hope for is a temporary suspension

of belief’. ‘But aren’t horror writers traditionally psychologically unpleasant people?’: the answer,

using famous examples, is yes but ‘I myself am the nicest sort of fellow you’d ever want to meet’. ‘Do

you draw situations from real life?’: ‘Obviously not. I’ve not met...a vampire, and I’ve never

spent...an evening in a haunted hotel’; but ‘…the plots and situations themselves are drawn from the

deep well of personal terror...my greatest fear is one that’s awfully common: fear of what I might do

in a given situation. What I might do to myself, my loved ones, my friends, possibly even to society.’

‘Are you ever going to stop doing commercial fiction and write something serious?’: here King

argues that commercial fiction is about ‘normal people in abnormal situations’ and so-called

experimental or intellectual fiction is about ‘abnormal people in normal situations’; that while

commercial writers respect intellectual writers, the latter ‘have nothing but contempt’ for commercial

writers; and ‘My own idea of the novel—literature in general—is that it should be able to reach the

widest spectrum of people. Any other idea seems to be elitism....’

As many writers retain this magazine, copies tend to surface with King resellers fairly regularly.

A Pilgrim’s Progress (January 1980)

This article appeared in American Bookseller for January 1980. An interesting and important

piece, it is mostly overlooked by fans and researchers. King is able to reflect on how difficult it was

early in his career to secure publicity and sales, and presents valuable advice to those novelists who

have recently been published for the first time. He also relates some of his own dismal experiences

(such as only selling five books at one bookshop signing session). Much of the article is about

exposure in bookshops and how to get it but he concludes (as he often does) that the story, in this case

‘the book’ is ‘the ultimate promotional tool’. If people read and like a book they will recommend it,

place it in more prominent positions in bookshops and so on. He suggests ‘that a good story is always

a rare thing...These books seem to stand forth with their own lovely light....’

Copies of this magazine are difficult to find and are best accessed via King resellers or eBay.

On Becoming a Brand Name (February 1980)

This essay first appeared in Adelina for February 198088. It is most easily accessed via its

reprint in Secret Windows: Essays and Fiction on the Craft of Writing (2000), a Book-of-the-Month

compilation of King writings. This book can generally be obtained from King dealers and the

secondhand book market. Copies of Adelina appear on the reseller market only rarely.

This is a lengthy and important article, which should be read by every King fan and every

putative author. King begins, ‘What follows is an attempt to relate...how a young man who knew no

one in the publishing world and had no literary agent became what is known in that same publishing

world as a “brand name author.”’

The early bulk of the piece deals with King’s experience in writing early, unpublished novels

and the series of events that lead to the publication of Carrie— his picking up of a book he didn’t

mean to read at the library and being prompted to query the publisher (Doubleday); the query being

read by Bill Thompson (the man, other than King, most responsible for King’s early career); Tabitha

King’s now mythical removal of the early pages of Carrie from a rubbish bin and encouraging her

husband to continue; the author’s continuation of a novel he disliked and felt was a certain bomb;

Thompson’s inspired editing advice; and so on.

He then moves on to discuss his next efforts—the genesis of ‘Salem’s Lot (crediting Tabitha and

school friend Chris Chesley, with whom King wrote his first, self-published ‘book’ People, Places

and Things, for a dinner-table conversation that lead to the novel); his not-inevitable typecasting as a

‘brand-name’ writer—of ‘horror’; the background to The Shining (and the reason for its name change

from The Shine, and the origin of that title in the lyrics of John Lennon’s Instant Karma).

King concludes that brand name or no, ‘the writer’s job is to write, and there are no brand names

in the little room where the typewriter or the pen or the notebook sit waiting. There are no stars or

brand names in that place; only people who will try to create something out of nothing, and those who

succeed and those who fail.’ Noting that Charles Dickens was perhaps the first brand name writer,

King argues that stardom did not hurt his later work, ‘Nor is there any reason for anyone to think it

might or expect it should. The idea that success in itself can hurt a writer is as ridiculous and elitist as

the commonly held belief that a popular book is a bad book... Being a brand name is all right. Trying

to be a writer, trying to fill the blank sheet in an honorable and truthful way, is better.’

There is some intentional obfuscation in this essay to deter readers from King’s Richard

Bachman pseudonym. One unintentional error is the reference to his two sales to ‘Robert A.

Lowndes’s Magazine of Strange Stories’, which was actually the magazine Startling Mystery

Stories.

In addition to Secret Windows the piece was also reprinted as Foreword—On Becoming a

Brand Name in Fear Itself: The Horror Fiction of StephenKing, edited by Tim Underwood and

Chuck Miller (1982).

On The Shining and Other Perpetrations (August 1982)

This piece appeared in Whispers #17/18 for August 1982. A special hardback edition (limited

to 376 copies) of this issue, signed by King and editor Stuart Schiff, was also released. The same

issue carries a revised version of King’s short story It Grows on You ; along with the unexpurgated

version of the deleted prologue for The Shining, Before the Play.

King writes here of ‘The Question’—the one most writers find to be ‘the bane of their

existence’—the inevitable ‘Where do you get your ideas?’ He notes that while any writer can answer

The Question—in his case it is normally that ‘two facts or two observations come in collision with

each other and produce an offspring—a what if? ’—this can only be done with clear specificity in

relation to a particular novel or story. What ‘boggles’ the mind of most writers is that The Question

itself ‘seems to presuppose some sort of giant idea-bin that could perhaps be reached by anyone, if

they were given the right treasure-map.’ He recalls once responding, ‘I get them at 239 Center Street

in Bangor, just around the corner from the Frati Brothers Pawnshop.’ The general question cannot be

answered sensibly but the specific one, ‘Where did you get the idea for?’(insert novel or story name),

can.

The balance of the essay is largely dedicated to the inspiration for King’s classic, The Shining.

He says the gestation took ‘roughly ten years’, beginning with his fascination for Ray Bradbury’s

‘wonderful’ story The Veldt (in which children are able to make dreams become real—but that’s a

massive oversimplification, you really should read the story). In 1972, while showering it occurred

to him that ‘the power to make dreams—or nightmares—become real might be in a place...as well as

in a person...The following day I began to toy with an idea for a novel called Darkshine, which

would feature a boy who was a psychic receptor and which would be set in an amusement park.’

However, King was concerned about both the setting not isolating the child properly, and the

possibility of plagiarizing Bradbury’s Something Wicked This Way Comes . So the story went into

limbo until the Kings moved to Colorado in 1974, and spent ‘a lovely October weekend’ at The

Stanley Hotel in Estes Park.

The rest is history, and readers should seek out this piece, if simply for its detailed description

of such developments as the dream that set King off (of his son running, screaming through the hotel’s

corridors); the decision (a ‘lucky accident’) to make Jack Torrance an alcoholic child-beater; King’s

feeling of pressure and inadequacy in his ‘early-marriage doldrums’ prior to the success of Carrie;

the use of The Shining as ‘ritual burning of hate and pain’ from those times, as he reflected upon Jack

Torrance’s face (‘to a large extent, my own’); the structure of The Shining (in explanation of the first

publication of Before the Play in the same magazine); and the effect of strong casting and

visualization in the book, which would lead many readers to be ‘offended’ by Kubrick’s film version.

King also provides short notes about It Grows On You (‘written when I was very much under the

influence of Sherwood Anderson’s Winesburg, Ohio and Thornton Wilder’s Our Town . I grew up in

a small town...and for a while in my twenties I felt an almost constant urge to capture that world of

dirt roads, abandoned houses, and general stores full of old men, old baked bean supper posters, and

old fly paper.’ It seems that particular urge has never left (see for instance, Bag of Bones).

This is one of King’s more important non-fiction pieces and it is therefore to be hoped that it

may be reprinted elsewhere. Copies of the magazine and hardback editions are generally available

through King resellers, although readers should expect to pay a significant sum.

Everything You Need to Know About Writing Successfully—In Ten Minutes (July 1986)

This popular piece first appeared in The Writer for July 1986. Many have forgotten that it

included the first appearance of The Village Vomit incident and its aftermath, with King working as a

sportswriter for his local newspaper89 and John Gould’s invaluable advice, which later appeared

(with only minor revision) in On Writing.

King says he learned everything he knows about pursuing ‘a successful and financially

rewarding career writing fiction’ from Gould in ten minutes, which is how long reading the core of

the article—excluding the two introductions and a story (the one about The Village Vomit , The

Enterprise and John Gould) will take.

These are the twelve points King makes: ‘Be talented’ (if people buy a writer’s work, then ‘they

are communicating. Ergo, they are talented.’); ‘Be neat’; ‘Be self-critical’; ‘Remove every extraneous

word’ (this advice migrated to the shorter ‘omit needless words’ by On Writing); ‘Never look at a

reference book while doing a first draft’; ‘Know the markets’; ‘Write to entertain’; ‘Ask yourself

frequently, “Am I having fun”’; ‘How to evaluate criticism’ (after showing your piece to, say, ten

people—if a significant number criticize the same things change them); ‘Observe all rules for proper

submission’; ‘An agent? Forget it. For now’ (‘…remember Stephen King’s First Rule of Writers and

Agents, learned by bitter personal experience: You don’t need one until you’re making enough for

someone to steal...and if you’re making that much, you’ll be able to take your pick of good agents’); If

it’s bad, kill it (‘When it comes to people, mercy killing is against the law. When it comes to fiction it

is the law.’)

This article has been reprinted in The Writer’s Handbook , edited by Sylvia K. Burack (1988,

1989, 1992); and the 2002 edition of the same book, edited by Elfrieda Abbe. It was also reprinted in

The Fractal, edited by David Gardener (Fall 1993); The Writer for March 2000; and as All the

Writing Advice You Need in 10 Minutes in The Writer’s Survival Guide (a special edition of The

Writer magazine released in November 2005). Most of these magazines and books are easily

accessed on the secondhand market.

Write In: Words from Stephen King (October 1986)

This one paragraph response to a question appeared in Writing!: The Continuing Guide to

Written Communication for October 1986. A relatively unimportant piece, it answers a reader’s

question: ‘When you are writing a new horror story, how do you make something shock a reader?’

King says this isn’t always necessary but when it is, ‘it’s easier if the shock arises from a story and a

situation where the reader feels at home, and comfortable with the characters.’ He then gives a rather

gross example (a model visiting Brazil on a shoot thinks her cat is lying next to her but awakens to

find a ‘vampire bat, bloated with her blood, bursts open and lies squeaking in a puddle of gore.’ King

concludes with trademark humor, ‘As you can see, it also helps to have a sick mind.’

This magazine is rare but does appear at King resellers on occasion.

The Best Advice (December 1995)

This two-paragraph piece is King’s part of a larger article of writing advice, The Best Advice,

which appeared in Writer’s Digest for December 1995. The overall article included input (each with

a date) from such writers as Shirley Jackson, Jack Kerouac and Louis L’Amour. King’s section is

dated March 1992 and it can therefore be argued it is not strictly an article by King but rather a

simple quote.

Reflecting a theme he would take up strongly in On Writing King feels, ‘The best work that I’ve

ever done always has the feeling of being excavated. I don’t feel like a creative writer as much as I

feel like an archaeologist who is digging things up and brushing them off....’ Sometimes he gets a little

pot (‘that’s a short story’), sometimes a bigger pot (‘a novella’), and sometimes a building (‘which is

like a novel’). ‘When I feel like I’m “creating” I’m usually doing bad work.’

As many writers retain this magazine, copies tend to surface with King resellers fairly regularly.

I Want To Be Typhoid Stevie (1997)

‘Reading Stephen King: Issues of Censorship, Student Choice, and the Place of Popular

Literature in the Canon’ was the title of a conference held at the University of Maine in Orono, Maine

(the title University of Maine at Orono had been superseded by this time) on October 11& 12, 1996.

In 1997 the National Council of Teachers of English published the papers in a slim oversized

paperback volume of the same title, edited by Brenda Miller Power, Jeffrey D. Wilhelm and Kelly

Chandler.

King, the Keynote Speaker, was introduced by his old mentor, UMO Professor of English Burton

Hatlen; and his speech, I Want To Be Typhoid Stevie , is reproduced in this volume; along with a

paper, King in the Classroom by noted King expert, Michael R. Collings, professor of English at

Pepperdine University in California.

King’s speech when printed covers seven-and-a-half pages and begins, ‘Readable, interesting

novels don’t begin with a desire to teach but a desire to please. The writers of such books aren’t

always successful because of any particular skill, but because their loves, obsessions, and objects of

fascination overlap [those] of their readers.’ Using other authors as example and noting Robert James

Waller’s complaint that each book he has written since Bridges of Madison County ‘is better written

and sells fewer copies’, King says, ‘I have been fortunate enough in my career to have struck a

number of those chords in my readers—points where my own perception of the world seems to

overlap their own, thus offering up that shock of recognition that sometimes only a book can provide.’

Repeating a Frank Norris comment90, one of his favorites, King says ‘I would be perfectly happy

to have that last part—I never truckled, I told the truth—on my tombstone. I may have told a few

whoppers about ghosts, goblins, vampires, and the living dead, but I like to think I have told the

truth...about the human beings that the books are mostly about.’

He explains he writes each book twice—as the first draft flows he is ‘mostly concerned about

the emotional gradient’ with ‘zippo interest in theme, allegory, symbolism, politics, ethics, sexual

roles, culture, or dramatic unity. What I want is to reach through the page and grab the reader. I don’t

want to mess with your head. I want to mess with your life.’ King wants his readers to be so

engrossed, so passionate about the tale as to leave everything else to one side until it is done.

‘Compulsive reading is a sickness, and I have always wanted to be Typhoid Stevie.’ King continues

that, of course, a book can be more than emotion, as in the many levels of blood imagery in Carrie.

And, since that first published novel, its author has re-written to ‘satisfy my own intellectual

curiosity’, each should be ‘about something’. Salem’s Lot was about ‘the connection between small-

town life as I understood it and the whole idea of vampirism. With The Shining, it was the connection

between alcohol abuse and child abuse; it was also the idea that, while hotels may or may not be

haunted in the off-season, human lives are almost always haunted by the lives of others.’

King continues to explain the connections, theme, subtext, call it whatever academic term you

will, of many other novels, but more importantly how some stories make him feel (‘there is nothing

thematic about the way the book [ It] feels to me; like The Body, it is about what I remember most and

treasure best in my childhood’), making this a valuable piece for King fans, students and academics

alike. The balance of the article deals with King’s disdain of being the ‘poster-boy’ for the pleasures

of reading; or of getting children to read in general, although he agrees of course with both—he

simply asks to be read for his own work, not as ‘a ramp’ on the way to something else. Equally, he

does not want to be the poster-boy for fighting censorship in the classroom (King’s strong views

against censorship are amply demonstrated in a number of pieces in our Opinion— Venturing into

Politics chapter)—his job is to write books, not to defend them; although he does condemn

censorship in a lengthy conclusion to the speech.

This is an important piece that deserves a wider audience than the dry academia of the

collection. Reading Stephen King is still in print and easily accessed.

Stephen King Comments on Fears That He’s Unable to Write (November 2, 1999)

This piece was posted on November 2, 1999 at King’s official website, www.stephenking.com.

King notes he is ‘aware that a lot of people have been concerned about press reports that I am either

not writing or not able to write.’ He credits this rumor to ‘material taken out of context in the Dateline

interview Tabby and I did. What I said—and I believe the actual interview makes this clear—is that I

found it extremely difficult to find my way back into writing after the accident.’ He says he ‘fought’

and won that battle the previous July and had since finished On Writing and Riding the Bullet and

begun work on Rose Red (‘an expansion of a screenplay I wrote some years ago.’) While he says his

‘endurance is much less than it was, and my output has been cut in half’, he is working and is ‘touched

by the expressed concern’.

The post no longer appears at the official website. Copies are best obtained from other King

fans (note that such material should not be bought or sold, as this would breach King’s copyright).

Advice to Writers (September 22, 2000)

This interesting article, published shortly before On Writing, appeared as the Author Forum

section in Book Street, a Special Advertising section in USA Today for September 22, 2000. King

says, ‘ On Writing contains ideas about writing and lots of examples, but little outright advice. This is

by design. My wife likes to say, “Never give a man a fish if you can give him a fishing pole,” and

when I wrote my book, my thinking...ran along that course...Advice, which is often no more than

superstition or received wisdom handed down as fact, is often tastier [than instruction] but hardly

ever so useful in the long run.’

He notes there’s plenty of advice ‘in the writing field. I’ve been given plenty and cannot resist

passing on some of my favorites.’ Of the ten pieces of advice he offers he accepts some—‘Never

write in the afternoon...don’t ruin the shine on a perfectly good story by writing when your mind is

dull’; others he does not—in 1975 Richard Matheson (‘a writer I absolutely idolized’) wrote him a

note, ‘Stephen, one piece of advice...get yourself a music stand’ (on which to place copy in an attempt

to avoid shoulder and back problems).

Perhaps most interesting is King’s advice to ‘Keep your sense of perspective’: ‘Don’t bore your

spouse, your kids, or anyone else with the old tortured-artist act. Please remember that what you’re

doing is only writing stories and making things up. It’s not curing cancer or assuring world peace in

our time. The novelist is, when you get right down to it, just another ink-stamping bureaucrat; call him

or her a secretary of dreams. It’s a good job, no one would agree with that more than I, but if you

were crucified on Friday you would not rise on Sunday—please believe me on this.’ The Secretary

of Dreams, of course, is the title of a two-volume collection of King short stories, illustrated by

Maine artist Glenn Chadbourne, and due for release by Cemetery Dance Publications in 2006.

This is an obscure piece (appearing as it did in an advertising supplement) but copies do appear

from time to time at King resellers.

Great Hookers I Have Known (2000)

This piece appeared exclusively in Secret Windows: Essays and Fiction on the Craft of

Writing (2000), a Book-of-the-Month compilation of King’s writing, which can be obtained from

King dealers and the secondhand book market.

King opens with family matters: ‘All three of my kids write well, and all three enjoy making

fiction. I don’t find this particularly surprising, given the increasing evidence that most talents are

hereditary...My father, a merchant mariner, regularly submitted short stories to the pulps, and while he

was never published (at least not while living with my mother...), he had received enough rejection

notes from magazines like Argosy with added invitations to try them again to suggest he was getting

close, and might have made some sort of professional career for himself with a little more effort.’ He

goes on to describe asking his mother how good his father had been as a writer: ‘She shrugged. “Bad

Westerns,” she said. “He was pretty good with animals. The best were sea stories. Those were the

ones he came closest to getting published. There was one about a boat going down in a storm that I

liked very much.” She paused and added carefully, “I think you’re a little better, Stevie.”’ On the

subject of his wife Tabitha’s writing talent, King adds she ‘writes wonderful poetry and has

published three novels...they’re all damned good and... Caretakers, is much better than anything I’ve

ever written or ever will.’ There is also more about their children’s reading habits and writing skills.

The main thrust of the article is the use of ‘hookers’—the slang for opening lines in pulp-

magazines, to which son Joe was ‘attracted’—‘the same pulp fiction that attracted his old man, and

his old man’s father.’ Joe’s query of his father as to whether his books usually opened with great

‘hooker-sentences’ led King to realize he did not, in fact, usually do so. Even his personal favorite

from opening lines in his own novels, ‘Everybody thought the man and the boy were father and son’

(from ‘Salem’s Lot), ‘isn’t much of a hooker.’ King feels that, in an unconscious reaction to this lack,

he had often used other writer’s hookers as epigraphs to his own novels—for instance, ‘It was a

pleasure to burn’, from Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 in Firestarter.

He then lists ten great hookers by other novelists, ranging from James M. Cain’s The Postman

Always Rings Twice through one important to Bag of Bones (‘Last night I dreamed I went to

Manderley’ from Daphne du Maurier’s Rebecca) and Peter Straub’s Ghost Story. He does feel the

hookers for his short stories are better than his novels, going so far as to argue that the one from

Beachworld (‘Fedship ASN/29 fell out of the sky and crashed’) is one of the best.

Creating by Hand (March 2001)

This article first appeared in Inside Borders, a free monthly magazine distributed at Borders

bookstores, for March 2001. It also appeared as Stephen King Takes Pen in Hand for Dreamcatcher

in The Book Report, a free monthly newsletter distributed at Waldenbooks bookstores that month. The

same company owns these chains.

The piece was to promote the release of King’s novel, Dreamcatcher, which he had written

entirely in longhand as part of his post-accident therapy. He notes that he’d used word processing

devices to write since ‘1989 or so’ and was by now a Mac user, ‘… like most Mac users, I’m a huge

fan: you’ll have to pry my Power-Book from my cold dead fingers, as they say.’ Calling this

technology ‘downright seductive’ King says he had caught himself on a ninth rewrite of one passage

i n Insomnia for no other reason than the technology allowed it to be done with great ease. For

Dreamcatcher he’d returned to a cartridge pen ‘in a deliberate effort to slow myself down...I printed

simply because I thought my assistant, Marsha, would find it easier to transcribe my work.’ The result

was, King believes, ‘a ground-level view of a story, the kind I hadn’t had for years. I found myself

writing more directly and simply because the physical effort of writing longhand...is far more arduous

than tickling a keyboard.’ The result was ‘that I heard my own voice more clearly’; the process was

‘intimate’; and he had a feeling ‘of actual work involved in writing.’

T h e Inside Borders article appeared entirely in King’s handwriting (which was fitting,

considering the subject); while The Book Report appearance had only the first paragraph in

handwriting, with the balance typeset. Copies of these magazines are best obtained through King

resellers.

America the Literate (July/August 2003)

A spectacular piece of satire, America the Literate appeared in Book magazine for July/August,

2003. King appears on the magazine’s cover, unshaven and looking down at the heels—the cover

headline reads: ‘The Shocking Truth About Literary Losers Like Me*’. In small print the asterisk

notes: ‘Actual Truth Not Included’. The magazine’s table of contents introduces the essay: ‘You’d

think that the author of The Shining, Carrie, The Dead Zone and dozens of other bestsellers would

have it made. Truth be told, while Jonathan Franzen, Annie Proulx and Margaret Drabble are raking

in the big bucks, Stephen King is barely getting by.’

The four pages of the article (including two photos of King on the steps of and in an old trailer

home), and subtitled A Fictional Essay, are heavily footnoted, including: ‘This quote and this source

—like all the quotes and sources in this essay—are, of course, fictitious. One may argue that this to

some extent negates the arguments that the essay makes, but since actual sources supporting these

arguments don’t exist, all I can say is that it seemed necessary.’

Clearly having enormous fun King begins by arguing that literate writers, far from having no

audience but themselves, in fact sell and are read in record numbers: ‘Let us begin with Ulysses,

James Joyce’s tale of Leopold Bloom’s big day. In 1998, eighty-one million copies of Ulysses were

sold—not worldwide, but in the United States alone.’ He quotes a high-school junior’s rather

sophisticated views of William H. Gass’s The Tunnel (‘it was pretty easy to see the vaginal

symbolism’); and claims one of Jonathan Franzen’s novels ‘sold fourteen million copies in a single

month.’ As a result literary novelists were living in tax havens and buying entire islands in the South

Pacific! He wonders why the ‘myth’ of the literate novelist being broke and a lone voice persists in

face of such facts and quotes one author as claiming she would get no respite from relatives if they

knew she earned more than Clancy, Grafton and Grisham combined.

King argues ‘wealth has always made writers uncomfortable’, although this has ‘always been

less true of the more easily recognized “popular” writers’; this explains why such novels as

Nabokov’s Ada, although selling millions of copies each year, never appears on bestseller lists—‘a

powerful group of “literary novelists” have purchased all the major newspaper and Internet sites that

publish bestseller lists, and any novel considered “too literary” is blocked from those lists.’

So, ‘Where is Stephen King?’, along with Cussler, Rice, Kellerman, Lehane and Connelly? ‘I,

like virtually every other popular novelist in America, live mostly on a subsidy check of just over

twelve thousand dollars a month...The check comes from Literature ‘R’ Us, a company incorporated

in the Bahamas.’ This company is owned and run by literary novelists (who, after all, have all the

money). ‘As for my last novel, From a Buick 8? It sold just over a thousand copies.’

He concludes in confession mode, ‘America’s so-called “popular novelists” are actually fronts,

created so that TV and the press will have someone to bother when they have an extra five minutes at

the end of the nightly news or space to fill in the arts-and-leisure section of the Sunday paper...On a

personal level I must admit I wish my books sold more, but sometimes the movies give me a boost;

thanks to Frank Darabont’s film of The Green Mile, for instance, my novel sold an extra fifteen

thousand copies. And, as J.K. Rowling admits, “Without the movies, Harry Potter would actually be a

total unknown.”’

Copies of this magazine are best obtained through King resellers, although copies do appear at

other venues.

We can expect more essays and articles on writing from King as the years pass—for, as we

know, writing is core to the man, his family and his life.

Author’s Notes and Introductions

to His Own Work

More than anything else I wanted to get inside my reader’s defenses, wanted to rip them and

ravish them and change them forever with nothing but story. And I felt I could do those things. I

felt I had been made to do those things.

—From On Being Nineteen (and a Few Other Things) in the Revised and Expanded Edition of

The Gunslinger.

King took early to including introductions, afterwords, notes and the like to his work—the first

appeared in only his second novel. They are generally intended to enlighten the reader about the

work, often exposing the spark for the idea that became the novel or short story, and normally include

acknowledgements of various individuals. We would encourage readers so inclined to actually read

the pieces in order. They give a wonderful insight into King the writer, King the man and his

development in these two ‘roles’ over the past three decades.

Often written with humor and always interesting they almost deserve a collection of their own.

But only almost. In the end each piece best serves its purpose in the context of the fiction it is

illuminating.

Notes: The following pieces are dealt with in the Danse Macabre, On Writing chapter of this

book: the Forenote , Forenote to the Paperback Edition and Afterword to Danse Macabre ; the

Author’s Note, and the three Foreword s to On Writing . The authors have classified the Foreword to

the Paperback Edition of Dolores Claiborne (first published in 1993) as ‘fiction’ for the purposes of

this book. While we realize this is subject to debate, a close reading of the piece did not justify its

inclusion in this volume, a review of King’s non-fiction writings.

Author’s Note—Salem’s Lot (1975)

The first example of King as author speaking directly to the readers of one of his books appears

in only his second novel, ’Salem’s Lot . In On Writing the author described it as ‘a peculiar

combination of Peyton Place and Dracula....’ that he had originally titled Second Coming.

The Note begins, ‘No one writes a long novel alone…’ and proceeds to thank four people—‘…

my wife, whose criticism is as tough and unflinching as ever’, a Catholic priest, the County medical

examiner and a former colleague from the one school at which King taught—Hampden Academy.

King also says, ‘Although the towns surrounding ’salem’s Lot are very real, ’salem’s Lot exists

wholly in the author’s imagination....” Note the use of the lower case ‘s’ in ’salem’s lot, as it appears

in the original novel. As time has passed the shortened version of the town’s name (Jerusalem’s Lot)

has, in general, come to be referred to as ’Salem’s Lot, or even Salem’s Lot (no apostrophe).

In 1999 King published an Introduction to the novel for the first time. Yet another Introduction

appears in the ’Salem’s Lot Illustrated Edition , released by Doubleday in 2005. Both are described

in detail later in this chapter.

Untitled—The Shining (1977)

An untitled piece of three sections appears at the beginning of The Shining, King’s novel of a

man slowly descending into madness under the influence of his own weakness and the malevolence of

a Bad Place. The short piece is effectively an Author’s Note. The first section dedicates the novel to

the King’s second child, ‘This is for Joe Hill King, who shines on.’ The second section

acknowledges the editor of King’s first three published novels, William (Bill) Thompson, ‘a man of

wit and good sense’.

The final section reads, ‘Some of the most beautiful resort hotels in the world are located in

Colorado, but the hotel in these pages is based on none of them. The Overlook and the people

associated with it exist wholly within the author’s imagination.’ Of course, we now know the book

was inspired by the King’s stay at The Stanley Hotel in Estes Park, Colorado91. In fact, the mini-

series version of the tale, Stephen King’s The Shining , was filmed at The Stanley, between February

and June of 1996.

King wrote a four-page Introduction for a 2001 edition of the book, detailed later in this

chapter.

Author’s Note—The Stand (1978)

Opening this piece by noting that The Stand is fiction King says, ‘Many of the events occur in

real places, and with these places I have taken the liberty of changing them to whatever degree best

suited the course of my story. This is a monstrous impertinence, and that is as good a definition of the

word “novel” as any.’ King thanks two staff of the Bridgton (Maine) Family Medical Center for

answering his questions on the mutating nature of the flu virus (one, Russ Dorr, would also be

acknowledged in Pet Sematary and Misery; and honored through the use of his name for a bit-part

character played by director John Landis in the mini-series of The Stand). The Note was significantly

revised for its appearance in the Complete & Uncut edition (the revision is covered later in this

chapter).

The 1980 Signet mass-market paperback editions of King’s great apocalyptic novel carry this

additional line, ‘Minor revisions have been made for the Signet edition of this novel.’ In fact, the

revisions were not all that minor, considering they revolved around changing the timeline of events in

the original novel from 1980 to 1985. Most, if not all, overseas paperback editions stayed with the

1980 timeline. When the Complete & Uncut edition of The Stand was released the timeline changed

again, to 1990 (and has stayed there in subsequent editions).

Foreword—Night Shift (1978)

This lengthy Foreword to King’s first short story collection was one of his earliest dissertations

on horror, particularly the emotion of fear. King wrote it in his Bridgton, Maine home on 27 February

1977 (‘… a cold February rain is falling outside. It’s night.’)

On the subject of fear King tells his readers, ‘We sense the shape. Children grasp it easily,

forget it, and relearn it as adults. The shape is there, and most of us come to realize what it is sooner

or later: it is the shape of a body under the sheet. All our fears add up to one great fear, all our fears

are part of that great fear—an arm, a leg, a finger, an ear. We’re afraid of the body under the sheet.

It’s our body. And the great appeal of horror fiction through the ages is that it serves as a rehearsal for

our own deaths.’92

‘Those working in the genre...know that the entire field of horror and the supernatural is a kind

of filter screen between the conscious and the subconscious; horror fiction is like a central subway

station in the human psyche between the blue line of what we can safely internalize and the red line of

what we need to get rid of in some way or another.’

Taking up a discussion of the ‘big-bug’ and ‘teen’ horror movies of the 1950s (he would expand

this line of argument significantly in Danse Macabre), King says, ‘Great horror fiction is almost

always allegorical; sometimes the allegory is intended, as in Animal Farm and 1984, and sometimes

it just happens—J.R.R. Tolkien swore up and down that the Dark Lord of Mordor was not Hitler in

fantasy dress, but the theses and term papers to just that effect go on and on...maybe because, as Bob

Dylan says, when you got a lot of knives and forks, you gotta cut something.’

Of some interest to readers of this chapter is the case King makes: ‘… here is a truth that makes

the strongest writer gnash his teeth: with the exception of three small groups of people, no one reads a

writer’s preface. The exceptions are: one, the writer’s close family (usually his wife and his mother);

two, the writer’s accredited representative (and the editorial people and assorted munchkins), whose

chief interest is to find out if anyone has been libeled in the course of the writer’s wanderings; and

three, those people who have had a hand in helping the writer on his way...Other readers are apt to

feel...that the author’s preface is a gross imposition, a multi-page commercial for himself....’ While

King may be right about most authors (or indeed, himself, at that point in his career) this is no longer

the case with King’s Constant Readers. This volume is testament to the extraordinary interest King

creates with any of his non-fiction; and Constant Readers will regularly turn to the Introduction,

Argument or Afterword in King’s works for enlightenment and entertainment.

He closes with acknowledgements to members of the three groups who read the prefaces: to

Tabitha (‘my best and most trenchant critic’); their children; his late mother (‘to whom this book is

dedicated’, ‘no one—including myself—was more pleased than she when I broke through’’’);

William (Bill) Thompson (‘who showed kindness to a young writer with no credentials some years

ago’); ‘the people who bought my first work’—‘Robert A.W. Lowndes, who purchased the first two

stories I ever sold’93, Douglas Allen and Nye Willden for Cavalier and Gent, staff of the New American Library, Penthouse magazine, and Cosmopolitan.

In an early acknowledgement of his audience (soon to be ‘Constant Readers’), King says,

‘There’s one final group that I’d like to thank, and that is each and every reader who ever unlimbered

his or her wallet to buy something that I wrote. In a great many ways, this is your book because it sure

never would have happened without you. So thanks.’

Parts of this Foreword were later incorporated into the book length Danse Macabre; and the

entire piece was reprinted as Foreword to Night Shift in the Book-of-the-Month Club collection of

King pieces, Secret Windows: Essays and Fiction on the Craft of Writing (2000).

Author’s Note—The Dead Zone (1979)

This Note, to one of King’s great tragedies, is short and largely relates to stating the book is

fiction, ‘All of the major characters are made up. Because it plays against the historical backdrop of

the last decade, the reader may recognize actual figures...It is my hope that none of these figures have

been misrepresented.’ King also states, ‘There is...no town of Castle Rock in Maine.’ Castle Rock

first appeared in this novel (in something of a bit part), became King’s first great fictional ‘home

town,’ and was finally so important that King apparently felt it was distracting him, leading to the

delivery of the ‘last Castle Rock story’, Needful Things, twelve years later. The town’s creator has

since relented and allowed both passing reference to the town (e.g., Riding the Bullet) and set

significant scenes there in Bag of Bones. In the realm of King’s fiction, at least, there is a town of

Castle Rock in Maine.

Synopsis—The Way Station (April 1980)

The Way Station was the second of the five parts of the original version of The Gunslinger to be

published in The Magazine of Fantasy and science-fiction (this one in the April 1980 issue). For

each of the latter four parts King summarized the action to date for readers by use of a Synopsis. He

would use the same technique for volumes two to five of the Dark Tower Cycle when they were

published in novel format, using the term, Argument.

This short piece (only five paragraphs) summarizes the action in The Gunslinger, the first Dark

Tower fiction, which appeared in F&SF (the accepted abbreviation for this venerated magazine) for

October 1978, more than eight years after King first wrote the fateful line, ‘The man in black fled

across the desert and the gunslinger followed’. Copies of F&SF can be secured from used magazine

dealers, particularly those specializing in these genres, and King resellers. The piece was also

reprinted in Bev Vincent’s The Road to the Dark Tower94.

Synopsis—The Oracle and the Mountains (February 1981)

The Oracle and the Mountains was the third part of the original version of The Gunslinger,

published in The Magazine of Fantasy and science-fiction for February 1981.

This piece is fairly lengthy, at one and a half pages, considering it summarizes what were then

simply two short stories; and effectively summarizes the action in The Gunslinger and The Way

Station. King begins, ‘This is the third tale of Roland, the last gunslinger, and his quest for the Dark

Tower which stands at the roots of time.’ The piece was also reprinted in Bev Vincent’s The Road to

the Dark Tower.

Synopsis—The Slow Mutants (July 1981)

The Slow Mutants was the fourth part of the original version of The Gunslinger, published in

The Magazine of Fantasy and science-fiction for July 1981.

This piece summarizes the action to date in the tale of Roland Deschain. In fact, the first half or

so of the one and three quarter pages virtually reproduces the Synopsis for The Oracle and the

Mountains word for word. King prepares the reader in the last two paragraphs for the awful fate that

awaits Jake Chambers: ‘The gunslinger begins to climb toward the dark opening from which the river

spills, the opening which leads under the mountains...and Jake, the boy, his sacrifice, follows. / They

go into the darkness together.’ The piece was also reprinted in Bev Vincent’s The Road to the Dark

Tower.

Afterword—Firestarter (1981)

This Afterword, written in Bangor, first appeared in the August 1981 Signet US paperback

edition of Firestarter and has since only appeared in those editions. It was not included in UK

paperback editions or the Plume US paperback. King largely devotes the page-and-a-half here to a

discussion of the alleged attempts by US and Soviet authorities to harness ‘wild talents’ such as

pyrokinesis (Charlie McGee’s particular skill in Firestarter). He tells us a ‘good many real-life

incidents of pyrokinesis have been reported (Charles Fort catalogues several in Lo! and The Book of

the Damned)’95 and says that while not claiming such talents exist ‘some of the cases are both eerie

and thought provoking. / If I mean to suggest anything, it is only that the world, although well-lighted

with fluorescents and incandescent bulbs and neon, is still full of odd dark corners and unsettling

nooks and crannies.’

In a touching last half paragraph King thanks ‘my wife Tabitha, who offered her usual helpful

criticisms and suggestions; and my daughter, Naomi, who brightens up everything and who helped me

understand—as much as any man can, I guess—what it is to be young, intelligent and a girl

approaching the age of ten. She’s not Charlie, but she helped me help Charlie be herself.’

Synopsis—The Gunslinger and the Dark Man (November 1981)

The Gunslinger and the Dark Man was the fifth and final part of the original version of The

Gunslinger, published in The Magazine of Fantasy and science-fiction for November 1981. All five

pieces would be collected the following year, as the first Dark Tower novel, The Gunslinger.

This piece summarizes the action to date in the first four of these tales. It is also the first non-

fiction piece in which King states (most likely incorrectly) that the man in black had killed Jake

Chambers (for more on this debate see the sections on the Argument s to The Drawing of the Three

and The Waste Lands later in this chapter): ‘…Jake, who was somehow “killed” by the man in black

(the man in black pushed him under the wheels of a Cadillac)....’ It is also here that King states in a

non-fiction piece for a first time that Marten is John Farson (a quarter century later, this is still

subject to debate). More about both these controversial subjects as we proceed. The piece was also

reprinted in Bev Vincent’s The Road to the Dark Tower.

Afterword—Different Seasons (1982)

King wrote this fairly lengthy Afterword in Bangor on 4 January 1982. Different Seasons

collects four novellas, each placed in its ‘season’96. King opens with the interesting tale of how his

second published novel was chosen—by editor Bill Thompson (who rejected the still unpublished

Blaze97 in favor of Second Coming (released as ’Salem’s Lot )—while making the point that this choice led directly to his typecasting as a ‘horror-writer’. By the time The Shining and Firestarter

were being written King had decided that it was ‘just fine’ to be typecast along with writers who’d

given him ‘great pleasure over the years’, and a long list of those follows.

King tells us each novella was written immediately after completing a novel— The Body after

’Salem’s Lot; Apt Pupil in two weeks following The Shining; Shawshank after The Dead Zone; and

The Breathing Method following Firestarter. In a footnote King says he realized that each was

written in a different house—three in Maine, one in Boulder.

He notes that none of the stories had previously been submitted for publication, because each is

in the 25-30,000 word range, the length of the strange beast known as a ‘novella’, for which at that

time (and today) there is a limited mainstream market; he then spends some pages mourning the death

of the market that had once existed for the mainstream novella in such publications as The Saturday

Evening Post. It is amusing that King notes two magazines that were publishing long fiction at the

time— Atlantic Monthly and The New Yorker —had not ‘been particularly receptive to my stuff,

which is fairly plain, not very literary and sometimes...downright clumsy.’ Ironically, a change of

editing staff (and perhaps a general reassessment of King’s work) has led to five pieces of King’s

fiction98and four of his non-fiction99 appearing in the pages of The New Yorker , the first of them only two years after this Afterword! In fact, among King’s fans these rather literary, non-horror pieces tend

to be known collectively as The New Yorker stories.

One of the most famous of King’s statements (usually repeated as criticism and out of context)

appears here, where he says of his novels: ‘Most of them have been plain fiction for plain folks, the

literary equivalent of a Big Mac and a large fries from McDonald’s.’ He claims to be able to

recognize ‘elegant prose’ but to have found it ‘difficult or impossible to write it myself’ (we must

demure).

Afterword—The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger (1982)

In 2003 King released a revised and expanded version of the first Dark Tower novel, The

Gunslinger. His major reasons for revision were to bring the first volume of a seven-volume epic

into line with the mythology of the subsequent books; and to fix the writing problems suffered by the

young man who wrote the novel’s five parts over the period from 1970 to its initial publication as a

Limited Edition by Donald M. Grant in 1982.

The parts that made up the novel were first published in The Magazine of Fantasy and science-

fiction during 1978, 1980 and 1981. There are notable differences between the original publications

in the magazine and the subsequent Limited Edition published by Grant (1982), and republished as a

mass-market version by NAL (1988). The Complete Guide to the Works of Stephen King documents

at least 93 changes from the short stories to the original novel. While some changes were apparently

to improve the writing or to fix errors, others are substantive. Compare for instance Roland saying, ‘I

trained David. I friended him,’ in The Slow Mutants to ‘I never trained David. I friended him’, in the

original novel.

So, there are actually three versions of The Gunslinger—the combination of the five short

stories, the ‘original’ novel and the ‘revised and expanded’ novel!

When the burgeoning King community became aware of this novel after its publication as a

Limited in 1982 (only a little over 20,000 copies were released) there was considerable controversy,

with average readers complaining about their lack of access to this ‘new’ novel. To quell the reaction

King allowed the first trade publication of the novel in the US (September 1988); the British

Commonwealth (June 1989); and the UK (December 1989).

The Afterword, written in Bangor, represents the first time King directly related his intent with

the Dark Tower Cycle to his Readers. At this point in his career King was projecting a very lengthy

series of books—‘my brief synopsis of the action to follow [ The Gunslinger] suggests a length

approaching 3000 pages, perhaps more.’ In fact, counting the pages in the Grant first editions, there

are over 3500 in total, so King wasn’t far from the mark. Then again, this particular author is rarely

accused of the sin of brevity. This Afterword, for obvious reasons, did not appear in the Revised and

Expanded Edition.

King takes the reader back to 1970, and the genesis of the entire Dark Tower Cycle, by

describing reams of unusually colored and sized paper that turned up at the University of Maine

library ‘totally unexplained and unaccounted for.’ Tabitha Spruce (soon to be Tabitha King) took

home a robin’s egg blue ream; her boyfriend of the time the ‘Roadrunner yellow’ ream; and King got

the ‘bright green’ lot.

He tells of his contemplation of the possibilities for these five hundred blank pages and

continues, ‘I was living in a scuzzy riverside cabin...and I was living all by myself—the first third of

the foregoing tale was written in a ghastly, unbroken silence... Those two factors, the challenge of that

blank green paper, and the utter silence...were more responsible than anything else for the opening lay

o f The Dark Tower .’ In fact, this is exactly what the reader perceives in the opening section, also

titled The Gunslinger: a vast, silent space, yellow-green in a hideous form of near-dead geography.

The author also reveals for the first time a major inspiration for the Cycle: the ‘third element

was a poem I’d been assigned two years earlier, in a sophomore course covering the earlier romantic

poets...Most of the other poems had fallen out of my consciousness...but that one, gorgeous and rich

and inexplicable, remained...and it remains still. That poem was “Childe Roland”, by Robert

Browning. ’100

King says during the spring semester of 1970 he felt the time had arrived to become more

serious with his writing ambitions, ‘a sense that it was time to stop goofing around with a pick and

shovel and get behind the controls of one big great God a’mighty steamshovel, a sense that it was time

to try and dig something big out of the sand....’ He would deliver a much more sophisticated

alternative in On Writing, decades later: ‘Stories are relics, part of an undiscovered pre-existing

world. The writer’s job is to use the tools in his or her toolbox to get as much of each one out of the

ground intact as possible...short story or thousand-page whopper of a novel, the techniques of

excavation remain basically the same. No matter how good you are, no matter how much experience

you have, it’s probably impossible to get the entire fossil out of the ground without a few breaks and

losses. To get even most of it, the shovel must give way to more delicate tools: airhose, palm-pick,

perhaps even a toothbrush. Plot is a far bigger tool, the writer’s jackhammer. You can liberate a

fossil from hard ground with a jackhammer, no argument there, but you know as well as I do that the

jackhammer is going to break almost as much stuff as it liberates. It’s clumsy, mechanical,

anticreative.’

Coming back to the spring of 1970 King writes simply of the evening he began the tale that is

now recognized as his magnum opus, ‘And so, one night in March of 1970, I found myself sitting at

my old office-model Underwood with the chipped “m” and the flying capital “O” and writing the

words that begin this story: The man in black fled across the desert and the gunslinger followed.’

These are perhaps now the most famous words of all the millions King has written. The final words

of the Cycle are also: ‘ The man in black fled across the desert and the gunslinger followed.’ Just

below those words, in The Dark Tower VII: The Dark Tower King writes: ‘June 19, 1970—April 7,

2004 / I tell God thankya. ’ (Note that by 2004 King was saying he began the Cycle not ‘one night in

March of 1970’ but June 19, 1970.) Interestingly, the night before King had been arrested near the

University Motor Inn in Orono and charged with intoxication. Released on $60 bail he was ordered to

court the next morning but received a continuance until June 30, at which time he was found not

guilty101. Somehow, despite the inevitable stress of the arrest and outstanding charge, King was able

to begin perhaps his greatest work!

His thoughts never left Roland’s world in the twelve years between that 1970 evening and the

publication of The Gunslinger as a novel: ‘I came back to the gunslinger’s world when ’Salem’s Lot

was going badly...and wrote of the boy Jake’s sad ending not long after I had seen another boy, Danny

Torrance escape another bad place in The Shining. In fact the only time when my thoughts did not turn

at least occasionally to the gunslinger’s dry and yet somehow gorgeous world (at least it has always

seemed gorgeous to me) was when I was inhabiting another that seemed every bit as real—the post-

apocalypse world of The Stand.’

King also reveals here the genesis of the term he would also use in the next four volumes of the

Cycle—‘I believe that I probably owe readers who have come this far with me some sort of synopsis

(“the argument”, those great old romantic poets would have called it)....’ before noting he is not sure

where the tale is going. But, ‘I know from Roland’s vision near the end that his world is indeed

moving on because Roland’s universe exists within a single molecule of a weed dying in some

cosmic vacant lot....’ and reveals that segments of the second novel had already been written. He also

says he knows virtually nothing of Roland’s past—noting matters of which we would learn a lot more

(Susan Delgado) and those about which we are still fundamentally in the dark.

The piece concludes with a promise, one Roland could not (yet) keep more than two decades

later: ‘I do know this: at some point, at some magic time, there will be a purple evening (an evening

made for romance!) when Roland will come to his dark tower, and approach it, winding his

horn...and if I should ever get there, you’ll be the first to know.’

Author’s Note—Christine (1983)

In this two paragraph note King says, ‘Lyric quotes in this book are assigned to the singer (or

singers, or group) most commonly associated with them.’ He says this ‘may offend the purist’ but

argues, ‘In the world of popular song, it is as the Rolling Stones say: the singer, not the song.’ He also

credits those who assisted to get legal permissions to quote the lyrics, including Dave Marsh (later

both were members of the Rock Bottom Remainders); and ‘James Feury, a.k.a. “Mighty John

Marshall”, who rocks my little town on WACZ’ (see Visit With an Endangered Species in our

Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television chapter).

Untitled (1983)

This is a short untitled author’s note to The Return of Timmy Baterman, a story excerpted from

Pet Sematary, due out that Fall. It appeared in the program for the Satyricon II/DeepSouthCon XXI

conventions—the Satyricon II Program Book—a trade paperback released in June 1983. There are

very minor variations between the short story version and the novel.

King says, ‘Most excerpts from novels don’t make much sense, but I think this one stands pretty

much on its own’ and goes on to set the scene, including the chilling comment that ‘the story of Timmy

Baterman’ is Jud Crandall’s attempt to dissuade Louis Creed from attempting to bring his dead son

back to life (remember, at this point readers had yet to see Pet Sematary).

Author’s Note—Pet Sematary (1983)

This very short note to King’s powerful novel of grief thanks Russ Dorr (previously

acknowledged in The Stand, and later in Misery) for providing medical background; and Steve

Wentworth for ‘information on American funeral and burial customs and some insight into the nature

of grief.’ Both men were from Bridgton, the Kings’ hometown for a short period in the 1970s (King

would write an Introduction for the novel in 2000, this is covered below).

Cat From Hell (1984)

This is one of only two King non-fiction pieces known to have been published in a foreign

language before they were in English (the other appeared in le nouvel Observateur in French, see

Title unknown (November 1994) in our Miscellany chapter).

King wrote this introduction for his story The Cat From Hell for its appearance in an anthology,

Top Horror , edited by Josh Pachter and published in West Germany by Wilhelm Heyne Verlag. It

was reprinted in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter for June 1985 and this is by far the

easiest access point for English-speaking fans.

In six paragraphs King explains the origin of The Cat From Hell, as a competition in Cavalier, a

men’s magazine that carried a lot of his early fiction: ‘At any rate, that was the only time I ever wrote

a story to order—and from a photograph, at that. Whew! That was one scary house-cat!’ The tale has

not been included in any King collection. Full details about The Cat From Hell and the various

anthologies to include it appear in Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished. 102

Afterword—Cycle of the Werewolf (1985)

King’s short Afterword to Cycle of the Werewolf , written on 4 August 1983, is intended to

protect him against accusations of not understanding the cycles of the moon. He writes, ‘I have taken a

great many liberties with the lunar cycle—usually to take advantage of days (Valentine’s, July 4th,

etc.) which “mark” certain months in our minds. To those readers who feel that I didn’t know any

better, I assert that I did...but the temptation was simply too great to resist.’

The 1985 trade paperback edition of this werewolf-stalking small-town novella was the first to

carry the Afterword, which did not appear in the original Limited Edition of the book, released by

The Land of Enchantment in 1983. The piece is also reproduced in Silver Bullet, the movie tie-in for

the film version of Cycle (more of which later).

Introduction—Skeleton Crew (1985)

King wrote the Introduction to his second short story collection on 15 April 1984 in Bangor,

Maine. The piece is composed of five sections.

The first begins with a rather tongue-in-cheek statement, ‘Here’s some more short stories, if you

want them.’ He notes the stories were written over a 17 year period between the ‘summer before I

started college’ (1966— The Reaper’s Image ) and November 1983 ( The Ballad of the Flexible

Bullet).

In the second section King, reliving some of his early sales, says he was just as glad of the

twelve contributor’s copies that were his ‘payment’ for the Ubris version of Here There Be Tygers

or the few dollars he received for his men’s magazine contributions (particularly their ability to pay

overdue bills) as the $2000 he received for The Word Processor from Playboy. Showing his dry

sense of humor he says, ‘I am of a kindly nature and have always assumed that Ubris was a cockney

way of spelling hubris.’ ‘All the same, you don’t do it for money, or you’re a monkey...In the end you

don’t even do it for love, although it would be nice to think so. You do it because to not do it is

suicide.’

King briefly dwells on the nature of a short story in the third section: ‘… a short story is like a

quick kiss in the dark from a stranger. That is not, of course, the same thing as an affair or a marriage,

but kisses can be sweet, and their very brevity forms its own attraction.’ He also reveals that writing

short stories had gotten harder for him over the years (‘they keep wanting to bloat...I have a real

problem with bloat—I write like fat ladies diet.’)

Acknowledgements are the subject of the fourth section—Bill Thompson, by this time at Arbor

House; Phyllis Grann at Putnam; his agent, Kirby McCauley (‘who pulled “The Mist” out of me with

a chain fall’); ‘this is starting to sound like an Academy Awards acceptance speech’; and a group of

the magazine editors who had bought the stories originally. Finally the Constant Reader (‘Without you

it’s a dead circuit.’). The fifth section sets the CR on the trail—‘Grab onto my arm now. Hold tight.

We are going into a number of dark places, but I think I know the way. Just don’t let go of my arm.

And if I should kiss you in the dark, it’s no big deal; it’s only because you are my love. / Now listen:’

Notes—Skeleton Crew (1985)

King also delivers a set of Notes about some of the stories included in this collection; most

describe the genesis of the tale. The novella The Mist was written for a collection edited by King’s

agent, Kirby McCauley and was inspired by a storm (‘much as described in the story...there was

indeed a waterspout’) on Long Lake at Bridgton, Maine when the King family lived there. King notes

he ‘never liked it much until the rewrite’, which was for Skeleton Crew; and that the character

Stephanie Drayton is named after Tabitha King’s sister—Stephanie Leonard.

Here There Be Tygers was inspired by King’s ‘pretty scary’ first-grade teacher; The Monkey by

a man selling wind-up toys on a New York street; Mrs. Todd’s Shortcut by Tabitha’s habits (‘the

woman really is mad for a shortcut...And Tabby really does seem to be getting younger

sometimes....’). Of this tale King says three women’s magazines refused it (‘two because of the line

about how a woman will pee down her own leg if she doesn’t squat’). The Jaunt was originally for

Omni, ‘which quite rightly rejected it because the science is so wonky.’

Perhaps the most interesting note is about The Raft. He wrote the story in 1968 as “The Float”

and sold it in 1969 to Adam magazine, which paid only on publication, not acceptance. Relating his

arrest and conviction for petty larceny in 1970103 (‘I was my own attorney and did indeed have a fool

for a client’), he says the fine was $250, which he did not have. Failure to pay within a week would

result in 30 days in the county jail but, three days later, a check for exactly the amount required

arrived from Adam, for The Float. Despite Adam’s policy of paying only on publication King never

saw the magazine; later he lost the original manuscript; and found himself rewriting the tale in 1981.

He then appeals for anyone who may have a copy or have seen the story in published form to contact

him. No one ever has and King researchers currently assume the story never made it to print.

Survivor Type came about when King was mulling cannibalism one day (‘because that’s the sort

of thing guys like me sometimes think about...anyway, I started to wonder if a person could eat

himself....’); Uncle Otto’s Truck was based on a real truck and a real house; and The Reach104 by a story Tabitha’s younger brother, Tommy (a Coast Guardsman) told about a real-life Stella Flanders,

who never left her Maine island for the mainland, at least while alive.

The note about The Reach was excerpted as Note from the Author in Maine Contemporary

Fiction: An Anthology of Short Stories (2005), edited by Wesley McNair, in which the story was

reprinted.

Why I Was Bachman—The Bachman Books (1985)

From the original publication of The Bachman Books omnibus in 1985 through 1995, this piece

was effectively the Introduction to the volume, which first collected Rage, The Long Walk ,

Roadwork and The Running Man. In 1996 it was replaced by an updated piece, The Importance of

Being Bachman (covered later in this chapter) but only in the United States (it still appears in United

Kingdom editions). Unusually, the original version was reprinted in The Stephen King Desk

Calendar 2006, a Doubleday Book Club publication only made available to subscribers of Book-of-

the-Month Club’s The Stephen King Library.

Those with a specific interest in the provenance of Bachman and ‘his’ novels should read this

piece but it is otherwise unremarkable (one almost feels King was somewhere else when penning its

six pages—he effectively confirmed this in the second introduction, eleven years later). Some

interesting facts are divulged— Misery was planned as a Bachman original until that gentleman died

of ‘cancer of the pseudonym’; and The Running Man, ‘which may be the best of them’, was written in

seventy-two hours and published virtually unchanged —but this piece is not nearly as revelatory as

one would expect.

Foreword—Silver Bullet (1985)

Silver Bullet was released in 1985 as the movie tie-in for the film version of Cycle of the

Werewolf. There were only two trade paperback printings of the book; it is now out of print but can

be obtained occasionally from online or other secondhand booksellers. It contains King’s novella

Cycle of the Werewolf (including the Afterword dealt with earlier); a new Foreword by the author;

the final draft of King’s SilverBullet screenplay; and an eight page movie photo section.

This lengthy Foreword, written in Bangor on February 12, 1985, only appears in this volume

and is therefore rarely read by King fans. It is in two parts, the first detailing the genesis and creation

of Cycle of the Werewolf and the second dealing with the creation of the movie from that tale.

‘ Silver Bullet is probably the only movie ever made that began as a calendar proposal,’ King

says, detailing the idea Christopher Zavisa pitched to a ‘drunk’ King, while both were attending the

1979 World Fantasy Convention in Providence, Rhode Island. The author agreed to write a series of

monthly vignettes, which would be combined with paintings by Berni Wrightson105 to create a

calendar. King opines that, apart from being inebriated, he was inclined to agree to a small project in

part to atone for his financial success in the face of such legends and pioneers of horror fiction

attending the Convention as Frank Belknap Long, Robert Bloch (to whom, among others, Danse

Macabre is dedicated) and Fritz Leiber.

As he worked the calendar/vignette model around the tale he’d developed of a werewolf

terrorizing a small town King felt constrained by the 500 word per month limit. Writing the July

installment in Puerto Rico in February 1981 the story suddenly took off, ‘And what happens at the

best times happened then: I could see ahead of what I was writing to all the things I would write, and

I could see backward to all the things I would fix up.’ Returning to Maine King rang Zavisa to report

the calendar project was dead; Zavisa proposed a ‘slim book’ instead (‘he said it with such real

enthusiasm that I wondered if it wasn’t what he had sort of wanted all along....’).

In the second part King tells of his relationship with the movie producer, Dino DeLaurentiis.

Having bought the rights to The Dead Zone Dino ‘charmed’ King into writing the screenplay (it was

later discarded; and King’s choice of actor for Johnny Smith—Bill Murray, of all people—also

failed to come to pass; ‘No matter; it turned out to be a pretty damned good picture anyway.’). King

says that, although he never asked DeLaurentiis why he kept buying King’s work for the screen, he

thinks it ‘may be because we share many of the same interests: an urge to entertain people; a rather

childish interest in the largeness of effect; the idea that simple stories may be the best ones; a

sentimental belief that most people are good and that, in general, cowardice tends to be a scarcer

commodity than bravery when the chips are down.’

In early 1984 King proposed Cycle of the Werewolf to DeLaurentiis and a week later they had

an agreement; he did not expect (or have the time) to write the script but ended up agreeing (‘I’m still

not entirely sure how he did it; I think it was a form of benign hypnotism’).

In closing King says he likes the screenplay ‘a lot, and that’s why I’ve allowed it to be reprinted

here.’ By 1999 it was apparent he did not like the movie nearly as much, writing in the Introduction

to Storm of the Century, ‘the movies have been pretty good to me, by and large (let’s just ignore such

films as Graveyard Shift and Silver Bullet).’

In fact, King publishing a screenplay is most unusual. The only other instances are the original

mini-series Storm of the Century (as the only stand-alone screenplay published, in 1999); Sorry,

Right Number, in Nightmares & Dreamscapes (1993); and General (the wraparound segment of

Cat’s Eye) in the Richard Chizmar edited Screamplays (1997).

Argument—The Dark Tower II: The Drawing of the Three (1987)

This is the first of the ‘Arguments’ King uses to set the scene for readers at the beginning of

volumes two to five of the Dark Tower novels. Perhaps realizing that, by Song of Susannah, readers

were already walking the trails with Roland, King discontinued the use of the Argument for the last

two novels, titling the piece in Wolves of the Calla , The Final Argument. He had used a similar

technique to introduce the latter four parts of The Gunslinger as they appeared in The Magazine of

Fantasy and science-fiction (see the sections covering each Synopsis earlier in this chapter).

King writes: ‘We know that Roland was forced to an early trial of manhood after discovering

that his mother had become the mistress of Marten, a much greater sorcerer than Walter [aka The Man

in Black] (who, unknown to Roland’s father is Marten’s ally)....’ The same statement appears in the

Argument for The Dark Tower III: The Waste Lands . When he revised the first volume of the Cycle,

The Gunslinger, partly to have it fit with the events that occurred in later volumes, Walter/The Man

in Black and Marten became the same character. By the end of The Dark Tower readers come to

know that this creature is also known as Walter O’Dim, Walter Padick (his birth name), Randall

Flagg (and, in just the faintest of possibilities, John Farson).

He also says of Jake, ‘A boy who was, in fact, pushed from a street-corner by the ubiquitous

(and iniquitous) man in black.’ This hints that King, at least at one point, intended Walter/Marten

(thereby Flagg) to have been the actual killer of Jake Chambers. In fact we know from the very

volume King is introducing here that it is, in fact, Jack Mort who pushed Jake to his first death (Mort

had earlier pushed Odetta Holmes in front of a train). In The Pusher section of The Drawing of the

Three Roland entered Jack Mort (‘Jack Mort didn’t feel a thing. He was too intent on the boy...Today

he was going to push him’); Roland recognized ‘The boy was Jake’ and proceeded to save Jake’s

life, which led to other consequences best considered another time. Roland realized Jake had been

murdered before appearing in Roland’s world and thought he had been ‘Pushed by the man in black’.

Just before ‘coming forward’ and stopping Mort from pushing Jake Roland thought, ‘What if the body

he entered was itself that of the man in black?’ It becomes very clear to both Roland and Reader later

in The Pusher that Mort is no such thing, and he dies after Roland forces him to jump in front of a

train.

On the other hand it seems Walter was actually present when Jake died (and Jake himself

mistakenly thought he was the killer), with this from The Gunslinger: ‘… he sees the man who kills

him out of the corner of his eye. It is the man in black, and he doesn’t see his face, only the swirling

robe, the outstretched hands....’ and as he lay in the street: ‘He sees the black robe and knows sudden

horror. It is him, the man in black. He turns his face away...Looking at his hand, Jake dies.’ King

revised this passage slightly when he reworked The Gunslinger so that it now reads ‘...the swirling

robe, the outstretched hands, and the hard, professional grin’ yet did not alter the section with Jake

turning his face from Walter (Mort?) and still looking at his hand as he dies. So, still confusion. Is this

simply in Roland’s mind, or in King’s? One of the joys/frustrations of the Dark Tower Cycle are

these unresolved anomalies. One explanation is the nature of the King macroverse itself—there are so

many levels of time and space in/around the Dark Tower that every possible series of events and

timelines can play out in every physical reality. Perhaps we really are reading of two separate

attempts on Jake’s life—one successful at the hands of Walter; and one by Mort, averted by Roland’s

interference?

We continue this debate later in this chapter, in Argument— The Dark Tower III: The Waste

Lands.

Afterword—The Dark Tower II: The Drawing of the Three (1987)

King opens this short piece, written on December 1, 1986, saying the novel ‘completes the

second of six or seven books which make up a long tale called The Dark Tower’ (it would eventually

be seven, of course) and says of the next two volumes: ‘The third, The Waste Lands , details half of

the quest of Roland, Eddie, and Susannah to reach the Tower; the fourth, Wizard and Glass , tells of

an enchantment and a seduction but mostly of things which befell Roland before his readers first met

him upon the trail of the man in black.’

He also writes of his surprise at the ‘acceptance’ of The Gunslinger ‘which is not at all like the

stories for which I am best known....’ Tellingly, he says ‘This work seems to be my own Tower, you

know; these people really haunt me, Roland most of all.’ Of course, they really would haunt a Stephen

King in Song of Susannah, and save the life of that same man in The Dark Tower . Less accurately,

King encourages the reader to ‘prepare yourself for the very real possibility that he [Roland] will not

be the one to’ reach the Tower.

Untitled—Misery (1987)

This short note by ‘S.K.’ to his novel of addiction acknowledges three medicos who helped

King with facts for the novel, which involves the use of drugs, surgery (if you can call it that) and the

recovery of a victim from a major accident. They are: Russ Dorr (previously acknowledged in The

Stand and Pet Sematary), Florence Dorr ( Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption is

dedicated to both Dorrs106), and Janet Odway (a psychiatrist). King says, ‘If you see a glaring error,

it’s mine.’

Untitled—The Tommyknockers (1987)

This one page piece is effectively an Author’s Note to King’s major science-fiction novel. The

author (now reverting to ‘Stephen King’ after recent notes in his novels as ‘S.K.’) refers to the origin

of the word ‘Tommyknockers’; thanks a variety of people; and closes with his trademark humor.

Webster’s Unabridged says Tommyknockers are either ‘tunneling ogres’ or ‘ghosts which haunt

deserted mines or caves’ and King refers to a possible British origin, through the Army term ‘tommy’.

He also says the first verse of a ditty is ‘common enough for my wife and myself to have heard it as

children, although we were raised in different towns [both in the then isolated state of Maine],

different faiths, and came from different descendants—hers primarily French, mine Scots-Irish.’ He

also states that ‘All other verses are products of the author’s imagination.’ The page facing this note

reads:

Late last night and the night before,

Tommyknockers, Tommyknockers,

knocking at the door.

I want to go out, don’t know if I can,

‘cause I’m so afraid

of the Tommyknocker man.

—TRADITIONAL

King thanks Tabitha—‘an invaluable if sometimes maddening critic (if you get mad at critics,

you almost always can be sure they are right)’; and others including George Everett McCutcheon,

‘who has read each of my novels and vetted it carefully—primarily for weapons and ballistics

reasons, but also for his attention to continuity.’ McCutcheon (‘Mac’) died of leukemia and King

heard of the passing while he was making corrections based on one of his notes—‘I miss him terribly,

not because he helped me fix things but because he was part of my heart’s neighborhood.’ Lastly,

King credits Stephen Jay Gould (the brilliant paleontologist, evolutionary biologist and historian of

science, now also dead, of lung cancer) for comments on the possibilities of what King calls ‘dumb

evolution’ which ‘helped to shape the redraft of this novel’. Gould, like King, was a huge baseball

fan, and King notes, ‘Although he is a Yankee fan, and thus not entirely to be trusted....’107

He closes, ‘The Tommyknockers are real. / If you think I’m kidding, you missed the nightly

news.’

Author’s Note—The Dark Half (1989)

Another short one: ‘I’m indebted to the late Richard Bachman for his help and inspiration. This

novel could not have been written without him. / S.K.’

This is rather obviously a tip to the Stephen King/Richard Bachman interplay that inspired the

Thad Beaumont/George Stark relationship portrayed in the novel.

Afterword—The Dark Half (1989)

In the Afterword to this novel ‘S.K.’ notes that the name of Alexis Machine (George Stark’s

character) is not original to King but, in fact, the name of a fictional crime boss in Dead City by

Shane Stevens (King thought it ‘so perfectly summed up the character of George Stark and his

fictional crime boss that I adopted it....’). He also notes use of the name is hommage to Stevens,

saying his three novels Rat Pack, By Reason of Insanity and The Anvil Chorus are ‘three of the finest

novels ever written about the dark side of the American dream.’ King recommends them

‘unreservedly...but only readers with strong stomachs and stronger nerves need apply.’

Author’s Note—The Stand: The Complete & Uncut Edition (1990)

This note is a significant revision of the Author’s Note that appeared in the original 1980 edition

of this classic novel. King notes that the book is a work of fiction and that he has ‘taken the liberty of

changing’ real places that appear in it to suit ‘the course of my fiction.’ He hopes that readers who

live in these places ‘will not be too upset by my “monstrous impertinence,” to quote Dorothy Sayers,

who indulged freely in the same sort of thing.’

The same people who were originally thanked remain in place and the note (as was the original)

is signed ‘S.K.’

A Preface in Two Parts—The Stand: The Complete & Uncut Edition (1990)

As the title of this piece suggests it is presented in two parts—the first To Be Read Before

Purchase and the second To Be Read After Purchase . Both detail the reasons why King ‘restored’

The Stand in a Complete & Uncut Edition, twelve years after the novel was originally published;

and the results of the restoration.

He suggests the potential buyer read the first part before buying the book as ‘this is not a new

novel’ nor is it ‘a brand-new, entirely different version’; rather it is ‘an expansion of the original

novel’ in which the original characters can be observed ‘doing more things’ and ‘if I didn’t think

some of those things were interesting...I would never have agreed to this project.’

The second part, presuming the reader bought the book and read on, explains why the first

version was cut (the accounting department at Doubleday wanted a cover price that effectively

dictated the elimination of approximately 400 pages of manuscript; King chose to do the ‘cutting’

himself, refusing what was surely an outrageous offer from the publisher that ‘someone in the

editorial department’ do it); and why King felt there was value in restoring them. Skirting around the

argument of certain critics that the book was too long in the original version (we doubt King fans

would agree) he says he would not offer this longer version ‘… if I myself didn’t think those portions

which were dropped from the original manuscript made the story a richer one....’

In restoring the tale to its original glory, ‘I haven’t restored all four hundred of the missing

pages; there is a difference between doing it up right and just being downright vulgar. Some of what

was left on the cutting room floor...deserved to be left there, and there it remains....’; and argues that

the restoration of Frannie Goldsmith’s confrontation with her mother and the portions concerning The

Kid add richness, dimension and counterpoint.

King states, ‘...I am republishing ‘The Stand’ as it was originally written....’ and, of course, that

first version was published in 1978. Freddy Krueger is referred to at the end of the Uncut Chapter 11.

The first Nightmare on the Elm Street movie was produced in 1984. There is also a reference

(without actually naming her) to Bobbi Anderson, a character who appeared first in The

Tommyknockers in 1987. In these cases more was added to the manuscript, rather than simple

restoration. There are dozens of examples of this, meaning that the true Uncut version (or Original

Uncut, if you will) has never been published. King clarified this matter in his Foreword to the

Revised and Expanded Edition of The Gunslinger: ‘What I reinstated in the late eighties were

revised sections of the pre-existing manuscript. I also revised the work as a whole, mostly to

acknowledge the AIDS epidemic....’

He closes this piece, written on October 24, 1989, with a telling description of The Stand:

‘Finally, I write for only two reasons: to please myself and to please others. In returning to this long

tale of dark Christianity, I hope I have done both.’

Straight Up Midnight: An Introductory Note—Four Past Midnight (1990)

King wrote this first introductory piece to his collection Four Past Midnight in Bangor in the

late July of 1989. It deals loosely with the nature of time and the reception for King’s earlier

collection, also of four novellas, Different Seasons: ‘Most readers...wanted to tell me that one of the

stories roused their emotions in some way, made them think, made them feel, and those letters are the

real payback for the days (and there are a lot of them) when the words come hard and inspiration

seems thin or nonexistent.’

He also provides this interesting insight: ‘I know writers who claim not to read their notices, or

not to be hurt by the bad ones if they do...I’m one of the other kind—I obsess over the possibility of

bad reviews and brood over them when they come. But they don’t get me down for long; I just kill a

few children and old ladies, and then I’m right as a trivet again.’ And this: ‘I still believe in the

resilience of the human heart and the essential validity of love; I still believe that connections

between people can be made...I still believe, I suppose, in the coming of the White and in finding a

place to make a stand...and defending that place to the death. They are old-fashioned concerns and

beliefs, but I would be a liar if I did not admit I still own them. And that they still own me.’

King writes that, ‘Because a great many readers seem curious about where stories come from, or

wonder if they fit into a wider scheme the writer may be pursuing, I have prefaced each of these with

a little note about how it came to be written.’ The notes are presented as an increasing number of

minutes after midnight.

One Past Midnight: A note on ‘The Langoliers’—Four Past Midnight (1990)

The first of these notes (the lowercase for the first letter in ‘note’ is King’s) is for The

Langoliers. The inspiration for this story was an image the author had ‘of a woman pressing her hand

over a crack in the wall of a commercial jetliner’, combined with his later realization ‘that this

woman was a ghost’. The story was written over a one-month period. King credits three pilots for

their assistance and says (as always) that he alone is responsible for any errors: ‘Factual mistakes

usually result from a failure to ask the right question and not from erroneous information.’ He also

states that because the story ‘had an apocalyptic feel similar’ to The Mist, he chose to head each

chapter ‘in the same old-fashioned rococo way.’

Two Past Midnight: A note on ‘Secret Window, Secret Garden’—Four Past Midnight

(1990)

In this note King says that, over the previous four years, he had reached a period of ‘cloture’, a

term used by psychologists to describe a ‘time in which we end things’. ‘It’s as apparent in my work

as anywhere else. In It, I took an outrageous amount of space to finish talking about children and the

wide perceptions which light their interior lives.’ He goes on to say he’s written the ‘last’ Castle

Rock novel, Needful Things and claims that Secret Window, Secret Garden is ‘the last story about

writers and writing and the strange no-man’s land which exists between what’s real and what’s make

believe.’ While it is still the case that Needful Things is the last Castle Rock novel, Bag of Bones

went perilously close to joining that classification; and that very novel is very much about a writer

and writing, as have been a number of other later stories.

As to the inspiration for Secret Window, King notes he had begun to consider writing ‘a secret

act—as secret as dreaming’ and discovered a previously unnoticed view from his laundry room into a

small internal garden, hence the story’s title. The phrase itself seemed to King to be a metaphor for

writing—the ‘spiritual analogue’ for the physical act of writing ‘is looking out of an almost forgotten

window, a window which offers a common view from an entirely different angle...an angle which

renders the common extraordinary.’

This piece is also reprinted in the Book Club collection, Secret Windows: Essays and Fiction

on the Craft of Writing (2000).

Three Past Midnight: A note on ‘The Library Policeman’—Four Past Midnight (1990)

The Library Policeman began as a passing remark from King’s son Owen (now also a published

author) about the ‘Library Police’, who would supposedly visit if one did not return overdue books.

Owen’s Aunt Stephanie had told him about these lawmen108. King had also heard of the Library

Police as a child and had spoken about them with Peter Straub in the early 1980s. As he began a tale

titled ‘The Library Police’, the real story began to unfold as King realized ‘something I knew already:

the fears of childhood have a hideous persistence. Writing is an act of self-hypnosis, and in that state

a kind of total emotional recall often takes place and terrors which should have been long dead start

to walk and talk again.’

Four Past Midnight: A note on ‘The Sun Dog’—Four Past Midnight (1990)

In this note King deals with the insulting question of when he will get tired of horror/fantasy and

‘write something serious’. He notes, a little defensively, that if ‘real’ is the definition of ‘serious’ that

many famous and critically regarded authors had written fantasy—among them Kafka and Orwell. He

says he writes what he does as the ‘tale of the irrational is the sanest way I know of expressing the

world in which I live. These tales have served me as instruments of both metaphor and morality; they

continue to offer the best window I know on the question of how we perceive things and the corollary

question of how we do or do not behave on the basis of our perceptions.’

He notes that most of the ‘Really Serious Things’ he has to say ‘have to do with the small-town

world in which I was raised and where I still live’—‘… aside from the firm belief that a story may

exist with honor for its own self, the idea of the small town as social and psychological microcosm is

mine.’ This is indeed one of King’s trademarks. As example, he gives a relatively short, but very

enlightening description of his relationship with the mythical town of Castle Rock, Maine (‘… Castle

Rock is really just the town of Jerusalem’s Lot without the vampires’) and his decision to leave it

behind. It is here Constant Readers first learned of as yet unwritten/unpublished events in the town’s

history: ‘how the late Sheriff George Bannerman lost his virginity in the back seat of his dead father’s

car, how Ophelia Todd’s husband was killed by a walking windmill, how Deputy Andy Clutterbuck

lost the index finger on his left hand (it was cut off by a fan and the family dog ate it).’

The Glass Floor: Introduction—The Glass Floor (Fall 1990)

The Glass Floor had the honor of being the first piece of fiction for which King was

professionally paid (all of $35 for its appearance in Startling Mystery Stories for Fall 1967). He

was but twenty when he received this first payment for his years of writing, and the five years of

rejection slips he had collected perhaps seemed to shrink a little on its receipt.

Nearly a quarter century after its first publication King allowed the story to be reprinted in the

Fall 1990 issue of Weird Tales . 109 As to the revision King says in the Introduction, after acknowledging that the story was not as bad as he’d thought: ‘Darrell Schweitzer, the editor of Weird

Tales, invited me to make changes if I wanted to, but I decided that would probably be a bad idea.

Except for two or three word-changes and the addition of a paragraph break (which was probably a

typographical error in the first place), I’ve left the tale just as it was. If I really did start making

changes, the result would be an entirely new story.’

In fact the most significant change is toward the end of the story, in which the original read: ‘The

ladder was still there, stretching up into the darkness and down into the glimmering depths of the

mirror’; and was changed to: ‘The ladder was still there, stretching up into the glimmering depths of

the mirror.’

Author’s Note—The Bear (1990)

The Bear is described in King’s Author’s Note as ‘the first section’ of his upcoming third Dark

Tower novel. In fact, while it broadly duplicates the first nine-and-a-half subchapters from the Bear

and Bone chapter, which begins The Dark Tower III: The Waste Lands , the version included in that

novel the following year is significantly different.110 The Bear was published in the December 1990

issue of The Magazine of Fantasy & science-fiction, which also included King’s short story, The

Moving Finger; a King bibliography compiled by his assistant, Marsha DeFilippo; and an article on

King by F&SF’s Books Editor, Algis Budrys.

The Author’s Note itself (only four paragraphs in length) is in the form of the Arguments King

presents in volumes two through five of the Dark Tower Cycle—setting the scene for readers of the

following story.

Author’s Note—The Woman in the Room (1991)

This piece appears only in the following volumes: The Complete Masters of Darkness, edited

by Dennis Etchison (Novato, CA; Lancaster, PA: Underwood-Miller), released in February 1991 as a

Limited Edition of 345 numbered copies, signed by King and other contributors, and in a hardcover

trade edition; a trade paperback released later in 1991; and a mass-market paperback, under the title

Masters of Darkness III, released in May 1991. The hardcover and paperback are available via the

usual dealers.

King’s original manuscript for this piece is headed, ‘Concerning “The Woman in the Room”’. In

a letter dated August 16, 1996 the anthology’s editor Dennis Etchison refers to the piece as the

‘Afterword’. In the same letter Etchison refers to an attached letter from King. That correspondence,

dated January 30, 1991, on King’s Bangor home address letterhead, refers to the tip-sheets (on which

the various authors penned their signatures) and is revelatory of King’s humor:

‘Here are the tip-sheets. Apparently neither the years nor the sobering reality of a brand-new

war have been able to moderate my essentially sick nature very much. As I was sitting at my desk and

signing away like the good fellow I mostly am, my eye dropped from one of those utterly mad Jack

Vance scrawls to the blank for Joseph Payne Brennan’s signature. It occurred to me that I might

scribble the following on one of those blanks: [King had drawn a signature with the last name tailing

off as if Brennan had...well, you’ll see] / Sick, sick behavior. Hope this finds you well. / Best,

[King’s signature]’.

Etchison explains: ‘The letter from King regarding one of the contributors to an earlier volume,

Joseph Payne Brennan, refers to his experience with the signature pages for the Underwood-Miller

edition. Through an unfortunate error Brennan’s name was printed on the sheets, despite the fact that

he was by then deceased, and King could not resist commenting upon this morbid detail.’

In this short but very powerful piece King lays bare his soul, relating that his mother was

diagnosed with cancer in the summer of 1972: ‘She was a woman who had worked hard all her adult

life, and during the second half of 1972 and the first two months of 1973, she did her hardest job,

which was waiting to die with dignity and patience. / She did a good job of it—as she did with most

things—but it was a dark and difficult time for her loved ones...This story is about a young man who

collaborates with his mother in an act which might be murder, or suicide, or simple mercy. The

actions are fictitious; the feelings are not. As my mother’s end drew nearer, there were many times

when I wished I’d had the guts to do what the character in the story does. / When my mother’s dying

was done, I wrote this story...[it] was my therapy. I have never enjoyed rereading it, but at times I

do...because my mother’s death was also part of my life. And, you know, writing it made me feel

better. If there is a stronger moral justification for the reading and writing of stories, I have never

found it.’

Argument—The Dark Tower III: The Waste Lands (1991)

This is the second of the Arguments King uses to set the scene for readers at the beginning of

volumes two to five of the Dark Tower novels. He also penned an Author’s Note to an excerpt from

this novel, The Bear, in The Magazine of Fantasy & science-fiction for December 1990 (see earlier

this chapter).

King has this to say (again, see the section about the Argument for The Drawing of the Three

earlier in this chapter) about Jake’s New York death: ‘Jake Chambers died with the man in black—

Walter—peering down at him, and awoke in Roland’s world.’ It is unclear why King would still be

making this argument when it is very clear from The Pusher section of The Drawing of the Three that

it is not Walter, but Jack Mort, who pushed Jake, although Robin Furth argues ‘… he was no more

than a pawn of Walter, also known as the Man in Black.’ 111 A careful reading of both versions of The

Gunslinger does show, however, that Jake had deliberately averted his gaze from the man dressed as

a priest, the man in black, and died looking at his own hand.

Later in this Argument King adds to the debate: ‘Roland has never had any cause to doubt Jake’s

story of how he died in our world, nor any question who Jake’s murderer was—Walter, of course.

Jake saw him dressed as a priest as the crowd gathered around the spot where he lay dying, and

Roland has never doubted the description. Nor does he doubt it now; Walter was there, oh yes, no

doubt about that. But suppose it was Jack Mort, not Walter, who pushed Jake into the path of the

oncoming Cadillac.’ By the time he wrote the Argument for The Dark Tower IV: Wizard and Glass

King’s position was this: ‘The pusher was a man named Jack Mort...except the thing hiding inside of

Mort’s head and guiding his murderous hands on this particular occasion was Roland’s old enemy,

Walter.’ There is one more slight revision to King’s position on this incident, in The Final Argument

t o Wolves of the Calla : ‘The pusher was a criminal sociopath named Jack Mort, Walter’s

representative on the New York level of the Dark Tower.’

He closes by acknowledging he has taken ‘certain geographical liberties with the city’ of New

York. ‘For these I hope I may be forgiven.’ Actually, it becomes clear by the end of the Dark Tower

Cycle that it is possible none of the New York cities members of the ka-tet are drawn from and visit

is the one that exists in our reality.

Author’s Note—The Dark Tower III: The Waste Lands (1991)

King begins, ‘The fourth volume in the tale of the Dark Tower should appear—always assuming

the continuation of Constant Writer’s life and Constant Reader’s interest—in the not-too-distant

future. It’s hard to be more exact than that; finding the doors to Roland’s world has never been easy

for me....’ In fact, King’s life would nearly be terminated between the fourth and fifth volumes; but

Constant Readers certainly never lost interest and there was irritation from the most committed Dark

Tower fans over the six years it took before that fourth volume would appear. That was partly driven

by the hanging ending of The Waste Lands , with Roland and his ka-tet hurtling toward their possible

deaths, trying desperately to find a riddle to confound Blaine the Mono. Of this King says, ‘although

you are not obligated to believe me, I must nevertheless insist that I was as surprised by the

conclusion to this third volume as some of my readers may be. Yet books which write themselves (as

this one did, for the most part) must be allowed to end themselves....’

He says Roland’s world ‘still holds me in thrall...more, in many ways, than any of the other

worlds I have wandered in my imagination’; and speaks briefly of the events to be described in the

fourth volume (Roland’s youth; the reappearance of the Tick-Tock Man and Walter) before quoting

the first stanza of his inspiration, Browning’s poem Childe Roland to the Dark Tower Came.

Untitled—on Gerald’s Game (1992)

An American Booksellers Association edition of Gerald’s Game was sent to bookshops in May

of 1992. It included a facsimile of a handwritten letter from King, dated April 11, 1992 and

addressed, ‘Dear Booksellers/Constant Readers’. King says that, although he’d been writing ‘horror

stories’ for over twenty years, he had ‘very little idea...what scares readers’ and ‘I only know what

scares me.’ He goes on to argue ‘by that yardstick’ this ‘is my most successful novel since The

Shining.’ He briefly says he first visualized the story while flying to New York (‘and nary a langolier

in sight’). Having created three months of ‘broken sleeps and bad dreams’ for its author he hoped to

pass those effects on. King also thanks the booksellers for their ‘efforts on my behalf’ over the years:

‘So thanks...and pleasant screams [this last word is crossed out and replaced with—] dreams.’

As King included no author’s material in the mainstream publication of this rather graphic and

telling novel this piece is a key reference. However, copies of this edition are extremely rare and

difficult to source. Start with specialist King resellers.

Introduction: Myth, Faith, andRipley’s Believe It or Not! —Nightmares & Dreamscapes

(1993)

This is one of King’s better introductions and we highly recommend it be read in full (feel free

to do so right now. We’ll wait). There are a number of themes in these action-packed six pages—

King’s own credulity (Tabitha King ‘delights in telling people that her husband cast his first

Presidential ballot...for Richard Nixon. “Nixon said he had a plan to get us out of Vietnam... and Steve

believed him! ’’’); the link between belief, myth and imagination (‘I think that myth and imagination

are, in fact, nearly interchangeable concepts, and that belief is the wellspring of both’); and how

difficult it had become for him to write short stories (the risk of self-parody; the fear ‘I may have

already said everything I have to say’; and ‘these days it seems everything wants to be a novel’).

In a revelatory section King says: ‘I don’t talk about this much, because it embarrasses me and it

sounds pompous, but I still see stories as a great thing, something which not only enhances lives but

actually saves them. Nor am I speaking metaphorically. Good writing—good stories— are the

imagination’s firing pin, and the purpose of the imagination, I believe, is to offer us solace and shelter

from situations and life-passages which would otherwise prove unendurable. I can only speak from

my own experience of course, but for me, the imagination which so often kept me awake and in terror

as a child has seen me through some terrible bouts of stark raving reality as an adult.’

Late in this piece King says he considers Nightmares & Dreamscapes the third book in a trilogy

of short story collections, following Night Shift and Skeleton Crew. Having said he’d avoided

including ‘trunk stories’ and other older, uncollected tales for this collection he states: ‘All of the

good short stories have now been collected; all the bad ones have been swept as far under the rug as I

could get them, and there they will stay. If there is to be another collection, it will consist entirely of

stories which have not as yet been written or even considered...and I’d guess it will show up in a year

which begins with a 2.’

In fact, King’s next collection was a Limited, from his own Philtrum Press, Six Stories and was

released in 1997. As we might be seen to be a little disingenuous here, we’ll point out that the next

pr i nt mass-market short story collection (2000’s Blood and Smoke was an audiobook) was

Everything’s Eventual, in 2002. That collection, true to King’s word, included not one story that had

been published (and most likely, written) when he penned this Introduction in Bangor, on 6

November 1992.

Author’s Note to Sorry, Right Number—Nightmares & Dreamscapes (1993)

There is a lengthy Notes section at the end of this volume (covered shortly) but King still chose

to jump in before three of the pieces with short notes, apparently because he felt each of these notes

needed to be read before the tale itself.

For Sorry, Right Number he gives a short lesson in screenplay abbreviations to assist readers.

Author’s Note to Head Down—Nightmares & Dreamscapes (1993)

In the case of King’s non-fiction baseball piece, Head Down, which is reviewed in our Baseball

chapter, the note reads: ‘I am breaking in here, Constant Reader, to make you aware that this is not a

story but an essay—almost a diary. It originally appeared in The New Yorker in the spring of 1990. /

S.K.’

Notes—Nightmares & Dreamscapes (1993)

Even for King these Notes are lengthy, at ten pages in the first edition hardcover, and cover

seventeen of the twenty-four pieces in the book. The pieces about which King apparently had nothing

to say are: The End of the Whole Mess, Chattery Teeth , Sneakers, Rainy Season (there is a brief

reference to this tale but no note of its own), Crouch End and The Doctor’s Case . Written on the

morning of September 16, 1992 they are prefaced by a short dissertation on the work that is necessary

to get stories right and the magic of a story’s genesis. As to the stories themselves what follows are

some short takes from King on each.

A moment after King, sitting at roadwork behind a big green Cadillac, saw a hole and thought,

‘ Even a car as big as that Cadillac would fit in there’, the story appeared in his head, ‘firmly in

place, fully developed, and none of the narrative elements ever changed so much as one iota.’

( Dolan’s Cadillac ). This section also details Dave (Steve’s brother) King’s brilliance and the

assistance he provided to researching the piece; and the interesting fact that King had hated the

finished product and put it in ‘one of the cardboard boxes of Bad Old Stuff I keep in the hallway

behind my office.’ Some years later, when King allowed Lord John Press to release the story as a

Limited (by this time it read much better to its author, although he mysteriously fails to mention its

previous publication in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter four years earlier), he had to

retrieve it from ‘what I think of as the Hallway of Doom....’ One suspects many a King fan would give

quite a lot to visit that Hallway!

‘I like it quite a lot—it feels a little like the Bradbury of the late forties and early fifties to

me...Put another way [it] is a ghastly sick-joke with no redeeming social merit whatever. I like that in

a story.’ ( Suffer the Little Children).

King sometimes discovers a supporting character who will not go away—in the case of Richard

Dees (originally from The Dead Zone) his reprise is as intrepid reporter for a supermarket tabloid

who gets more than he bargained for while chasing a vampire—he says Dees turned out to be a man

of ‘profound alienation’, who found the column of truth has a hole in it. ( The Night Flier). ‘… is this

little boy’s grandfather the same creature that demands Richard Dees open his camera and expose his

film at the conclusion of ‘The Night Flier’? You know, I rather think he is.’ ( Popsy).

King says the revised version of It Grows On You 112 in this collection is actually something of

an epilogue to the so-called ‘last’ Castle Rock story. ‘As I read the original story I began to realize

that these old men were actually the survivors of the debacle described in Needful Things. That novel

is a black comedy about greed and obsession; this is a more serious story about secrets and

sickness...it was great to glimpse some of my old Castle Rock friends one last time.’

‘It seems to me now that this story, originally published in 1985 was a trial cut for the novel

Dolores Claiborne (1992)...It’s not a very politically correct story, and I think a lot of readers are

going to be outraged by it.’ King also says Dedication articulates his unease about those among

famous, talented people who are ‘utter shits in person’.

King says The Moving Finger is the type of fantasy short story that, unlike movies, does not

have to explain why things happen and that the protagonist’s efforts to deal with the finger forms ‘a

perfectly valid metaphor for how we cope with the nasty surprises life holds in store for all of us...In

a tale of fantasy, this gloomy answer actually seems to satisfy us. In the end, it may be the genre’s

chief moral asset: at its best, it can open a window (or a confessional screen) on the existential

aspects of our mortal lives.’

King argues You Know They Got a Hell of a Band (couple meets dead rockers) and Rainy

Season (couple meets strange deaths) are not lapses into self-imitation of Children of the Corn,

suggesting the ‘peculiar-little-town story’ is a horror-tale archetype. We are told Home Delivery was

actually written to order, for an anthology of zombie tales113: ‘The concept fired off in my imagination

like a Roman candle, and this story, set off the coast of Maine, was the result.’

The note for My Pretty Pony provides the interesting information that The Dark Half was

reworked from ‘an almost complete novel called Machine’s Way, ’ written under the pseudonym of

Richard Bachman’s pseudonym, George Stark....’ Stark, of course reappeared in The Dark Half as

Thad Beaumont’s pseudonym (still with us?). When King ‘killed’ Bachman he was also left with six

chapters of a failed crime novel called My Pretty Pony, only one episode of which was reworked

into the short story of the same name. King calls the resulting short story, ‘...a little better than some,

not so good as others.’ And this is King’s entire comment on The Fifth Quarter: ‘Bachman again. Or

maybe George Stark.’

He explains that the version of Sorry, Right Number appearing in this volume is his first draft,

rather than the shooting script, and details the short voyage this tale took from concept to broadcast.

He also notes the genesis of The Ten O’Clock People was his noting the ‘odd pockets of sociological

behavior’ that are working smokers, forced out of their buildings and onto the streets to get their fix.

The House on Maple Street is King’s take on one picture in Chris Van Allsburg’s The

Mysteries of Harris Burdick (Tabitha and Owen King both wrote stories based on other pictures

from the book and he wishes he could publish their offerings as well).

King describes Umney’s Last Case as an ‘ambitious’ pastiche114: ‘I have loved Raymond

Chandler and Ross Macdonald passionately since I discovered them in college...and I think it is the

language of these novels which so fired my imagination; it opened a whole new way of seeing, one

that appealed fiercely to the heart and mind of the lonely young man I was at that time.’ He also says,

‘... of all the stories in this volume, it’s the one I like the best.’

A further note on Head Down, referencing King’s short time as a high school sports reporter115

pairs the piece with the elegiac baseball poem Brooklyn August (it ‘appears to have been

selected...upon occasion by editors who seem not to have the slightest idea of who I’m supposed to

be or what I’m supposed to do. And I really like that.’)116

Author’s Note to The Beggar and the Diamond—Nightmares & Dreamscapes (1993)

The Beggar and the Diamond is the last piece in this collection (strangely, it actually appears

after the main Notes section; perhaps this is because The Beggar and the Diamond is not listed in the

Table of Contents in the first edition, presumably meaning it was added at the last minute). King’s

note reads: ‘This little story—a Hindu parable in its original form—was first told to me by Mr

Surendra Patel, of New York City. I have adapted it freely and apologize to those who know it in its

true form, where Lord Shiva and his wife, Parvati, are the major characters.’

Foreword: A Letter—The Green Mile (1996)

Due to the extraordinary and deserved success of the movie, The Green Mile is one of the best

known of all King’s tales. This piece first appeared in the first of the six monthly serial novellas in

which the novel was initially published, Part 1: The Two Dead Girls, in March 1996. It did not

appear in the remaining five parts and was next reprinted in the first omnibus edition, The Green

Mile: The Complete Serial Novel (1997). It was also issued as a pamphlet that was part of a

promotional packet called “The Green Mile File” distributed by Penguin UK.

Written on the rainy evening of October 27, 1995 this Foreword essentially explains the origin

of the serial format for the tale. King’s foreign rights agent, Ralph Vicinanza, in discussion with

another author, was reminded that many of Dickens’ original tales were serialized in the publications

of his time and, among many rejected ideas, put the concept to King as a way of releasing a tale. King

notes that the technique had been used since Dickens, most notably for Tom Wolfe’s Bonfire of the

Vanities, serialized in Rolling Stone. Notably, he says ‘I don’t think I am a modern Dickens—if such

a person exists it is probably John Irving or Salman Rushdie....’ Far be it from us to disagree,

but...Salman Rushdie? Apart from creating timeless stories and characters Dickens was read by the

masses. For all of the brilliance assigned to Rushdie’s works by the good and the great, can you,

Constant Reader, name a storyline, or a character created by Rushdie, or point to a widespread

audience? Irving, however, does match these criteria. We argue elsewhere 117 that King is a Dickens

of our time and shall let that matter rest for now.

King recalls the enjoyment he, his mother and brother had reading serialized stories in such

publications as The Saturday Evening Post and tells of catching his mother checking the ending of an

Agatha Christie potboiler while actually only on page fifty or so. He says the idea came along at ‘the

perfect psychological moment, I had been playing with a story idea on a subject I had always

suspected I would get around to sooner or later: the electric chair.’ King had already ‘filled a

notebook with scribbled pages of The Green Mile’ when the concept of the serial novel was raised

and Vicinanza suggested King write it the way it would be read—in installments; the author accepted.

Author’s Afterword—The Green Mile (1996)

King’s Afterword to this serialized experiment first appeared in The Green Mile Part 6: Coffey

on the Mile. It was next reprinted in the first omnibus edition, The Green Mile: The Complete Serial

Novel (1997). It was written in New York City on 28 April 1996, just before the second part of the

novel was released.

King says the speed at which he had to write the novel might have led to a number of errors and

anachronisms and says he may or may not correct those if the individual parts were ever collected. In

fact, they were included in a single volume the following year and King made only one notable

correction (see the section on the Introduction to the combined edition later in this chapter). He also

claims a combined edition could not be published of the installment version, although exactly that

occurred.

Learning that the method Dickens had used in serial novels to refresh his reader’s memory of the

storyline was to build the synopsis into the tale as a ‘front story’ King developed the concept of

Edgecombe’s secret at Georgia Pines, Mr. Jingles, to fulfill this need. This choice was also a result

of Tabitha King’s ‘telling me (she doesn’t exactly nag, but sometimes she advocates rather

ruthlessly)’ that King had ‘never really finished the story of Mr. Jingles.’ Further thanking his wife, he

says she ‘read this story and said she liked it. Writers almost always write with some ideal reader in

mind, I think, and my wife is mine. We don’t always see eye to eye when it comes to what we each

write (hell, we rarely see eye to eye when we’re shopping together in the supermarket), but when she

says it’s good, it usually is. Because she’s tough, and if I try to cheat or cut a corner, she always sees

it.’

Among those thanked in this piece is King’s personal assistant, Marsha DeFilippo (who has also

been wonderfully helpful to the authors of this book over a number of years), ‘who transcribed a

whole stenographer’s notebook full of my cramped handwriting and never complained. Well... rarely

complained.’

The Importance of Being Bachman—The Bachman Books (1996)

This piece replaced Why I Was Bachman , which had appeared in all previous editions of The

Bachman Books since its release in 1985. Written at King’s Lovell, Maine lake home on 16 April

1996, it has also been reprinted in the three of the four Bachman novels King has allowed to be

republished as stand-alone titles (due to the blight of school shootings King does not allow the

republication of Rage in the United States)— The Long Walk, Roadwork and The Running Man118.

We stated earlier that the original introduction to this collection was lacking—King effectively

confirms this here: ‘My first introduction wasn’t very good; to me it reads like a textbook case of

author obfuscation.’ He puts this down to ‘Bachman’s alter ego (me, in other words)’ being in rather

a bad mood (‘pissed off’) at the revelation Bachman was King, as he’d intended to use the pseudonym

in the long haul.

‘Probably the most important thing I can say about Richard Bachman is that he became real,’

King continues. ‘Not entirely, of course (he said with a nervous smile): I am not writing this in a

delusive state. Except...well...maybe I am. Delusion is, after all, something writers of fiction try to

encourage in their readers, at least during the time that the book or story is open before them....’ King

explains Bachman’s initial role was to provide ‘a sheltered place’ where he could publish early

work but he quickly grew (‘came alive, as the creatures of a writer’s imagination so frequently do’),

adding a wife and life story; ‘…when his cover was blown, Richard Bachman died. I made light of

this in the few interviews I felt required to give...saying that he’d died of cancer of the pseudonym,

but it was actually shock that killed him; the realization that some people just won’t let you alone.’

King continues, explaining the genesis of The Dark Half (‘a novel my wife has always detested’) in

this King/Bachman dichotomy; the grim nature of Bachman and his works; his return with The

Regulators and King’s own role in developing that twinning tale (‘Desperation is about God; The

Regulators is about TV’).

Readers should seek out this piece for its importance as explanation of why King was

Bachman119: ‘The importance of being Bachman was always the importance of finding a good voice

and a valid point of view that were a little different from my own.’ He closes, ‘I wonder if there are

any other good manuscripts, at or near completion, in that box found by the widowed Mrs. Bachman

in the cellar of their New Hampshire farmhouse. / Sometimes I wonder about that a lot.’

Untitled—The Dark Tower IV: An Excerpt from the Upcoming Wizard and Glass: A Gift

from Stephen King (1996)

A promotional booklet was given away in the United States with some purchases of the

hardcover editions of both Desperation and The Regulators—it was used when supplies of the night-

light that originally came with the purchase of both novels ran out. The booklet carried the first two

chapters of Wizard and Glass — Beneath the Demon Moon and The Falls of the Hounds, but not the

Prologue.

King posted at alt.books.stephen-king, an Internet newsgroup about this free booklet (‘there’s

been a fair degree of pissing and moaning’ about it). This post is covered in the Miscellany chapter.

The piece is only four paragraphs long and appears with a facsimile King signature. Noting he is

writing in October 1996 and that Wizard and Glass ‘is still not done’ King says, ‘What follows isn’t

a tease but a signal of good faith: for those of you who have waited’ and that the wait would be over

the next year (indeed, it was). Explaining why it had already been five years since the cliffhanger

ending of The Waste Lands, King says, ‘it is hard to begin. And sometimes scary, too.’

Untitled—Before the Play (April 26 — May 2, 1997)

Before the Play is King’s Prologue to The Shining, excised from the original novel and first

published in Whispers #17/18 (August, 1982). As part of the promotion for the mini-series version of

The Shining King allowed an abridged version to be published in the April 26 — May 2, 1997

edition of TV Guide to promote the mini-series adaptation shown on the US ABC network. These cuts

were partly a matter of self-censorship to suit the sensibilities of that magazine. In this short untitled

piece, King notes he wrote both a Prologue and an Epilogue ( After the Play) after finishing the novel.

The Epilogue was ‘strenuously edited’ and included in the novel, and the Prologue was ‘cut out to

keep the book from growing too long.’ King closes, ‘… there was some pretty spooky stuff behind the

opening curtain, and I’m glad to see the best of it restored to print here.’

Introduction—The Green Mile: The Complete Serial Novel (1997)

When a combined edition of The Green Mile was released in 1997 King left the original

Foreword and Afterword in place and added a new Introduction. He relates that during his cycles of

insomnia he spends time working on a story in his ‘mind just as I would on a typewriter or word

processor.’ One of these stories, in 1992 or 1993, was What Tricks Your Eye , in which ‘a man on

death row—a huge black man’ makes ‘himself disappear’. King was unable to make the story work

although some icons, such as a pet mouse and the inmate’s surname, survived to appear in the later

novel.

He expresses satisfaction at the ‘magical acceptance’ the tale received—‘this time even most of

the critics went along for the ride. I think I owe a lot of the book’s popular acceptance to my wife’s

perceptive suggestions....’; speaks of the experience of working under the artificial pressure of the

installment deadlines; and indicates his surprise that the original parts did not carry more errors and

anachronisms. However, he does say this: ‘I did change the moment where Percy Wetmore, bound in

a straightjacket, raises one hand to wipe the sweat from his face’. The original Book Six actually

reads: ‘I reached up, grabbed the end of the runner he’d worked loose, and gave it a hard yank. It

made a loud peeling sound. Brutal winced. Percy yipped with pain and began rubbing his lips. He

tried to speak, realized he couldn’t do it with a hand over his mouth, and lowered it.’ In the combined

edition it is corrected to: ‘I reached up, grabbed the end of the runner he’d worked loose, and gave it

a hard yank. It made a loud peeling sound. Brutal winced. Percy yipped with pain and his eyes

watered.’ While King closes, ‘At some point I’d like to revise it completely....’ this seems most

unlikely, even from that serial (if you’ll excuse the pun) reviser, Stephen Edwin King.

Argument—The Dark Tower IV: Wizard and Glass (1997)

This is the third of the Arguments King uses to set the scene for readers at the beginning of

volumes two to five of the Dark Tower novels (King had also written a brief note for a free booklet

containing the first two chapters of this novel, see Untitled—The Dark Tower IV: An Excerpt from

the Upcoming Wizard and Glass: A Gift from Stephen King earlier in this chapter).

By this point, with three previous novels and a number of story lines to detail, the piece is four

pages long. A reading of this Argument now, with the Dark Tower Cycle completed, shows how

complex the tale had become, yet how easily King is able to summarize it for new readers (and to

refresh the memories of the regulars, the previous ‘episode’ having been published six years earlier).

Afterword—The Dark Tower IV: Wizard and Glass (1997)

King begins this piece dwelling on the ‘weirdness of the Dark Tower experience for me’, saying

he had written one Dark Tower scene in the spring of 1970, and another in the summer of 1996.

‘Although only sixteen hours pass between the two occurrences in the world of the story, twenty-six

years had passed in the life of the story’s teller...I found myself confronting myself across a whore’s

bed [in the afore-mentioned scene]—the unemployed schoolboy with the long black hair and beard on

one side, the successful popular novelist...on the other.’

Getting fully into the swing of admitting the Dark Tower had become his magnum opus he states:

‘Roland’s story is my Jupiter—a planet that dwarves all the others (at least from my own

perspective), a place of strange atmosphere, crazy landscape, and savage gravitational pull...I am

coming to understand that Roland’s world (or worlds) actually contains all the others of my making’;

and that there are places in Mid-World for Randall Flagg (there certainly would be, and how); Ralph

Roberts; the boys from The Eyes of the Dragon; ‘even Father Callahan, the damned priest from

‘Salem’s Lot ...who wound up dwelling on the border of a terrible Mid-World land called

Thunderclap.’ King says Mid-World is where all these characters finish up, ‘why not? Mid-World

was here first, before all of them, dreaming under the blue gaze’ of Roland’s eyes.

He explains the reason it had taken six years between Dark Tower episodes was simply, ‘It is

hard to begin’, knowing he ‘was scared to death’ of the story of Roland’s youth and first love. For

King writing of ‘suspense is relatively easy...love is hard.’ He finally began the tale in motel rooms

driving back to Maine from Colorado after filming the mini-series The Shining. Believing he no

longer knew ‘the truth of romantic love’ a voice responded, ‘I will help you with that part.’ Between

hearing the voice and writing this piece King realized whose it was, ‘because I have looked into his

eyes across a whore’s bed in a land that exists very clearly in my imagination. Roland’s love for

Susan Delgado...is what was told to me by the boy who began this story.’

Curiously, King again intimates his own mortality, ‘And I have started to believe that I might

actually live to complete this cycle of stories. (Knock on wood).’ This Afterword was written on 27

October 1996 at King’s lake house in Lovell, Maine. Less than three years later he would leave that

house for the afternoon walk that would nearly terminate his life and which would itself become a

critically important incident in The Dark Tower.

Untitled—in KING etc. (1998)

KING etc. was a free promotional paperback issued in August 1998 by BOOKS, etc in

association with Hodder & Stoughton as part of their FICTION etc. series. It contains excerpts from

twelve of King’s novels with this short introductory note by the author, over 232 pages. This item is

very rare and the reader’s best chance of accessing one would be via specialist King booksellers.

The untitled introduction also appeared as “Letter from King” on Simon & Schuster’s official

web site; and was sent out as an untitled letter to various booksellers as a promotion, both in the Fall

of 1998.

Finally, it was included in a 1998 Hodder & Stoughton trade paperback Advance Reader’s

Copy of Bag of Bones, of which only 200 copies were printed; and Bag of Bones: A Preview, a

promotional ‘limited edition collector’s magazine’ published by Scribner, which also includes a note

from King and an interview. These editions are even rarer than KING etc.

This entire untitled piece is largely a promotional plug for Bag of Bones, which its author

describes as, ‘a haunted love story’. He says, ‘As I began work on Bag of Bones...I looked a few

sheets down the calendar and saw fifty staring me in the face...fifty is a dangerous age, a time when a

writer might have to find a few new pitches if he’s going to continue to be successful.’ Continuing the

baseball analogy King claims he ‘can still throw a pretty good fastball’ but that with this new novel

he’d ‘mixed in a few sliders, a few change-ups, and maybe a midnight curveball or two.’ He claims

he’d wanted to write ‘at least one more good scary story before hitting the big five-oh’ but had also

wanted to combine ‘the romantic suspense of Rebecca120 and that sense of otherworldly terror that

permeates The Haunting and The Uninvited. I also wanted to write about my Maine again. I found

myself lonely for it after spending time in Nevada ( Desperation) and the border south ( The Green

Mile).’ He succeeded, on all levels.

Author’s Note—Bag of Bones (1998)

This one page note for one of King’s best novels, an erotic ghost story, is signed ‘S.K.’ and

acknowledges the assistance of a number of people, including his Bangor attorney, Warren Silver (for

legal aspects of child custody law in Maine). In July 2005 Silver had to give up his most famous

client when he accepted an appointment as Justice of Maine’s Supreme Judicial Court. King relates,

‘Warren also asked me—rather plaintively—if I could maybe put a “good” lawyer in my book. All I

can say is that I did my best in that regard.’ King also thanks his son Owen and novelist Ridley

Pearson (both ‘for technical support’). Pearson worked with King on the Rose Red project, writing

the book and screenplay for The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer. A final thanks goes to ‘Tabby, who was

there for me again when things got hard. I love you, hon.’

Author’s Note—The Little Sisters of Eluria (1998)

This piece is but one paragraph appearing before the only Dark Tower novella, The Little

Sisters of Eluria. It was first published in Legends: Short Novels by the Masters of Modern

Fantasy, edited by Robert Silverberg and published in 1998; and was subsequently collected in

Everything’s Eventual . There, all but the last sentence of this Author’s Note is reproduced as an

untitled introduction to The Little Sisters of Eluria before the actual story in Everything’s Eventual.

The Note tells us the events of the novella occur before Roland catches up with the ‘magician in

a black robe’ he’d been chasing at the beginning of the Dark Tower books, ‘A knowledge of the

books is therefore not necessary for you to understand—and hopefully enjoy—the story which

follows.’

Screenwriter’s Note—Storm of the Century (1999)

The complete Note to the only one of King’s screenplays to have been published in a stand-alone

form reads, ‘The “reach” is a coastal New England term that refers to the stretch of open water

between an island and the mainland. A bay is open on one end; a reach is open on two. The reach

between Little Tall Island (fictional) and Machias (real) can be supposed to be about two miles

wide.’

Introduction—Storm of the Century (1999)

King returned to Little Tall Island (‘which I sometimes think of as “Dolores Claiborne’s

island”’) as the setting for Storm of the Century. Dolores is mentioned in this script and her dead

husband Joe referenced. Despite living on the island during the time of the Storm, Dolores was

apparently not at the Town Meeting, so may have been on the mainland. The only other mentions of

Little Tall Island in King’s fiction are in Home Delivery and another screenplay, Kingdom Hospital

(both of those stories are set in different realities from ours/that of Dolores Claiborne and Storm of

the Century).

In the course of explaining the genesis of this moral tale (the ‘jailhouse image of a man...sitting

on the bunk of his cell, heels drawn up, arms resting on knees, eyes unblinking. This was not a gentle

man or a good man...this was an extremely evil man. Maybe not a man at all’), King relates the

inspiration for It (‘crossing a wooden bridge, listening to the hollow thump of my bootheels, and

thinking of “The Three Billy Goats Gruff”’), Cujo (‘an actual encounter with an ill-tempered Saint

Bernard’), and Pet Sematary (‘my daughter’s grief when her beloved cat, Smucky, was run over....’).

At thirteen pages this Introduction, written in Bangor on 18 July 1998, is quite lengthy. Among

points made is that King ‘had a chance to say some interesting and provocative things about the very

nature of comm-unity...because there is no community in America as tightly knit as the island

communities off the coast of Maine’; and ‘I write about small towns because I’m a small-town

boy...and most of my small-town tales...owe a debt to Mark Twain (“The Man That Corrupted

Hadleyburg”) and Nathaniel Hawthorne (“Young Goodman Brown”).’ King also covers the tale’s

desire to take a certain form—the screenplay (‘Every image in the story seemed to be a movie image

rather than a book image...I wrote it as a TV script because that’s how the story wanted to be

written’); and his contention that this form is not lesser than prose (‘I would remind you that the man

most students of literature believe to be the greatest of English writers worked in an oral and visual

medium, and not (at least primarily) in the medium of print. I’m not trying to compare myself to

Shakespeare—that would be bizarre—but I think it entirely possible that he would be writing for the

movies or for television...if he were alive today.’)

As is King’s custom he thanks his wife (among others), ‘I’d also like to thank my wife, Tabby,

who has been so supportive over the years. As a writer herself, she understands my foolishness pretty

well.’

Untitled—The New Lieutenant’s Rap (1999)

The New Lieutenant’s Rap was printed as a chapbook, the entire text in King’s handwriting, and

provided to guests at an April 1999 New York City party to celebrate his 25th anniversary in book

publishing. Marsha DeFilippo, King’s assistant, confirmed that guests who did not realize what the

item was left copies at the party! The story has never been published in the mass market and most

likely will not be. It should be regarded as a version of Why We’re In Vietnam , which appeared in

Hearts in Atlantis later that year, as King’s untitled introduction notes, ‘This version, which differs

considerably from the one that will appear in the book (it’s longer, for one thing) is offered as a little

keepsake....’

Original copies of this chapbook are rarely offered for sale. Photocopies circulate in limited

numbers in the King community. As this material is King’s copyright, readers should not pay for

copies or scans, only originals.

Author’s Postscript—The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon (1999)

The first of these author’s notes to be written from the King’s home in Longboat Key, Florida (on

1 February 1999, the day Storm of the Century was released in book form), mostly relates a few

career notes about the real Tom Gordon, a Boston Red Sox pitcher.

Author’s Note—Hearts in Atlantis (1999)

This short piece (again as ‘S.K.’), dated 22 December 1998 notes the setting for the titular tale

in this collection, the University of Maine at Orono, exists; that King attended that very institution

from 1966 to 1970; and that he had taken deliberate ‘chronological liberties’. Yet again, we read: ‘I

also want to thank my wife. Without her, I would never have gotten over’; and he thanks Nan Graham

‘for helping me find the courage to write this book.’

Introduction—Carrie (1999)

Beginning in 1999 Pocket Books introduced a series of King reprints with new introductions by

the author. The first of these was Carrie, released in October, with ‘Salem’s Lot (November 1999),

Pet Sematary (February 2001) and The Shining (September 2001) the only titles to have so far

followed suit.

In this poignant piece, written on February 23, 1999 in Longboat Key, Florida King writes of his

early career ( Garbage Truck, Graveyard Shift, I Am the Doorway ); meeting future wife Tabitha at

the University of Maine’s Fogler Library (he ‘really got to know her in a series of poetry seminars’;

when she complimented him on one story he was ‘flattered out of my socks...not to mention the rest of

my apparel’); marriage, the lean times with young kids (‘all that flattering each other out of our socks

had inevitable consequences’); and then moves to the genesis of Carrie and inspirations for its lead

character.

King says he got an idea for a short story about a girl with telekinetic powers in the late fall or

early winter of 1972 (‘the idea had actually been kicking around my head since high school, when I

read a Life magazine article about a case of poltergeist activity in a suburban home’). When King first

attempted the tale he found that ‘ghosts of my own began to intrude; the ghosts of two girls, both dead,

who eventually combined to become Carrie White.’ He relates the unfortunate histories of these two

girls—one a student at Durham Elementary with King (the girl was treated badly by other students

because her family was so poor as to afford her only one outfit for school per year—he repeats this

tale in On Writing); and a girl who lived in Durham with her mother (when King visited the house he

was struck by a huge and ‘grisly’ crucifix in their living room; she was regarded as different not only

for the religious beliefs but a feeling of ‘ STRANGE! NOT LIKE US! KEEP AWAY! ’ she gave off). The

first girl committed suicide and the second died alone, of an epileptic seizure; neither survived high

school, and now these ghosts ‘kept insisting that I combine them’ in this tale.

Though frightened as he was of the world of young girls he ‘would have to inhabit...and the level

of cruelty I would have to describe’, the prosaic intervened—he and Tabby needed quick cash for

living expenses—and King threw the ‘half-completed first pages of the story into the wastebasket.../

Tabby asked me what I had been working on. I told her a short story, but it had gone bust...Perhaps

she saw something in my face...All I know is she went into my little writing room, took the pages out

of the wastebasket...read them, and suggested I go on. I did, mostly to please her.’ He closes by

saying he wished that the two dead girls ‘were alive to read it. / Or their daughters.’

Untitled—The Wedding Gig (1999)

King’s crime caper The Wedding Gig was originally published in Ellery Queen’s Mystery

Magazine for December 1980. It was republished in the same magazine for June 2004, with minor

changes in style. The story was revised for its appearance in Skeleton Crew in 1985. It has also

appeared in three anthologies.

Lawrence Block edited one of these, Master’s Choice: Mystery Stories by Today’s Top

Writers and the Masters that Inspired Them121. In a piece headed ‘Stephen King’ but effectively

untitled, King introduces both his tale and Joyce Carol Oates’ Murder-Two. Of the latter he says, ‘Its

very quietness becomes part of its terrible final effect.’ And of the author: ‘...[she] is a fine literary

writer; she is also capable of writing paralyzing stories of horror and suspense.’

The one paragraph about his own story states it isn’t the ‘sort of tale I ordinarily tell, and maybe

that’s why I like it so much.’ The anthology is out of print. However, there are significant numbers

available via online booksellers.

Introduction—Salem’s Lot (1999)

King wrote this new Introduction at Longboat Key on February 24, 1999, for the Pocket Books

edition of ’Salem’s Lot (November 1999). The piece was reprinted as the Afterword to the Centipede

Press edition (2004) and to ’Salem’s Lot: Illustrated Edition (2005). These latter editions included

forty-nine pages of ‘Deleted Scenes’ from the original manuscript; included in a separate section after

the original version, making the examination of the excised material a simple matter, and providing

such interesting information as the original name of the head vampire (‘Sarlinov’). The Illustrated

Edition carried a further new Introduction (covered later in this chapter).

King relates that his mother brought Dracula home from the Stratford Public Library at his

request in around 1957; it ‘was my first encounter with the epistolary novel as well as one of my

earlier forays into adult fiction...I loved the form.’ What King liked most about the novel was ‘the

intrepid band of adventurers’ chasing down the Count and when he later discovered Tolkien’s Rings

trilogy he thought, ‘this is just a slightly sunnier version of Stoker’s Dracula with Frodo playing

Jonathan Harker, Gandalf playing Abraham Van Helsing, and Sauron playing the Count himself.’

Calling it ‘the first fully satisfying novel I ever read’ King is not surprised it ‘marked me so early and

so indelibly.’

He also tells us that his musing, what if Dracula had come to the America of the 1970s had led to

Tabitha King’s query, ‘What if he came here, to Maine?’ and the sudden inspiration that led to his

classic American vampire novel. In a couple of revelatory lines King says, ‘some of my human

characters turned out to be stronger than I had expected. It took a certain amount of courage to allow

them to grow toward each other as they wanted to do, but I found that courage. If I ever won a single

battle as a novelist, that was probably it’; and, the novel ‘is dated in many ways (I have always been

more a writer of the moment than I wanted it to be)’.

Author’s Note (9 November 2000)

King uses this short piece to announce that ‘ The Plant will be going back into hibernation.’ The

author says he needs to continue work on Black House, Dreamcatcher, another novel ( From A Buick

8) and the remaining Dark Tower books: ‘Part 6 is the most logical stopping point. In a traditional

print book, it would be the end of the first long section (which I would have probably called “Zenith

Rising”). You will find a climax of sorts, and while not all of your questions will be answered—not

yet, at least—the fates of several characters will be resolved. Nastily. Permanently.’ He also

announces that as a way of thanking the readers who paid for previous parts of the serialization Part 6

will be free.

King updated the Note later to say that he is stopping The Plant due to other commitments; and

that the percentage of readers paying on the honor system had dropped significantly, possibly due to

the fact that the story was going to stop midway.

This piece was posted on King’s official website on November 9, 2000; and also included in the

fifth installment of The Plant, released that month. Later the same month a slightly longer version was

posted on the website. The posts and .PDF of The Plant are no longer accessible, although complete

sets of the electronic version regularly appear for resale (King’s Philtrum Press had released an

earlier version roughly matching parts one to three of the electronic version, in 1982, 1983 and

1985)122.

Untitled—The Old Dude’s Ticker (2000)

The Old Dude’s Ticker was published in the NECON123 XX Commemorative Volume for 2000,

its only appearance to date. The Volume was limited to 333 copies. However, King actually wrote

the story nearly three decades earlier and he explains its genesis in the Introduction: ‘In the two

years after I was married (1971-1972), I sold nearly two dozen stories to various men’s magazines.

Most were purchased by Nye Willden, the fiction editor at Cavalier. These stories were important

supplements to the meager income I was earning in my two day jobs, one as a high school English

teacher and the other as an employee of The New Franklin Laundry, where I washed motel sheets.

These were not good times for short horror fiction...but I sold an almost uninterrupted run of mine—

no mean feat for an unknown, unagented scribbler from Maine....’

‘Two of them, however, did not sell. Both were pastiches. The first was a modern day revision

of Nikolai Gogol’s story, “The Ring” (my version was called “The Spear”, I think). That one is lost.

The second was the one that follows, a crazed revisionist telling of Poe’s “The Tell-Tale Heart”. I

thought the idea was a natural: crazed Vietnam vet kills elderly benefactor as a result of post-

traumatic stress syndrome. I’m not sure what Nye’s problem with it might have been; I loved it, but he

shot it back at me with a terse “not for us” note. I gave it a final sad look, then put it in a desk drawer

and went on to something else. It stayed in said drawer until rescued by Marsha DeFilippo, who

found it in a pile of old manuscripts consigned to a collection of my stuff in the Raymond H. Fogler

Library at the University of Maine. I was tempted to tinker with it—the seventies slang is pretty out of

date—but resisted the impulse, deciding to let it be what it was then: partly satire and partly

affectionate homage....’

The story is short, only six small pages in the Volume, and is headed ‘ The Old Dude’s Ticker

— Stephen King and Edgar Allan Poe’. Typically of King in an environment where he feels very

comfortable with the ‘audience’ he signs the introduction ‘Steve King’. To access this piece readers

will need to track down one of the few copies of the NECON volume that appear for resale.

Alternatively, photocopies also circulate in the King community.

Introduction—Pet Sematary (2001)

This new Introduction (King had originally penned an Author’s Note , covered earlier in this

chapter) was written on September 20, 2000 and first appeared in the 2001 Pocket Books edition of

the novel. King retells the tale’s genesis, well known to fans, of his daughter’s cat being killed on a

busy road outside a house the family was renting, and his fear the same would happen to his youngest

son; along with the nearby ‘Pet Sematary’ for animals ‘used up’ by the road. He also tells us he wrote

the novel in ‘an empty room’ in a store across the road, as there was ‘no writing space in the

Orrington house’; and that he considers the ‘most resonant line’ in the novel to be that spoken by Jud

Crandall to the protagonist, Louis Creed: ‘Sometimes, Louis, dead is better.’

Author’s Note—Dreamcatcher (2001)

King relates here that he ‘was never so grateful’ to be writing as he was on this science-fiction

novel. This despite the discomfort of his rehabilitation from his near fatal 1999 accident although,

‘The reader will see that pieces of that physical discomfort followed me into the story.’ The majority

of the piece is dedicated to thanking those who helped with technical aspects of the story, and those

assisting with its publication. As to wife Tabitha, King says she ‘simply refused to call this novel by

its original title, which was Cancer. She considered it both ugly and an invitation to bad luck and

trouble. Eventually, I came around to her way of thinking, and she no longer refers to it as “that book”

or ‘the one about the shit-weasels’.’

Introduction—The Shining (2001)

This new Introduction, penned in New York City on February 8, 2001, first appeared in the

2001 Pocket Books edition of the novel. A philosophical dissertation on the nature of the horrors

humans perpetrate upon themselves and, in particular, upon their families (a theme recurrent in King’s

fiction), readers should seek out this important piece. King starts by saying he considers The Shining

his ‘crossroads’ novel—the one where he decided to ‘reach’, rather than simply continue to write the

way he had before—that choice dictated by his decision to describe the brutal but loving relationship

between Jack Torrance and his father (King feels this made Jack’s character ‘more realistic...and

therefore more frightening’). The And Now this Word from New Hampshire section of Before the

Play, the excised Prologue to The Shining makes this point even more clearly than the remaining

scenes in the novel.124

Explaining a basic view made very clear by a broad reading of King’s canon he says: ‘… aren’t

memories the true ghosts of our lives? Do they not drive us all to words and acts we regret from time

to time? / The decision I made to try and make Jack’s father a real person, one who was loved as

well as hated by his flawed son, took me a long way down the road to my current beliefs concerning

what is so blithely dismissed as “the horror novel.” I believe these stories exist because we

sometimes need to create unreal monsters and bogies to stand in for all the things we fear in our real

lives: the parent who punches instead of kissing, the auto accident that takes a loved one, the cancer

we one day discover living in our own bodies. If such terrible occurrences were acts of darkness,

they might actually be easier to cope with. But instead of being dark, they have their own terrible

brilliance, it seems to me, and none shine so bright as the acts of cruelty we sometimes perpetrate in

our own families. To look directly at such brilliance is to be blinded, and so we create any number of

filters. The ghost story, the horror story, the uncanny tale—all of these are such filters. The man or

woman who insists there are no ghosts is only ignoring the whispers of his or her own heart, and how

cruel that seems to me. Surely even the most malignant ghost is a lonely thing, left out in the dark,

desperate to be heard.’

In an important aside King writes, ‘My single conversation with the late Stanley Kubrick, about

six months before he began filming his version of The Shining....’ This effectively contradicts claims

made by others elsewhere of extended, late-night telephone conversations between the director and

King during the filming of the movie.

Jack’s Back: Stephen King’s Thoughts on the Sequel (2001)

This is a very rare piece of King’s non-fiction about his own work. As it is revelatory it is to be

hoped it might be reprinted in a more widely circulated version, perhaps a future edition of Black

House. To date it has only been circulated in the promotional press kit for Black House sent out in the

US in September, 2001; published on the official Black House web site in the UK that month (as

Jack’s Back); and in the e-book of Black House released by Random House.

The piece explains how King and Peter Straub came to write ‘not just one but two books about

Jack Sawyer and his travels to another world called the Territories’; and explains how they managed

the ‘collaboration’, originally intended to begin in the summer of 1999 but, interrupted by King’s

accident, finally started in the winter of 2000.

For those fans of this particular ficton125 this sentence will be of great interest: ‘Peter at one

point wrote four spectacular single-spaced pages about the absurd, successful, and unhappy life of

Richard Sloat. Very little of it ever made its way into the finished novel, but it’s there if and when

needed.’ And for those fans of the Dark Tower ficton, King relates that the novel has ‘… some

interesting connections to the Dark Tower novels (and that, Constant Reader, was actually Peter’s

idea).’ This may explain the jarring problem that the Big Combination does not seem to quite gel with

the ‘established’ Dark Tower mythology (particularly that contained in the latter three novels).

On Dreamcatcher (2001)

On Dreamcatcher is a short piece that first appeared in the science-fiction Book Club edition of

the novel, in April 2002. It was reprinted in The Stephen King Desk Calendar 2006, a Doubleday

Book Club publication only made available to subscribers of Book-of-the-Month Club’s The Stephen

King Library. The science-fiction Book Club edition is extremely difficult to find (most who offer it

for sale at such venues as eBay do not even know they have that particular edition), but the Calendar

is regularly offered at eBay and should be available from specialist King dealers.

King says Dreamcatcher ‘is my attempt to simultaneously pay homage to The War of the Worlds

and give the Wells concept of invasion from space a millennial twist. It is also an attempt to write

about how men—ordinary ones, not heroes—behave when they are under stress...Last of all,

Dreamcatcher is really about dreams’. He says that in his non-writing life he finds it hard to believe

that we are monitored by aliens ‘in ways that seem so frankly Freudian’ and would not be surprised if

real aliens left humanity to itself: ‘We are the dogs that bite’; but that, as a writer, ‘I believe it all.’

Untitled—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

This one paragraph note on the ‘Contents’ page explains how King chose to order the fourteen

tales in his most recent short story collection—by selecting fourteen playing cards, shuffling and

dealing them. ‘Next collection: selected by Tarot.’ He also says there is ‘an explanatory note before

or after each story’. The ‘note’ for The Little Sisters of Eluria is actually a slightly revised version

of the Author’s Note to the novella’s original publication in Legends and was covered earlier in this

chapter.

Introduction: Practicing the (Almost) Lost Art—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

This piece is something of a dissertation on the act of writing and the surviving markets for

writers’ work. King starts with ‘a confession: I also take an amateur’s slightly crazed pleasure in the

business side of what I do...a little media cross-pollination and envelope-pushing. I’ve tried doing

visual novels...serial novels...and serial novels on the Internet...It’s not about making more money or

even precisely about creating new markets; it’s about trying to see the art, act, and craft of writing in

different ways, thereby refreshing the process and keeping the resulting artifacts—the stories, in other

words—as bright as possible.’

King paints a broad picture of the literary art form at the beginning of a new century—the radio

play (dead); plays in blank verse (dead); poetry (more alive than most think); the short story (closer

to death than most realize); and creating new ways to market the written word (using Riding the

Bullet in lengthy and interesting example). He also baldly states he will continue to write short

stories even if there remains no market, or readers: ‘... I refuse to let a year go by without writing at

least one or two of them. Not for money, not even precisely for love, but as a kind of dues-paying.’

Written on 11 December 2001 the piece closes with King’s thanks to various people who assist

in bringing his books to market (by now almost ‘the usual suspects’); some of those who bought and

published his short stories over the years (Bill Buford at The New Yorker ; Ed Ferman of The

Magazine of Fantasy & science-fiction, Nye Willden at Cavalier and Robert A. W. Lowndes, the

first man to pay to publish King’s fiction); and Tabitha King, ‘who remains my favorite Constant

Reader.’

Untitled, to Autopsy Room Four—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

King credits an Alfred Hitchcock Presents TV episode as inspiration for this story and notes his

more ‘ modern?—method of communicating liveliness’ than the original’s single tear; along with his

joy in being able to use a snake breed—the ‘boomslang’, from one of Agatha Christie’s Miss Marple

tales (as an aside, the African version is not fictional).

Untitled, to The Man in the Black Suit—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

The Man in the Black Suit is King’s most awarded short story, securing the prestigious O.

Henry Award (the best short story written by a North American and published in a North American

magazine) for 1996. He writes the tale is his hommage to Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Young Goodman

Brown, ‘I think it’s one of the best stories ever written by an American.’ The tale sprung from one of

King’s friends who told him his Granpa truly believed he’d once met the Devil in the woods. King

found the result of his own retelling ‘humdrum’ and was surprised by both critical and reader

reaction: ‘This story is proof that writers are often the worst judges of what they have written.’

Untitled, to All That You Love Will Be Carried Away—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

King reveals this story sprung from his own habit of collecting rest stop graffiti. ‘I cared very

much for the lonely man at its center and really hope things turned out okay for him. In the first draft

things did, but Bill Buford of The New Yorker suggested a more ambiguous ending.’

Untitled, to The Death of Jack Hamilton—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

In one paragraph King tells us this story was inspired by his childhood fascination with

Depression-era outlaws and facts from John Toland’s history of those times, The Dillinger Days.

Using real-life characters and Homer Van Meter’s ‘ability’ to rope flies, he created a tale of ‘pure

imagination...or myth, if you like that word better; I do.’

Untitled, to In the Deathroom—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

In another single paragraph King says he wanted to write one of those ‘Kafka-esque’ stories of

South American interrogations, but one for which there was ‘a happier ending, however unreal that

might be. And here it is.’

Untitled, to Everything’s Eventual—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

The image that inspired this tale was of ‘a young man pouring change into a sewer grating

outside of the small suburban house in which he lived.’ The story ‘came out smoothly and without a

single hesitation, supporting my idea that stories are artifacts: not really made things which we

create...but pre-existing objects which we dig up.’

Untitled, to L.T.’s Theory of Pets—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

One of the longer of these notes at nearly a page King declares this story his favorite of the

collection. ‘The origin of the story so far as I can remember was a “Dear Abby” column where Abby

opined that a pet is just about the worst sort of present one can give anyone.’ He says he had ‘a

marvelous time working on it, and whenever I’m called to read a story out loud, this is the one I

choose...It makes people laugh, and I like that.’

Untitled, to The Road Virus Heads North—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

The author reveals he actually has the picture described in The Road Virus Heads North, given

to him as a present by wife Tabitha, who thought he might like, ‘or at least react to it’. When he hung

it in his office their children claimed the eyes followed them as they crossed the room.

Untitled, to Lunch at the Gotham Café—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

This story was inspired by a New York maître d’, who tipped King ‘the most cynical wink in the

universe’ while seating an arguing couple. He says this story is powered not by Guy, the crazed

maître d’, but by ‘the spooky relationship between the divorcing couple. In their own way, they’re

crazier than he is. By far.’

Untitled, to That Feeling, You Can Only Say What It Is in French—Everything’s Eventual

(2002)

This somewhat derivative tale, written in strong literary tones, is not a favorite with King’s

broader fan base, but has assisted in bringing some critics to reconsider the worth of King’s canon. In

this very short note King says the story is about Hell, ‘A version of it where you are condemned to do

the same thing over and over again...My idea is that [Hell] might be repetition.’ Roland Deschain

certainly, and briefly, felt that way.

Untitled, to 1408—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

‘As well as the ever-popular premature burial, every writer of shock/suspense tales should

write at least one story about the Ghostly Room At The Inn. This is my version of that story. The only

unusual thing about it is that I never intended to finish it. I wrote the first three or four pages as part of

an appendix for my On Writing book, wanting to show readers how a story evolves from first draft to

second...But something nice happened: the story seduced me and I ended up writing all of it.’ King

declares the story ‘scared me while I was working on it’ and that he found its original appearance on

the Blood and Smoke audiobook ‘scared me even more’.

Untitled, to Riding the Bullet—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

Having detailed almost as much as he wanted to about Riding the Bullet in the collection’s

Introduction, King says ‘… like an earlier story of mine (“The Woman in the Room”), it’s an attempt

to talk about how my own mother’s approaching death made me feel.’ And: ‘This is probably the

single great subject of horror fiction: our need to cope with a mystery [death] that can be understood

only with the aid of a hopeful imagination.’

Untitled, to Luckey Quarter—Everything’s Eventual (2002)

King wrote this story ‘longhand, on hotel stationery’ in a Nevada hotel while on a Harley-

Davidson motorcycle trip across America, promoting his novel Insomnia. The inspiration was a two-

dollar slot chip and a note left by the turndown maid.

Author’s Note—From a Buick 8 (2002)

In this piece King details the genesis of the novel (he slipped on a steep slope near a rural gas

station in Pennsylvania, narrowly avoiding tumbling into a stream; and began to wonder how long the

attendant would have waited before noticing that King’s vehicle was missing its driver). Within a few

hours the story was set in King’s mind. ‘This story became...a meditation on the essentially

indecipherable quality of life’s events, and how impossible it is to find a coherent meaning in them.’

After completing the first draft King was nearly killed when hit by a vehicle while walking in rural

Maine: ‘The coincidence of having written a book filled with grisly vehicular mishaps shortly before

suffering my own has not been lost on me, but I’ve tried not to make too much of it.’ He also thanks

members of the Pennsylvania State Police, who assisted with research but not (very unusually) either

wife Tabitha, or publishing industry colleagues.

One interesting note about this piece is that it varies from edition to edition. The last two

paragraphs of the Scribner US hardback and Pocket Book US paperback editions read:

‘Susan Moldow and Nan Graham, the Dynamic Duo at Scribner, would not let me close this note

without pointing out that certain—ahem!—liberties have been taken with the Buick on the book

jacket. GM-ophiles will likely notice that the Eight’s cover-girl ( sic) is several years younger than

the Buick in the story. I was asked if this little cheat bothered me, and I said absolutely not. What

bothers me, especially when it’s late and I can’t sleep, is that sneermouth grille. Looks almost ready

to gobble someone up, doesn’t it? Maybe me. Or maybe you, my dear Constant Reader.

‘Maybe you. / Stephen King / May 29, 2002’.

When published as a UK hardback by Hodder & Stoughton the first line opened, ‘Hodder &

Stoughton would not let me close this note....’ Cemetery Dance Publications also released a Lettered,

Limited and Gift Edition of this book—in those both paragraphs are missing in their entirety. 126

Introduction: On Being Nineteen (and a Few Other Things)—The Dark Tower: The

Gunslinger(Revised Edition) (2003)

This is one of the most important pieces about his own work in King’s canon. Here, we learn of

the motivations and inspirations for the series King considers his master work—the Dark Tower

Cycle. The piece is in three parts—a dissertation on what it was like to be nineteen; his desire to

write the longest popular novel in history, inspired by The Lord of the Rings and The Good, the Bad,

and the Ugly; and the pressure to complete Roland’s tale.

The piece, written on 25 January 2003, first appeared in the Revised and Expanded edition of

the first Dark Tower novel, The Gunslinger and was reprinted in rereleases of volumes II-IV of the

series, which were the only other books in the Cycle at the time (it is of passing interest that they have

yet to be included in any printing of the later three volumes); and with Roont, an excerpt from Wolves

of the Calla, in a promotional booklet, The Dark Tower: Introduction & Extract from Wolves of the

Calla, given away in Fall 2003 with press kits in the United Kingdom.

King says in his Author’s Note to The Dark Tower that this piece was originally intended to be

the afterword to The Dark Tower and explains why he had made the change (we explain later this

chapter).

In the first section King says he read The Lord of the Rings books in 1966 and 1967 and states

that the Dark Tower books (like other long fantasy tales written by others of his generation) were

‘born out of Tolkien’s.’ Despite King’s emotional response to ‘the sweep of Tolkien’s imagination’

he held off writing what would have been another hackneyed copy of that master’s work, wanting

instead to ‘write my own kind of story....’ King’s 19 th birthday fell on September 21, 1966 and, like

most 19 year olds, he was arrogant ‘enough to feel I could wait a little while on my muse and my

masterpiece (as I was sure it would be).’

King has always been able to take us back to certain times in our lives (his ability to reflect our

memories of how we were as children is legendary) and he demonstrates this again here, revealing

what it was like (for him, for us) to feel nineteen. Do yourself a favor, if our book inspires you to

read but one piece of King’s non-fiction, this is it. Making his argument specific King reveals of

himself (italics ours, for emphasis):

‘I had a lot of reach, and I cared about that. I had a lot of ambition, and I cared about that. I

had a typewriter that I carried from one shithole apartment to the next, always with a deck of

smokes in my pocket and a smile on my face. The compromises of middle age were distant, the

insults of old age over the horizon. Like the protagonist in that Bob Seger song they now use to

sell the trucks, I felt endlessly powerful and endlessly optimistic; my pockets were empty but my

heart was full of stories I wanted to tell. Sounds corny now; felt wonderful then. Felt very cool.

More than anything else I wanted to get inside my reader’s defenses, wanted to rip them and

ravish them and change them forever with nothing but story. And I felt I could do those things. I

felt I had been made to do those things.’

King begins the second section opining that those who consider themselves serious/literary

novelists are bound to consider What would writing this sort of story mean to me? while those

‘whose destiny (or ka, if you like) is to include the writing of popular novels are apt to ask... What

would writing this sort of story mean to others? ’ Recognizing that The Lord of the Rings was the

second type of novel; that he ‘ loved’ the idea of the quest; and that he did not want to go down

Tolkien’s line of a ‘British band of pilgrims’ set against ‘bosky Scandinavian settings’, he waited.

Then, in 1970127, ‘...in an almost completely empty movie theater (the Bijou, in Bangor, Maine, if it

matters)128, I saw a film directed by Sergio Leone. It was called The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly,

and before the film was even half over, I realized that what I wanted to write was a novel that

contained Tolkien’s sense of quest and magic but set against Leone’s almost absurdly majestic

Western backdrop.’ In fact, King was so inspired that ‘in my enthusiasm...I wanted to write not just a

long book, but the longest popular novel in history.’

The third and final section deals with King’s feeling of responsibility for finishing the Dark

Tower cycle, particularly after his near-death experience. He describes it as ‘the troubling idea that,

having built the Dark Tower in the collective imagination of a million readers, I might have a

responsibility to make it safe for as long as people wanted to read about it...Fantasy stories, the bad

as well as the good...seem to have long shelf lives. Roland’s way of protecting the Tower is to try to

remove the threat to the Beams that hold the Tower up. I would have to do it, I realized after my

accident, by finishing the gunslinger’s story.’

He also briefly mentions the pressure exerted by fans to complete Roland’s tale (including

letters from dying old ladies and condemned men requesting the final outcome to be given in secret to

them before they went to the clearing at the end of the path) but reminds everyone that he could not

know the outcome: ‘To know, I have to write.’ King, who rails against plot in On Writing, also says:

‘I once had an outline, but I lost it along the way. (It probably wasn’t worth a tin shit, anyway).’ And

now, a long, long way from the young man of nineteen, ‘Like it or hate it, the story of Roland is now

done. I hope you enjoy it. / As for me, I had the time of my life.’

Foreword—The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger(Revised Edition) (2003)

On February 6, 2003 King wrote a new Foreword for the Revised Edition of The Gunslinger,

explaining the reasons he revised the original published novel (after twenty-one years). He recalls the

furor when he published the revised and expanded edition of The Stand (in 1990), that novel being

the one his readers, to that time, had ‘loved the best (as far as the most passionate of the “Stand-fans”

are concerned, I could have died in 1980 without making the world a noticeably poorer place).’

King explains why reading this Foreword with his reasons for revising The Gunslinger should

be exempt from ‘King’s Bullshit Rule’ (in this case reading, ‘Most of what writers write about their

work is ill-informed bullshit’; this rule also appears in a different form in the Second Foreword to

On Writing).

In total some nine thousand words and ‘two or three totally new scenes’ were added in this

revision. The case he puts forward for the revisions is this: as he’d never read, or revised, the Cycle

as one entity a re-reading of The Gunslinger presented ‘three obvious truths’: that the novel ‘had

been written by a very young man and had all the problems of a very young man’s book’; ‘that it

contained a great many errors and false starts’ (in our view this issue can only have been

compounded by the fact that the novel was originally published as five separate episodes over a three

year period); and that it ‘did not even sound like the later books—it was, frankly, rather difficult to

read. All too often I heard myself apologizing for it, and telling people that if they persevered, they

would find the story really found its voice in The Drawing of the Three.’ We would still have to

agree on the last point—even in its revision The Gunslinger is a difficult entry point for the Cycle

and we recommend The Drawing of the Three as the best place to start. King, whose right it is to

present his work in any manner he chooses, arguing against an even fuller revision says, ‘… for all its

faults, it has its own special charms, it seems to me. To change it too completely would have been to

repudiate the person who first wrote of the gunslinger in the late spring and early summer of 1970,

and that I did not want to do.’

King also notes his policy on revision (as he had in On Writing) which is to plough ahead on the

first draft, ‘my method of attack has always been to plunge in and go as fast as I can, keeping the edge

of my narrative blade as sharp as possible by constant use, and trying to outrun the novelist’s most

insidious enemy, which is doubt.’ He will then lay the work aside for months (or years) before

completing a cool revision.

He concludes by noting there were thirty-three years between first words and the completion of

the first draft of the Cycle. ‘Yet Roland would be the first to point out that such a span of time means

very little. In fact, when one quests for the Dark Tower, time is a matter of no concern at all.’

The Final Argument—The Dark Tower V: Wolves of the Calla (2003)

This is the fourth, and last, of the Arguments King uses to set the scene for readers at the

beginning of volumes two to five of the Dark Tower novels. At this point King chose to call his

summary the ‘Final Argument’ and does not explain why here, or in the later volumes, it was not

necessary to summarize the storyline before Song of Susannah or The Dark Tower , although he is

ready to state that the latter book would be the last in the Cycle and would be published in 2004.

For the first time King refers to the subtitles he had introduced to printings of the earlier novels

after the Revised and Expanded version of The Gunslinger was released in July 2003 ( Wolves was

released in November). The titles known at that time were, in fact, a clue to the closing passages of

the final novel. They are: The Gunslinger—Resumption (as King boldly points out in The Final

Argument) ; The Drawing of the Three—Renewal; The Waste Lands—Redemption ; Wizard and

Glass—Regard; and Resistance for Wolves of the Calla . In 2004 readers would discover the

remaining subtitles— Reproduction for Song of Susannah and Resumption (again, if you’ll excuse

us) for The Dark Tower.

As the story has progressed King has reached the point where he is ready to clearly state of

Roland’s goal: ‘At the point where the Beams cross, at the center of Roland’s world (and all worlds),

stands the Dark Tower, the nexus of all where and when.’ The italics are King’s.

It is in this non-fiction piece that King leads (or misleads, depending on which side of the

debate one falls) readers for a second time into thinking John Farson (the rebel who brought down the

Affiliation and Gilead) is also Marten and Randall Flagg (and therefore Walter O’Dim): ‘With Tick-

Tock dead, the real Wizard steps forward. It’s Roland’s ancient nemesis, Marten Broadcloak, known

in some worlds as Randall Flagg, in others as Richard Fannin, in others as John Farson (the Good

Man).’ The first instance occurred in the Synopsis for The Gunslinger and the Dark Man discussed

earlier in this chapter. There he wrote: ‘Marten, the court sorcerer who may have somehow been

transformed into the man in black he now pursues (and who, as the charismatic Good Man, pulled

down the last kingdom of light)....’

Despite this Robin Furth, King’s research assistant on the Dark Tower Cycle, has this to say

about the matter: ‘One passage in The Gunslinger hints that Farson was actually Steven Deschain’s

sorcerer, Marten Broadcloak...However, by the end of the Dark Tower series it seems fairly certain

that Farson—though mad as the Crimson King himself—was not another incarnation of the demonic

R.F., but one of his many pawns.’129

King concludes this last Argument by saying (incorrectly, in our view) that it ‘in no way

summarizes the first four books of the Tower cycle....’; and ‘These books are but parts of a single long

tale, and you would do better to read them from beginning to end rather than starting in the middle.’

While we do agree with this last opinion, it must also be said that many readers find their way best

into the Dark Tower Cycle via the second volume, The Drawing of the Three, as noted earlier.

Despite a rewrite of the first book, The Gunslinger is turgid at times and difficult to ‘get into’. Once

hooked by the tale that volume is more easily read and it is not critical that it be the first (certainly it

should be read before Wizard and Glass as it provides context to that episode).

Author’s Note—The Dark Tower V: Wolves of the Calla (2003)

In this two-paragraph piece King acknowledges the source for some of the material in Wolves

— Sergio Leone (as noted in On Being Nineteen Leone’s The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly was a

primary inspiration)—an Italian; and Akira Kurosawa—the Japanese director of The Seven Samurai.

He also credits the cinematic legacy of both these men, Sam Peckinpah, Howard Hawkes and John

Sturgis ( sic). King notes ‘the Calla did not come by the final part of its (slightly misspelled) name

accidentally.’ Amusingly enough both the US and UK first editions of Wolves actually misspell the

gentleman in question’s name as John Sturgis in this Author’s Note—it is actually John Sturges!

Thanks are also extended to his Dark Tower research assistant, Robin Furth and Tabitha King

(‘who is still patiently giving me the time and light and space I need to do this job to the best of my

abilities.’)

Author’s Afterword—The Dark Tower V: Wolves of the Calla (2003)

In the first sentence of this piece, written in Bangor on December 15, 2002, King asks readers to

check the dedication page to the novel: ‘I’ll wait.’ The dedication reads, ‘This book is for Frank

Muller, / who hears the voices in my head.’ King then relates his personal friendship and professional

relationship with Muller, who read many of King’s novels for the audiobook market, including the

first four Dark Tower novels, before being permanently disabled in a motorcycle accident (he

suffered serious neurological damage and will never return to his profession). King tells us he

prepared for the final books of the Dark Tower Cycle by listening to Muller’s readings and found a

‘sense of newness and freshness’ in doing so, ‘a sense of Roland and Roland’s friends as actual

people, with their own vital inner lives.’ So when ‘I say in the dedication that Frank heard the voices

in my head, I am speaking the literal truth as I understand it.’

He then pitches for donations to The Wavedancer Foundation (addressed care of King’s lawyer,

Arthur Greene), set up by King and others to support Frank Muller and other freelance artists in a

similar situation (King donated his earnings from the audio version of Wolves). ‘Frank’s wife, Erika,

says thankya. So do I. / And Frank would, if he could.’ Donations are still being accepted. 130

Wordslinger’s Note—The Dark Tower VI: Song of Susannah (2004)

King changed his usual Author’s Note into that of a Wordslinger, the term Roland uses

(affectionately?) to describe his creator, the Stephen King character in this novel.

Barely a page in length the piece, written on May 28, 2003, again credits Dark Tower research

assistant Robin Furth, Chuck Verrill (editor of the final five novels in the Cycle, and many other King

books) and a cast from the various publishers. Also, noting the fictionalization of ‘certain

geographical details’, King says ‘to the best of my knowledge, there were never coin-op storage

lockers in the World Trade Center.’ This last refers to an important plot point that we will not ruin

here for those (shame on you!) who have yet to enjoy this particular novel. Acknowledging it is the

penultimate episode in the Cycle King ends with: ‘One more turn of the path, and then we reach the

clearing. 131 / Come along with me, will ya not?’ And, we did.

Contributors’ Notes—The Best American Mystery Stories, 2004(2004)

King’s short story Harvey’s Dream was originally published in The New Yorker for June 30,

2003. It’s second anthology appearance was in The Best American Mystery Stories, 2004, 132 edited

by novelist Nelson DeMille. In the Contributors’ Notes section DeMille writes a short paragraph

about each author (he says of King, ‘He’s written a lot of novels and short stories...Some aren’t too

bad, and a couple really kick ass.’) and publishes their short notes about their tale. The anthology is

currently in print and will be available from usual dealers when it is not.

King says he wrote of waking from a dream in which he didn’t want to answer a phone call

because ‘I knew—positively knew, the way you sometimes do in dreams—that someone wanted to

tell me one of our children was dead.’ He went straight from bed to word processor and wrote this

somewhat derivative story ‘at a single go.’

Author’s Note—The Dark Tower VII: The Dark Tower (2005)

This piece, written on 21 August 2003, completes King’s commentary on the Dark Tower Cycle

in the novels themselves (subject, of course, to some new piece in a future collection or revision). In

fact he seems a little embarrassed, noting that sometimes ‘I think I have written more about the Dark

Tower books than I have written about the Dark Tower itself.’ He describes the ‘ever-growing

synopsis (known by the quaint old word Argument)’133; and the afterwords (‘most totally unnecessary

and some actually embarrassing in retrospect’).

King reveals that Michael Whelan (illustrator of The Gunslinger and The Dark Tower ) had

bluntly suggested to King that the original afterword for this novel, light-hearted as it was, was

jarringly out of place. Taking another look, King realized Whelan was right and tells us the first half

of that original piece was included in On Being Nineteen in editions of the first four Dark Tower

novels.

Having made this change King contemplated leaving Roland’s discovery at the top of The Dark

Tower as his last word on the Cycle but claims to have realized he ‘had one more thing to say, a thing

that actually needed to be said. It has to do with my presence in my own book.’ He immediately

expresses his dislike for the ‘smarmy academic term’ that covers such matters—metafiction; and tells

us he is in the story ‘only because’ he’d known (consciously since writing Insomnia in 1995;

unconsciously since Father Callahan left town in ‘Salem’s Lot) that ‘many of my fictions refer back to

Roland’s world and Roland’s story’; and that since ‘I was the one who wrote them, it seemed logical

I was part of the gunslinger’s ka.’

King’s idea was to somehow unify all his fiction under the Dark Tower’s umbrella and

expresses the hope that readers (and critics, one presumes) won’t see this as pretentious but in fact ‘a

way of showing how life influences art (and vice-versa).’ Referring to Roland’s being forced back on

the wheel of ka (or fate) King says, ‘I hope that the reader will see that by discovering the Horn of

Eld, the gunslinger may finally be on the way to his own resolution. Possibly even to redemption. It

w as all about reaching the Tower, you see—mine as well as Roland’s...You may not like what

Roland found at the top, but that’s a different matter entirely...I wasn’t exactly crazy about the ending,

either, if you want to know the truth, but it’s the right ending. The only ending, in fact. You have to

remember that I don’t make these things up, not exactly; I only write down what I see.’

He goes on to note that the Stephen King character in the novels is ‘not very’ real, although the

one Roland and Eddie met in Bridgton in Song of Susannah is ‘very close to the Stephen King I

remember being at that time.’ He also notes he has fictionalized the geography of western Maine and

asks readers/fans not to ‘drop in and say hello’, requesting respect for his family’s privacy.

Finally, of the odyssey that is the Dark Tower for characters, writer and readers alike, he says,

‘I thank you for coming along, and sharing this adventure with me. I never worked harder on a project

in my life, and I know—none better, alas—that it has not been entirely successful. What work of

make-believe ever is? And yet...I would not give back a single minute of the time I have lived in

Roland’s where and when. Those days in Mid-World and End-World were quite extraordinary.

These were days when my imagination was so clear I could smell the dust and hear the creak of

leather.’

Afterword—The Colorado Kid (2005)

Many King fans, and those of ‘hard core pulp crime’ novels, were disappointed by ‘The

Colorado Kid’, a short unsolved mystery that was somewhat inaccurately promoted by the publishers.

However, there is no doubt it is a delightful stand-alone King tale. Sensing controversy King notes in

his five page Afterword, written on January 31, 2005, ‘Depending on whether you liked or hated The

Colorado Kid (I think for many people there’ll be no middle ground on this one, and that’s fine with

me)’. He concentrates on the nature of ‘mystery’—the rest of the piece details the idea that set King to

writing this tale (a newspaper clipping about a girl found dead on a Maine island in mysterious

circumstances); the mystery King finds inherent in island communities; his lack of interest in a

solution but rather the mystery of this tale (‘… if you tell me I fell down on the job and didn’t tell all

of this story there was to tell, I say you’re all wrong’); and the nature of the unexplained mysteries of

our existence and the lives we lead.

Introduction to ’Salem’s Lot—’Salem’s Lot: Illustrated Edition (2005)

This new Introduction was written on June 15, 2005, at Center Lovell. A previous

Introduction, for the 1999 Pocket Books edition, serves as the Afterword to this edition of the novel

(and was reviewed earlier this chapter). The two pieces are effectively bookends and should be read

in tandem. In a small, but very interesting point, King reveals that the reason the novel’s original title

was changed to ’Salem’s Lot was ‘because my wife, Tabby, said that Second Coming sounded like a

sex manual’.

King returns here to the technophobia that informs so much of his fiction ( Trucks, The Stand,

Maximum Overdrive and The Mangler are but the most obvious). In fact, in October 2005 King said,

‘I just like telling stories. And if there’s one message that comes up again and again, it’s “Love

conquers Fear”. And if there’s one concern that comes up again and again, it’s “Don’t trust the

technology—it may not be your friend.” 134 He says that it was his intent to reflect a view opposing

that of Stoker’s Dracula, which glorified technology as the antidote to the Count’s evils, ‘I saw

myself and my society at the other end of the technological rainbow, and set out to write a book that

would reflect that glum idea.’ Despite this, as noted in the previous Introduction/ Afterword, the

characters rose up against the author’s will and delivered ‘a surprisingly optimistic book.’

Finally, King claims he now holds on to only one of the many ideas he’d once had about fiction

—the first, ‘one I’ll probably hold onto until the end: it’s good to tell a story, and even better when

people actually want to listen.’

And that is as good a way as any to close any chapter on Stephen King’s work, if it were not for

this last:

Untitled—Cell (2006)

This short untitled piece, effectively an Author’s Note , is simply signed ‘S.K.’ King thanks his

longtime editor, Chuck Verrill; researcher Robin Furth (Furth also supported King on the last three

Dark Tower books)135 and Tabitha King. He also notes he’d taken liberties with geography; and that

although, to the best of his knowledge FEMA hasn’t appropriated money to provide backup

generators for cell phone transmission towers, many such towers do have their own generator

backups. 136

LATER COLUMNS—

THE POP OF KING

That is the true magic of novels, which often possess more strength (and reality) than their

creators suppose: They see into our secret hearts.

—From The Pop of King: My So-Called Admirer.

After years of occasional contributions in the summer of 2003 King fully committed himself

again to writing a regular column, this time for EntertainmentWeekly magazine. Through 31 March

2006 nearly fifty The Pop of King columns had been published and King was continuing to contribute

regularly. Entertainment Weekly had previously published a number of King pieces, including letters

to the editor and such important articles as The Reel Stephen King and How I Created Golden

Years…and Spooked Dozens of TV Executives.

King appears to be enjoying his relationship with the magazine, agreeing to allow an excerpt

from his novel Cell in the magazine’s 27 January 2006 edition. The feeling appears to be mutual; as

this was the first time in Entertainment Weekly’s history they had carried fiction!

One of the main reasons you are holding this book is King’s involvement in popular culture. As

this volume shows, King is not only a major part of American popular culture; he also feeds it through

commentary in his non-fiction. The majority of these Entertainment Weekly columns focus on film,

television, music and books, as is to be expected in this type of magazine. The space provides King a

blank canvas on which to deliver the same type of material as in a good deal of his other non-fiction.

Janet Maslin, in reviewing Faithful for The New York Times called The Pop of King ‘the savviest

pop-cultural criticism this side of William Goldman’s.’

The columns can be accessed in any number of ways. Each is available on Entertainment

Weekly’s web site, if you are willing to spend time searching, as not all are easily accessible and

many are listed under different titles137 from that used in the magazine. To access them via this

method one has to be a subscriber to the magazine, or input an America Online screen name and

password ( EW and AOL are both part of the same conglomerate). One can also subscribe to the

magazine or buy it from the newsstands and read the newest installments, which appear every three

weeks or so. Older issues can be accessed at most significant libraries; and copies can be purchased

from used magazine dealers. A good percentage of these columns are reprinted in the Australian

equivalent of Entertainment Weekly, Who (both are owned by Time Warner). For details of the Who

reprints, see our Bibliography section.

The Pop of King: Ready or Not, Here I Come (August 8, 2003)

‘So here’s what happened, best that I can figure. A couple of months back, the editors at

Entertainment Weekly asked me to review Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and either

liked the review itself or liked the fact that it was written in longhand,’ King writes, opening for his

first The Pop of King column. This references his review, Potter Gold, published in the July 11,

2003 issue (see our Book Reviews chapter).

Here, King covers recent movies, music and books he has either liked or disliked and writes

about each. As far as films go, he says he ‘loved’ Terminator 3 and liked (but did not love) 28 Days

Later. He also disliked Anger Management and hated both Antwone Fisher and The Life of David

Gale.

As to music King writes, ‘the fact is, I don’t have much use for pop music, and I refuse to listen

to any musical artist who goes by a single name. Beyoncé? Go away. Jewel? Out of my face. Ashanti?

Quit it. The only exception to this rule is Eminem. I love Eminem, partly because he’s funny and

savage, but also because he still admits that underneath it all, there is a person named Marshall

Mathers.’

On books, he is positive about Donna Tartt, Elmore Leonard (‘but...he was a lot better 10 years

ago’), Stewart O’Nan (later to be King’s co-author on Faithful), Peter Robinson, Peter Abrahams and

Dennis Lehane (his early novels). He also believes the immensely popular The Da Vinci Code by

Dan Brown is ‘garbage’.

This column is listed as The Tao of Steve on Entertainment Weekly’s web site.

The Pop of King: Always, They Come Back (August 22-29, 2003)

This column deals with the film Freddy vs. Jason, and also functions as commentary on the

franchises for this specific style of horror movie. King tells us the original incarnations of A

Nightmare on Elm Street , Friday the 13th, and Halloween all ‘scared the hell’ out of him, but none

of the subsequent sequels were that good.

He asks why yet more of these sequels are made and why consumers still go to see them: ‘The

answer is simple: because schmucks like me keep going to see them. And why? Because the fear

generated by a good horror picture is a drug, and as any junkie will tell you, you go on chasing the

high long after the high is gone’.

Also: ‘When it comes to horror franchises, the second-to-last gasp is almost always the “combo

movie,” and this summer we have, for better or worse, reached that point with Freddy vs. Jason. And

I’ll be first in line. I mean, in my heart I know it’s gonna be terrible, but I’ll still be there. After all,

it’s not the final twitch in this evolutionary process: That’s the comedy.’

While King does not actually review the movie in this article (he had not seen it, yet), he writes,

‘maybe it’ll be good.’ He closes, ‘No matter who wins, it’ll be a good fight.’

The Pop of King: The Best Book You Can’t Read (September 19, 2003)

King opens, ‘My gig at EW isn’t writing book reviews, but I can still state with a fair degree of

certainty that Ron McLarty’s The Memory of Running is the best novel you won’t read this year. But

you can experience it, and I’m all but positive that you’ll thank me for the tip if you do.’

He goes on to give a brief description of the novel and explains several publishers turned it

down. It finally found a home at Recorded Books, which used McLarty as a reader. King urges

readers to ‘visit www.recordedbooks.com/ and buy or rent the CD or cassette version of the

book...This is why I say it may be the best book you won’t read this year’—there is no print version.

King feels that if enough people bought the audiobook and enough fanfare was generated, the

novel may make it between covers. He closes, ‘you’ll do the stuff good novels are supposed to make

you do—laugh a little, cry a little, maybe ride (or jog) an extra time around the block in order to find

out what happens next. You’ll also discover a fine American voice...and actually get to hear it talking.

Do I want some of the credit if this nice thing happens? You know I do. Tell ‘em Steve sent you.’

Viking (one of King’s previous publishers) almost immediately signed McLarty to a deal and

published The Memory of Running in hardcover in December 2004, to positive reviews. The jacket

even carried a blurb from King! Penguin issued a mass-market paperback in December 2005.

This piece is listed as Listen Up on Entertainment Weekly’s web site.

The Pop of King: In My Book, It’s No Contest (October 3, 2003)

This column is shorter than the others, as it mainly represents what King designated as his first

annual ‘Hollywood Babble-On Competition.’ Winners of this contest (sponsored by King and

Entertainment Weekly magazine) were entered in a draw to win one of twelve signed copies of his

then newest novel, The Dark Tower V: Wolves of the Calla.

He lists fifteen movie quotes and the reader was to write the name of the movie the quote was

from, and then take the first letter of each title to spell the name of an important American sports

landmark, past or present. He then asked readers not to spoil the contest by posting the answer on the

Internet: ‘If you’ve got the answer, DON’T be a wiener! KEEP IT TO YOURSELF!’ He promises the

answer to the question will appear in his next column, to be published three weeks later (it was

actually delayed, see Do Movies Matter? (Part 1) below).

The Pop of King: No Pain, No Fame (October 24, 2003)

This column sees King turn an eye to the way our culture worships celebrities. He relates a

story, in which he took his son Owen to a boxing match in 1988 and saw the paparazzi go wild at the

joint arrival of Madonna and Sean Penn. ‘I got a good look at the expression of horror on Penn’s face.

It was the face of a young man who’s finally beginning to understand what he’s gotten himself into.’

‘This memory comes back to me whenever I hear that a soft-news press pool has hired an

aircraft to get pictures of a “celeb wedding,” or when I see front-page tabloid photographs of some

celeb who has either put on a lot of weight (indicating heartbreak) or lost a lot (indicating cancer, and

necessitating use of the word brave, as in BRAVE [INSERT CELEB’S FIRST NAME] FACES

CANCER WITH HELP OF EX-WIFE ... AND GOD!)’, he relates.

He also deals with the current hot celebrities: ‘Bennifer,’ the ridiculous name the media coined

for Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez as a couple; and pop singer Michael Jackson; saying that while

being a celebrity certainly has its perks, it also has drawbacks.

The Pop of King: Do Movies Matter? (Part 1) (November 14, 2003)

This is the first of a two-part piece dealing with the state of popular film in America at the time:

‘Of course movies matter. But, you might ask, do movies really matter? Do they matter the way great

books do, or great plays like “King Lear?” This ephemeral medium that you can look right through,

and that burns in an instant if you touch a match to it? That rots away in 30 years if not carefully

cosseted and cared for? That happens before you in a constant now, and allows for no going back or

stopping to think, and that is—unlike stage plays—always exactly the same? My answer is you bet

your sweet round fanny.’

King contends that most movies really don’t matter—at least in the artful terms he set forth at the

beginning of the piece; and provides a list of a few good films he had seen during the past fifteen

years— The Usual Suspects, Fargo, There’s Something about Mary , Sling Blade, Frequency, The

Matrix, Stir of Echoes, American Beauty, Wonder Boys , The Sixth Sense, High Fidelity, L.I.E. , Inthe Bedroom, Cinema Paradiso, Iris and Mystic River.

He closes, ‘Chew on those, and we’ll finish our discussion of why movies matter next time,

okay?’ It is reported at the bottom of the column that Entertainment Weekly received 8,505 responses

to the First Annual Hollywood Babble-On Competition (see In My Book, It’s No Contest above) and

the names of the twelve winners are revealed (the answer to King’s quiz? Candlestick Park).

The Pop of King: Do Movies Matter? (Part 2) (November 28, 2003)

This is the second of a two-part column dealing with the state of popular film in America (see

directly above). King opens with some film history: ‘It’s said that in the ’60s, when Francis Ford

Coppola was but a lad, he found himself working on one of Roger Corman’s pictures. According to

legend, Coppola convinced Corman, a low-budget junkie, to let him make his own film on the side

using Corman’s equipment and crew. The film Coppola then made (in nine days) was Dementia 13.

For mood, atmosphere, and plain old gut-churning horror, 13 makes Psycho and Night of the Living

Dead look tame. Dementia 13 is a movie that matters.’

King says he’d become frightened that he had lost the feeling that movies mattered. He’d seen

two movies recently, one that mattered and one that did not. The movie that did not matter was

Quentin Tarantino’s Kill Bill, Part One: ‘It’s certainly well made, and the story garners some of our

interest as it goes along, but dull is still dull, isn’t it?’

The film that changed King’s mind that movies can still matter was directed by Clint Eastwood:

‘ Mystic River, on the other hand, will burn itself into your memory. Twenty years from now, you’ll

be able to recall Sean Penn’s terrible cries of grief when he realizes his daughter is dead.’

King sums up this two-part essay: ‘Maybe the point is this: The movies that matter (and the

books, and the music) call out to us in their own voices—voices that are sometimes low but always

compelling. Movies are the highest popular art of our times, and art has the ability to change lives.

That means that some movies matter, and the best matter a lot.’

The Pop of King: Don’t Go To Sleep (December 5, 2003)

This column deals with the decline in sales in different entertainment media and, more

specifically, books. King’s view: ‘I think we’re seeing an entire generation—my generation, the

baby-boom generation—turning off the lights upstairs and putting a sign on the door: SORRY, BUT

I’M TAKING A NAP. MIND CLOSED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. Pretty much the same deal is

going on with music sales. Piracy and illegal downloads, although covered to a fare-thee-well in the

press, account for only a fraction of the drop in $$. I think what’s happening is all too clear: We baby

boomers are just too pooped to party.’

King had written of his generation before—most notably in his collection of short fiction, Hearts

in Atlantis—but here he is worried, and is frank with readers: ‘I can reach millions of people with

this column, but I can’t convince them that this is a very bad time to go to sleep. Outside, the world is

changing rapidly. Inside, too many of us are sitting at home on our ever-expanding asses, watching

Gilligan on TV Land. At the time we baby boomers were buying our first hardcover books, we were

apt to question authority (and very likely flout it). Now, however...maybe Bob Dylan said it best (he

often does): “I used to care, but things have changed.”’

He urges readers to buy a new novel or an album. Finally, he again urges them not to go to

sleep: ‘The brain is the most obedient organ in the body; if you tell it to shut up awready and stop

bothering you, it will. I hope you don’t do it. Fifty-five, even 60 isn’t too old to rock & roll; you’re

still young enough to boogie. Just don’t go to sleep, okay? Please don’t go to sleep.’

The Pop of King: You Don’t Know Jackson (February 13, 2004)

King starts writing of his recent illness, which resulted in a hiatus in The Pop of King columns.

‘Did you miss me? After this column, you may not. But, if you remember way back at the start, I said

I’d tell you exactly what I thought about American pop-cult, and if you didn’t like it...hey, grab a

quarter and call someone who cares’. Here, King is prepared to tackle a subject that was on a lot of

American minds (no matter their opinion): the Michael Jackson trial.

He relates the story of his caretaker driving him to the hospital and their conversation regarding

the trial. This had him thinking about the subject for some time afterward: ‘I think it’s sad that talk-

show hosts think it’s okay to make fun of this eccentric and obviously disturbed man; I think it’s

horrible, almost sick-making, that tabloids like the New York Post and the NewYork Daily News can

regularly vilify him as Wacko Jacko and (for pix with the umbrella, natch) Scary Poppins. Maybe

he’s a child molester and a jury will say so, but right now, sir or madam, he is as innocent as you are.

Right now, he’s just this weird guy who came by his kooks and kinks from being raised in a gotta-

sing, gotta-dance family where he was the principal breadwinner because he and Janet were, quite

clearly, the only ones who really could sing and dance. When your childhood is stolen from you, it’s

probably not all that unusual to try to steal a little back in your early middle age.’

King concludes with a statement that attempts to demonstrate what our celebrity-worshipping

society had come to: ‘What I’m asking is whether this is still a country where a peculiar person such

as Michael Jackson can get a fair shake and be considered innocent until proven guilty...or is this just

a 21st-century American barnyard where we all feel free to turn on the moonwalking rooster...and

peck it to death?’

The Pop of King: The Rating Game (March 5, 2004)

‘Back in ’69, when I was young and full of revolutionary fire, Jack Valenti and the MPAA’s

motion picture ratings system attracted my less-than-admiring attention. In a column written for the

University of Maine’s campus newspaper, I opined that they ought to throw both the system and

Valenti out. Now here I am, taking the whipping stick to the very same dog, and damned if the very

same guy isn’t still holding the chain,’ King writes. The campus newspaper reference is to his King’s

Garbage Truck column for January 8, 1970 (see our Early Columns—Garbage Truck chapter).

He even devoted a lengthy essay to the same subject, The Dreaded X in the December

1986/January 1987 issue of Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter; and talks about this issue (in

relation to his film project Maximum Overdrive) in A Postscript to ‘Overdrive’ in the February 1987

issue of Castle Rock (both covered in our Opinion—Venturing into Politics chapter).

He writes that the subject of the ratings system came to mind after he saw a trailer for the remake

of George Romero’s Dawn of the Dead. Because of the movie’s R rating, he says ‘veteran

moviegoers know exactly what they won’t see, because guys and gals like us know exactly where the

border between the Land of R and the Wilderness of NC-17 lies.’

King has mellowed only slightly on issues of censorship over the years (as the reader can see

from the numerous articles on the subject discussed in this book). Employing typical humor he says,

‘In spite of the hypocrisy and changing morality, I’ll no longer argue that the Rating Board should be

abolished—that was yesterday’s King. I do think that ratings take some of the damn fun out of it. Some

of the surprise. Except for big-budget PG-13s, that is. In that case, watch out for flying severed

heads.’

The Pop of King: The Passion of Alicia (March 19, 2004)

King opens, ‘I write about pop culture here, but I had no more intention of writing about The

Passion of the Christ than I had of writing about Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl booby prize. It takes me

weeks instead of days to get my mutterings into print, and that means every talking (and writing) head

in America will have had his or her say on this film and What It Means by the time this issue of EW

reaches your hands. So my idea was to write something a bit fresher, thank you very much.’ The Janet

Jackson reference refers to a ‘wardrobe malfunction’ that exposed her breast during live Super Bowl

entertainment.

He thought ‘ The Passion was a pretty terrific film, full of emotion and commitment. Is it uneven,

sometimes going way, way over the top? You better believe it. It’s easy to imagine Mel Gibson

deciding it would be worth $25 million just to show people the crucifixion The Way It Was, down to

the last broken bone, gaping wound, and buzzing fly. He’s delivering the very painful truth of a

particular form of execution. And his enthusiasm—or religious fervor—for the task takes him again

and again into a world of hyper-violence: Sam Peckinpah does Good Friday.’

King then comes to the main point of this column, which is a little girl he calls Alicia, and

relates the story of a theatre manager telling a woman that the film may not be appropriate for a child

of her age (8-10 years). The woman took her in anyway and the little girl was obviously horrified by

the scenes of violence in the film, as she was probably too young to be able to put them into context.

This makes King extremely uncomfortable. This column is important, as it ties into the issues of

violence in film and on television and their effect on children that King discusses in other non-fiction

articles.

The Pop of King: Enquiring Minds...(April 9, 2004)

In this column King discusses the National Enquirer tabloid ‘newspaper’ and why Americans

enjoy it: ‘All right, show of hands—who out there buys the National Enquirer, or at least noodges

through it while waiting in line at the supermarket checkout? Come on now, get ‘em up, Uncle Stevie

can see you through his magic word processor and knows if you’re holding back. Besides, I do it, and

when I buy it, I read it just as soon as I finish helping my wife put the groceries away. If I can confess,

you can too. So get those hands up. You too, Lisa and Owen [a reference to two EW staff members—

Lisa Schwarzbaum and Owen Gleiberman] I’m watching you.’

King asks, ‘What in the hell makes the Enquirer so damned addictive? What’s the secret of its

success? ... I can tell you there’s not just one secret but at least four.’ He outlines these ‘secrets’:

‘THE CELEBRITY IS YOUR NEIGHBOR!; THE CELEBRITY IS NAUGHTY!; RICH PEOPLE

ALWAYS GET IN TROUBLE!’; and ‘FAMOUS PEOPLE GET TO DIE IN PUBLIC!’

He closes, ‘Hey, maybe it’s just human nature. Human curiosity. Or a taste for fresh meat. Maybe

you readers have an idea. If so, give it up. Enquiring minds want to know.’ Of course, “Enquiring

minds want to know” is the National Enquirer’s slogan, hence the closing line and the column’s

subtitle.

The Pop of King: Head-Bangor’s Ball (April 30, 2004)

‘I was going to begin this by blasting American Idol, but after sitting for nearly 20 minutes in

front of a computer screen with nothing on it but a blinking cursor, I’ve decided to admit defeat’. King

says he knows American pop has never been very exciting, although one exception was radio—in

fact, he’s always had a love/hate affair with this medium (see Between Rock and a Soft Place in our

Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television chapter).

The growing trend of satellite radio was what saved King’s love for the medium: ‘There’s a

happy ending to this story. Someone gave me an XM satellite radio. As a local radio station owner

(Bangor, Maine), I suppose I should hate satellite radio, but with over a hundred channels and

commercial-free multiformat capability, it’s almost certainly the future of radio (assuming radio has

one, which is open to question). After maybe 12 years of listening to the radio less and less, I find

myself suddenly listening to it all the time again.’

He lists some of the artists and albums he has come to love and explains why. The albums are:

Wheels of Fortune by the Flatlanders; Wishbones by Slaid Cleaves; Tangled in the Pines by BR549;

Your Country by Graham Parker; and Live in Aught-Three by James McMurtry. King finishes by

saying none of this type of music would ever be on a show like American Idol, and that this is

‘probably a good thing’ because ‘Simon’s head would explode.’ This last refers to the famously

grumpy American Idol judge, Simon Cowell.

The Pop of King: It’s Alive! It’s Alive! (May 21, 2004)

Beginning this column King claims there hasn’t been any good news in years and no good food

either, because ‘everyone is watching their calories’. As far as television and movies go, everything

is out to lunch for the time being. Books, on the other hand, are a different story: ‘Usually once each

spring and fall—when the publishers issue their major titles for the year—some ill-tempered dodo

whose familiarity with American fiction ends with Sherwood Anderson will proclaim the novel

dead, nothing but a time sink for adults stuck in airport lounges between planes or for kids at camp

with lightning-bolt scars decaled on their foreheads. Don’t you believe it. The Great American Novel

is livelier than ever, and here are three that prove it; just pick the one(s) that fit your hammock.’

The three are: The Stones of Summer by Dow Mossman; The Shadow of the Wind by Carlos

Ruiz Zafon; and The Narrows, by Michael Connelly. He closes, ‘So, with books like these, who

needs good news, or even good TV?’

King is a big fan of Connelly’s work and gives The Narrows ample praise, saying ‘the story is

told in slightly dislocated fashion—first-person-narrative chapters from the Bosch point of view

interwoven with third-person chapters from the point of view of FBI agent Rachel Walling—but the

clarity of Connelly’s writing and the steadily building pace of his narrative more than compensate for

the slightly uncomfortable feel of that back-and-forth. This is scarifying in a big way—a Thomas

Harris kind of scary, which is high praise indeed.’ The Narrows is a sequel to Connelly’s The Poet

for which King contributed an introduction to certain editions (see the Introducing the Work of

Others chapter).

The Pop of King: Lines to Live By (June 11, 2004)

In this piece King relates attending a film society meeting, where a gentleman told him that the

screenwriter ‘has become almost dispensable, and there are no more great cinema lines.’ A longtime

fan of movies, both old and new, King disagrees: ‘I have a theory that Americans fall into two

groups: those who are passionate about movies and those who aren’t. Those who are live in families

that develop a whole stock of great lines, a kind of inner slanguage that helps to trace a family’s

growth just as accurately (and sometimes just as poignantly) as old videotapes or Kodaks in a

scrapbook. My own kids are now grown up, but they’re still passionate about the movies, and when I

asked them for some of their favorite lines from childhood, they were more than happy to comply.’

‘So here come some lines that track the history of my family. I’m curious to know if any of these

resonate with you—if they call up the sort of memories we more ordinarily associate with

photographs or pop music. If they do, would you write and say so? And if these aren’t the ones that do

the trick for you, which ones do? Please let me know.’ This, of course, led to an influx of mail to

Entertainment Weekly (covered in King’s Now Hear This—see our Opinion—Radio, Music, Film

and Television chapter).

King finishes the article with quotes from the following movies: Jaws; The Godfather, Part II ;

E.T. ; Deliverance; Sling Blade; Finding Forrester; Die Hard; Road to Perdition; Ghostbusters; Reservoir Dogs; Unforgiven; Gladiator; and Aliens.

The Pop of King: A Kingdom That Didn’t Come (July 9, 2004)

King co-wrote Kingdom Hospital, a TV miniseries based on Lars von Trier’s Danish

miniseries, The Kingdom. One US ABC-TV press release described Kingdom Hospital as a

‘shocking and frightening tale of a haunted hospital that was built over an ancient graveyard. The

doctors have put all their faith into science and technology, and are dismissive of any suggestion of

mysticism or unseen powers ... at their own peril.’ Unfortunately, the mini-series was a failure—as

good as it was, the viewers just did not tune in after the first few episodes!

This column is important, as it gives King’s views on why Kingdom Hospital failed to rate. He

says he does not want to blame the ABC network for the failure of the show: ‘that would be an easy

answer—ABC has fallen on hard times—but it won’t wash.’ King believes the reason for the show’s

decline was that he and the network ‘were asking viewers to give us a week or two, maybe three, and

that was more time than most were willing to.’ (For a similar situation see How I Created Golden

Years...and Spooked Dozens of TV Executives in our Miscellany chapter).

After explaining the possible reasons behind Kingdom Hospital’s failure, King seems resigned:

‘Am I putting TV viewers down, accusing them of being dumb? I am not. You come home tired, you

want something that’s fun and familiar? That’s fine. It doesn’t preclude the thrill of discovering

something new—just look at the success of 24. All I’m saying is that inertia is a tough barrier to crash

through, and Kingdom Hospital wasn’t capable of doing it. Those last four episodes sure are fine,

though—for me, they pay off like a jackpot in Vegas. I only wish I could have brought a larger

audience along to collect it.’

King commented on the same subject in Kingdom Come, a two-page essay in the liner notes for

the DVD box set of Kingdom Hospital released in October 2004 (see our Miscellany chapter).

The Pop of King: The Four-Star Follies (August 20/27, 2004)

‘I love the movies. Let’s get that up front. Have since I was a kid. And I’m from an

unsophisticated school of thought that believes a movie (always a movie and never a film, even if it

comes with subtitles) should be fun before it’s anything else: an ice cream cone for the brain. Because

of this I especially like the summer season, when the studios shoot off so many of their big fireworks.

And usually I have fun, because it doesn’t take a lot to please me. I mostly go to be entertained, not to

learn the meaning of life’, King opens this column, as if those of us who follow his work closely

didn’t already know that (of course, many EW readers may have thought King was nothing but a

writer!)

King has never been an elitist and states he sneers at ‘people who sneer at entertainment for

entertainment’s sake.’ However: ‘There’s been a steady critical gradeflation—what could even be

called four-star fever—that makes me uncomfortable when I page through the entertainment section of

The New York Times . Here ads for major studio movies now routinely appear trailing kite tails of

critical superlatives’, he complains.

The column closes with summer blockbusters compared to one of King’s favorite films, Sam

Raimi’s The Evil Dead: ‘When you looked at Evil Dead, you knew you were looking at low-budget.

When you look at Spider-Man 2, you know you’re looking not just at high-budget but at top-end

Hollywood Humvee budget. Nothing wrong with that, either. But Evil Dead had a raw and horrifying

beauty that has stayed with me for 23 years, and in my mind that makes it a true four-star movie.

Spider-Man 2? Very cool, but I doubt if I’ll be able to remember many of the details by the time next

June rolls around with a new load of summer pix. But that’s okay, because—like Troy; Dodgeball; I,

Robot; and The Day After Tomorrow—it’s a pretty good movie’.

The Pop of King: Paint It Black (September 17, 2004)

This column, about celebrity deaths, opens: ‘I’m writing this on the 27th anniversary of Elvis

Presley’s death, and I can still remember what a shock it was to walk into the house and hear he had

left the building for good.’ King continues, commenting on the deaths of comedian John Belushi and

musicians Warren Zevon, George Harrison and Rick James.

He says he knows everyone has an idea of what happens to us when we die, ‘but even the most

cynical among us probably likes to think that there might be something afterward; something to go on

to’; and claims that celebrities, such as those mentioned, will live on in people’s hearts and minds

forever because of their work and talent.

The piece closes: ‘For Elvis there’s an afterlife of a hundred songs, and people will be listening

to them long after we’re gone. Folks born years after he died will make a pilgrimage to Memphis to

put flowers on his grave, and that’s not a bad thing. It doesn’t make me stop wishing the big stupe had

laid off the pills and fried banana sandwiches, but no—memory and pilgrimage are how we honor

those who have brightened our lives and made us happy, and that’s not a bad thing at all.’

The Pop of King: Shut Up ’n Play Yer Guitar (October 8, 2004)

King begins this column talking about the infamous anti-George W. Bush comment Dixie Chicks

singer Natalie Maines made in 2003. At the time this article was written the Dixie Chicks were

joining Bruce Springsteen, Pearl Jam, Dave Matthews Band, Jackson Browne and John Mellencamp

on a ‘Vote for Change’ tour of the ‘swing states’ 138 before the US Presidential election a few weeks

later.

The American public was torn on the issue of the Iraq war, and the tour drew strong criticism

from some. ‘As America becomes ever more entertainment-oriented (witness the splendid success of

this very magazine, if you doubt), the talking heads who hang out on the news channels have become

ever more wary of actors, writers, and rockers who want to get involved in the political process.

These talk-for-their-supper specialists (as opposed to those who only sing for theirs) often disparage

entertainers as dilettantes who only dabble in politics every four years, while at the same time

ignoring guys like Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger, who have used their celebrity and

relaxed, camera-friendly personae to attain high public office’, King opines.

The subtitle of this column reflects the negative “shut up ’n play yer guitar” press accorded the

Vote for Change tour by significant players in the media. Once again, King uses his non-fiction to

inform readers of his opinion on a subject more important than pop culture: ‘I also think the

politicians, George W. Bush in particular, who happen to be on the wrong end of this guitar attack

may have reason to be worried. Music is powerful. Music can change hearts. And hearts can change

minds’, he writes. President Bush narrowly defeated Senator John Kerry in the election.

The Pop of King: Pet Peeves of 2004 (October 29, 2004)

Beginning this column King writes, ‘Pop culture is full of pleasures, but it also has its share of

annoyances; for every pretty, talented Elisha Cuthbert there is a Paris Hilton (and her little dog, too).

We soldier on bravely in spite of this, but sometimes it helps to unbutton that stiff upper lip and

verbalize. In that spirit, I offer the First Annual Pet Peeves Column in the selfless hope that by

exposing my own annoyances (in all their triviality), I may encourage you to speak of your own and

thus lighten your psychic load.’

He proceeds to list the things that ticked him off in 2004 and also rates each peeve, from mild to

severe headache level. The list: ‘I’m George W. Bush/John Kerry and I approved this message’

(referring to presidential campaign ads); Britney Spears; ‘TV talking heads who wanted Martha

Stewart to do hard time’; the song Many Men (Wish Death) by 50 Cent; high-concept TV ads; Dr.

Phil; ‘The Donald’ (referring to Donald Trump); classic-rock FM stations (as King readers know,

this isn’t just a 2004 rant); and commercials airing before theatrical movies.

The Pop of King: A Dozen Thanks (November 19, 2004)

‘The last time I monopolized this space at the back of the magazine, I wrote about pet peeves and

petty annoyances, but now it’s the Thanksgiving season, and time to turn the flip side’, King opens and

goes on to list twelve things he is thankful for, with some supporting detail for each.

They are: writer Donald E. Westlake; Jack Ketchum (author of The Girl Next Door, for which

King wrote an introduction)139; the novel Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell by Susanna Clarke; Laura

Lippman’s novel Every Secret Thing; two albums (Tom Waits’ Real Gone and The Inmates’ Fast

Forward); the music downloading service/program iTunes; ABC’s television show Lost; the new

season of FOX’s 24 beginning in January; the television soap opera All My Children (no, he is not

kidding); the DVD release of the Dawn of the Dead remake; the Filthy Critic review web site; and

last, but not least, the Boston Red Sox, who finally won the World Series that year!140

The Pop of King: 2004: The Year in Music (December 10, 2004)

King opens, ‘Compiling a year-end “best-of” list is a tradition for most critics, but it has also

become something of a tradition to adopt a tone of lofty, humorous disdain while offering them (I

think of this style as New York Times Modern). “What a very silly thing to be doing,” the critic seems

to be saying, “but if you want to waste your time—here’s my list.” You won’t find that attitude here. I

love end-of-the-year lists (although I have a tendency to avoid the ill-tempered 10 Worst bitchfests). I

love them so much in fact that it’s going to take me three whole columns to elucidate my own

favorites.’

He begins with individual music tracks, including the Eminem songs Mosh and Just Lose It; and

also mentions Suds in the Bucket by Sara Evans; Save a Horse (Ride a Cowboy) by Big & Rich;

Earthbound by Rodney Crowell; I Believe in a Thing Called Love by The Darkness; and John

Sinclair from the reissue of John Lennon’s Acoustic album.

Finally, the best six albums of the year ‘with no apologies (and no fake boredom)’: Mojo Box by

Southern Culture on the Skids; Tonight Alright by Spiderbait; Live in Aught-Three by James

McMurtry and the Heartless Bastards; The Revolution Starts...Now by Steve Earle; Ollabelle by

Ollabelle; and American Idiot by Green Day.

This piece is listed as Ear Candy on the Entertainment Weekly web site.

The Pop of King: 2004: The Year in Books (December 17, 2004)

This column begins: ‘Every family has its holiday rituals. One of the best-loved in mine is the

annual New Year’s Day lists. We sit around the kitchen table with cans of soda and slices of pizza,

announce our picks for the 10 best books we read and the 10 best movies we saw in the past year,

then defend our choices while other family members scoff (said scoffing sometimes accompanied by

loud throwing-up noises). The films are always from the year itself, but when it comes to the books,

the only rule is that they must have been read between Jan. 1 and Dec. 31. That’s the rule I’ve

followed here. And here’s a bonus: With the exception of A Fan’s Notes , none of these books were

finalists for a National Book Award, so you may actually have already heard of a couple. Isn’t that a

treat?’

The top ten books of this year: Double Play by Robert B. Parker; Eventide by Kent Haruf;

Prince of Thieves by Chuck Hogan; The Punch:One Night, Two Lives, and the Fight That Changed

Basketball Forever by John Feinstein; Double Vision by Pat Barker; Absolute Friends by John le

Carré; Life of Pi by Yann Martel; A Fan’s Notes by Frederick Exley; Vernon God Little by DBC

Pierre; and The Plot Against America by Philip Roth.

The Pop of King: 2004: The Year in Movies (December 24, 2004)

King opens: ‘I love the movies. At my local theater they know me at the box office, at the snack

bar, where my order rarely varies (popcorn and a medium soft drink, half Pepsi and half Diet Pepsi),

and at the entrance to the cinemas, where the ticket taker in the wheelchair always asks after the wife

and kids. If any of this strikes you as juvenile, all I can say is let’s hear it for arrested development. I

love living those other lives for a while; I love those bright stories played out in the dark. And

although my mental reach is longer than it was when I was 16, what I ask of the movies hasn’t

changed much: Entertain me for a while. Touch my emotions without insulting my intelligence. I saw

more than 60 movies in 2004, and many entertained me hugely. I’ve been disappointed by a sense of

creative exhaustion in this year’s holiday offerings—the only two I look forward to are the remake of

The Flight of the Phoenix and Kevin Spacey in Beyond the Sea—but there were enough good ones in

the months before Thanksgiving to make up the difference. Here’s my list of 2004’s best. It comes

with the usual lack of apologies, but one small caveat: For every flick that made this list, there were

two ( Super Size Me and Friday Night Lights, for instance) that almost made it. And to me, that makes

it a really good year at the movies.’

King’s ten favorite movies of the year were: Red Lights, The Bourne Supremacy, Collateral,

The Incredibles, Shrek 2, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Fahrenheit 9/11 , The

Manchurian Candidate, Dawn of the Dead (the re-make) and Maria Full of Grace.

This piece is listed as Personal Best on the Entertainment Weekly web site.

The Pop of King: Crying Wolfe (January 21, 2005)

‘Nobody wanted to like Tom Wolfe’s new novel, I Am Charlotte Simmons, more than I, and no

one put less stock in the largely negative reviews the book generated. There’s a reason for that’, King

writes. Many critics and readers alike indeed eagerly anticipated Wolfe’s latest. The description of

the novel from amazon.com reads: ‘In I Am Charlotte Simmons, Tom Wolfe masterfully chronicles

college sports, fraternities, keggers, coeds, and sex—all through the eyes of the titular Simmons, a

bright and beautiful freshman at the fictional Dupont University.’

Closing his column, King says: ‘I wanted this to be one of those wild hog-stomping books; for a

variety of reasons...it isn’t. Even Wolfe’s usually raucous language grows tiresome and eventually

begins to grate—by page 600 or so, I felt a little as if I were listening to the longest Donna Summer

disco tune ever recorded. Yet this immense (and immensely troubling) novel is driven by two things

most American novels lack: ideas and ambition. Some of the ideas on view in Charlotte Simmons

may provoke discussions deep into the night (the book seems to be a very hot item on many college

campuses). Good—that’s what social fiction’s for. I only wish this novel’s high ambition had not

been so undone by its wooden characters, who move and speak but never really seem to breathe.’

The Pop of King: The 14 Lessons of 24 (February 24, 2005)

King writes: ‘It’s always annoying to be bumped by the front-of-the-book boys and girls (this

column was slated to go last week, but then News & Notes141 ran Has 24 Gone Too Far? ), but the

additional time has given me a chance to refine these 14 Lessons. Hell, even back-of-the-book guys

understand that when it comes to current events, the clock is always...but that’s Lesson 1.’

He lists the lessons of 24, a very popular US television series, with a short description for each:

The Clock Is Always Ticking; There Are Enemies Everywhere; We Fight Back With American

Technology; The Technology Always Screws Up; The Management Ain’t That Great Either; The

More Chloe Pouts, the Better; Never Trust the President’s Wife; Never Trust Smart African-

American Women in General; The President’s Advisers Are Monsters of Expediency; On 24, Suicide

Is Always an Option; For 24 Hours, the Rule of Law Is Suspended; In the Course of the Season, One

Good Guy Will Get Killed; In the Course of the Season, One Good Guy Will Turn Out to Be a Bad

Guy; and For One Day a Year, Jack Bauer Will Not Need to Go to the Bathroom for 24 Hours.

Entertaining and pointed, this column is deserving of reprint.

The Pop of King: The Worst Ads on TV (March 4, 2005)

This piece deals with the ads for prescription drugs that have become all too prevalent on

American television. King ties this relatively new fad in with his deep knowledge of American

popular culture: ‘Who can forget the game little tennis player in the Celebrex ads? Or the happy

Celebrex cartoon couple, bundled up and making angels in the snow? And you had to get behind the

plucky guitarist in the TV ads who vowed, “I can play the long version.” The Celebrex slogan was “I

will not give in!” What could be more American? Ironically, the problems of Vioxx and Celebrex

were reported extensively on the same network news programs that have become the No. 1 sales

platforms for the 21st century’s medicine-show pitch-daddies...Just as CMT would be the

demographically logical place to market thalidomide, CBS, ABC, NBC, and Fox newscasts are great

places to sell prescription pain relievers and “sleep aids” (street name: downers), because much of

their audience is overweight, overstressed, and over 50. They ache, they lie awake, and they

sometimes hobble to the bathroom in the morning. When someone tells them a pill will magically

make it all better, they want to believe. Americans love a quick fix, and our love affair with snake-oil

salesmen probably stretches clear back to the Pilgrims. And when the man says, “Daddy fix, Daddy

make it all better”… man, we love that. We love it.’

King goes on to mention recent news regarding COX-2 inhibitors used in certain prescription

medications. It was reported in November of 2004 that Vioxx might have caused up to 139,000 heart

attacks and 55,000 deaths. So, he closes, ‘Want a moral? Try this: If COX-2 inhibitors are dangerous

enough to warrant black-box warnings or even outright prohibition, maybe we should have been

worrying a little more about prescription-drug ads on TV all along and a little less about Janet

Jackson’s boob...which, as far as I know, didn’t kill anyone.’

As one can see, this column is quite a departure from King’s usual focus on pop culture in EW,

but not from the ‘socially conscious’ King opinions central to his non-fiction all the way back to his

days on the University of Maine campus.

The Pop of King: No Stars, Sorry (March 25, 2005)

‘Some bad habits are hard to break. Making stupid cell phone calls while driving on the

turnpike. Snack hunting in the fridge after 10 p.m. Scanning USA Today ’s Life section for the

inevitable postmortem on how last night’s American Idol contestants did. And then there’s believing

in movie stars. The Hollywood elite were less than charmed when Chris Rock took after this myth in

his Academy Awards monologue—the most amusing result was Sean Penn’s impassioned defense of

Jude Law—but I thought Rock was right on. At last someone pointed out the obvious: The emperor is

strutting around in his birthday suit’, King argues in opening this column. Once again we find King

negatively commenting on the way Hollywood (or at least Hollywood celebrities) conduct business.

Later, he evokes the column’s sub-title and gives specific examples to back his argument:

‘Sorry, no stars. The myth of star power may seem pretty, but the statistics prove it is nothing but a

lie. For every high-budget, starring-vehicle flop you can name—a King Arthur with Clive Owen or

an Alexander with Colin Farrell—there’s a string of low-budget, no-star flicks that found multiplex

success in spite of studio indifference. They had the only thing that audiences really care about: story.

I’m thinking of Cary Elwes in Saw; Sanaa Lathan in AVP: Alien vs. Predator ; Jon Heder in Napoleon

Dynamite; Because of Winn-Dixie, with Anna Sophia Robb; and, of course, Kimberly Elise in Diary

of a Mad Black Woman . In Hollywood, studio execs are even now sitting around asking themselves,

“Why didn’t we do that?” The answer, of course, is because Halle Berry was too busy doing art films

like Catwoman.’ King, as ever, is consistent about the one thing he finds vital to good books and

movies— story.

The Pop of King: My Fever Pitch Obsession (April 8, 2005)

It seems most everyone knows of King’s obsession with the Boston Red Sox142. My Fever Pitch

Obsession turns out to be the perfect movie for King: ‘Like Shakespearean tragedy, the course of

romantic comedy is immutable: In Act 1, the boy gets the girl; in Act 2, he loses her; in Act 3, he gets

her back. A good story, but it’s a little long in the tooth. At this point it better have something else

going for it. What the Farrelly Brothers’ sweetly amusing Fever Pitch offers is the familiarity of the

manic sports-obsessive. You’ve probably had one sitting next to you on the couch from time to time,

drinking a gentlemanly beer if the big game is going his way, eating the bottle from the neck down if

it’s not. Or staring back at you (out of bloodshot eyes) from the bathroom mirror on a workday

morning after you stayed up to watch a West Coast game that ended around 2 a.m. Or, if you happen to

be married to one, you’ve probably heard him bellowing like a moose in rut from the living room

while you hid out in the bedroom, trying to talk about The Secret Life of Bees to your sister in St.

Paul. You don’t have to be a Red Sox fan to recognize the manic-obsessive subtext (which isn’t very

sub) in Fever Pitch, but it certainly helps.’

Of course, even baseball fans in America who don’t read King know the author is frequently

shown on television attending games, mostly at the Red Sox’s home ground, Fenway Park. King

closes with changes made to the film after the Red Sox’s winning season: ‘The filmmakers had to

rewrite their ending (happily, without cutting my cameo), but no one in New England is going to mind.

In fact, they’ll probably hear us cheering in St. Louis when the lights go down at the start of Fever

Pitch and the Standells crank up “Dirty Water.” That’s the one that goes “Boston, you’re my home.”

Because up here, the Red Sox are karma, dharma, and obsession. Sox first, while sex and breathing

will take care of themselves? Sounds like a plan.’

The Pop of King: Prime Downloads (April 29 - May 6, 2005)

Music has always been one of King’s passions, as one can tell from the many references in his

fiction, and the amount of non-fiction he’s written that deals with the subject. ‘The first thing I used to

turn to in this magazine was the movie reviews. No more. Since my youngest son showed me how to

burn CDs and my daughter-in-law taught me how to use my computer to get music online (to a geezer

like me that’s a beautiful thing, like sucking songs through a magic electronic straw), I immediately

hunt for the “Download This” box in the Music section of each new EW. I don’t like everything, but

that’s okay; many music download services offer you a little taste—that spoon, that spoon, that

spoonful—so you can try before you buy’, is the opening of this column.

He proceeds to list some tracks he’s downloaded and a short note for each. The tracks on his

‘compilation’ are: Dance With Me by Michael McDermott143; California Stars by Billy Bragg & Wilco; To Be Young (Is to Be Sad, Is to Be High) by Ryan Adams; City of the Damned by the Gothic

Archies; Castanets by Alejandro Escovedo; Our Love by Rhett Miller; Tell Mama by Savoy Brown;

Diamonds and Rust by Judas Priest; Blue on Black by Kenny Wayne Shepherd; Manifesto No. 1 by

Shooter Jennings; What I Got by Sublime; Don’t Leave Me This Way by Thelma Houston; We Can’t

Make It Here by James McMurtry and the Heartless Bastards; and Yeah (Pretentious Mix) by LCD

Soundsystem.

The column ends, ‘That’s 63 minutes of total bliss that will fit easily on most blank CDs. Just

remember who gets the credit when you play it for your friends, and also remember your Uncle

Stevie’s motto: It all sounds better when you turn it up to 11.’

The Pop of King: My Summer Hit List (June 3, 2005)

Here, King reminds readers he’d ‘rashly promised to pick the big box office winners and losers

of the 2005 summer season.’ Some time after, our columnist realized he needed some help in this task

and turned to a good friend for help: ‘Shane Leonard grew up going to the movies with my kids and

still never misses a major release or a minor chopsocky flick. In the old days he was known in the

neighborhood as The Longhair. Well, you know how that usually turns out—he finally had to visit one

of the local head-choppers in order to get a damn job—but to me Shane will always be The Longhair,

Peerless Guru of Movie Success, and I went to him like Luke Skywalker goes to Yoda.’

King’s predictions are presented with supporting notes. The projected winners are: Star Wars

III; War of the Worlds ; Charlie and the Chocolate Factory; Batman Begins; Fantastic Four; The

Longest Yard ; Must Love Dogs; and Land of the Dead. Other ‘projected winners: Deuce Bigalow:

European Gigolo (“Same ho, new lo”), and Dark Water (more Ring-style PG-13 horror for the

junior-high/Harry Potterset).’

The column ends in King’s typical humorous style: ‘Those are our picks; write ‘em down. If we

hit it out of the park, someone owes us a chicken dinner. Of course, it’s faintly possible that we might

screw up. In that case, we’ll be eating the bird associated with Thanksgiving. Side by side with

summer’s big-budget failures.’

The Pop of King: Extras Bite (June 17, 2005)

‘Like the SUV your uncle Fred bought before gas prices went up, DVDs are loaded with extras.

Unlike your uncle’s SUV, which came with air-conditioning, onboard navigation, and power

everything, you get the DVD extras whether you want them or not, and they’re usually dumber than

mud. I suspected this for years; a month reviewing recent discs transformed my suspicion into

certainty. I don’t know what the Big One is, but I am sure that DVD extras are one of the things that

bite it’, King comes out swinging in this column, which gained some media attention at the time. He

lists some DVDs that had good extra features ( Saw; The Incredibles) and others that weren’t so good

( The Day After Tomorrow).

Later, he expresses his frustration with these extras: ‘You can tell me I don’t have to watch the

extras if I don’t want to, and besides, they’re free. Not always true. There is, for instance, the

“Suicide Ending” of First Blood, a brief clip piggybacked on a three-disc Rambo collection that

retails for about 35 bucks. And don’t forget the so-called “Special Edition” packages, buoyed by

extras designed to, as far as I can tell, completely muddle your experience of the movie—for the right

price, of course. Sometimes there’s a newly inserted “lost” scene, which was probably lost for good

reason. Other times you get new special effects dumped into old movies—and who cares, really, if

they don’t quite match the old special effects?’

The Pop of King: Long Live the Dead (July 8, 2005)

In the summer of 2005, the fourth film in George A. Romero’s Dead quartet was released and

King was excited to review it: ‘How long has George Romero been fashioning his living dead epic,

which concludes this summer with the long-awaited (if you like zombies, that is; fans of the Olsen

twins have probably not been counting the days) Land of the Dead? Well, let’s put it this way: Night

of the Living Dead—maybe the most important horror flick of the last 50 years —showed up in

theaters nine years before George Lucas introduced the world to Luke Skywalker.’

King has long been a fan of Romero’s work144, has written non-fiction both exclusively about or

mentioning the films, and even wrote the liner notes for the laserdisc/DVD editions of Night of the

Living Dead (see Untitled (1994; 2002) in our Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television

chapter). He closes with more praise: ‘What I admire most is that this phase of the series is ending

almost 40 years later with Romero’s original creative vision intact. In each succeeding film the arena

is larger, but the grim bottom line is the same: not dog-eat-dog, but man-eat-man. Jedi Knights

notwithstanding, this may be the only true other world you’ll have an opportunity to visit between

now and Labor Day. The zombies are coming, and in the world of George Romero, there is no wise

old Yoda to set things right.’

The Pop of King: My Manifesto (July 29, 2005)

One of the main things King does with his non-fiction, as we have said, is comment on American

culture, and his study of the subject is never more focused than in these Pop of King columns. King

begins this column writing about The Pop of King itself and why he does what he does: ‘This column

was written two days after the Fourth of July—if it seems a little sentimental put it down to that. I’ve

been dwelling on the back page of EW for two years now, and a surprising number of people still ask

me why I do it when I have a perfectly adequate day job (there were times when I wondered if there

would be more novels for me after the Dark Tower books—seems there are). The reason is simple:

The American popular culture is my culture, and I don’t just live in it; I love it madly, and writing

about it seems as natural—and as necessary—as breathing’. Obviously, the public confirmation that

King would continue to write novels makes this an important column, although insiders were well

aware his ‘retirement’ after the Dark Tower was most unlikely.

King writes, ‘It’s my culture and I love it dearly—I have, I think, ever since the age of 8, in a

Connecticut movie theater, when I first heard Clark Gable tell Vivien Leigh, “Frankly, my dear, I

don’t give a damn.” There are plenty of people who see this beautiful junk-shop carnival as lowbrow,

thoughtless, ruinous, even vicious (I’m thinking of folks like Harold Bloom, the literary critic who

had a cow when the National Book Foundation gave me an award for, ahem, Distinguished

Contribution to American Letters). They are not, as a rule, the ones who shoot off fireworks on the

Fourth of July. Or subscribe to Entertainment Weekly, for that matter. Many are folks who believe art

should be work and see entertainment as subversive.’

This column was titled Poppin’ Fresh on the Entertainment Weekly web site and is deserving

of reprint elsewhere.

The Pop of King: Kick-Back Books (August 12, 2005)

King, who loves entertainment for its own sake, is the perfect person to serve up a summer

reading list. He begins in his normal personable style: ‘Oh God, it’s August. Ads for school supplies

have started showing up in Staples. In the pharmacies, they’re offering big discounts on sunscreen, not

to mention those crappy plastic toys that always get left behind at the beach when Mom and Dad pack

up the little ones and drive back to Greater Suburbia. And once more your promise to yourself that

this summer you really would kick back and do some reading went unfulfilled. You got to the new

Harry Potter... but everybody got to Harry. Do not fear, little Nell (or Nelson); it’s your Uncle Stevie

to the rescue. Below is my Great Late-Summer Reading List, every book guaranteed to please the

mind, eye, and heart. And before you go moaning that summer’s practically over, let me whisper a

secret in your ear: Summer doesn’t really end until Sept. 22, so you’ve got plenty of time to check

these out on the porch with a glass of iced tea nearby (hammock optional).’

He lists seven books with a short description of each: Battle Royale by Koushun Takami; No

Country for Old Men by Cormac McCarthy; Lost in the Forest by Sue Miller; The Breakdown Lane

by Jacquelyn Mitchard; Hello, Darkness by Sandra Brown; Killing Floor by Lee Child; and Mystery,

So Long by Stephen Dobyns145.

The Pop of King: Lost’s Soul (September 9, 2005)

Note: This special guest piece is by Jamie Zeiters.

This column contains King’s musings on the television show Lost, the ‘cash cow’ launched by

the ABC network in 2004. King begins by praising the drama and comparing it to hit shows of a

similar genre: ‘Ah Lost. There’s never been anything like it on TV for capturing the imagination,

except for The Twilight Zone and The X-Files...Lost projects a sense of genuine awe and mystery,

making it most unusual in a medium more known for boredom and predictability.’

Next, King discusses a problem the Lost writers could eventually face: ‘… the Prime Network

Directive: Thou Shalt Not Kill the Cash Cow.’ In other words, if a television network has a million

dollar show, it will continue to milk it sometimes beyond its worth, possibly continuing the show long

after the story should have ended. King writes, ‘ X-Files blundered off into a swamp of black oil, and

in that swamp it died...If J.J. Abrams, Damon Lindelof, and their band of co-conspirators allow

something similar to happen to Lost, I’m going to be even more pissed, because this show is better.

Memo to Abrams and staff writers: Your responsibilities include knowing when to write The End.’

As a storyteller himself, King knows that one quality of a good writer is to know when the story

should end. The hardest part, he writes, ‘… will be telling ABC that Lost is going to conclude with

season 3 or season 4, while the audience is still crazy about the show.’

King pleads with the writers to make the right decision: ‘End it any way you want, but when it’s

time for closure, provide it.’ He adds, ‘When a meal is perfectly cooked, it’s time to take it out of the

oven. And when a story is told, it’s time to fade to black.’

The Pop of King: My So-Called Admirer (September 30, 2005)

King says a local bookstore clerk told him Bret Easton Ellis (author of American Psycho) had a

new novel out that was very similar in style to King’s. King did some research on the Internet and

was surprised to find this was indeed true. ‘Bret Easton Ellis is calling Lunar Park a Stephen King

homage, and claims to have read Salem’s Lot at least a dozen times as a kid ... or so says Elizabeth

Hand in The Washington Post , but she also calls the demonic toy in Lunar Park a Yerby (it’s

actually a Terby, and yes, it matters). If Ellis really did read Salem’s Lot a dozen times as a kid, the

reasons for the past drug use he’s spoken of become much clearer to me’, he says.

King ends this column giving his own views on the matter and commenting on the book itself:

‘Whether or not Bret Easton Ellis is “doing” Stephen King at the beginning of Lunar Park (little

parenthetical expressions and all) doesn’t matter, because by the end, all the masks, imitations, and

pharmacological shopping lists have been set aside. Even in American Psycho, that boringly

bloodthirsty book, it was clear to me that Ellis was a fine storyteller. It’s this facet of his writing that

has most appealed to readers and been most overlooked by critics. It seems at times to have appalled

Ellis himself (one could almost believe it’s the Terby hidden inside his laptop, flexing its claws). I

got a clear sense of Lunar Park having started almost as a joke—perhaps a rather desperate one, part

apology for American Psycho—and having finished as what is close to a credo. That is the true magic

of novels, which often possess more strength (and reality) than their creators suppose: They see into

our secret hearts.’

The Pop of King: The Fright Stuff (October 28, 2005)

One would think a guy like King would love Halloween. As that horrifying time of year

approaches, the author uses his column space to make some relevant viewing and listening

suggestions. ‘Gosh. Zowie. It’s almost Halloween again. Somebody peel me off the ceiling’, he

writes.

As we know, King likes to write about his musical interests and this column is no exception.

Under a section titled ‘Putrid Pop’, he says, ‘There’s no shortage of grim pop music, but let us push

aside such chestnuts as “(Don’t Fear) the Reaper” and “Thriller” in favor of the real sicko stuff.

There’s “Hey Man, Nice Shot” by Filter (inspired by a politician’s tasteful decision to commit

suicide on live television), “Days of Graduation” by Drive-By Truckers (a car-wreck tune that makes

“Last Kiss” seem like Mother Goose), the Pine Valley Cosmonauts’ version of “Gary Gilmore’s

Eyes” (a transplant operation goes horribly wrong), and my favorite (and a brief top 20 hit in the

‘70s), “Timothy,” the Buoys’ rock ode to cannibalism’. Under the ‘Terror Television’ section he

mentions the television shows Invasion and Lost. There is also a section called ‘Dreadful DVDs’,

where King recommends The Changeling (an older film), or the Japanese import Infection (a newer

one). Finally, under ‘Malevolent Movies,’ he mentions the remake of The Fog, Saw II, Flightplan

and A History of Violence.

In closing, King asks readers to remember others in the wake of recent tragedies: ‘One other

suggestion while I’m at it. Mother Nature played two of the biggest tricks of all this year, and she

didn’t wait until Halloween. One was called Katrina, the other Rita. People have been incredibly

generous with cash donations in the wake of these storms, but one thing the Red Cross never gets

enough of is—heh-heh-heh—blood. If you’d like to give a treat instead of playing a trick this

Halloween, why not find your nearest Red Cross blood bank and roll up your sleeve? Maybe I’ll see

you there, because I always try to give a pint on that day as a way of remembering that blood has been

pretty good to me. I just don’t look when they stick the needle in, because I’m a little squeamish about

the sight of that red stuff. Especially my own.’ And there’s a piece of personal information to amuse

his legion of fans.

The Pop of King: Lights in a Box (November 18, 2005)

‘George Clooney’s film about Edward R. Murrow and the early days of TV news is probably

sending many audience members on extra trips to the snack bar and bathrooms out of sheer

claustrophobia. It almost never leaves the stark confines of the CBS newsroom and editorial offices.

This will come as a shock to 21st-century viewers accustomed to seeing Anderson Cooper (CNN)

and Brian Williams (NBC) being blown around by hurricanes, and Katie Couric wearing a pair of

cute goggles, working on Habitat for Humanity houses in Rockefeller Plaza’, King begins this

installment.

At the end of his review of Good Night, and Good Luck he recounts his favorite moment and

gives us some insight into the sub-title of this column. ‘The best moment in GN&GL? Easy. When

Murrow finishes his Liberace interview (with a promise to visit Mickey Rooney and his lovely new

wife the following week), he signs off and the harsh studio lights go out. As they do, an expression

crosses his face, as fleeting as a brief muscle cramp. It is weary distaste. Speaking to an industry

audience some four years after the McCarthy debacle, Murrow says: “[Television] can illuminate and

yes, it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are willing to use it to those

ends. Otherwise, it is merely wires and lights in a box.” It’s something to think about the next time you

sit down in front of news that may be more flash than fact: It’s merely lights in a box.’ Here we see

King again delivering an important philosophical point in what appears to be nothing more than a

light column in an entertainment magazine.

The Pop of King: My 2005 Picks: Music (December 9, 2005)

In 2004 around the same period, King published three columns on the best music, movies and

books of the year, and EW ran them one after the other, instead of with the usual three weeks

separation. This following year it seems that the magazine and King wanted to do the same thing. King

opens, ‘I don’t think it’s possible any longer just to talk about the best albums of the year and leave it

at that; albums may not be as dead as the dodo, but they’re certainly an endangered species. I bought

about 50 in the year just past (for the purposes of these best-of columns, my year runs roughly from

one Turkey Day to the next), but only a dozen in actual stores. It amazes me to write that, but it’s true.

Most were downloaded...and through perfectly legitimate pay-then-play sources, I hasten to add.

Copyright is my bread and butter, and I do not cockadoodie where I eat.’

King’s top six albums of the year: Delirium Tremolos by Ray Wylie Hubbard; Solo Acoustic,

Vol. 1 by Jackson Browne; Kicking Television: Live in Chicago by Wilco; All Jacked Up by

Gretchen Wilson; Childish Things by James McMurtry; and If You Didn’t Laugh, You’d Cry by

Marah. He also offers his top eight singles of the year: Sugar, We’re Goin’ Down by Fall Out Boy;

My Humps by The Black Eyed Peas; Land Locked Blues by Bright Eyes; If I Ever Leave This World

Alive by Flogging Molly; Maria’s Bed by Bruce Springsteen; We Can’t Make It Here by James

McMurtry; and I Summon You by Spoon.

This article is titled Music to My Ears on EW’s web site.

The Pop of King: My 2005 Picks: Movies (December 16, 2005)

King opens his review of the movie year, ‘As this magazine has pointed out until it was blue in

its editorial face, 2005 wasn’t a good year at the box office. EW has advanced lots of reasons for

declining grosses, from the annoyance of in-theater advertising to the popularity of home

entertainment centers. I’ve suggested that the improving quality of series TV ( Lost, Desperate

Housewives, et al) might have something to do with it. Here’s another possibility: Many of this year’s

best movies were really depressing. Below is my admittedly eccentric list of the year’s best; a B in

parentheses stands for Bummer. As always when reading one of my lists, remember that I’m a

consumer—just one more shlub in the popcorn line. Living in Maine as I do, this means I tend to see

fewer “arty” films. But I had to spend almost a month in New York this year, and that gave me a

chance to see several of the (B) films on this list...and no, I haven’t gotten around to such Christmas

goodies as King Kong, so don’t bug me about ’em.’

King’s top ten movie picks this year are: The Jacket; The Devil’s Rejects (B); Cinderella Man;

The Constant Gardener (B); War of the Worlds ; Crash; Good Night, and Good Luck; Downfall (B);

Capote (B); and The Squid and the Whale (B).

This article is titled Scene It on the Entertainment Weekly web site.

The Pop of King: My 2005 Picks: Books (December 23, 2005)

King begins his annual review of best books relating a story about an up and coming writer

friend: ‘A friend of mine sold her first novel this fall. She said the good part was finally being

allowed into the playground where the big kids play. The bad part, she said, was that her book was

tentatively scheduled for publication in 2007. She asked me if I thought people would even be reading

novels in 2007, with so many other entertainment options available. I had to laugh, because novels

are still the best entertainment option. Even a hardcover is cheaper than two tickets to the local

multiplex, especially once you throw in gas, parking, and babysitting. Also, a book lasts longer and

there are no ads. Need more? No tiresome ratings system to keep you out if you’re under 17, the

special effects are always primo (because you make ‘em up yourself), and although I read nearly 80

books this year, I never ran across the Olsen twins a single time.’

King’s top ten books for 2005: The Godfather Returns by Mark Winegardner; The Mad Cook of

Pymatuning by Christopher Lehmann-Haupt; Drama City by George Pelecanos; The Lincoln Lawyer

by Michael Connelly; The Hot Kid by Elmore Leonard; Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince by

J.K. Rowling; No Country for Old Men by Cormac McCarthy; Saturday by Ian McEwan; This Book

Will Save Your Life by A.M. Homes; and Case Histories by Kate Atkinson. He closes, ‘As long as

there are books like that around, people will still be reading in 2007. Because that s—- is tight, yo.’

The title of this article on Entertainment Weekly’s web site is Book Report.

The Pop of King: Just Askin’ (January 20, 2006)

In one of the funniest of these columns King ponders some questions about popular culture. ‘I

published a little paperback mystery novel last fall ( The Colorado Kid) that was long on mystery and

short on solutions. Many book critics took me to task for it. I wasn’t surprised, but I wouldn’t change

a thing. I’m the sort of guy who’s always liked questions more than answers, so sue me. And if they’re

questions without answers—how many roads must a man walk down before he knows he’s a man, for

instance—that’s fine too. Here are some of the more interesting questions I’m mulling over this

winter. No need to send me your answers, although of course you can if you want to, just as long as

you’re clear on the fact that there are no right ones. You have entered the Zen zone, Grasshoppah’, he

writes.

Among the unanswerable questions posed is, ‘Why is New York-style pizza a big deal in

Chicago and Chicago-style pizza a big deal in New York? Aren’t you big-city people ever satisfied?’

But, in closing: ‘Some questions, even the tough ones, do have answers. Is Elvis still the King of rock

& roll? Yes. Will Lost eventually come to a satisfying conclusion? Yes. Will the conclusion satisfy

everyone? Don’t be naive—the geek factor in Lost’s fan base is too high. Will Veronica Mars ever

achieve the popular success it so richly deserves? Alas, probably not. Will Harry Potter defeat Lord

Voldemort? There is an answer to this question, and it’s probably yes, but only J.K. Rowling knows

for sure. Can James Patterson write a book with 200 chapters in it, some only five or six words long?

Oh, probably. When we look back at the first decade of the 21st century, which director’s films will

have made the most money? Easy—Peter Jackson’s.’

It is interesting to note that soon after UPN (a US TV network) started using the following quote

in commercials: ‘ Veronica Mars has some very big fans...The King of Mystery, Stephen King, says

Veronica Mars is so good, he can’t take his eyes off it ...’!

The Pop of King: Frey’s Lies (February 10, 2006)

At the time this column was published it seemed that most of America knew about the “lies”

James Frey told in his bestselling memoirs, A Million Little Pieces. As always, King is ready to

tackle any topic on the minds of Americans in this column: ‘In the 50 years or so since first watching

Mike Wallace verbally mousetrap various guests on Night Beat, I don’t think I’ve ever seen such an

emotionally exhausting hour as Oprah Winfrey’s late-January interview with James Frey on her talk

show. I suppose truth was the winner, but it was messy; by the end it was like watching Mike Tyson

in his prime beating up some tank-town palooka in a grudge match where the ref refused to stop the

fight.’

King mentions his own problems with drug abuse, which he’d made public in his part-memoir,

On Writing and chooses to focus on the more important issues at hand: ‘Surely there are more

important lessons to be learned here. They have to do with drugs and alcohol as well as truth.

Addiction is a plague on American society. The cruelly ignorant assumption that addicts bring it on

themselves (and thus can take care of the problem themselves) only exacerbates the problem. No

child on third-grade Careers Day says he wants to grow up to be an alcoholic like Mommy or a rock

hound like Dad, and no addict struggling to get clean before the spike or pipe can do him in deserves

to be told, “Just pull yourself together and clean up your act like James Frey did.”’ He concludes,

‘Because, dig: James Frey isn’t the way you sober up ... and if you think I’m lying, let’s go to the

videotape.’ This advice, from a recovering addict, may make this the socially more valuable of any

these columns, considering the large audience of EW and its demographics.

The Pop of King: Mistakes Were Made (March 3, 2006)

We know King is a fan of underground music, independent and little-known bands (this also

applies to art in general). He is also known to like the alt-country genre of music and this column

opens with King telling his faithful readers about exactly such a group: ‘This is a sad story about how

good you can be in America and still not be quite good enough to make it. It’s about an alt-country

band called Diesel Doug and the Long Haul Truckers. Please don’t confuse them with the Drive-By

Truckers, a fine alt-country band that’s still going strong; you can only experience Diesel Doug on a

retrospective CD—available on the Net at cornmealrecords.com—called Mistakes Were Made.’

King urges readers to give their music a try and mourns the lost opportunity: ‘And, given the

quality of the 16 tracks on Mistakes Were Made, maybe they should have gotten that chance...the Long

Haul Truckers got about as far as Double-A on the alt-country circuit before their particular upward

curve topped out. You’d have to listen to the record and judge for yourself if that was far enough, or if

they got cheated—by the system or just blind fate. All I know is that talent is a lightning rod and

America is a thunderstorm. You go running around like crazy, you get soaked, your arm gets tired

holding that damn thing up...and still, lightning, all too often, strikes half a block over, electrifying

someone else.’

The Pop of King: Crashing the Party (March 17, 2006)

This column focuses on American popular culture, with March the month of the annual Oscar

awards. King opens in his usual humorous style: ‘I know what you’re thinking: You need another

column on this year’s Oscars, especially at this late date, about as much as Dick Cheney needs a few

more jokes about hunting quail in Texas. But bear ( sic) with me; this is, after all, the only Oscar

postmortem you’ll read from a guy who put The Devil’s Rejects on his 2005 Ten Best List. Besides,

this year I actually picked most of the big winners, although I admit there were some surprises—a rap

crew wins for Best Song? Slap my tail and call me stinky. I don’t know if Academy voters were

trying to show their kids (make that grandkids) that they’re still hep (make that hip), but Three 6

Mafia’s performance—and exuberant acceptance—lit up the evening. And the “clean” version went

over pretty well; my elderly ears detected only a single ABC bleep.’

The big controversy in this Academy Awards was over the winner of Best Film— Crash

(incidentally the movie that King had picked for best picture) won over the favored film Brokeback

Mountain—and many were saying the latter film wasn’t chosen because of its themes of

homosexuality. ‘Was it [ Crash] the best film of the year?...Good God, no. Brokeback was better. So

were Capote and The Squid and the Whale, for that matter,’ he says, somewhat contradicting his

previous prediction, and closes: ‘But let’s let it go, okay? The lights are off in the Kodak Theatre for

another year. The set has been struck. The Academy sent the same soothing message it almost always

sends: Everything’s all right, everything’s okay, the right movie won—the good movie, not the gay

movie. Go to sleep, and sleep tight. Next year we’ll do it all again.’

This piece was titled Analyzing Oscar on Entertainment Weekly’s web site.

The Pop of King: Confessions of a TV Slut (March 31, 2006)

‘I wasn’t always like this,’ this column opens. ‘For years, I could take TV or leave it...and

mostly I left it. What I did with my free time was read books, go to movies, play my guitar, or

sometimes—don’t be shocked—I even talked to people. This talking-to-people thing was an arcane

social ritual I learned as a child and perfected in college, where it was known as “rapping.” (I know,

I’m old, don’t rub it in.) Then, about three years ago, something happened. For a while I thought it

was only that TV got better—and that was part of it—but I’ve come to realize there was another

factor at work. You see, it was about three years ago that I took this gig at the back of the book. In

retrospect, it’s so obvious: EW has turned me into a TV slut.’

Canning so-called ‘reality’ shows he continues: ‘Hey, it’s your remote control and what you do

with it is your business, but I’d rather take my unreality straight. This year I’ve found more to take

than ever. Here are my basic addictions, along with the various (and fiendish) ways in which I’m

being enabled.’ King lists the five shows he was currently obsessed with and explains why: The

Shield; Veronica Mars; Lost; Battlestar Galactica; and The Sopranos.

He notes: ‘Of course that’s the power of TV: Let these characters into your life by way of

repeated viewings and they become real. I’m a sad case in point; once a respected novelist (by my

children, at least, and once in a while by my wife as well), now a common TV slut.’ Very funny, Big

Steve.

The Pop of King is King’s lengthiest commitment as a columnist to date and, as of writing,

shows little sign of ending. The prospect of commenting on American entertainment culture every

three weeks or so does not seem to faze the columnist, who has been known to complain about the

work involved in non-fiction. He delights in being able to comment on the media forms that have

interested him since childhood—television, the silver screen, popular and genre music and the

literary arts. Long may he and the magazine continue to serve up his opinions and tastes in modern

culture.

INTRODUCING THE

WORK OF OTHERS

The tale of horror and the supernatural fulfills one more valuable human function. Besides

showing us where the taboo lines of our society lie, they emphasize the light by marking out that

spot where the darkness takes over. The best tales in the genre make one point over and over again

—that the rational world both within us and without us is small, that our understanding is smaller

yet, and that much of the universe in which we exist is, so far as we are able to tell, chaotic. So the

horror story makes us appreciate our own well-lighted corner of that chaotic universe, and

perhaps allows a moment of warm and grateful wonder that we should be allowed to exist in that

fragile space of light at all.

—From Introduction to The Arbor House Treasury of Horror and the Supernatural

Over the years, King has blurbed a large number of books by other authors (see Why I Blurb

Books in our King’s Unpublished Non-Fiction chapter). If he likes the book, he often goes a step

further and writes an introduction or foreword for it. Over the years these have added up to a grand

total of exactly fifty! They present King’s insight into the works, and into related matters. Some

introductions are to the classics that influenced his work. While King collectors may only check one

of these books to read King’s introduction, it is normally worth reading the entire volume. Who

knows? Maybe it will turn you on to another author or genre!

It should be noted that almost all of these books are easy to secure from used bookstores or

online sources (abebooks.com, eBay.com, etc.) Some may be purchased new as they are still

available or have been reprinted. Also, check the usual King dealers, as they often have these titles in

stock. Special mention is made below of how to track down a piece if it is not readily available.

Introduction (December 1978)

King takes on some heavy literature here. Frankenstein, Dracula and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

are not only three of the most important books in the horror genre, ‘Within the pages of this volume

you will come upon three of the darkest creations of English nineteenth-century literature; three of the

darkest in all of English and American literature, many would say...and not without justification.’

King then presents a description of each monster from the works themselves: ‘These three creatures,

presented together for the first time, all have a great deal in common beyond their power to go on

frightening generation after generation of readers apparently without end, but that fact alone should be

considered before all others.’

He closes with the highest praise for these literary classics: ‘The most overlooked facet of each

may be that it succeeds in overlapping reality and entering a world of total fantasy...but in the leap we

are not left behind but somehow, magically and marvelously, brought along for the ride of our lives.

And this, at least, surpasses “good.” It is a great feat.’

This piece first appeared in a December 1978 Signet mass-market paperback omnibus,

Frankenstein, Dracula, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde , by Mary Shelley, Bram Stoker, and Robert Louis

Stevenson146. The volume was reprinted in the United Kingdom and portions of the piece were

incorporated into King’s non-fiction book, Danse Macabre.

Introduction forThe Shapes of Midnight(October 1980)

King begins: ‘Hey, I want to tell you something funny...and you better listen. The reason you

better listen is that you are holding Joseph Payne Brennan’s new collection of short stories in your

hands, and pretty soon you’re going to start to read them, and soon after that night is going to fall (or

maybe, worse luck for you, it has already fallen), and believe me, dear friend, believe your old Uncle

Stevie: When night comes and you are in the middle of Joe Brennan’s latest—and long overdue—

collection of ghastly family snapshots, you may find you need something funny to hold onto. Like a

lifeline. So here is the something funny: They paid me to do this introduction.’

As a lynchpin of the horror genre, King has always kept an eye on who’s who and he has nothing

but praise for the author of this collection. ‘Joseph Payne Brennan is one of the most effective writers

in the horror genre, and he is certainly one of the writers I have patterned my own career upon; one of

the writers whom I studied and with whom I kept school.’

He ends the piece in his familiar style of addressing the reader as they hold the book in their

hands. ‘So turn off the damned television. Drag your chair a little closer to the fire, even if it’s August

out there with heat lightning tattooing the sky and mosquitoes whining against the screens. A lot of

cold winter chills are waiting for you. I’m through; I’m turning you over to Joseph Payne Brennan.

Just for God’s sake don’t let go of his arm!’

This piece only appears in the mass-market paperback edition of The Shapes of Midnight, by

Joseph Payne Brennan, published by Berkley Books in October 1980.

Introduction (1981)

This introduction is to an important collection of horror tales, both new and old, that stand as

classics in the genre. King’s own story, The Crate is included. He opens talking about his writing and

the horror genre in general, which he always faithfully defends when it comes under fire. ‘First of all

(and this is fundamental), you have my cheerful permission to shoot me if I fall into a classic

crouching posture and begin to defend the horror story, your right to read it or the right of any writer

—those represented in this volume, those not and those yet unborn—to tell such tales. I have been

writing professionally since the age of eighteen and writing full-time since the age of twenty-five, and

the bulk of what I’ve written has been classified as horror fiction...so this defense posture comes

naturally to me.’

While this Introduction was written early in King’s career it is but one of many (to his own

work and others) he would write, and he shows an understanding of their place, function and

importance: ‘I think we’ve said most of it now—the most important point perhaps being that the

stories you are about to read are unique not only because they are some of the best, but because they

take the most stringent dictum of popular literature, “amuse the reader,” to its darkest and outermost

limits—but I’ll finish by repeating an observation that I’ve made in other places: namely, that few

people read introductions. Of course if you are a student and this book forms a part of your course

work, and if your instructor has assigned these introductory pages, you are no doubt grimly slogging

your way through to the end and wishing that I would hurry up and get out of your way. The author of

an introduction to such a volume as this is like an after-dinner speaker, who is more heartily

applauded for finishing than for whatever it was he had to say. Like an after-dinner speaker, I find the

urge to drone on for another ten pages, (or another hundred!) almost undeniable, but I will manage.’

King’s most concise and important description of the horror story may be this: ‘The tale of

horror and the supernatural fulfills one more valuable human function. Besides showing us where the

taboo lines of our society lie, they emphasize the light by marking out that spot where the darkness

takes over. The best tales in the genre make one point over and over again—that the rational world

both within us and without us is small, that our understanding is smaller yet, and that much of the

universe in which we exist is, so far as we are able to tell, chaotic. So the horror story makes us

appreciate our own well-lighted corner of that chaotic universe, and perhaps allows a moment of

warm and grateful wonder that we should be allowed to exist in that fragile space of light at all.’

He closes wearing his kindly old Uncle Stevie mask: ‘We’re at the edge of the light now, and I

think I’ll leave you here to find your own way. You have only to turn the page and step into the dark.’

This interesting piece first appeared in The Arbor House Treasury of Horror and the

Supernatural, compiled by Bill Pronzini, Barry N. Malzberg and Martin H. Greenberg, published

simultaneously in hardcover and trade paperback. It has been reprinted in both the United States and

the United Kingdom, sometimes under differing titles (see the Bibliography).

Foreword (1981)

A good introduction contains an early hook for the reader. King begins with such a hook, but

ends the first paragraph with an old classic. ‘There is something mildly surreal about writing this

introduction for Charles Grant’s Tales from the Nightside , or so it has seemed to me in the last few

days as I thought about what I might say and how I might say it. I think I finally pinned down the cause

of that surreal feeling about ten minutes ago, as I changed the ribbon on the typewriter I am using to

write this, the hands doing their own work, the mind tracking free. The oldest cliché in the book

suddenly popped into my head as an opening line (give me credit, folks: I didn’t use it). That line

was: “Here is a man who needs no introduction.”’

King knows a good writer has to work hard and writes the one thing that matters ‘can be summed

up in five words of one syllable, none of them longer than three letters. It doesn’t take long to write or

to say, but from where I sit, those five words say everything that needs to be said: The man is a pro.’

He closes with some advice to the reader and a reference to the title of the collection. ‘We’re headed

over to the nightside now, so grab on, people. Get ready to break out. In a hellish sort of way, I think

you’re going to enjoy yourself.’

This piece appeared in Tales from the Nightside , by Charles L. Grant, published in hardcover

by Arkham House in October 1981. In 1988 Futura reprinted it in the United Kingdom as a mass-

market paperback.

Introduction (1981)

John Farris is another writer in the category of those King has learned from; he speaks of the

influence of Farris (and others) in the opening paragraph: ‘It’s more difficult for me to write about the

work of John Farris than it would be for me to write about the work of a number of writers because,

in the years of my late adolescence and early adulthood, I did more than just admire his work —I

adopted his career as both a goal to be reached and an example to be emulated. This goes a bit

beyond those authors whose styles you copy as a necessary part of coming to a style of your own

(young writers absorb the distinctive styles of writers they admire in the same way milk is supposed

to absorb the flavor of whatever you put next to it in the refrigerator; my own period of stylistic

imitation was so intense and so comically complete that some of the stories I wrote as a teenager

would begin sounding like Ray Bradbury and end sounding like H.P. Lovecraft, with a nice slice of

Cornell Woolrich right in the middle) or the ones you envy because their ideas seem so fresh and new

and wonderfully executed, or those whose language speaks directly to your heart (as the language of

Don Robertson, the Ohio writer of such great novels as Paradise Falls and The Greatest Thing Since

Sliced Bread, speaks to mine). The feelings I had about Farris’s work were both more childish and

yet more powerful: I wanted to be like him.’

Through the rest of this piece (which is shorter than usual), King talks of Farris’s career and

steadfastly refuses to give any plot details away for fear of spoiling the novel. He closes, ‘it’s a great

pleasure to see When Michael Calls back in print so it can find a whole new group of readers. It is an

uncommonly good book. And because that is the highest praise I can give, I’ll now turn you over to

John Farris.’

This introduction appeared in a 1981 mass-market paperback edition of When Michael Calls, by

John Farris. Readers should take care when searching for this piece, as printings before that date do

not include the introduction, and some later ones also may not contain King’s contribution.

Introduction: The Importance of Being Forry (1981)

King has had a long relationship with Forrest J Ackerman, publisher of a number of landmark

horror magazines. In On Writing he says: ‘In the late 1950s, a literary agent and compulsive science-

fiction memorabilia collector named Forrest J. Ackerman changed the lives of thousands of kids—I

was one —when he began editing a magazine called Famous Monsters of Filmland. Ask anyone who

has been associated with the fantasy-horror-science-fiction genres in the last thirty years about this

magazine, and you’ll get a laugh, a flash of the eyes, and a stream of bright memories—I practically

guarantee it.’

King opens this Introduction by referencing the title, and bringing us into the world of his

subject: ‘Let me try to get at the importance of being Forry—to me, at least—by telling you a

simplistic little parable. Back there in the European middle ages (picture Lon Chaney ringing the

bells in The Hunchback of Notre Dame to get in the mood, if you want), nobody ate tomatoes. The

reason they didn’t was because the tomato was thought to be a deadly poisonous fruit—about two

bites and you were supposed to drop down with your nostril linings falling out, your hands clutching

your swelling neck, your skin turning purple. “Graaag! Choke!, ” as the folks in the old E.C. comics

used to say.

Now suppose you were some more or less typical middle ages dude...except that you had

discovered that tomatoes were not only not poisonous, they were delicious! No problem with that,

you say: that’s great, in fact. And so it is...except that being the only person in the village who knows

the truth would have to be both lonely and frustrating. No one is going to come over to your hut for

spaghetti unless you go back to the traditional butter-and-garlic sauce (which not only wouldn’t

poison you, it would keep the vampires away). No one is going to join you in a bowl of tomato soup,

and you would extol the virtues of ketchup in vain. / Now imagine that, after years of putting up with

this attitude, a new guy shows up in town... and he’s selling tomatoes!!! / If you can imagine your

feelings at such a point, you can imagine what I mean by the importance of being Forry, at least as his

life has impinged on mine.’

King closes recommending the book and sending the reader off with a dose of the tongue-in-

cheek humor he is known for, again referencing his parable: ‘So grab that there ketchup bottle and

pour it on!’

This entertaining piece only appeared in Mr. Monster’s Movie Gold , by Forrest J. Ackerman;

released in trade paperback by Virginia publisher, The Donning Company, in 1981.

Of great interest is that Ackerman almost published a story King wrote and sent him as a child,

The Killer. Ackerman kept the manuscript and it was eventually published in Famous Monsters of

Filmland in 1994.147 Also, see the letter King wrote to Ackerman when the budding author was but

fourteen, listed as Untitled (1987) in our Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns chapter.

Stephen King (1982)

This is an extremely short piece in which King briefly discusses two short stories, The Color

Out of Space by H. P. Lovecraft and Sweets to the Sweet by Robert Bloch. He also briefly introduces

The Companion by Ramsey Campbell, which he chose for inclusion in this anthology. Of that story he

writes, ‘I have never really fully understood what’s going on in “The Companion”; all I know is that

it produces a sense of growing dreamlike menace, capped by one of the most frightening final

moments in short horror fiction. I can’t remember ever reading a finer example of the genre.’

The piece appears in The Arbor House Celebrity Book of Horror Stories, edited by Charles G.

Waugh and Martin H. Greenberg. Arbor House published the book simultaneously in hardcover and

trade paperback in 1982.

Foreword (1982)

This foreword first appeared in Stalking the Nightmare, by Harlan Ellison. That book was

printed in limited and trade edition hardcover by Phantasia Press in 1982, reprinted in book club and

mass-market paperback editions and finally as part of an omnibus edition, Edgeworks 2.

King begins this lengthy introduction in Ellison’s style. He also uses the milk in the icebox

metaphor, as in his introduction to John Farris’s When Michael Calls (see above): ‘Does it sound

like Harlan wrote it?’ he asks. ‘It does? That’s because I just finished the admirable book which

follows. For the last four days, I have been, so to speak, sitting next to Harlan in the icebox. I am not

copying his style; nothing as low as that. I have, rather, taken a brief impression of his style, the way

that, when we were kids, we used to be able to take a brief impression of Beetle Bailey or Blondie

from the Sunday funnies with a piece of Silly Putty (headline in the New York Times Book Review :

KING OFFERS EERILY APT METAPHOR FOR HIS OWN MIND!!).’

He closes with one of his most endearing appreciations of any author: ‘You don’t make it over

the long haul on the basis of your personality. Fifteen years after the funny guys and the dynamic guys

and the spellbinders croak, nobody remembers who the fuck they were. Luckily, Harlan Ellison has

got it both ways—but don’t concern yourself with the personality. Instead, dig into the collection

which follows. There’s something better, more lasting, and much more important than personality

going on here: you’ve got a good, informed writer working well over a span of years, learning,

spinning tales, laying in the needle, doing handstands and splits and pratfalls...entertaining you

goddammit! Everything else put aside, is anything better than that? I don’t think so. And so I’ll just

close by saying it for you: Thank you Harlan. Thank you, man.’

Special Make-Up Effects and the Writer (January 1983)

The book King introduces here is by Tom Savini, a famous special effects artist who worked on

King’s Creepshow film project. He opens: ‘“I’ll show you things beyond your wildest dreams.” For

a writer of novels—particularly spooky ones—showing the reader such wild things comes so cheap

it’s positively disgusting. The Shining cost roughly 19 million dollars to produce as a film; it cost

roughly $24.00 to produce as a novel—costs of paper, typewriter ribbons, and postage. The thing is,

when it’s on the page it’s what Paddy Chayefsky once called “mental work”...and you can’t put a

price on that. No more, I suppose, than you can put a price on the special effects artist’s genius. And

genius is what it is, when it’s done right.’

King argues the importance of a technician like Savini: ‘The writer sees it in his mind, and that’s

good. Seeing it on the screen, carried through with vision and daring, is wonderful. Special effects

may not be the greatest thing about the movies—I would not argue that they are—but when anyone

really can show you something beyond your wildest dreams, I’d have to argue that it’s pretty damn

fine.’

This piece was first published in a trade paperback book, Grande Illusions: A Learn-by-

Example Guide to the Art and Technique of Special Make-Up Effects by Tom Savini, in 1983.

Harmony Books/Crown Publishers reprinted it the same year as Bizarro!

Introduction (1983)

King starts the introduction to Tales by Moonlight by tackling a regular topic—the declining

market for short fiction. He goes on to say that some of the stories in this book are quite bad and

others are very good, and that in this case the good do outweigh the bad. With a couple of exceptions,

the writers in this anthology are relatively unknown; King mentions this and knows it isn’t necessarily

a bad thing. ‘Sitting down with the manuscript was like sitting down to inventory the contents of a

large suitcase purchased in a sealed-trunk auction.’

He concludes writing of the quality of the stories within and the value of finding a diamond in

the rough. ‘But everything good in this outlaw genre comes from the jungle, and no one understood

better than our parents when they ripped the horror comics and the screaming paperbacks by A.

Merritt and Richard Matheson and H.P. Lovecraft out of our hands. They didn’t want us in the jungle,

and serious critics acknowledge that jungle only reluctantly, but it is there, in all its ripe-rotten

mystery. These stories expose that jungle, and some of these writers will certainly come out of it rich

(“There are diamonds in there! Diamonds!!” as one of the characters in “King Solomon’s Mines”

whispers in a voice hoarse with wonder). One only hopes they will bring some of the jungle with

them. This is a flawed, uneven book, but it compensates with wonder; I hope we will see a sequel

soon.’ There was indeed a sequel, published in 1989, though King did not contribute.

Tales by Moonlight, edited by Jessica Amanda Salmonson, was originally published in 1983 by

Robert T. Garcia in numbered, lettered and limited trade editions. In 1985 Tor Books reprinted it in

mass-market paperback format.

Introduction to the Marvel Edition of Frankenstein (1983)

King’s introduction to this edition of the classic Frankenstein by Mary Shelley is in two parts: I.

“Concerning The Book” and II. “Concerning the Artist”. This method of introduction is especially

relevant because Berni Wrightson illustrated this edition and, as King fans know, Wrightson is one of

his favorites. He was responsible for the artwork in Creepshow, Cycle of the Werewolf , The Stand:

The Complete & Uncut Edition, the limited edition of From A Buick 8 and The Dark Tower V:

Wolves of the Calla.

King mentions he had written about this book in length in his introduction to the omnibus

Frankenstein, Dracula, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (see above) and in his non-fiction book Danse

Macabre, and that he is not about to do it again! He writes most readers might be disappointed with

this book because of the expectations they have already built up and, if they are looking for an

analysis, they should look ‘in Danse Macabre (shallow analysis), in the PhD file at your local

college (deep analysis), or in a Cliff’s Notes (dumb analysis).’ King tells us that even though it is a

difficult novel it is wonderful. ‘How is it wonderful? Never mind. I said I wasn’t going to serve that

particular batch of leftovers again, remember? Go to one of the sources cited above, or better still,

read the book.’

Concerning the artist King writes, ‘The man who made the pictures which go with this book is

Berni Wrightson, and he is one of the most talented artists to come out of the comic-book field in the

last twenty-five years or so. I don’t know if Berni is offended by the term “comic-book artist” or not,

because I know next to nothing about art. There is no prejudice in my ignorance, however; I know as

little about Michelangelo as I do about Walt Kelly.’ He closes, ‘I hope you’ll enjoy the wild tale that

follows and the joyous, energetic representations of life which accompany them...and I think you

will.’

Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus by Mary W. Shelley and illustrated by Berni

Wrightson was published in 1983 by Dodd, Mead, & Co. in numbered, lettered and trade edition

hardcovers. That same year it was published by Marvel as an “illustrated novel.” In 1994,

Underwood-Miller reprinted that edition in limited and trade hardcover, and trade paperback, as

Bernie Wrightson’s Frankenstein. All carried King’s Introduction.

Introduction (1984)

King’s introduction to the reprinting of the classic novel, The Blackboard Jungle by Evan

Hunter is in three parts: “The Story”; “The Blackboard Jungle”; and “American Naturalism and

Some Critical Thoughts”. In the first King briefly discusses the basis for the novel in two paragraphs.

Moving to the second section he provides a metaphor and his definition of naturalism, which he

believes this novel uses: ‘What exactly is naturalism? I won’t try to define it, exactly, but I’d say this:

imagine a figurative car. The body and the accessories are drama or even out-and out melodrama. The

engine, however—the hidden part that makes the car actually go—is realism.’

King has always had a keen eye for what is going on in America: culturally, sociologically,

politically and so on. Closing, he argues ‘… this is a brave voice, speaking out suddenly and with

surprising vigor from the literary horse latitudes of the mid-fifties. As we face a great revolution in

American education and in the way Americans view and deal with the rot of their urban centers, it is

not a bad idea at all to reissue this book, so that a generation of thoughtful readers can reexperience

its clarity, its drama ( and its melodrama), but perhaps most of all its early warning of educational and

urban illness.’

This piece was first published in a 1984 Arbor House trade paperback edition of The

Blackboard Jungle, as part of Arbor’s Library of Contemporary Americana series. Evan Hunter is, of

course, a pseudonym for writer Ed McBain.

King also wrote a portion of a tribute to McBain in Mystery Scene magazine in 2001‚ see On Ed

McBain; and a short tribute to McBain in 2005, which appeared in A Celebration of the Life and

Achievements of Evan Hunter A.K.A. Ed McBain, a very rare program booklet—both are covered in

our Miscellany chapter.

You Are Here Because You Want the Real Thing (March 1986)

King begins this rare piece recounting being at the 1983 World Fantasy Convention and hearing

everyone talking about Clive Barker being the future of horror. Later, he relates an interesting

anecdote many may not have noticed, which relates to the title of this piece: ‘At the beginning of Bob

Seger’s first live album— Live Bullet, the good one—you can hear the stage announcer telling an

audience almost delirious with excitement, “You are here because you want the real thing.” The same

might be said of Barker’s audience.’

King ends with fine praise for Barker, who would become a major writer in his own right:

‘Barker’s tales, both surreal and naturalistic at the same time, represent horror fiction at its best.

Which is also its worst; nasty, insane, brutal, breathtaking, allegorical, asymmetrical, deeply

revolting and deeply challenging. Here are all the freaks and weeping children. His unabashed glee in

what he does is his best recommendation, the sledgehammer effect of his tales his best card of

identity. Are you here because you want the real thing? Then you are here to meet Clive Barker.’

This piece was first published in the Albacon III Programme Book, which was distributed at

Albacon III, a convention held in Glasgow, Scotland from March 28—31, 1986. The authors have not

been able to track down this piece in its original appearance and have never seen the booklet for sale.

Even a hardcore collector will therefore have trouble securing an original copy. Fortunately it was

also reprinted in a preview booklet, A Special Preview Tale from The Inhuman Condition , for

Barker’s collection, The Inhuman Condition. This appearance is also very hard to find. The easiest

form of access is therefore a reprint in Clive Barker’s Shadows in Eden , edited by Stephen Jones,

published in limited and trade edition hardcovers by Underwood-Miller in 1991 and a trade

paperback in 1993.

On the Far Side (September 1986)

This is a short and interesting introduction, mostly composed of short sentence-long ‘paragraphs’

with more substantive writing between. King opens: ‘Wanna hear my definition of a Golden Age as

applies to x? No? Okay, here it is anyway: A Golden Age is a time when so many things about x are

wonderful and unique that x itself is taken for granted. And you can quote me honeychile. Take the art

of cartooning in the ‘80s. I could say that the work of Gary Larson is absolutely unique, and that it

will make you laugh your butt off, and that is true, but it means nothing in itself because in the ‘80s

there are at least two dozen cartoonists who can make you laugh your butt off, and all of them are

unique.’

He ends with this, of Larson’s work: ‘ Explain him? No. Explicate him? No. Enjoy him? Yes.

God, yes. Forget the anchovies on your pizza; if you can dig anchovies of the mind, you’re gonna have

a blast. Just don’t o.d. You could die laughing.’ The style perfectly suits the work King is introducing,

something we see throughout the breadth of his non-fiction.

This piece appeared in The Far Side Gallery 2 by Gary Larson, first published in a trade

paperback edition in 1986 by Andrews and McMeel. A book club reprinted it, as did Warner, and

Futura in the United Kingdom.

Why I Chose Batman (October 1986)

King begins with the questions that were impossible to answer when one was a kid: ‘These

were questions asked and answered after you were too tired to swim out to the raft anymore and had

crashed out on the beach, or when you were walking home from the baseball field in summer’s sweet

dusk with your feet burning inside your sneakers, or before you fell asleep on camp-outs. And one of

them was always this: Who do you like better, Superman or Batman? I always chose Batman.’

He closes, ‘I’d like to congratulate the Caped Crusader on his long and valiant history, thank him

for the hours of pleasure he has given me, and wish him many more years of heroic crime-busting. Go

get ‘em, Big Guy. May your Bat-Signal never fail, your Batmobile never run out of the nuclear pellets

it runs on, your utility belt never come up fatally understocked at the wrong moment. And please,

never come busting through my skylight in the middle of the night. You’d probably scare me into a

brain hemorrhage...and besides, Big Guy, I’m on your side. I always was.’

This piece was only printed in the Batman Comics #400 Anniversary Issue, published in

October 1986. Copies of this issue can be found in many comic book stores, online comic book

dealers or from the usual King sources.

Big Jim Thompson: An Appreciation (1986)

King is almost encyclopedic in his knowledge of hardboiled crime stories and the authors that

populate the genre. He opens this introduction: ‘If you put me under the gun (and I guess, considering

the subject, the pun is intended), I could probably name twenty great novelists of the “hardboiled

detective” school within half an hour. It would by my list, granted; purists might not like the inclusion

of such writers as Ed McBain and John D. MacDonald, but it would also include those of who even

the purists would approve—Dashiell Hammett, Raymond Chandler, Ross MacDonald, Robert Parker,

and so on. If you put me under the gun and asked me to name those American novelists who I believe

have written great novels of the criminal mind, my list would be much shorter, and half the people on

it only wrote one. Theodore Dreiser ( An American Tragedy); Frank Norris ( McTeague); Elliot Chaze

( Wettermark). The three who wrote more than one are Shane Stevens, James M. Cain, and Big Jim

Thompson.’

King closes with further name-dropping, now as contrast rather than comparison: ‘You are going

into the darkness without me, without Eudora Welty, without John Updike or Truman Capote or

Edmund Wilson. You are going there with a genuine maniac of the human underside. You may be

revolted. You may turn away, gasping with a sickened sort of laughter. But Big Jim Thompson will

not stop...and my guess is this: neither will you.’ For more on Thompson’s work, see A Word (Or

Two) From Stephen King: WARNING! WARNING! Hitch-hikers May Be Escaped LUNATICS!

below.

This introduction first appeared in Now and On Earth, by Jim Thompson, released in a limited

edition of 400 copies by Dennis McMillan Publications in 1986. The more accessible appearance is

a 1994 trade paperback edition, published by Vintage Crime/Black Lizard.

Foreword (1986)

This unusually short introduction is to a collection of short stories by Richard Christian

Matheson. Here, King gives a brief description of Matheson’s work, along with an apt analogy:

‘Matheson is remarkable because his stories are not novellas like many of [Theodore] Sturgeon’s

best, or short stories of traditional length like such [Ray] Bradbury classics as “Small Assassin” and

“The Emissary.” They are, instead, short, tightly wrapped, and abrupt. The typical Matheson story is

like something shot out of a staple gun.’

He closes, ‘The stories vary somewhat in execution and effect—a rather too-elegant way of

saying that some are better than others. This is to be expected; Richard Christian Matheson is still a

young man and still maturing as a writer. But these stories do more than mark him as a writer to

watch; they mark him as a writer to enjoy now.’

The piece first appeared in a limited (50 copies) advance reader’s copy edition of Scars, by

Richard Christian Matheson, distributed at the 12th World Fantasy Convention in 1986. The actual

book appeared the following year, in a limited edition by ScreamPress; and, finally, in a more

accessible, expanded version published by Tor in a mass-market paperback, Scars and Other

Distinguishing Marks.

The Ideal, Genuine Writer: A Forenote (October 1987)

King opens this lengthy piece with a note to the reader in which he thanks his wife Tabitha; and

writes briefly of the effect Robertson’s work had on him. He then begins the actual introduction, ‘This

is a forenote to Don Robertson’s novel The Ideal, Genuine Man. It is not an introduction. The idea of

writing an introduction to a Don Robertson novel is ridiculous because it is impossible. This is a

topic to which we will return once we have set our feet firmly on the ground...something which is not

always easy to do when discussing Robertson and his work.’

Robertson is still a relatively unknown writer but his talent inspired King to publish this book

under his personal imprint, Philtrum Press and to pen this essay. Later, King tells us ‘the most

unfortunate thing about Don Robertson is that he does need an introduction: he may be one of the best

unknown publishing novelists in the United States. This is not to say he does not have a coterie of fans

and admirers, because he does.’

Closing with even more praise for Robertson and his work, King writes, ‘I envy you the

experience, although I must tell you that you may never again be entirely satisfied with a book

purporting to depict “real” American life. And the effect of Robertson is a little like the effect of

going a fast five rounds with Cassius Clay about two decades ago: it takes quite awhile to wear off. I

repeat: win, lose, or draw, you have never read anything quite like the novel which follows. Never.

Never.’

This piece was originally published in The Ideal, Genuine Man, by Don Robertson, published

in a limited edition and trade hardcover by King’s private press, Philtrum in 1987. There has also

been a Book Club edition, a Signet mass-market paperback edition and a Sphere trade paperback

edition in the United Kingdom, each containing King’s Forenote, which had originally been titled The

Ideal Man.

The Strange Case of the Westlake Stationery (December 1987)

King begins this piece by hinting at the meaning of its title: ‘I suppose you’d think Don

Westlake’s stationery was only bizarre if you’d never read his novels and stories. If you have, you

understand. If you understand, it becomes pretty funny. Not as funny as the man himself—when he’s in

the mood, Donald Westlake can be downright hilarious—but pretty funny.’ He goes on to relate that

Westlake’s stationery comes from the many hotels at which he has stayed. King received a letter on

Holiday Inn stationery asking if he wanted to participate in one of Westlake’s weekend mystery

retreats and the book he is introducing is based on one of those weekends.

He closes with another reference to ‘the Westlake stationery’: ‘Now comes this book from the

estimable Mr. Dennis McMillan. Dennis sent me a check for a hundred bucks. Dennis, I’ll send it

back if the Westlake manuscript comes on hotel stationery...and if you send me a Xerox. I’ve never

been in Don and Abby’s house. The wallpaper...the toilet paper...I wonder... Could it be that...? No,

surely not. But...maybe... Day’s Inn? Caesar’s Palace? Best Western? Or maybe....’

This piece has only been published in a trade paperback, Transylvania Station: A Mohonk

Mystery by Donald and Abby Westlake. This is part of the MOHONK MYSTERY SERIES released

by Dennis McMillan Publications. It can be difficult to access, with King resellers probably the best

source.

This Guy isReallyScary (1987)

‘Banned in Boston: You’ve heard of that one, right? But banned in Dallas? Dallas, Texas? You

know, down there where they call that black stuff you put in your car awl, like the carpenter’s tool?

Where they drink Lone Star beer and eat chili so hot it comes with its own fire extinguisher (only

what you say down there is far extinguisher)? Where men are still men and women aren’t? Banned in

Dallas? Say what, boy? Only one time it’s been done, so far as I know. Only one man who could do

it. You are holding that man’s first book in your hand.’ All this in King’s short introduction to satirist

Joe Bob Briggs’ collection of film reviews.

He goes on to say that he is a big fan of Briggs’ ‘unique brand of critique-by-flamethrower’

criticism. He also wants to recommend it to readers, humor-ously noting, ‘You women step into your

frillies, your shortest skirt, your tightest tank top, and your penny loafers, you guys, throw a case of

beer in the trunk and grab your Case hat out of the closet.’ In closing: ‘Big Steve King says check it

out.’

This introduction appeared in Joe Bob Goes to the Drive-in, by Joe Bob Briggs (a pseudonym

of John Bloom). Delacorte Press published the book in the United States; and Penguin Books did so in

the United Kingdom, both in 1987. As an aside it should be noted ‘Joe Bob Briggs’ starred (and did a

remarkably good job) as the lead character, Alfie Zimmer, in James Renner’s ‘dollar baby’ 148 movie

adaptation of King’s short story, All That You Love Will Be Carried Away ; and appeared in a cameo

as Deputy Joe Bob Brentwood in the mini-series, The Stand.

A Word (Or Two) From Stephen King: WARNING! WARNING! Hitch-hikers May Be

Escaped LUNATICS! (1988)

Once again we find King writing about a hardboiled crime novel and once again the author is

Jim Thompson (see Big Jim Thompson: An Appreciation earlier in this chapter). Referencing the title

of this piece King opens, ‘When a sign like this appears by the side of the road in the nightmare world

of Jim Thompson, no one even comments on it...which may be one of the reasons that Thompson’s

work is still worth regarding some forty years after it first began to be published.’

He closes by sending us into a world of Thompson’s creation and quotes the author on his way

out: ‘So it’s time to let go of my hand and enter Central City, Jim Thompson’s vision of hell. Time to

meet Lou Ford, the nothing man with the strangled conscience and the strangely divided heart. Time to

meet all of them: “Our kind. Us people. All of us that started the game with a crooked cue, that

wanted so much and got so little, that meant so good and did so bad. All us folks...all of us. All of

us. ” Amen, Jim. A-fucking-men.’

This introduction first appeared in The Killer Inside Me, by Jim Thompson, a limited edition

published in 1988 by Blood & Guts Press. It was reprinted in The Fine Art of Murder: The Mystery

Reader’s Indispensable Companion , edited by Ed Gorman, Martin H. Greenberg, and Larry Segriff

with Jon L. Breen, published in hardcover and trade paperback in 1993 by Galahad Books and

Carroll & Graf respectively; and in the Winter/Spring 1997 issue of Midnight Graffiti magazine.

Each appearance is relatively obscure and the best point of access will be online sources and King

resellers.

The Collector:A New Introduction (1989)

Opening the introduction to this novel, one of the great classics of dark fiction, King writes, ‘The

novel of suspense and the novel of ideas are two species which rarely mix well. In most cases it

seems that a suspenseful situation so excited our emotions that it’s hard to think, and a cerebral one

makes it hard to rouse any but the most delicate emotions—amusement, distaste, and surprise.’ He

realizes the importance of this book being reprinted and wants to tell us why: ‘It’s a marvelous idea

to reissue The Collector in a new edition because it...will give the reader only half of what it has to

offer on first reading. The reason is simple: If you give the average reader a novel which offers a

number of intriguing ideas about sex, class, art, and even the purpose of life wrapped around a

situation of teeth-aching suspense, like fine wire wrapped around a heavy nail, that reader will

discard the ideas wholesale and concentrate completely on the situation that is generating the

suspense.’

King again mentions the amount of ideas in this book and its literary importance: ‘I’ve done little

more than mine a few of the ideas in this marvelously rich book, but I think it’s time to have done.

Literary analysis itself is a form of collecting, and I’ve pinned enough butterflies to these

pages...enough so that I am a little disgusted at my own willingness to play the game. In a sense, it

doesn’t matter. What appears dead and mounted here will come back to life in Fowles’s taut

character study, and so I will leave you now to go on by yourself. Just leave your net behind.’

This piece originally appeared as a 12-page booklet distributed with the Book-of-the-Month

Club edition of TheCollector, by John Fowles; and was reprinted as A New Introduction to John

Fowles’s The Collector in Secret Windows by Stephen King, a collection that was also only

available through the Book-of-the-Month Club. This last appears frequently on eBay and can easily

be purchased from online King dealers.

From Stephen King (1989)

King opens this short introduction comparing the horror genre of literature to the rock genre in

music, offering a parallel between Richard Matheson and Elvis Presley: ‘To say that Richard

Matheson invented the horror story would be as ridiculous as it would be to say that Elvis Presley

invented rock and roll —what, the purist would scream, about Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Stick

McGhee, The Robins, and a dozen others? The same is true in the horror genre, which is the literary

equivalent of rock and roll—a quick hit to the head that bops your nerves and makes them hurt so

good.’

King often closes his introductions to books in the horror genre with a warning to the reader, and

compliments and praise if appropriate. He writes here: ‘Be warned: You are in the hands of a writer

who asks no quarter and gives none. He will wring you dry...and when you close this volume he will

leave you with the greatest gift a writer can give: He will leave you wanting more.’

This introduction first appeared as From Stephen King in Richard Matheson: Collected

Stories, published by Dream/Press in a variety of 1989 limited editions. It was reprinted as the

Introduction to Nightmare at 20,000 Feet, a collection of Matheson stories, published by Tor Books

in January 2002, in both hardcover and trade paperback; and under its original title in Richard

Matheson: Collected Stories, Volume 3 , edited by Stanley Wiater, an expanded three-volume edition

o f Richard Matheson: Collected Stories, released by Edge Books/Gauntlet Press in a 2005 trade

paperback.

The Importance of Being Archie (March 1991)

King has always loved the comics, but when we think of King and that type of publication, we

usually think of E.C.-style horror comics. But what about the rest—say, an American classic like

Archie? He starts this short introduction with: ‘Forewords, even when they’re as short as this one,

rarely touch the reader’s heart unless the writer sends them out from that same location. That gives me

at least a fighting chance, because I’ve spent a lot of hours in the company of Archie Andrews,

Riverdale’s premiere teenager, and I still count him as one of my good friends.’

He closes with the longtime familiarity of one who loves the characters in this particular

fictional world: ‘So take it away, Archie; I think it’s time you jumped into your jalopy and headed

out. You’ve got a date (unfortunately for you, both Betty and Veronica think it’s with her), and you’re

running behind schedule. Just say hi to Moose, Midge, Reggie, and all the rest for me, would you? Oh,

and by the way—if you see Jughead, ask him where he got that hat. I’ve always sort of wanted one.’

This piece originally appeared in Archie Americana Series: The Best of the Forties, edited by

Scott D. Fulop, a collection released by Archie Comic Publications in trade paperback dated March

1, 1991. It appears only rarely at used booksellers and King sources.

A Warning from...Stephen King (October 1991)

This is a short introduction for Aaron N. Carmichael’s story Mr. Tilmore , King’s choice as the

winning entry in a children’s ‘scary stories’ contest. He opens, ‘There are always a few grumpy

grown-ups out there who like to go around moaning that kids are too busy watching TV and playing

Nintendo to read anymore, let alone write stories. It’s pretty clear to me that the current crop of

grumps missed the Scary Stories Contest in Disney Adventures magazine, because if they had seen the

six final entries that I saw, they would have changed their minds in a hurry. Tommi Lewis, the editor

in charge of taking care of the contest entries, told me there were over seven hundred stories in all,

and if the ones I saw were any indication of how much good writing kids are doing...wow!’

King closes, ‘... for the rest of you, just remember that the best way to fight fire is with fire, and

the best way to fight fear is with fear. In other words, keep writing those scary stories.’ He signs the

piece, ‘gruesomely yours.’

This short piece appeared only in the October 1991 issue of the children’s magazine Disney

Adventures and is relatively difficult to track down. Start with the usual online sources for used

magazines, and King resellers.

Introduction (1991)

This introduction appeared in a limited-edition only hardcover book, Signatures, published by

Lord John Press in 1991. The book is an album of photographs and signatures from contemporary

American authors and was signed by King and many others.

Keeping to the book’s theme King tells the story of his first autograph and first publicity

photograph. As far as the autograph is concerned: ‘I signed my first autograph in late 1973. It was on

the blank head-page of a paperback “advance reader’s copy” of Carrie, my first novel. That

autograph read: For Ruth King—Thanks for letting me wonder. I love you, mom—Stephen King .

And the date. My mother, who was suffering with mid-stage cancer at the time I gave her that first

copy of my first book, died not long after. I haven’t the slightest idea what happened to the proof

copy. It would be worth a small fortune, I suppose, in the mad atmosphere of today’s collector’s

market, where the autographs of some writers command sums of money which seem—to me, at least

—surreal.’

He then tells the second tale: ‘My first “author photograph” was taken in the later summer of

1973, in the offices of Doubleday and Company. The photographer was Alex Gottfryd, whose credit

runs up the side of hundreds (perhaps thousands) of Doubleday books. I remember feeling a mild

sense of unreality—almost déjà vu—as I was placed in front of the unobtrusive and slightly

crumpled-looking gray backdrop that I had seen on the back flaps of Crime Club and Double D

Westerns without number. Because I didn’t have a jacket, and because Mr. Gottfryd was strongly of

the opinion that novelists (especially those who were still wet behind the ears) should be properly

dressed, I borrowed my editor’s suit-coat. It was a less than perfect fit. Then, just before beginning to

snap, Gottfryd took away my glasses, which were causing reflection problems for him. These factors,

combined with the authorly beard which had just begun to sprout, created an unintentionally comic

unity which still has the power to make me wince with embarrassment today. In that picture I look a

good deal more like Mr. Ratty from The Wind in the Willows than the so-called “master of the

modern horror story,” as the Doubleday publicity department later dubbed me.’

Aside from King’s signature and introduction, the book also includes a reproduction of a

handwritten manuscript page from King’s novel Misery and photograph of a Time magazine cover

story featuring the author. The publisher, Lord John Press, also released the limited single-volume

edition of King’s short story, Dolan’s Cadillac ; and the limited edition broadsheet Letters From

Hell149.

Some of the other authors included in this book are: Robert Bloch, T. Coraghessan Boyle, Ray

Bradbury, Ramsey Campbell, Dennis Etchison, Ursula K. LeGuin, Elmore Leonard, Norman Mailer,

Richard C. Matheson, Joyce Carol Oates, Robert B. Parker, James Purdy, Dan Simmons, Peter

Straub, John Updike, Eudora Welty and Donald E. Westlake.

Stephen King PraisesThe M.D. by Thomas M. Disch (April 1992)

This is a page-long introductory piece to the mass-market paperback edition of Disch’s novel

The M.D. King writes, ‘ The M.D. is simply one of the best novels of horror-fantasy I’ve ever read.

Thomas Disch has been writing wonderful tales of imagination for years now—stories that sometimes

amuse, sometimes sting, sometimes horrify, and sometimes manage to do all three at the same time —

but The M.D. is surely his magnum opus.’

It isn’t clear when the piece was written, but one would guess sometime after the hardcover

edition and right before this mass-market edition was published, excepting that King closes with some

congratulatory words and best wishes to the author: ‘A thousand bravos to Thomas Disch, who has

written a brilliantly entertaining novel. I hope it’s a big fat #1 best-seller.’

King’s piece was only published in the Berkley Books mass-market paperback edition of

Thomas M. Disch’s novel The M.D.— readers should take care to secure the correct edition.

No Cats: An Appreciation of Lawrence Block and Matthew Scudder (1992)

As readers can already deduce, King has introduced a lot of books. The assortment is eclectic

and includes many genre novels. He opens discussing this aspect of his non-fiction writing: ‘Writing

an introduction to a good genre novel—one which has withstood the ever-popular “test of time”—is a

little bit like being the best man at a wedding, with this difference: all the best man has to do in order

to succeed is not faint or fart audibly during the ceremony, and produce the ring when it is asked for.

The introduction-writer doesn’t have to worry about losing the ring, at least, but he is supposed to say

something, and the person being introduced (the only person who can be absolutely counted on to

read the introduction) hopes it will be something interesting.’

In his introductions, book reviews and elsewhere, King is often trying to make readers aware of

the work of good, relatively unknown artists and this piece is no different. ‘If it does nothing else, The

Sins of the Father will introduce new readers to a distinctive voice in American fiction, and to a

character who confirms the worth of the genre from which he came. It is writing which exists

splendidly on its own merits, and it emphatically deserves this longer-lasting hardcover edition. One

other thing—if you enjoy it as much as I did upon re-reading it, remember that this is only the place

where Matt Scudder’s long, sometimes painful, and always interesting journey begins.’ Indeed,

through 2005’s All The Flowers Are Dying there are sixteen Matthew Scudder novels.

This introduction appears only in the Dark Harvest limited and trade hardcover editions of The

Sins of the Fathers: A Matthew Scudder Novel, by Lawrence Block. King would later write short

introductory notes for an anthology edited by Block—see Untitled (November 1999) below.

Introduction: Shiver...Shake...Scream...and Wonder (1992)

King begins this introduction telling readers that comedies and horror movies are the only movie

styles that have never gone out of fashion. He continues in this vein: ‘comedies and horror pictures,

the only ones that invite us—hell, beg us—to disregard ordinary theater etiquette (“Please Be Quiet

So EVERYONE Can Enjoy the Show!”) and make as much racket as possible. Comedies and horror

pictures, which, when successful, cause us to make loud noises in the dark. Comedies and horror

pictures, which, in their bright simplicities and nightmarish juxtapositions, are most like the dreams

that slip through our sleep as half-glimpsed shapes. And perhaps, in the end, they are really the same

thing...because isn’t our laughter more often than not a defense against some painful indignity or

almost unbearable embarrassment? Is it perhaps horror when it happens to us and only comedy when

it happens to someone else?’ Of course, this isn’t the first time King has posed the idea of horror as a

form of catharsis.

He lists his ten favorite horror movies and his ten favorite horror movie posters (appropriate

because this book is a collection of horror, fantasy and science-fiction art). King’s ten favorite horror

movies in this offering150: Alien, Burnt Offerings, The Changeling, Curse of the Demon, Dawn ofthe Dead, Dementia 13, The Evil Dead, Pet Sematary, Psycho and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre .

His ten favorite horror movie posters are: Child’s Play 2 , Curse of the Demon, Earth vs. the Flying

Saucers, I Was a Teenage Frankenstein , I Was a Teenage Werewolf , Night of the Living Dead,

Paper House, Rabid, The She-Creature and Them!

This introduction makes its only appearance in Graven Images: The Best of Horror Fantasy

and science-fiction Film Art from the Collectionof Ronald V. Borst and Margaret A. Borst edited

by Ronald V. Borst, Keith Burns, and Leith Adams. Published in hardcover in 1992 by

Grove/Atlantic, it appears regularly on eBay and can be also purchased from online booksellers and

King dealers.

James Herbert: Introduction (1992)

King provides quotes from the punk rock band, the Sex Pistols, and James Herbert to head this

introduction, and references the former later in the essay. The Sex Pistols quote that King uses is from

their song, Anarchy in the U. K. : ‘Don’t know what I want, but I know how to get it.’ The James

Herbert quote is from his novel, The Spear: ‘He knew that she was dead. But he wondered why her

tongue had been ripped out.’

The actual piece opens, ‘ “Engage brain before grasping pen” is a pretty good rule to follow

when writing essays, but in this case I might have overdone it a little. I was first asked to write a

piece for By Horror Haunted over a year ago, and have been thinking about James (Jim, to his

friends) Herbert at odd moments ever since. Sometimes I found myself wondering how he has

continued to write such delightful (strange word to use, considering his subject matter, but a true

word nevertheless) and involving novels when so many of his contemporaries and imitators have

either fallen by the wayside or into self-parody. At some later date I found myself wondering if I

might be able to write about him in an evolutionary sense—because he has evolved—and realized

that I had answered my original question by posing this second one. James Herbert is still around and

still prospering precisely because he has evolved.’

King closes speculating about Herbert’s future career and echoing a sentiment he himself has

uttered more than once over the years: ‘ I’m just a storyteller—he says it over and over again in his

interviews. Just a storyteller, and that’s fine with me. Yet the interviews—and, more importantly, the

books—of the last few years make it clear that the process of becoming a storyteller is still going on

inside Jim. The cauldron is still bubbling, the loom still shuttling. Herbert has got enough better, in

fact, to make me wonder with real excitement what he might be up to in the year 2010, and that is a

long way from thinking he might flame out or blow up. It’s enough to make you wonder what the Sex

Pistols might have become if that silly clot Sid Vicious had managed to stay away from needles.’

This introduction is exclusive to United Kingdom publications, only appearing in James

Herbert: By Horror Haunted, edited by Stephen Jones, published in hardcover by New English

Library and by Book Club Associates, both in 1992.

Introduction (September 1993)

This very short piece of only three paragraphs was included at the beginning of a companion

book about the popular television classic, The Fugitive. King makes two claims about why this show

was different from all others: ‘ The Fugitive was a groundbreaking television series because it

featured a hero who was totally powerless. Everybody who watched The Fugitive could identify

with Richard Kimble... The Fugitive broke all the stereotypes. It was at the time (and still is, when

you see the reruns) absolutely the best series done on American television. There was nothing better

than The Fugitive—it just turned everything on its head.’

Thi s Introduction has only appeared in The Fugitive Recaptured: The 30th Anniversary

Companion to the Television Classic by Ed Robertson, released in trade paperback format by

Pomegranate Press in September 1993.

On J. K. Potter: The Art of the Morph (November 1993)

In this piece King talks about his previous forays writing essays on artwork: ‘There’s an old

superstition which holds that things come in threes, and it’s one that offers some comfort as I sit down

to write this brief essay. This is the third time in the last seven or eight years that I’ve agreed to

introduce a book of artwork, you see (my previous lunges in this direction covered the work of Berni

Wrightson and the gargoyles which overlook downtown Manhattan151), and that means that I may soon

be able to put my art critic’s hat back in the closet. I will be happy to do; it doesn’t fit very well. I

reached the apogee of my own career as a visual artist in the first grade, doing stick-figure drawings

of children jumping rope outside vast, crooked houses, and that fact makes me very uneasy about

writing essays that concern themselves with art. I lack the unquestioning arrogance of the true critic,

and am thus able to write with very little confidence about artistic ideas in which I have absolutely no

talent whatsoever. To write a negative analysis concerning somebody’s work in such a field would

be completely beyond me, but that is most definitely not the case—J. K. Potter’s best work may

sometimes unsettle me, but it never leaves me feeling let down, presumed upon, or demeaned.’

Once again, King ends a piece by donning the friendly old Uncle Steve mask: ‘Oh, look here—

we seem to have come to a barricade across the path. One could push it over and stride on, I suppose,

but I urge you not to. If we step into the shadow of yon trees, we may enter a new world, one full of

sights we have never seen before. Shall we? Take my arm—I’ll go with you,’ he closes.

The piece first appeared in a magazine, Interzone for November 1993. It was reprinted in a

book, Horripilations: The Art of J. K. Potter by Nigel Suckling, published as a trade paperback in

the United Kingdom in 1993. That book was reprinted by the specialist King publisher, The Overlook

Connection Press in 1995. The magazine is very difficult to locate but the two books may be

purchased from the usual King sources.

Foreword (1993)

This is a very short (three paragraph) introduction to the modern classic, The House Next Door

by Anne Rivers Siddons. King opens, ‘When I began putting together a study of the Gothic horror

novel for a non-fiction book I’d been thinking about since the mid-70s, I had just become aware of a

young Southern writer who seemed to have quite an original talent for the genre. Anne Rivers

Siddons, it occurred to me as I read The House Next Door, was one of those rarities—a fledgling

fiction writer (this was her second novel) who could create a fully realized sense of place, populate

it with real people and make them do things that any reader would die to know about.’

King had expressed his liking for this work previously: ‘As I wrote to her in April of 1981, “I

loved The House Next Door and hope you’ll work in the genre again.” While her eight subsequent

novels retain much of the tone and spirit of the horror novel, I was happy when she asked if I would

write this foreword for the new edition of her only pure Gothic. So far.’ As he suggested, King wrote

extensively of this book in Danse Macabre—see our Danse Macabre, On Writing chapter.

The piece first appeared in the limited edition hardcover of The House Next Door by Anne

Rivers Siddons, published by Old New York Book Shop Press in 1993 (a limited trade hardcover

edition was published simultaneously). In 1995, The Overlook Connection Press printed an edition

consisting of re-bound copies of the Old New York Book Shop Press limited edition. While all these

are fairly difficult to obtain specialist King sellers do offer them irregularly.

An Introduction (1994)

King has always been a fan of comic books and graphic novels, so an introduction to a

collection of the classic Sandman series should come as no surprise. He writes, ‘Can I say anything

new about the Sandman, Death’s dark brother, at this point, or add to the cartography of his legend?

Doubt it, Constant Reader152. Doubt it very much. I got to this introducin’ party rather late, you see,

and some of the people who got here first are pretty awesome heads. Neil Gaiman is a pretty

awesome head himself, but those of you who have been following the series through its many odd

— very odd, extremely odd, ultimately odd—twists and turns hardly need me to tell you that. Which

is part of the problem. I should give you a bunch of reheated leftovers when this guy (not to mention

Bryan Talbot, Mark Buckingham, Shea Anton Pensa, and all the other pencil people and inkfolk here

represented) is going to follow me? I mean, jeez, Louise. Gimme a friggin’ break.’

He closes, ‘These are great stories, and we’re all lucky to have them. To read Now, and maybe

again Then, later on, when we need what only a good story has the power to do: to take us away to

worlds that never existed, in the company of people we wish we were...or thank God we aren’t.

That’s enough from this end, I think. All of you turn the page, like good little girls and boys....’

This introduction appeared in The Sandman, Volume 8: Worlds’ End , by Neil Gaiman, edited

by Bob Kahan, illustrated by D. Giordana, V. Locke, and Dave McKean; a graphic novel printed in

hardcover by DC Comics/Vertigo in 1994. The book was issued in trade paperback in 1995.

Foreword (1995)

King opens the foreword to PSYCHOanalysis, by Steve Lyons by writing of its baseball

player/author, referencing his nickname and the book’s title: ‘At some point between the time when

baseball crapped out in August of 1994 and the time when it finally crapped back in during April of

1995, Steve Lyons wrote a book, which he calls Psycho analysis. Great title. And, if you happened to

go through most of your baseball career nicknamed Psycho, maybe the only title.’

King loves baseball (see our Faithful, Head Down and the Red Sox Obsession chapter)—that

he loves Lyons’s book comes as no surprise. Closing, he says, ‘Steve Lyons’s book...is the story of a

hard-working (and occasionally ill-used) player who never lost his love of the game...or (lucky for

him) his sense of humor. It doesn’t tell everything; there’s not much in the way of sin, sex, and scandal

(what a relief) but it tells enough to make me absolutely positive of one thing: if Steve Lyons is a

psycho, I want to be one, too.’

This piece appeared in PSYCHOanalysis, by Steve Lyons. Sagamore Publishing released it in

hardcover in 1995; a trade paperback appeared in 2001.

Introduction: Rita Hayworth and the Darabont Redemption (March 1996)

The Shawshank Redemption was one of the best, most successful and critically acclaimed of

King film adaptations. He opens: ‘I love the movies. When people ask how come so many films have

been made from my work (twenty-five or so, including half a dozen pretty good ones), I say it’s

simple: I love the movies. From time to time I have been accused by curmudgeonly critics of writing

with the movies foremost in my mind, but why would I? The money for the books is three times

better...if, that is, money is even the yardstick we must use to measure with. The fact is, I have never

written with the movies in mind, but I have always written with them in my eye. When asked why I

had been so successful as a novelist, Bill Thompson, my first editor, said: “Steve has a projector in

his head.” I don’t (it would be very bulky, for one thing, and would make it impossible to get through

airport metal detectors), but sometimes it does feel that way. My books are the movies I see in my

head, that’s all. I write them down, and some producer says, “Hey! This’d make a pretty good

movie!” because in a way it already is one.’ King mentions this metaphor of seeing his writing as a

film inside his head from time to time and most readers would agree it is apt.

As most King fans know, many of the film adaptations of his work are sub-par at best. However,

there are many that are good and a few are widely praised, and among those is The Shawshank

Redemption, written and directed by Frank Darabont. King closes with praise for the director and the

film, and with reference to the playful title of this introduction: ‘Frank’s screenplay follows. I urge

you to read it and enjoy it, but also to marvel over it: you are, in the realest sense, reading a dream

come true, a miraculous triumph of art over the buck. As for me, I’m just grateful to have known

Frank, and to have experienced the Darabont Redemption firsthand.’

Darabont previously made the first ever ‘dollar baby’ (a movie made from King’s work by film

students, for which King charges $1.00 for the rights but does not allow commercial exploitation)

and, of course, would go on to write and direct The Green Mile, another huge critical success. 153

King also introduced that screenplay (see Introduction to The Green Mile: The Screenplay below).

This piece appears in The Shawshank Redemption: The Shooting Script, by Frank Darabont,

published by Newmarket Press in 1996.

~FLASH~ Tim Sample Saves America! (1996)

Tim Sample is a well-known Maine satirist. King has always supported fellow New Englanders

(especially those from Maine) and Sample is no exception. With regard to the title of this piece he

feels some explanation is in order: ‘Okay. Okay. So Tim didn’t save America. Exactly. But he has

been responsible for saving a part of America, an important part, and if you’ll lend me your ear for

just a few minutes before turning it (your ear, that is) over to Mr. Sample, I think I can make you

understand what I mean. And by the way, up in these parts, ear rhymes with the girl’s name Leah. If

you can get that straight and keep that straight, you’ve come a fair way toward understanding Maine

humor. Deah.’

The crux of King’s argument is this: ‘Tim has done three great things in his career, in typically

modest Down East fashion: he has accurately set down the stories and voices of his home place, he

has made them universal, and he has captured our own unique version of humorous storytelling.’

The piece only appeared in The New Saturday Night at Moody’s Diner: Even More Stories , a

book written and illustrated by Tim Sample. 154 It was published by a small Camden, Maine company,

Down East Books in trade paperback in July 1996 and is very difficult to find. Readers should

contact the usual King sources; second hand book dealers in Maine and New England generally; along

with eBay and abebooks.

Introduction toThe Girl Next Door(October 1996)

King begins this piece with the author of The Girl Next Door and his pseudonym: ‘There is no

Jack Ketchum, not really: It’s a pseudonym for a man named Dallas Mayr. This is certainly not the

sort of thing I’d be letting out if it were a closely kept secret, but it’s not; Dallas Mayr’s name

appears on the copyright pages of all Ketchum’s novels (seven or eight have been published in the

United States), and if he gives you an autograph, he’s apt to sign himself “Dallas.” (His readers will

probably get “Jack Ketchum” on the tip-sheets of this edition, however!) Jack Ketchum never seemed

like a bona fide nom de plume to me, anyway; more like a nom de guerre. And a fitting one. Jack

Ketch was, after all, the name given to generations of British hangmen, and in the novels of his

American namesake, no one really survives; the trap always drops, the noose always runs up tight,

and even the innocent are apt to swing.’

King loves Ketchum’s style and, in fact, revels in it: ‘The only two sure things in life are death

and taxes, the old saying goes, but I can add a third: Disney Pictures will never make a movie out of a

Jack Ketchum novel. In Ketchum’s world the dwarves are cannibals, the wolves never run out of

breath with which to huff and puff, and the princess ends up in a fallout shelter, tied to a beam while a

madwoman burns away her clitoris with a laundry-iron.’

He opines, ‘we would be poorer in terms of our literary experience without him [Ketchum], it

seems to me. He is a genuine iconoclast, a writer who is really good, one of the few outside of the

Chosen Circle who really matter.’ King always promotes lesser-known artists where he thinks they

have merit and their work deserves exposure and praise. Ketchum is no exception: ‘an edition such as

this, which is sure to attract attention and comment, is a step in that direction.’

This important Introduction, one of King’s finest and about one of his most important subjects,

appears in several publications—it was first printed in an edition of The Girl Next Door by Jack

Ketchum, published in limited and trade hardcover editions by The Overlook Connection Press in

1996. The same publisher rereleased it in hardcover in 2002 and trade paperback in 2003, although

some of the extra material included in the first edition had been excised. The Introduction also

appeared in the Book-of-the-Month Club-only King collection Secret Windows in 2000. King’s piece

appears in all these editions. Ketchum’s The Girl Next Door is one of the most harrowing pieces of

horror fiction to emerge in recent years and readers with strong stomachs and nerves of steel would

do well to seek it out.

Introduction (1997)

This very short piece came about because King had the idea Joey Froehlich should publish a

poetry collection; and offered to contribute an introductory piece to the book. He writes: ‘Joey

Froehlich’s poetry is exhilarating. Truth. Not because it’s deathless and dazzling (although it does

sometimes dazzle, usually when the reader least expects it), but because it rides so closely above the

blasted terrain where so many really bad versifiers dwell.’

The Fuel of Tender Years by Joey Froehlich was released by Baton Rouge publisher Gothic

Press in a 48-page chapbook, which is difficult to secure, published as it was by a small press, with a

low print run. Both the book and King’s Introduction have yet to be reprinted in any form. Readers

looking to secure it should check with the usual King reseller sources and specialist secondhand

booksellers.

Introduction (1998)

This Introduction appeared in Crosscut, an annual Husson College (Bangor, Maine) literary

journal. King opens writing of the publication of one of his own pieces in a small college literary

journal: ‘It’s the spring of 1967, okay? I’m a second semester freshman at the University of Maine,

nineteen years old, on my way to an eight o’clock class with one eye open and a Pall Mall stuck in the

corner of my mouth (this was in an ancient age when even doctors smoked enthusiastically). I’m not

thinking about much except whether or not I’ll get home that weekend to see my girlfriend when this

guy walks up beside me, some guy I’ve never seen before. He says, “Liked your story, man.” I draw a

complete blank—what in the world can he be talking about? I show my stories to my friends, my

relatives, and sometimes, if an assignment’s due, to my English teachers. I don’t as a rule show them

to total strangers. He sees I don’t get him, so he says, “The literary magazine, man. Ubris. I bought a

copy in the Union because my sister’s got a poem in it. Like her poem. Also liked your story.” And off

he goes, headed for the library or maybe the University Barns. I stand where I am for a moment,

totally freaked. I have just received my first review—a favorable one, too—for a short story called

“Cain Rose Up” 155. In it, a student who has just lost his girlfriend (a good deal of student writing

tends to be about student loving, and the loss of same) goes bonkers and starts shooting people from

the window of his dorm room. It wasn’t a very good story—and since the victims were on their way

to the caff when the shooting started, their deaths might have been deemed mercy killings—but this

kid I’ve never seen before had not only read it but liked it. He liked my story! I think that was when

my career actually began.’

Though this appearance is relatively obscure, King relates an important story...as he does

frequently in his non-fiction. Closing, he has the following to say in support of small literary journals

such as Ubris or Crosscut: ‘Magazines like Crosscut provide a crucial link for the writer; they are

often the means of that first step outside of the classroom and toward the audience that waits for that

Holy Grail of the literate society: SOMETHING GOOD TO READ. It doesn’t have to be The Illiad,

Gone with the Wind, or The Grapes of Wrath; just something to lighten up that long bus ride to

Montreal. If the writer provides that, someone will notice. Believe me, I know.’

This piece is very difficult to secure. It appeared only in Crosscut, Volume 1, Number 6

“Centennial Edition”, in 1998. The print run was only 1000 copies. Stores that specialize in King are

most likely the only places a copy will appear and collectors should be prepared to pay a handsome

sum.

Untitled (October 1999)

This is a brief introductory piece to Cary Holladay’s short story Merry-Go-Sorry: ‘Good fiction

shows us the inside of things—a community, a job, a relationship, the human heart. Great fiction can

sometimes show all of these things working together; it lifts us briefly above the event horizon of our

own day-to-day existences and gives us a dreamlike (and godlike) sense of understanding what life

itself is about. Cary Holladay’s “Merry-Go-Sorry” is one of those rare and always welcome stories,’

King writes.

It appears only in Prize Stories 1999: The O. Henry Awards , edited by Larry Dark and

published by Anchor Books, a division of Doubleday.

Introduction (January 2000)

Like The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile was one of King’s best, most successful and

critically acclaimed film adaptations, and King was extremely pleased with Darabont’s work: ‘What

came of it [ The Green Mile] was a sprawling and emotionally generous film that most admirers of

The Shawshank Redemption will likely welcome with open arms. What amazes me isn’t how good it

is—Frank is, above all, a wonderful and painstaking filmmaker—but how easily and clearly he saw

that it could be good. I also admire his courage in going back to the same sort of environment—prison

—and creating a kind of fraternal twin to his previous picture. I have heard Frank tell the press, “I

have the world’s smallest specialty—I only make Stephen King prison movies set in the thirties and

forties.”’ This humorous Darabont quote aptly sums up the way some people viewed his work before

he went on to direct the universally hailed film, The Majestic.

King has nothing but good things to say about Darabont, the film, and the screenplay itself: ‘In a

decade where too many movies are cold and glossy and have all the emotional gradient of a

customized muscle-car, Frank makes openhearted audience-pleasers that beg us to go with the belly

laughs and turn on the old waterworks...to respond in other words. He was aided in this by Morgan

Freeman and Tim Robbins in his last film; with The Green Mile he has put together an even stronger

cast, led by Tom Hanks. The result is the sort of film they supposedly don’t make anymore and some

of the magic is in the script which follows. I don’t know how Frank feels about it, but as for

myself...man, I’m delighted to be a repeat offender.’

Thi s Introduction only appears in The Green Mile: The Screenplay by Frank Darabont,

published by Scribner Paperback Fiction in January 2000 in trade paperback format; and later

released in a hardcover Book Club edition.

Introduction (October 2000)

Mick Garris has helmed many of King’s film adaptations: Sleepwalkers, The Stand, The Shining

miniseries, Chattery Teeth as part of Quicksilver Highway, Riding the Bullet and Desperation. King

says, ‘As a collaborator, he has, from Sleepwalkers on, dedicated himself to bringing my words to the

screen. He has often done it with flair...but in doing so he has necessarily sublimated his own writing

skills, which are formidable indeed.’ The Introduction is to a collection of Garris’s writing: short

stories and a screenplay, titled A Life in the Cinema, published in limited and lettered hardcover

editions by Gauntlet Press in October 2000.

King was the perfect person to pen this piece due to his work and personal relationship with

Garris. He finishes in his usual personable fashion: ‘This is an entertaining and important debut

collection, one likely to end up on a good many year’s best lists, including my own. I felt fortunate to

be tapped for the introduction. I just want one little favor from my little long-haired buddy, and that’s

an option to “Dream on Me.” The only thing is, Mick, we’re going to set it on another planet, okay?

Lots of frontal nudity and dig this: we’re going to shoot in New Mexico and feature the world’s

largest truck. You’ll love it, sweetheart, trust me.’

The book can be difficult to secure as only 852 copies were released. Check with specialist

King resellers and related online sources.

Stephen King (2000)

This is an introductory piece to one of Richard Christian Matheson’s short stories, The

Screeming Man. Almost thirty authors wrote short introductions to specific stories or anecdotes

about Matheson himself for his collection, Dystopia: Collected Stories. In his note, King writes, ‘…

there are, occasionally, writers who are able to combine both story and style. They are, of course, the

best. You get a spectacular view and you also get to look at it from the backseat of a chauffeur-driven

Cadillac.’ He ends simply—‘Matheson is remarkable.’

The author contributions, including King’s, were only included in the deluxe numbered (limited

to 250) and lettered (limited to 26) editions of Dystopia: Collected Stories, and were not included in

the 500 copy numbered, signed edition of the book. The piece is therefore very difficult to secure, and

expensive at that. Readers should check with specialist King and other online booksellers.

Introduction (2002)

The Monk is a classic 1796 gothic novel by Matthew G. Lewis, later a member of the British

Parliament. King has nothing but good things to say about it: ‘ The Monk is exciting not just because of

its admittedly racy plot but because it’s an example of a literary form that was still in an exhilarating

state of flux. There is not merely one major plot, but two; not one protagonist, but at least three. These

plots and characters disappear into a scarcely pruned thicket of poems, moral fables, and short stories

disguised as flashbacks, only to reappear briefly before vanishing again into such interesting histories

as that of the Bleeding Nun and the Wandering Jew. What The Monk most resembles is a telescope,

with stories fitting inside stories.’

Closing this Introduction, King eloquently repeats a running thread of his non-fiction writings:

‘Through most of history, the novel has—often to its detriment—been divided: there is the “popular”

novel and the “literary” novel. These two halves of what should be a whole look at each other like

villages separated by a wide river—villages in which the same basic language is spoken but little

commerce takes place, due to a long history of mutual suspicion and distrust. Even Charles Dickens,

perhaps the greatest novelist ever to write in English, discovered that one could not be a citizen of

both villages at the same time (at least not in one’s own lifetime). Certainly the Gothic novel is the

wellspring of that dividing river, and if there is one book in the genre which may be fairly said to

exemplify the rest, it is The Monk.’

This piece appeared in a 2002 edition of The Monk, by Matthew G. Lewis, published by Oxford

University Press in a small-format hardcover edition, which as of 2006 was still in print.

Introduction (2002)

As we well know at this point, King has written some fifty introductions for books other than his

own, and they represent varying types of non-fiction and genres of fiction. He begins here by

addressing the purpose of this particular offering: ‘I’ve done my share of introductions during the

thirty-plus years I’ve been a professional writer, but most of them have been for anthologies or

collections of short stories. I never expected to be writing one for the history of a banking institution,

especially one prepared by the institution in question, and there’s a good story as to how that came

about. What makes the story good, I think, is the light it casts on how our business lives and

institutions may enrich our personal community lives.’

We all know from King’s work how close-knit New England (and especially Maine)

communities can be. While some will find this piece dry and obscure, it is actually an important part

of King’s canon, as it allows an exploration of the theme of community running throughout King’s

fiction. ‘Any bank will do the deal if the deal looks good, but all of a banking concern’s vital services

—from investment management to lending to deposit services—gain a dimension when the people

doing the work are the people you see when you go to lunch or maybe to a basketball game at the

William S. Cohen School. Bangor Savings has been this sort of hometown resource for a long time, as

this remarkable book shows. It also illustrates a long-held belief of mine: a living, vital community

has two hearts. One is cultural. The other is the heart that drives business and commerce. Bangor, I

think, is in good shape in both spheres. We have a wonderful library, a wonderful symphony

orchestra, and a lively community of the mind. We also have a thriving, community-oriented business

community, and of this there is no better example than the Bangor Savings Bank,’ he tells readers.

Islandport Press, a small Frenchboro, Maine publisher released Here for Generations: The

Story of a Maine Bank and Its City by Dean Lawrence Lunt in a 2002 hardcover. Copies of this book

can be ordered directly from the publisher while it is still in print. In the future, copies may be best

secured from online and other secondhand booksellers specializing in Maine.

All Story, No Bacon (April, 2003)

King opens this introduction with three quotes regarding the “bacon scene” in his novel

Dreamcatcher. The quotes are from his wife, his publisher Susan Moldow, and his editor Chuck

Verrill. ‘What they were all talking about and hoping for, just in case you’re one of those good-for-

nothing lazybones who goes to see the movie but never reads the book, is a sequence in the novel

version of Dreamcatcher where the alien invader, Mr. Gray (who has grown quite fond of using his

host’s sensory equipment), chows down on a few pounds of raw bacon and then whoops it all back

up. It’s not in the movie. The good news is that a lot of other stuff is in it, including a small but vital

something that usually gets left out: namely, the spirit of the story.’

Continuing on the lack of the bacon scene in the film, and also waxing positive about this

adaptation, King closes: ‘At the risk of repeating myself, this is one of the very, very good

adaptations of my work, and the book that follows is a valuable artifact showing how successful

adaptation is accomplished...The business of good fiction, whether on film or the printed page, is

saying something true about how we live, how we get along, and how we die. I talked about some of

those things in Dreamcatcher, and I was delighted to see Larry Kasdan’s film talking about them as

well...and in much the same language. Of course, the book also talked about raw bacon sandwiches,

but I guess you can’t have everything.’

This introduction appeared in Dreamcatcher: The Shooting Script, by William Goldman156 and

Lawrence Kasdan. New Market Press published this book simultaneously in hardcover and trade

paperback (they also published The Shawshank Redemption: The Shooting Script, which King

introduced) in April 2003.

Foreword (June 2003)

In this piece King introduces a major reference work by Robin Furth, his researcher for the latter

three volumes of the Dark Tower Cycle. This first volume of her Concordance covers the first four

books in the Cycle; the second volume (published in 2005) the last three. King points out that Furth

was commissioned to write these concordances as a private guide to help him complete the series.

Later, he decided his readers could also benefit from her research: ‘Even with most of my mind

preoccupied by the writing of my tale, I was aware of how good it was, how interesting and readable

it was. I also became aware, as time passed and the actual publication of the final three volumes grew

closer, of how valuable it might be to the Constant Reader who’d read the first three or four volumes

of the series, but some years ago.’

He concludes with praise: ‘It was Robin Furth who inventoried the goods I had on sale, and

replaced all the dim overhead lights so I could see everything clearly and find my way from

Housewares to Appliances without getting lost ... or from Gilead to Calla Bryn Sturgis, if you prefer.

That in no way makes her responsible for my errors—of which I’m sure there are many—but it is

important that she receive credit for all the good work she has done on my behalf. I found this

overview of In-World, Mid-World, and End-World both entertaining and invaluable. So, I am

convinced, will you.’

The Foreword appeared in Stephen King’s The Dark Tower: A Concordance, Volume I by

Robin Furth. It was released by King’s publisher, Scribner in June 2003 in trade paperback; and in

October 2003, in hardcover by King’s British publisher, Hodder & Stoughton. The British trade

paperback edition was released in November 2005. The Foreword does not appear in Volume II of

the Concordance.

Introduction (2003)

King opens talking of hookers, specifically one of Michael Connelly’s. Not those kinds of

hookers, of course, but the kind that King also writes extensively about in Great Hookers I Have

Known (see the Opinion—The Craft of Writing chapter): ‘Whether you are the reader or the writer, it

can be extremely hard to start a novel. No one in the book is your friend yet, and all the places are

strange; hence, starting to read feels like a forced act of intimacy. A hooker can help in this regard.

I’m not talking about a prostitute but a good first line. I’m a sucker for good first lines, collect them in

a little notebook the way some people collect stamps or coins, and the first line of The Poet is a blue-

ribbon winner. Death is my beat, Jack McEvoy writes, and we are immediately hooked and pulled

in. It’s not a cheat-line, either, but one that perfectly sets the tone: dark, brooding, just plain scary.’

He closes with some high praise for Connelly’s novel and harkens back to the beginning of his

Introduction and the author’s “hooker”: ‘This is the best work Michael Connelly, a prolific writer,

had done up to this point (1996), and marked him as an important voice in the genre at the turn of the

century. I do not use the word classic lightly, but I believe that The Poet may well prove to be one.

Sometimes a novelist sends us a wonderful message between the lines: “I am capable of much more

than I thought.” The Poet is that sort of book, long and rich, multilayered and satisfying. I wish you all

the joy of finding out what lies beyond “Death is my beat.”’

Thi s Introduction first appeared in a promotional booklet for The Narrows by Michael

Connelly, published by Orion Books in late 2003, issued to promote the UK hardcover edition of

Connelly’s novel. It contained King’s introduction to The Poet, excerpts from both The Poet and The

Narrows and some other short pieces. Steven C. Vascik Publications included King’s Introduction in

limited (to 200) and lettered (26) editions of The Poet released in March 2004. The piece was also

included in trade and mass-market paperback editions in the United Kingdom (Orion Books, 2004)

and the United States (Warner Books, 2004).

Horror, He Wrote (aka Introduction: ‘Lovecraft’s Pillow’) (17 April 2005)

King has always been a fan of H. P. Lovecraft and was heavily influenced by his body of work.

He recognizes Lovecraft’s achievement as literary art of great importance: ‘Michael Houellebecq’s

longish essay H. P. Lovecraft: Against the World, Against Life is a remarkable blending of critical

insight, fierce partisanship, and sympathetic biography—a kind of scholarly love letter, maybe even

the world’s first truly cerebral mash note. The question is whether or not the subject rates such a rich

and unexpected burst of creativity in what is ordinarily a dull-as-ditchwater, footnote-riddled field of

work. Does this long-dead, pulp-magazine Johnson deserve such a Boswell? Houellebecq argues that

H. P. Lovecraft does, that he matters a great deal even in the twenty-first century. As it happens, I

think he could not be more right.’

King entertains readers with a story idea he once had—while in Providence, Rhode Island

(Lovecraft’s home town) for the World Fantasy Convention in 1979, he passed a pawnshop and

looked in the window. ‘While I was looking in all this rickrack, Mr. Idea Man spoke up from his

Barcalounger at the back of my head, as he sometimes does, and for reasons no writer seems to fully

understand. Mr. Idea Man said, “What if there was a pillow in the window? Just an ordinary old

pillow in a slightly dirty cotton slip? And suppose somebody curious about why such an item would

be on display—a writer like you, maybe—went in and asked about it, and the guy who ran the

pawnshop said it was H. P. Lovecraft’s pillow, the one he slept on every night, the one he dreamed

his fantastic dreams on, maybe even the one he dies on.” Reader, I cannot remember—even now, a

quarter-century later—ever having an idea that gave me such a chill. Lovecraft’s pillow. The one that

cradled his narrow head when he left consciousness behind! And “Lovecraft’s Pillow” would, of

course, be the title of my story.’ Noting he never got around to writing the story, King even invites the

reader to try their hand at it!

This piece was excerpted as Horror, He Wrote in The Los Angeles Times Book Review section

for April 17, 2005. Its only full appearance is as Introduction: ‘Lovecraft’s Pillow’ in H. P.

Lovecraft: Against the World, Against Life by Michel Houellebecq, published by Believer Books in

May 2005.

So, there we have it—a round fifty introductions by King of the work of others—ranging from

non-fiction about a bank, special effects make-up, movie reviews, fantastic art, television series,

biography and Lovecraft, through genre novels, conventions, horror fiction, cartoons, comic books,

screenplays and poetry. We have been further informed about King’s reading habits, his strong

opinions, and delivered of a few personal anecdotes. The Reader is left with but one task: to actually

read the books and works King introduced, as he did so for a simple reason—he felt they were worth

our time.

BOOK REVIEWS

Horror stories are waking nightmares, and the best of them are whispering of very real fears

at the same time they are screaming of ghosts and demons and werewolves. It is the sound of these

two intertwined voices speaking together, one at top volume, the other very softly, that gives the

good tale of horror its dreamlike power, I think.

—From Robert Marasco: Burnt Offerings.

This chapter summarizes King’s published reviews of other authors’ material. These start with a

college-age King reviewing of one of the University of Maine’s literary journals, Ubris (a magazine

in which King was published) and end with Elmore Leonard’s last novel. Please note that any book

reviews published as a Pop of King column are discussed in our chapter on those columns.

These reviews are interesting, as they give us an idea of both King’s taste in literature and his

view of popular culture. In fact, they represent some of King’s most interesting articles, as he often

provides compelling views of the books, and writers, in question. Also, they can lead the obsessive

King fan to excellent books by other writers!

Ubris is the Best Ever (April 17, 1969)

King’s first published ‘review’ appeared in the newspaper of the university he was attending,

and took a look at a campus literary journal, Ubris for Spring 1969. King had previously been

published in Ubris, and he contributed to this issue also (although, humbly, he does not mention the

fact)157. Issues with contributions from King sell for large sums in the collector’s market. King is

overly enthusiastic about this specific issue of the journal: ‘So let me jump right in and say that this is

probably the best issue of Ubris that has ever come out. Don’t walk—sprint up to the Union and grab

a copy.’

He concludes with more praise for the magazine and its editor: ‘Well, I feel a little guilty—I

wish there had been more bad things to talk about, in a way. Fortunately there are not. Diane

McPherson may just make the best editor Ubris has ever seen.’ In his Introduction to Skeleton Crew

King writes, with trademark dry humor, ‘I am of a kindly nature and have always assumed that Ubris

was a cockney way of spelling hubris.’

This piece was originally published in the April 17, 1969 issue of The Maine Campus, the

student newspaper for the University of Maine at Orono. Re-discovered in September 2005 by Rocky

Wood, the only way to secure a copy is by taking a trip to the University’s library and making a copy

from the microfilm in their archives. King published numerous pieces in The Maine Campus and its

summer counterpart, The Maine Summer Campus/ The Summer Campus—see our King’s Garbage

Truck chapter for full details.

Books: The Sixties Zone (June 1980)

Most King readers probably don’t know he had another, albeit short-lived, column, between

King’s Garbage Truck and The Pop of King. By the time King began writing this column for Adelina,

a men’s magazine, he had been a professional writer for six years and the difference showed. King’s

seminal On Becoming A Brand Name158 essay appeared in this publication the previous February.

He was now writing as a professional reviewer, and doing so with literary novels.

Even at this early point in time we see King defending works that he believes are good in spite

of what the oft-hated critics say. ‘Every now and then a book comes along which seems so all right to

me and which also gets such awful, vituperative, downright skuzzy reviews that I get a little scared’,

he writes. The column reviews Leslie Waller’s novel The Brave and the Free. King writes the author

makes this novel work despite its troublesome reputation as a ‘BIG NOVEL OF THE SIXTIES IN

ALL ITS GRANDUER’ and ends, ‘So why was the book so meanly reviewed and universally tarred

and feathered? More about that—and some other pretty good books—next time.’

This piece was originally published in the June 1980 issue of Adelina, a raunchy men’s

magazine. Copies of the issues with King’s work in them can be found at secondhand magazine

dealers (especially those dealing in men’s magazines) and at King specialists, but expect to pay $40-

50 per issue.

Books: Critic Critique (July 1980)

King continues his review of Leslie Waller’s The Brave and the Free from the June issue. He

also looks at an important topic: ‘ The Brave and the Free is a good dose of popular fiction, by and

large.’

He ties the review into a discussion that hints of his later non-fiction pieces and lambastes

critics who draw clear-cut lines between literature and popular fiction: ‘Honest effort must be

considered; ineptness must be pointed out; usefulness must be evaluated; good entertainment must be

announced; bullshit must be marked with a tiny red flag so we can detour around it and avoid getting

it on our shoes; the occasional stroke of genius must always be applauded; foolishness must be

laughed at; venality and gross fairy-tale romanticism must be marked for what it is.’

This column was originally published in the July 1980 issue of Adelina.

Books: Two for Terror (August 1980)

In this column King takes a look at two novels— Mayday by Thomas H. Block and Cold Moon

Over Babylon by Michael McDowell. Of the Block book, King writes, ‘Imagine the original Airport

movie (whose virtues have been largely lost as the result of the three sequels so putrid one can only

laugh at them) crossed with George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead, throw in a dash of post-

Watergate paranoia, and you may have some thin idea of the wallop which Thomas H. Block’s first

novel, Mayday, delivers.’

He enthuses over Michael McDowell’s book: ‘With the publication of his second novel, Cold

Moon Over Babylon, one wonders if perhaps Avon has become the first paperback publisher in

American history to have published, in the mass market, a major American writer. In The Amulet,

McDowell writes good. In Cold Moon Over Babylon, McDowell writes great.’ King has always

taken a stand for fiction that he believes is of genuine quality and this novel is no exception: ‘But for

the reader who simply appreciates fiction—and never mind what genre it happens to be a part of by

virtue of its plot— Cold Moon Over Babylon becomes an arresting melody of style and story, the two

welded together by McDowell’s fertile imagination. Recommended.’

This piece was first printed in the August 1980 issue of Adelina.

Books: Travelers (September 1980)

Here King reviews The Resort by Sol Stein and Free Fall by J.D. Reed. Of The Resort, he

writes, ‘the book is readable, fascinating in a repulsive sort of way, and competently written...The

real problem with The Resort is Stein’s compulsion to explain the outré and then moralize upon it.

The first chapter is indeed the stuff of greatness but can you imagine Jackson’s The Lottery turned

into a 300-page novel? I can’t—and there I rest my case. Recommended...but without much

enthusiasm.’

King feels a little differently about Free Fall. ‘Reed is a good writer, and Free Fall’s slow drift

away from the original tone struck in the first 100 pages or so does not completely mar the book. And

as for the author’s hypothesis about what might have happened to the elusive Mr. Cooper, his guess is

as good as mine or yours, and might be better. Recommended with reservations.’

It is interesting to note that, while the existence of the other Books columns was known, this

piece was first brought to the attention of King collectors and experts only a few years ago. It was

first published in the September 1980 issue of Adelina.

An Amazing Trip to the Outer Limits of Fantasy (October 19, 1980)

This is a review of a short fiction collection, The Stories of Ray Bradbury. More than a book

review, it allows us some of King’s finest thoughts on one of the greatest writers of our time and is

deserving of a wider audience. ‘It may be that the story which comes closest to the center of the

dichotomy that is Ray Bradbury is the one at the exact center of this whopping collection of 100 short

stories. The story is “The Wonderful Happiness Machine,” originally published in the Saturday

Evening Post and later a part of “Dandelion Wine,” a book that also happens to stand at the center of

Bradbury’s career as a writer—both chronologically and, I think, philosophically.’

King takes a look at the stories in the book (and Bradbury’s career) as they are arranged

chronologically. In closing he writes: ‘In a real sense, even the shortcomings in the book’s second

half are comforting, because in this omnibus volume we can view that natural creative cycle of an

American writer who has felt well and written well, and remains content. Bradbury is the Sherwood

Anderson of the American fantasy story, and I can forgive him his little indulgences for one reason if

for no other—he is a man who began as a natural, and who remains a natural 28 years after the oldest

story in this volume was originally published; he is a man who has made peace with this dream.’

Sources that previously listed this piece lacked a title or description and dated it as October 10,

1980. We believe this is probably because no King expert or researcher had actually tracked the

piece down. Justin Brooks found microfilm of The Chicago Tribune at James Madison University’s

library in Virginia and searched for this piece. Realizing that October 10th wasn’t a Sunday that year,

he knew the date proposed must be wrong, considering that the Bookworld section it was said to be

published in only appeared on Sundays. Shortly after, he found it in the October 19, 1980 issue of

Chicago Tribune Bookworld. A reader trying to find a copy of this piece would be most likely

rewarded by copying it from the microfilm of a good library that archives The Chicago Tribune. It

can also be ordered from some libraries, although that costs up to $15 per article.

The original manuscript title of this piece was Ray Bradbury Stories.

Books: Love Those Long Novels (November 1980)

King readers know all about lengthy novels. In this column, he discusses an important subject:

negative reactions to long novels by many critics. He begins by describing the first 150 pages of a

600-page novel called No Name, by Wilkie Collins. This novel was first published during the Civil

War and had recently been reprinted in a mass-market paperback edition. At this point, King writes,

‘Are you still with me? You’re lost? Oh dear...and we’ve only covered 150 pages of a book which

runs over 600 pages, in fine print!’

He continues, ‘The point of all this is simple enough: there was an age—it ended around 1950, I

should judge—when the long novel was accepted on its own terms and judged upon matters other than

length; there was a time before that when the long novel was the rule rather than the exception.’ He

also mentions negative reactions to his own longer novels: ‘One critic was so put out by the 460-page

length of my novel The Dead Zone that he wished I might contract a case of permanent dyslexia. A

critic of a previous novel, The Stand (which runs to over 800 pages), said “Given enough rope, any

writer will hang himself...and in this novel, King has taken enough rope to outfit an entire clipper

ship.” The fact is, critics seem to hate big books as much as the general reader seems to love them.’

It is interesting to note that King writes as if he will be continuing this column in other issues of

Adelina, although this was his last for the magazine: ‘We’ll have more to say about the unique

problem of the long novel and how to deal with it next time...and the time after that, possibly.’ It is

unclear why the relationship between magazine and writer came to an end.

This piece was first published in the November 1980 issue of Adelina.

The Cannibal and the Cop (November 1, 1981)

This is a review of Thomas Harris’s novel Red Dragon, a prequel to The Silence of the Lambs.

King later reviewed Silence’s sequel Hannibal (see Hannibal the Cannibal below). He begins, ‘ Red

Dragon, Thomas Harris’ novel of a psychopath in the grip of the cannibalistic id-creature who lives

inside him, is probably the best popular novel to be published in America since The Godfather.’

As is typical with King, he ends this review with important social commentary that ties in to the

novel: ‘It may be that “serious” novels of men growing menopausal in southern California only sell

2,000 copies because readers sense, in the unmasking of mass murderer John Wayne Gacy, in the

assassination of John Lennon, or the rape of a nun in New York City, a more vital, more mortal

subject. The prose in this novel is in perfect sync with the pulse of the times, and in the end we may

sense that the Red Dragon in these pages is real enough...too real. In showing us that terrible face

here—the face that is never seen in the Blake watercolor from which the book takes its name—Harris

does more than entertain; he is able to create that sane and terrible clarity which we call art.’

This review was originally published in the November 1, 1981 issue of Washington Post Book

World. It was later reprinted in Shadowings: The Reader’s Guide to Horror Fiction, 1981-82 ,

edited by Douglas E. Winter. It is relatively easy to obtain, as larger libraries will have The

Washington Post on microfilm; and Shadowings can be obtained from used booksellers without great

cost.

The Ludlum Attraction (March 7, 1982)

Sometimes, reviewers of art will write a review in an atypical fashion; here King reviews

Robert Ludlum’s The Parsifal Mosaic in the form of a letter to a fellow businessman friend. Again,

his knowledge of society shines through. He opens: ‘Just a note to tell you that the new Bob Ludlum is

out and you’ll want to get it as soon as you possibly can. Business guys like us would no more leave

home without the new Ludlum than we would leave home without our American Express cards;

you’re going to see mega-copies of this one in the airline terminals and on planes as business guys

like us wing their ways to the next round of meetings in London, Los Angeles, Dallas, or Cleveland. If

you and muffin haven’t gone on vacation yet, be assured that you’ll see lots of Parsifals around lots of

bright blue resort pools or lying face down on chairs beside palm-lined tennis courts while the pro

screams “Where is your backhand? Where is your follow through?” at sweating, slightly overweight

business guys like us who have given up their Botany 500s and ties for shirts with alligators on the

breasts (at least for the week). To “cut right through it,” Tad, Ludlum’s Mosaic is essentially what’s

happening, escape-wise, as the snow finally begins to melt this later winter.’

King closes the letter/book review,‘Well, got to sign off, Tad: I’m flying to Boston day after

tomorrow and Ivy wanted me to run down to the mall and see if B. Dalton has got the new John Saul

or maybe even the new Sidney Sheldon. She doesn’t like to come with me on these trips, even though

Grace is married, Billy’s working for E.F. Hutton in San Francisco, and Davey is at school most of

the time, she doesn’t like to fly. But when the home is empty, I guess she likes something to occupy

her mind.’

This article was originally published in the March 7, 1982 issue of Washington Post Book

World. Although this is its only appearance, it should be easy to secure as most large libraries have

The Washington Post in their archives on microfilm or microfiche.

Ross Thomas Stirs the Pot (16 October 1983)

King begins this piece with some very positive words indeed for Ross Thomas’s newest novel.

‘In a country that chooses to canonize a few of its many fine comic novelists and ignore the rest, Ross

Thomas is something of a secret. Missionary Stew is Thomas’s 19th novel (five of them were issued

under the pseudonym Oliver Bleeck), but the people who know and relish the work of Ishmael Reed,

Don DeLillo, and Peter DeVries do not know the work of Ross Thomas, and that seems a great

shame. Perhaps Missionary Stew, certainly the best of the Thomas novels I’ve read, will help to

rectify that situation. It is funny, cynical, and altogether delicious. If buying a novel is, as a friend of

mine once said, always a speculative investment for the reader, then take it from me—this one is a

blue-chip stock. Baby, you can’t go wrong.’

King has a knack for pinning down exactly why readers should pick up the book he is reviewing

(if he likes it, that is): ‘This is crisp, incisive, delightful stuff; you read it and say, “Yeah, that had

crossed my mind, but this guy pinned it down for me.”’ This is high praise indeed, considering many

King readers and fans have said the very same thing about his work.

This review was published in the October 16, 1983 edition of the Washington Post Book

World. Again, it should be easy to secure as most large libraries have The Washington Post in their

archives on microfilm or microfiche.

Childress Debut with ‘World’ Shows Uncanny Style and Eye for Detail (21 October 1984)

This review is of A World Made of Wire by Mark Childress, who happened to be Regional

Editor of The Atlanta Journal and The Atlanta Constitution. He begins, ‘This is a damned fine story.

Listen to a little bit of it and see if you don’t think so’; and then unfolds the initial events of the novel.

‘There are two common failings in a first novel—one is wild and emotional profligacy; the other

is over-control. I think it is that over-control I sense here, and not a failure of the heart. Besides,

over-control is better for novelists who are just beginning, especially when they are as talented as

Childress obviously is. Emotionally profligate novelists are all too often apt to drink themselves to

death, or something like that. I don’t want that to happen to Mark Childress, because he’s got the

makings.’ King closes, ‘This is an auspicious debut; here is a fellow who can only get better. And

when he does—hoo! That Mark Childress gone be some witchy boy.’

This review was originally published in October 21, 1984 issue of the Atlanta Journal-

Constitution. While the existence of the piece was known, it took the authors years to track down, as

most libraries don’t keep this publication in their archives. Other than a trip to Atlanta libraries or the

newspaper, the only possible way to get this article is to pay the somewhat exorbitant costs of having

the article copied and sent from a Georgia library.

What Went Down When Magyk Went Up (February 10, 1985)

King begins with a great ‘hooker’: ‘How good is this novel? Probably the most convincing thing

I can say on the subject is that it cost me money. After finishing Glitz, I went out to the bookstore at

my local mall and bought everything by Elmore Leonard I could find—the stuff I didn’t already own,

that is.’ King later reviewed Leonard’s novel The Hot Kid (see Gangster Rap in this chapter).

He concludes, ‘ Time magazine has called Mr. Leonard a “Dickens from Detroit.” I haven’t read

enough of him yet (give me a month or so) to agree, but his wit, his range of effective character

portrayal and his almost eerily exact ear for the tones and nuances of dialogue suggest Dickens to me.

Although it’s only February, I’ll venture a guess— Glitz may be the best crime novel of the year. Even

if it’s not, I’m sorry it took me so long to catch up to Mr. Leonard.’

This piece was published in the February 10, 1985 edition of The New York Times Book

Review. Most major libraries will have copies of The New York Times in their archives.

All-American Love Story (June 6, 1986)

King loves The Moon Pinnace by Thomas Williams and writes he’s been a fan of the author for

some time. In fact, he only has one bad thing to say about this novel, and even then is unable to be too

critical: ‘The worst thing about The Moon Pinnace is its title. Williams, who teaches at the

University of New Hampshire and who has nurtured an amazing number of young writers as well as

students who aspire to be writers, gives the impression of a man who realized he had written a novel

of potentially enormous popular appeal and so, almost as an act of penance, decided to give it the

most off-putting title he could think of. It fits; it’s symbolically correct; but the cold introduction it

makes to the story which follows in no way suggests the heart and heat of this novel, which is the

finest Williams has ever written.’

Concluding, King writes: ‘I’ve thought for the last 12 years that when it comes to people who

make stories, Thomas Williams is about the best we can do. He never dances, but he walks just as

straight and pretty as you could want, and he’s never been better than this. In The Moon Pinnace we

are listening to a man whose tendency to be pedantic never has a chance. By his will or against it, this

is an exuberant novel which also manages to be sober and thus convincing in its heat and hope.’

This review was published in the October 16, 1983 edition of the Washington Post Book

World. Although this is its only appearance, it should be easy to secure as most large libraries have

The Washington Post (perhaps the second most important American newspaper) in their archives on

microfilm or microfiche.

Casting a Lovely Light on Mysteries of Life (April 24, 1988)

This article reviews William Kennedy’s novel, Quinn’s Book . King begins by summing up the

novel neatly but without giving anything away: ‘The Quinn of William Kennedy’s new novel is

Daniel Quinn, and Quinn’s Book is the story—mostly but not entirely narrated by the gentleman

himself—of Quinn’s life. That life falls into two neat segments: Quinn the boy, an orphaned Irish lad

under the rough care of a ferryman named John the Brawn, and Quinn the man, a successful war

journalist in search of mysteries.’

He closes with a reference to this review’s title. ‘Kennedy is wise enough to offer no

explanations of the inexplicable (any more than he tries to explain Maud’s psychic ability or the

mysterious brass plate left to Daniel Quinn—in the bottom of the birdcage—by his mother). He offers

only illumination but that is quite enough. Quinn’s Book casts a lovely light, indeed.’

This review was published in the April 24, 1988 edition of the Times-Union, an Albany, New

York newspaper. While the existence of this piece was known, it took the authors several years to

track it down, as most libraries don’t archive this particular newspaper. Other than a trip to upstate

New York, the best way to secure this article is to pay the somewhat exorbitant costs of having this

article copied and sent from an Albany-area library.

Robert Marasco:Burnt Offerings(1988)

As this piece is included in a collection of writings about horror books, King talks about the

genre: ‘Horror stories are waking nightmares, and the best of them are whispering of very real fears

at the same time they are screaming of ghosts and demons and werewolves. It is the sound of these

two intertwined voices speaking together, one at top volume, the other very softly, that gives the good

tale of horror its dreamlike power, I think. But writers of horror very rarely attempt out-and-out

allegory, and the novels of this sort which come immediately to mind are not generally considered

horror stories at all: Lord of the Flies, for instance, or George Orwell’s political fable Animal

Farm.’

Of Burnt Offerings, King writes, ‘Marasco’s haunted house tale...lends the tale a richness and

resonance even really good horror stories rarely achieve. It is a cautionary and disturbing tale, and

one which comes highly recommended not just for fans of the genre but to the general reader.’

This piece is relatively easy to find. It appeared in the volume Horror: 100 Best Books, edited

by Stephen Jones and Kim Newman, published by Xanadu Books in limited and trade edition

hardcover; and was later reprinted in trade paperback in both the United States and the United

Kingdom.

The Gospel According to John Irving (March 5, 1989)

‘It is probably not my job to wonder if John Irving has set himself up for a colossal critical

pasting by writing A Prayer for Owen Meany, but I would be less than honest if I did not begin by

saying the idea had occurred to me. Somewhere in the back of my mind I could hear a chorus of

intellectual groans: “Not another Christ figure! ”’ King writes, opening this review. He loves this

novel, however and defends it against those potential critics. ‘Not to worry. The hero of John Irving’s

seventh novel (and he is a hero; Irving begins by quoting Leon Bloy: “Any Christian who is not a hero

is a pig”) isn’t just a Christ figure; he appears to be a blood relative. I suppose it’s possible to be

appalled by such novelistic license, but I was filled with delighted amazement at the idea. No one has

ever done Christ in the way John Irving does Him in A Prayer for Owen Meany. This is big time,

friends and neighbors.’

He closes with a compliment for Irving—a baseball analogy and reference to the novel: ‘Owen

fouled his pitch off when he finally got it; John Irving has gotten all of his, and parked it in the upper

deck.’

This review only appeared in the March 5, 1989 edition of the Washington Post Book World .

Obtaining this piece should prove simple, as major libraries carry The Washington Post and

consequently have older copies archived on either microfilm or microfiche.

The Fantastic Mr. Dahl (April 10, 1994)

This is a review of Roald Dahl: A Biography by Jeremy Treglown. King opens: ‘According to

the Puffin editions of his fabulously successful stories for children, Roald Dahl was “the World’s

Most Scrumdiddlyumptious Storyteller.” Perhaps. But, as Jeremy Treglown’s biography makes clear,

he lived a less than scrumdiddlyumptious life.’

He closes with a meaningful quote from the book itself: ‘“I visited Dahl’s grave when I began to

write this book,” Treglown concludes. “On it were a few, small, rather dilapidated toys—a plastic

parrot, a teddy bear, a broken jack-in-the-box.” It is perhaps with these gifts that my meaningful

critique of Roald Dahl’s work should begin. And perhaps where it should end, as well.”’ The title of

this review refers to a Dahl book, The Fantastic Mr. Fox.

This is another one of King’s Washington Post book reviews and was published in the April 10,

1994 edition of the Washington Post Book World . Again, any major library should have this

newspaper archived and it will be accessible on microfilm/microfiche.

Blood and Thunder in Concord (September 10, 1995)

For something of a change, this is a review of an older book, A Long Fatal Love Chase, by

Louisa May Alcott. King starts by referencing his own novel Rose Madder. ‘How much has the

suspense novel—subgenre “women stalked/women in peril”—changed over the last 130 years or so?

Well, consider: during the summer of 1992 I wrote a novel in which a woman named Rose leaves her

violent, mentally unstable husband and flees to another city. Here she is taken in at a women’s shelter

and begins to build a new life. She also meets a much gentler man who falls in love with her. While

all this is going on, her obsessed husband is hard at work, tracking her down.’

Of Alcott’s novel King says, ‘In 1856, Louisa May Alcott write A Long Fatal Love Chase, a

novel in which a woman named Rose leaves her violent, mentally unstable husband and flees to

another city. Here she is taken in at a women’s shelter (a convent, in the Alcott version) and begins to

build a new life. This life includes a much gentler man who falls in love with her (That he happens to

be a priest was only one of the problems Alcott had with the subject matter of her book). While all

this is going on, her obsessed husband is hard at work, tracking her down.’

This piece was originally published in the September 10, 1995 edition of The New York Times

Book Review. It is easy to track down as The New York Times is one of the major newspapers—any

significant public or university library should have it available on microfilm.

[Untitled] (March 1997)

King writes glowingly of Stephen Dobyns’ new novel, The Church of Dead Girls in this letter.

He says it is ‘a glorious throwback to the suspense novels of the 40s, 50s and 60s (there’s even a

nifty little tip of the skimmer to Daphne DuMaurier’s Jamaica Inn), where the key word was still

“novel” and not “suspense”—where the latter arose from the former. I don’t think there’s been a

novelist’s novel as scary as this one at least since the early seventies, when John Farris wrote All

Heads Turn as the Hunt Goes By and When Michael Calls159. Those, as good as they were, were

cold works, stories from a chilly mind. There’s nothing cold about The Church of Dead Girls.’ King

has something of an attachment to Dobyns’ work. He dedicated an obscure poem, Dino, to the

novelist and poet160 and, in Insomnia, Dorrance Marstellar gave Ralph Roberts a copy of one of

Dobyns’ collections of poems, Cemetery Nights!

King closes this letter/review with, ‘Certainly I don’t expect to read a more frightening novel

this year. Very rich, very scary, very satisfying. Thanks for sending it, feel free to extract a blurb if

you feel it will help the book, and please convey a copy of this letter—along with my heartfelt

congratulations—to Stephen Dobyns.’

The average King collector or reader will find this piece extremely difficult to find. It is a

reproduction of a faxed letter from the author in praise of The Church of Dead Girls by Stephen

Dobyns and was only distributed with Advance Reader’s Copies of this book as a promotion.

Sequel Surpasses First Two Books (aka Hannibal the Cannibal) (9 June 1999)

This piece is a review of Thomas Harris’s novel Hannibal. As most readers will know, that is a

sequel to his novel The Silence of the Lambs. King also reviewed Silence’s prequel Red Dragon in

1981 (see The Cannibal and the Cop in this chapter.)

Obviously, King has long been a fan of Harris’s work and this novel is no exception. ‘ Hannibal

is full of rough bumps and little insights as sharp as one of the doctor’s own needles; Harris observes

America with a cultured civility and perfect grasp of Southern idiom that only Tom Wolfe can match.’

He closes writing of the future for the Hannibal Lecter character, while making reference to the

novel itself. ‘Is this the end for the doctor and the F.B.I. agent? Harris is crafty enough to leave the

door to a fourth installment open, but just a crack. I hope with all my heart that he will write again,

and sooner rather than later—novels that so bravely and cleverly erase the line between popular

fiction and literature are very much to be prized—but I would rather see him bar this door and go

down a different corridor. Familiarity, even with a monster, breeds contempt. As it is, I like to think

of Dr. Lecter in his Maple Leafs warm-up jersey, losing his carefully husbanded gourmet meal to the

little boy. He takes the loss quite well, I might add. Even genially. Why, a man like that could steal

your heart. Not to mention you liver...your sweetbreads... your....’

This piece was first published as Sequel Surpasses First Two Books in the June 9, 1999 edition

of Canadian newspaper, The Ottawa Citizen; and then in the June 13, 1999 edition of The New York

Times Book Review, as Hannibal the Cannibal. Obviously, the more accessible version of this piece

is the latter. Any major library will have back issues archived on microfilm and a copy is easy to

obtain.

Wild About Harry (July 23, 2000)

This is a review of the fourth book in J. K. Rowling’s wildly popular Harry Potter series, Harry

Potter and the Goblet of Fire. King also reviewed the fifth book, Harry Potter and the Order of the

Phoenix (see Potter Gold directly below).

He starts with his accident and describes how he fell in love with Rowling’s Harry Potter

series. ‘I read the first novel in the Harry Potter series, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone , in

April 1999 and was only moderately impressed. But in April 1999 I was pretty much all right. Two

months later I was involved in a serious road accident that necessitated a long and painful period of

recuperation. During the early part of this period I read Potters 2 and 3 ( Chamber of Secrets,

Prisoner of Azkaban) and found myself a lot more than moderately wowed. In the miserably hot

summer of ’99, the Harry Potters (and the superb detective novels of Dennis Lehane) became a kind

of lifeline for me. During July and August I found myself getting through my unpleasant days by aiming

my expectations at evening, when I would drag my hardware-encumbered leg into the kitchen, eat

fresh fruit and ice cream and read about Harry Potter’s adventures at Hogwarts, a school for young

wizards (motto: “Never tickle a sleeping dragon”).’

There are millions of Harry Potter fans in the world (of every age). King ends referencing this

modern-day phenomenon and half-jokingly referring readers to his own body of work. ‘And if these

millions of readers are awakened to the wonders and rewards of fantasy at 11 or 12...well, when they

get to age 16 or so, there’s this guy named King.’

This article was published in the July 23, 2000 edition of The New York Times Book Review . It

is easy to secure, as most major libraries will have back issues of The New York Times in their

archives.

Potter Gold (July 11, 2003)

This is a review of the fifth book in J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series, Harry Potter and the

Order of the Phoenix. King loves the series and had reviewed the previous novel in 2000 (see Wild

About Harry directly above).

He begins by giving a brief run-down of the current situation at the infamous Hogwarts School.

He also introduces the structure of the article itself, which is composed of questions and answers

about the series. ‘Volume 5 of J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series finds our hero and his friends

cramming for (and agonizing over) their end-of-term exams, known at Hogwarts School as O. W. L.

S. (Ordinary Wizarding Levels). Of course Harry has a few other things on his plate—the growing

menace of Voldemort, aka He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, and his serious crush on the beautiful Cho

Chang are only two of them—but here, in the spirit of the exam motif, are some questions (and

answers) of my own. The first is the most important...and may, in the end, be the only one that matters

in what is probably the most review proof book to come along since a little bestseller called the

Bible.’

This piece was published in the July 11, 2003 issue of Entertainment Weekly magazine. A

facsimile of King’s handwritten five-page manuscript of this article was posted on the Entertainment

Weekly web site as ‘ Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, by J. K. Rowling’ in July 2003.

Issues of EW can be accessed at most significant libraries; and copies can be purchased from

used magazine dealers.

The Turn of the Screwy (December 28, 2003)

This is a review of Alice Thompson’s novel Pharos: A Ghost Story. King explains his

experience with the book: ‘I came to Pharos expecting either a genteel ghost story in the 19th-century

style, or a 21st-century exercise in ambivalence and ambiguity (a great many smart young authors

seem to feel it necessary to do one of these before moving on to the three Ds: drugs, depression, and

divorce). What I got was a gaudy gothic music video of a novella that whirls with weirdness and

doesn’t make a lick of sense. The only thing I’m absolutely sure of after reading the book twice is that

Pharos was a large lighthouse built on an island near Alexandria, Egypt, and destroyed by an

earthquake in the 14th century. I know this interesting factoid thanks to Google; Alice Thompson

doesn’t bother passing it on.’

Toward the end of the article King writes, ‘In what could be a summation of the novel itself, he

[Cameron] muses: “It was a depiction of...life with the meaning taken out: no narrative, no analysis,

no thought. Just excerpts.” Yep, that’s Pharos: mostly excerpts with the meaning taken out. And a few

ghosts on the side.’ Now, these comments and the ones from the introduction may sound negative, at

least at first. However, earlier in the review King says, ‘In a longer book, all these peculiarities—the

lack of explanation for the now-you-see-it, now-you-don’t buried treasure, for example, or the

unanswered question of just whom Grace is haunting (and why)—would drive me crazy. But because

Pharos is as short as it is, and as energetic as it is (it may not make a lick of sense, but Thompson

keeps the pedal to the metal, by God), I sort of liked it. Admired it, even.’

This article was originally published in the December 28, 2003 edition of The Boston Sunday

Globe. The Globe is a large newspaper, although not as important as The New York Times or The

Washington Post . Microfiche copies will be available in some large US libraries; or a copy can be

procured from major Massachusetts libraries, although this could cost up to $15.

Gangster Rap (May 8, 2005)

In King’s first published review in nearly eighteen months he turns to Elmore Leonard’s novel

The Hot Kid. He loves Leonard’s work and has probably read his entire canon (see What Went Down

When Magyk Went Up in this chapter). Opening, King talks of Leonard’s career and his newest

offering: ‘Elmore Leonard’s first published story was “Trail of the Apache.” It appeared in Argosy.

The year was 1951. Harry Truman was president, and your faithful correspondent was still eating the

ends of his crayons. Fifty-four years and 39 novels later, you might think the prolific Mr. Leonard

would be content to phone one in. You certainly wouldn’t expect him to have produced his best novel

at the age of 79, but he seems to have done it. And hell, why not? Robertson Davies came to full

flower as a novelist late in life and won a boatload of literary prizes. It’s perhaps time Leonard was

given the same consideration.’

He closes: ‘ The Hot Kid will no doubt become a movie, probably with some current Hollywood

hot kid like Colin Farrell in the title role, but if I were you, I’d stick with the book...and then maybe

rent Arthur Penn’s Bonnie and Clyde. Both works are outlaw classics.’

This article was originally published in the May 8, 2005 edition of The Boston Globe, published

as The Boston Sunday Globe. The Globe is a large newspaper, although not as important as The New

York Times or The Washington Post. Microfiche copies will be available in some large US libraries

or a copy can be procured from major Massachusetts libraries, although this could cost up to $15.

In this chapter we’ve seen King review wildly popular books, such as the Harry Potter series;

well-known books like Red Dragon and Hannibal; genre works, for instance those by Elmore

Leonard and Ray Bradbury; and even the totally obscure works of little-known authors. This, along

with the introductions of works by other authors (covered in a separate chapter) and his pop-culture

contributions in King’s Garbage Truck and The Pop of King, give us a strong insight into King’s

eclectic reading habits and interests, all the while shedding light on influences that may impact his

fiction.

We can certainly expect more such reviews as the years pass, although it is notable that the

number of dedicated book reviews from his pen seem to have declined at the very time he has

invested regularly in The Pop of King column for Entertainment Weekly magazine.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR,

GUEST COLUMNS

If there’s one American belief I hold above all others, it’s that those who would set

themselves up in judgment on matters of what is “right” and what is “best” should be given no

rest; that they should have to defend their behavior most stringently. No book, record, or film

should be banned without a full airing of the issues. As a nation, we’ve been through too many

fights to preserve our rights of free thought to let them go just because some prude with a

highlighter doesn’t approve of them.

—From The Book-Banners: Adventure in Censorship is

Stranger Than Fiction.

This chapter takes a look at the numerous letters and guest columns King has published

throughout his career. In fact, King was writing this material and getting it published years before his

professional writing career even began! The first such piece appeared in a self-published newspaper

King’s brother David produced, with Steve’s assistance, when they were young. Several such pieces

were also published in the campus newspaper, and even TV Guide, during King’s college career. The

last to date was published in The New York Times at the end of 2005.

Contributions such as these letters and opinion pieces are valuable, allowing as they do King’s

public expressions of views ranging from trivial to important topics. They span the breadth of his

career and open doors to aspects of his work that may not be clear at first glance.

Many of the pieces covered here appeared in the Bangor Daily News. Copies of Bangor Daily

News articles may be secured from the microfiche files at the Fogler Library of the University of

Maine at Orono (at no charge, if you actually visit), from the newspaper direct (at a significant fee),

and from visiting the Maine State Library in Augusta.

T.V. News (Summer 1959)

This short piece is the first of King’s non-fiction ever published. He very briefly reviews the

Fall television season, mentioning a few specific programs and their respective genres. It first

appeared in the “Summer Special” 1959 issue of Dave’s Rag 161, a self-published, typed and

mimeographed, community newspaper King’s brother David ran and Stephen assisted with. No

original copies of this issue of the newspaper are known to exist other than, presumably, the one that

was later reproduced (probably owned by David King). However, this piece is quite readily

available as the entire issue of Dave’s Rag was reprinted in Stephen Spignesi’s wonderfully

comprehensive The Complete Stephen King Encyclopedia, first published in 1991.162

From The Nitty-Gritty (February 22, 1968)

This is a humorous letter to the editor which presents best (“Super Cool”) and worst (“Super

Out-of-It”) awards for the year 1967. King refers to himself as a representative of a fictitious campus

society called NGUTSCMC (Nitty-Gritty Up-Tight Society for a Campus with More Cools). This is

probably the first mention of King’s made-up group, later mentioned in the April 24, 1969, July 18,

1969 and October 20, 1969 King’s Garbage Truck columns. He presents the awards with more than

a little humor, in common with his later Maine Campus work.

This piece was originally published in the February 22, 1968 issue of The Maine Campus, the

student newspaper for the University of Maine at Orono. Re-discovered in September 2005 by Rocky

Wood, the only way to secure a copy is by taking a trip to the University’s library and making a copy

from the microfilm in their archives.

Untitled (July 13-19, 1968)

‘Drama—any kind of drama—is based upon conflict. And conflict often results in violence,’

King writes in response to those who feel all violence should be eliminated from television

programming. This letter concerns a theme that comes up again and again in King’s non-fiction

writing: violence and censorship in the visual arts.

This letter was published in the July 13-19, 1968 issue of TV Guide magazine. The King

community only came to know of this piece a few years ago. Several original copies of the magazine

are known to be in existence and sometimes surface for sale. King’s unknown status at the time of

publication and the age of the magazine make it a good bet that this one won’t be getting any less rare!

Check with specialist used magazine and King sources.

Lurching Charm (January 16, 1969)

This piece was originally published in the January 16, 1969 issue of The Maine Campus, the

student newspaper for the University of Maine at Orono. It has only recently been revealed to the

King community, in Stephen King: A Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most Popular Author . 163

The only way to secure a copy of this is by taking a trip to the University’s library and making a copy

from the microfilm in their archives.

King’s sometimes outrageous humor again shows itself in this lengthy letter to the editor. It

opens with pseudo-praise of The Maine Campus and throughout King poses mostly outrageous ideas

for improvement of the newspaper. The editors respond by calling ‘Steve King’ ‘NUTS!!’ and ask

him to stop by their office when he has the time. Though this is not confirmed, it is likely that this

meeting led to King contributing the infamous ‘Garbage Truck’ column to the newspaper (see our

Early Columns—King’s Garbage Truck chapter).

King Cat (December 11, 1969)

This is a letter to the editor of The Maine Campus regarding a reprint of one of King’s Garbage

Truck columns in a Maine newspaper. King was upset because a fellow student, William A.

Philbrook, passed on a copy of King’s November 13, 1969 column to a local newspaper, the

Rockland Courier-Gazette and misrepresented him in doing so. That newspaper subsequently

reprinted the column along with a letter from Philbrook commenting on the piece. The title of King’s

letter was in reference to The Black Cat, the column of the Gazette where King’s piece was

reprinted.

This letter appeared in the December 11, 1969 issue of The Maine Campus, the student

newspaper for the University of Maine, Orono. The best way to secure a copy is by taking a trip to the

University’s library and making a copy from the microfilm in their archives.

Cancelled Stamp (February 5, 1970)

In this letter to the editor King complains about the ‘revolting and nauseating’ full-page picture

printed as the cover of the January 15, 1970 issue of The Maine Campus. Once again, the letter and

the editor’s response are extremely sarcastic, as King is actually jokingly referring to a poster of

himself, in which he is crazily pointing a shotgun at the reader as a warning to “Study Dammit!’ This

picture is rather well known among King fans, as it has been reprinted many times.

The letter was originally published in the February 5, 1970 issue of The Maine Campus, the

student newspaper for the University of Maine at Orono. It was rediscovered in September 2005 by

Rocky Wood, and the only realistic way of gaining a copy is by taking a trip to the University’s

library and making a copy from the microfilm in their archives.

Toothy Trauma (January 7, 1971)

This is a letter to the editor of the Campus jokingly warning Chancellor McNeil (Chancellor of

the University of Maine system at that time) to beware of the master vampire, Dracula! King signs the

letter ‘in the cause of common decency.’

It appeared in the January 7, 1971 issue of The Maine Campus, the student newspaper for the

University of Maine at Orono. It has only recently been revealed to the Stephen King community, in

Stephen King: A Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most Popular Author . The only realistic way

of securing a copy is by taking a trip to the University’s library and making a copy from the microfilm

in their archives.

Constant Reader: Gone to the Movies (March 1976)

This is a letter to the editor about why people were turning away from reading books for

pleasure. It was later republished in an article discussing readers turning away from books and

toward other entertainment media.

King’s opinion—‘The audience is shrinking. The final necessity of any writer through all the

years since the craft was refined to an art is that engaging person the novelists of the 18th century

referred to as Constant Reader. I know that fellow well because I am part of his corporate

personality...I am more Constant Reader than I am Constant Writer.’ This quote is very important as it

partly explains why King uses the term ‘Constant Reader’ so often.

The letter originally appeared in The Maine Times newspaper for March 1976 under an

unknown title (no copies have surfaced in the King community). It was later reprinted under an article

headed Constant Reader: Gone to the Movies in the November/December 1976 issue of Coda:

Poets & Writers Newsletter. The chances of tracking down an original of this newsletter are quite

slim, as it took several years for one collector to track down an issue and provide a photocopy for

our research purposes.

Not Guilty (October 24, 1976)

In this guest piece, King discusses why he feels both guilty and not guilty when comparing and

contrasting publishing deals between his then recent novel ‘Salem’s Lot and another recent book,

David Madden’s Bijou. King feels guilty because Madden worked on Bijou for six years and made

$15,000 while he worked on ‘Salem’s Lot for eight months and stands to make $500,000—and he

thinks Madden’s is a better novel! However, King ultimately states that he does not feel guilty,

because ‘Salem’s Lot is more accessible than Bijou: ‘There’s an art to accessibility, too, although it

may be of a more humble sort than that which belongs to the artist who will not hew his peg to fit

accessibility’s hole.’

This article first appeared in the October 24, 1976 issue of The New York Times Book Review

as that week’s The Guest Word column. One can easily secure a copy from the microfilm at almost

any large library. It was later reprinted in the extremely rare horror fanzine Chernobog in the 1980s,

copies of which are almost impossible to track down.

The Student Talks Back (Fall 1977)

This is a letter addressed to a Professor Hamilton, regarding his review of King’s novel

‘Salem’s Lot in the Fall 1976 issue of Maine Alumnus. King tells Hamilton he believes he made a

mistake in reporting that King had essentially jumped on the bandwagon by writing a horror novel:

‘The fact is that I’ve always been interested in the occult and the supernatural.’ This letter also shows

that even early in his career, King had to defend the literary merit of his works: ‘It does rather irritate

me to see you dismiss the supernatural, the occult, the fantastic, and the whole literature of the ghost-

story with such light airiness—maybe it’s your journalistic bent.’ This quote foreshadows problems

King faces to this day regarding the acceptance of his work in certain circles.

Interestingly, he states that ‘Salem’s Lot ‘is, in a lot of ways, my love song about Maine—the

book I used to hope I’d grow up to write someday when I was just a kid hitchhiking around the

Lewiston-Auburn-Lisbon-Brunswick area.’

The letter was originally published in the Fall 1977 issue of Maine Alumnus, the University of

Maine’s alumni magazine. The best method of securing a copy is through the archives of the library at

the University of Maine. These magazines surface for sale on the collector’s market, but only rarely.

Don’t Be Cruel (April 30—May 6, 1983)

This letter is essentially short praise for a Dave Marsh164 article on Elvis Presley titled Elvis:

How He Rocked the World in the April 9, 1983 issue of TV Guide. King also uses the space to recall

some rock and roll memories from his youth: ‘The first record I ever owned was a 78-rpm of “Hound

Dog” backed by “Don’t Be Cruel,” and when I listened to those tunes I felt about 10 feet tall and I

grinned so hard that it felt like the corners of my mouth would meet in the back and the top of my head

would simply topple off.’

It appeared in the April 30-May 6, 1983 issue of TV Guide. Even though it is quite old copies of

this issue can sometimes be obtained through used magazine dealers and King resellers.

Untitled (Spring 1983)

This is a letter to the editor in response to a Dark Horizons magazine writer who claimed

Stephen King was actually Richard Bachman, the author of Rage, The Long Walk , Roadwork and The

Running Man. King denies the truth in the letter but, as everyone now knows, Bachman actually was

a King pseudonym. He even goes so far as to say that he has personally met the other author:

‘Bachman is indeed a pen-name, for a superannuated hippie-type who lives in New Hampshire. I

know who he is, and tell you with no qualms at all that he is authentically crazy.’ Of course, King

later made statements like this in jest, after the news of Bachman’s true identity was broken.

The letter appeared in the Spring 1983 issue of Dark Horizons magazine. A King collector

brought this rather important piece to our attention in late 2005 during the research for Justin Brooks’

King Bibliography and this book. Copies rarely appear for resale.

Forget Hermon (June 22, 1983)

Forget Hermon is a short letter to the editor regarding King’s home state of Maine and, in

particular, the small town of Hermon, of which he was a former resident. King speaks briefly here of

his personal experiences in the town: ‘In Hermon I was evicted from my home, harried by my

landlord and someone shot my dog. My wife carried the poor mutt out of the back field with one leg

hanging by a string.’ King ends the letter by stating he is sure that there are some good people in

Hermon but it will never be a favorite place of his.

It was first printed in the June 22, 1983 issue of the Bangor Daily News.

A Letter from Stephen King (January 1984)

This is a lengthy letter (almost an article) King wrote to Fantasy Review magazine in response

to Karl Edward Wagner’s column in issue #62 regarding anthologies and reprint publishing. King is

upset here because of the type of marketing used to sell anthologies; namely fantasy and horror

anthologies needing to have at least one ‘brand name author.’ Regarding the prominent use of his own

name on the cover of these anthologies, King writes: ‘I also think it’s damned unfair for the writer in

question to have to carry such a burden...and if anyone in publishing thinks I’m going to carry it,

they’re wrong. I’m not the rain, the snow or some tornado sweeping across the plains, or any

elemental force—I’m just old Steve King from up in Maine, and if anyone out there in Publisherville

is blaming me for ruining their literary pork-belly futures, I’m here to tell them they are so full of shit

they squeak.’

He opines there are plenty of great authors, some who were around before him, who are being

shoved aside so he and other big name authors can be bandied about on the covers of these

anthologies. King concludes with another sharp jab at the concept: ‘I hate that appellation of the Big

Name Author (although I am delighted not to have to worry about where the next house payment is

coming from), but if I have to have it, I’ll try to be responsible and not hurt anyone. That doesn’t

include, however, being shoved forward like a kooch dancer at a county fair. That shit demeans me,

and it also demeans all the men and women in this field who taught me how to see my dreams.’

King collectors may recall that the author of the original article, Karl Edward Wagner has edited

several anthologies that reprinted short stories by King. The letter ran in the January 1984 issue of

Fantasy Review magazine. Copies of this issue can sometimes be obtained through used magazine and

King dealers.

Untitled (1984)

This is a letter in which King writes to humorous film reviewer JoeBob Briggs (a pseudonym of

John Bloom). King shows his own sense of humor by utilizing the exaggerated style of a stereotypical

Maine Yankee. He also writes about his forthcoming film project Cat’s Eye : ‘It ain’t a real smart

piece of work, but it ain’t no indoor bullstuff either, if you know what I mean. You might give it two

or three stars if you ain’t feeling picky that night.’

King later wrote the introduction ( This Guy is Really Scary) to Joe Bob Briggs’ book, Joe Bob

Goes to the Drive-in, published in 1987165 (see our chapter, Introducing the Work of Others).

This letter was published in a ‘fanzine,’ The Bewilderbeast (issue No. 5) in 1984. Copies of this

piece are extremely difficult to find. For the most part fanzines have very small print runs and

distribution and this piece was only discovered when a copy showed up on eBay in late 2005.

Attacked by a Wet Poodle? (January 14, 1985)

‘Reading Charles Leerhsen’s piece on “The Talisman” (Books, Dec. 24) was a bit like having a

close encounter with an ugly-tempered poodle dog that bites your ankle and then retreats to a safe

distance, yapping and peeing on itself with excitement.’ This sentence opens a brief letter to the editor

o f Newsweek magazine regarding a review of the first novel King wrote with British author Peter

Straub. He was upset because Leerhsen led the authors to believe that he was doing a piece on the

marketing of the book, and wrote a review instead.

The letter originally appeared in the January 14, 1985 issue of Newsweek magazine. Copies can

be obtained fairly easily from the usual sources for older and used magazines. If one only wants a

photocopy any larger library should have back issues in their holdings.

Ephen Stephen (February 13, 1985)

A lot of uninformed people mistakenly spell Stephen King’s name as Steven. In fact, in some of

the very earliest venues in which his work appeared, the byline reads “Steven King.” This short letter

is about the Bangor Daily News constantly misspelling his first name. ‘My Lord! I’ve been living

here in Bangor for five years now, and I’m still Steven King to your writers and copy editors’, King

notes.

The letter first appeared in the February 13, 1985 issue of the Bangor Daily News.

Postscript on the King/Bachman Connection (March 5, 1985)

This letter is in response to articles in the Bangor Daily News breaking the news of King’s

Richard Bachman pseudonym, particularly claims that King orchestrated the revelation of his pen

name to benefit movie deals. He also uses this space to send a message to fans who were upset over

the secret: ‘The readers who feel betrayed, bitter, or angry about my use of this name are the sort of

people who confuse enjoyment with ownership. These are also the sort of people who have somehow

gotten the idea that books are not real things at all but something disembodied—thought-balloons.

Because they live in a society where access to the printed word is the rule instead of the exception,

they react like spoiled children denied an ice-cream cone when they discover they cannot have what

they want at the exact moment they want it.’

The letter originally appeared in the March 5, 1985 issue of King’s hometown paper, the Bangor

Daily News.

Onward and Upward (April 24, 1985)

This letter to the editor sarcastically thanks the Bangor Daily News for censoring the popular

comic strip Doonesbury. King seems angry here and his biting sarcasm is no surprise given his strong

feelings against censorship and for freedom of speech. He writes: ‘I hope it signals the beginning of a

new News policy and a broadening of editorial responsibility. You might begin by refusing to run

anything at all having to do with sex or sexually related diseases; you could cheer people up and also

calm them down by omitting bad financial news; assure support for our president by refusing to carry

such unpleasant stories as his visit to the SS version of Boot Hill; and these are really just a few of

the “creative management” possibilities which the censoring of the Doonesbury strip hint at.’

The piece was originally printed in the April 24, 1985 issue of the Bangor Daily News.

King Testifies (May 1985)

This letter was in response to a book review in the April 1985 issue of FantasyReview. The

review was by Helen Purcell and alleged King was the author of a pornographic novel, Love

Lessons, published as ‘by John Wilson’. This review caused King fans to snap up as many copies as

they could of Love Lessons and King didn’t want his devotees fooled. He states, ‘I am dismayed at

being misrepresented in this fashion and dismayed that no one at Fantasy Review asked for a

confirmation or denial before running the review, but mostly I am anxious that collectors not be

fleeced in such an unsavory business as this one.’ King explains that he is not the author of this novel,

though he did try to write an erotic novel in 1968 while he was in college (he wrote forty pages and

gave up).

An interesting aside to this piece is the letter that follows King’s, titled ‘Lawyer Threatens.’

From King’s lawyers, and addressed to Fantasy Review magazine, it states that Purcell’s review is

‘highly libelous.’

The letter was first printed in Fantasy Review for May 1985. It was subsequently reprinted

(untitled) in Locus; as Random Factors—Letters in science-fiction Chronicle: The Monthly SF and

Fantasy Newsmagazine in July 1985; and as The King Speaks in The Twilight Zone Magazine for

October 1985. The Twilight Zone, Fantasy Review and Locus appearances are the easiest to source,

through the usual used magazine dealers. The science-fiction Chronicle appearance is quite rare and

was only brought to the attention of the King community recently.

Regis Reprimandum(December 1985)

This letter is in response to Jack Chalker’s article about the Philtrum Press edition of King’s

novel, The Eyes of the Dragon. King references the mistakes Fantasy Review made about the identity

of the author of Love Letters (see directly above); and corrects Chalker’s numerous mistakes

regarding the circumstances of King’s privately-owned, specialty press limited edition of his novel.

He is upset at having to correct mistakes about himself at every turn: ‘I am damned tired of

defending my reputation and my integrity in these pages. If you guys are gonna publish, it’s time you

fucking quit this bush-league journalism. I hope that the next time Fantasy Review does a piece either

on me or concerning my work, that the editor will do the fair thing and consult me first.’

The letter was first published in Fantasy Review for December 1985; and reprinted as Fie on

Fantasy in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter for January 1986. The Castle Rock

appearance is probably the easiest place for collectors to obtain a copy, although the Fantasy Review

appearance can also be obtained from the usual used magazine sources.

A King (1985)

This is an extremely short letter to Fangoria magazine, stating King is quite happy to see his

name and talk of his works grace their pages once again. ‘What a relief to see my name in the new

issue of Fangoria—it was an even greater relief to see you will be doing stories on Cat’s Eye and

Silver Bullet in an upcoming issue or issues.’

It was published in Fangoria magazine (Issue No. 45) in 1985. Copies of this magazine can be

obtained from the usual used magazine sources.

King Vs. Chalker, One Last Round (May 1986)

This is another letter regarding Jack Chalker at Fantasy Review (see also Regis Reprimandum

and King Testifies ). King runs through eight-and-a-half points regarding mistakes made by Chalker

and the magazine and closes the letter with this statement about the whole affair: ‘I’m not even really

mad anymore. I was the first time, because you startled the living shit out of me. Now I’m simply

trying to pass on the message: don’t be a slob. Don’t clear your remarks with your wife, the CIA, or

the Pope—but try to get your facts straight or won’t nobody believe you.’

The letter appeared in the May 1986 issue of Fantasy Review magazine. Collectors interested in

obtaining a copy will be able to source it from used magazine specialists.

Whining About the Movies in Bangor: Take That, ‘Top Gun’ (April 9, 1987)

King begins this guest column: ‘“Say, Ezry! Hold up there, hoss! Didja know that us folks down

Bangor who like to go to the movin pitchers every once in a while ain’t nothing but a bunch of

whiners? Oh, ayuh! Says so right in the paper! I’ll have to tell Mother! ”’ He is responding to an

article the previous week in which the General Cinema Corporation implied Bangor moviegoers

were being thrown a bone by the company bringing two artistic films to the area (David Lynch’s

masterpiece, Blue Velvet and James Ivory’s A Room with a View).

This piece once again shows King defending lesser-known artists who actually have talent, this

time in the medium of film. ‘The General Cinema rep knows the real reason these pictures don’t play

in Bangor, and so do I. Bucks. Pictures with small print runs are not going to lose here, but many will

just break even. What good is that? Why take an even break on a Danish picture like “The Elevator”

when you can just leave a print of “Top Gun” that can’t find work anywhere else in its current venue?

You don’t make much, true, but you make a little, and you save the shipping and booking charges

you’d have to pay to open the theater to something else.’

King ends with a defense of the area’s movie-going public: ‘We may be at the end of the pipe,

but we’re not stupid, not whiners, and not indifferent to either quality cinema or the brave

independent experiment in the field. We’re just stuck with what they’ll give us.’

The column appeared in the April 9, 1987 issue of the Bangor Daily News.

Untitled (December 23-29, 1987)

The author King responds to Bangor writer Rosalind Warren’s negative comments on King’s

‘Ever Et Raw Meat?’ and Other Weird Questions in The New York Times Book Review ; his letter is

centered around this notion: ‘Rosalind Warren’s irritation with my piece in the New York Times Book

Review and her self-proclaimed status as one of Bangor’s least successful writers just might have the

same root cause: a failure to grasp the concept of universality.’

The letter appeared in the December 23-29, 1987 issue of The Bangor Review newspaper, a

free local weekly publication. It was only brought to light in late 2005 by King researcher Jonathan

Reitan, who discovered it in a box of papers that had belonged to the late King super-collector

Charlie Fried. It is next to impossible to secure a copy, as this newspaper is apparently not archived

at any library.

Untitled (December 1987)

This is a very brief letter (dated October 21, 1987) from King to Arlen Ettinger regarding the

auction of the Forrest J. Ackerman Collection, and the man himself.

It was printed in science-fiction, Fantasy, Horror—The World of Forrest J. Ackerman at

Auction—Guernsey’s, a catalogue for an auction held December 10-13, 1987 at Guernsey’s in New

York City (along with the letter noted directly below). A copy of this booklet surfaced on eBay in

early 2006, but collectors probably won’t have much luck trying to track one down.

Untitled (December 1987)

This is a short letter to the editor of Famous Monsters of Filmland (Forrest J. Ackerman),

written by Stephen King at the age of fourteen (in 1961 or 1962). He writes he’s been submitting

stories for a few years and that the story accompanying his letter is intended for the “O. Henry’s

Comet” section of the magazine.

The letter was printed in science-fiction, Fantasy, Horror—The World of Forrest J. Ackerman

at Auction—Guernsey’s , a catalogue for an auction that was held December 10-13, 1987 at

Guernsey’s in New York City (along with the letter noted directly above). A copy of this booklet

surfaced on eBay in early 2006, as noted above.

King on Firestarter: Who’s to Blame? (February 1991)

This letter is in response to Mark Lester’s angry comments about King’s public criticism of

Lester’s film adaptation of Firestarter. King goes on to briefly talk about technical aspects of the film

that he didn’t agree with and of the overall piece he says, ‘I don’t blame Mark Lester a whole lot, for

the way the movie turned out or for his angry reaction to my remarks, I imagine the whole thing was a

painful experience for him—one he’d rather forget—and I’m sure I was part of it. I’ve enjoyed most

of his other films.’

The letter appeared in the February 1991 issue of Cinefantastique magazine. Copies of this

magazine can be obtained fairly easily from the usual sources for older and used magazines.

Oscarama (April 12, 1991)

King uses this short letter to defend actress Kathy Bates’ performance as Annie Wilkes in the

film adaptation of his novel Misery. Entertainment Weekly magazine had previously made comments

suggesting that the Oscar nomination for her performance was actually to her detriment because it

came from work done in a Stephen King movie. King says Bates ‘did a great job’ and that he is

starting to understand how and why Spike Lee ‘manages to stay so pissed off at you guys in the

critical press.’

The letter appeared in the April 12, 1991 issue of Entertainment Weekly magazine. Copies can

be obtained fairly easily from the usual sources for older and used magazines.

From Stephen King (July-August 1991)

This short piece is an open letter to rare bookseller Barry R. Levin. King reproaches him for

selling copies of Nebel, the German bootleg edition of King’s novella The Mist. He writes, ‘you and

I both know that the limited edition of The Mist, like the limited edition of IT (titled Es in German),

was not authorized and was produced in arrant violation of my copyright.’ Nebel was limited to 250

copies and has since become a very expensive rarity among King collectors, with copies selling for

as high as $1,300. It is bound in black leather with a red velour slipcase and is arguably the true

world’s first edition (if an illegal one).

The letter was published in the July-August 1991 issue of Mystery Scene magazine. Copies may

be obtained through the usual used magazine resources, though this one is quite a bit rarer than others.

Silence of the Lambs (November 17, 1991)

This short letter was written in response to Walter Kendrick’s review of King’s novel Needful

Things. King takes aim at the high level of ‘academic arrogance’ used in the review of his book and

defends those who read for pleasure rather than for a living.

It appeared in the November 17, 1991 issue of the Washington Post Book World . The easiest

way to obtain a copy is from a larger library that keeps microfilm of The Washington Post

newspaper.

The Book-Banners: Adventure in Censorship is Stranger Than Fiction (March 20, 1992)

This guest column once again shows King railing against censorship and defending freedom of

speech. Over the years King has had to deal with his books being banned in libraries all over the

world (for more information on this see Banned Books and Other Concerns: The Virginia Beach

Lecture in our Opinion—Venturing Into Politics chapter). He writes, ‘If there’s one American belief

I hold above all others, it’s that those who would set themselves up in judgment on matters of what is

“right” and what is “best” should be given no rest; that they should have to defend their behavior most

stringently. No book, record, or film should be banned without a full airing of the issues. As a nation,

we’ve been through too many fights to preserve our rights of free thought to let them go just because

some prude with a highlighter doesn’t approve of them.’

The piece was originally published in the March 20, 1992 issue of the Bangor Daily News.

On ‘Rampage’ (November 27, 1992)

This is an extremely short letter regarding a harsh review of William Friedkin’s film Rampage

in a previous issue of Entertainment Weekly magazine. ‘To review this fierce, emotional, and

spiritually challenging movie on the basis of its legal stance is the act of a critic too busy counting

trees to see there’s a forest in front of him.’

It appeared in the November 27, 1992 issue of Entertainment Weekly magazine. Copies of this

magazine can be obtained fairly easily from the usual sources for older and used magazines and

possibly from contacting Entertainment Weekly for back issues.

See for Yourself (September 25-26, 1993)

Over the course of his career, Stephen King has constantly been outspoken in matters of opinion

for the Bangor Daily News and other publications, especially in regard to the subject of censorship,

and this article is no exception. ‘Okay, let’s talk a little bit about “NYPD Blue,” which is this

season’s bit of TV controversy’, King writes. He goes on to stress that he is not reviewing the

television show, but writing about ‘whether or not this program is going to stay on the air in this

market, and if not, why not.’

In 1993, NYPD Blue was facing controversy over issues of language, violence and nudity. In this

article, King once again states that it is up to people to make up their own minds rather than letting a

small group control what they can see. ‘I am suggesting that it’s not fair to allow a small group of

letter-writing, phone-calling zealots to impose their will on me, on you, and all the other viewers in

the WVII broadcast area who might like to check out this program and judge for themselves.’ The

creator of NYPD Blue, David Milch would later go on to create HBO’s acclaimed western

Deadwood, which is technically the most profane show ever aired on television!

The article was published in the Maine Weekend section of the September 25-26, 1993 issue of

the Bangor Daily News.

A Satiric Punch (October 11, 1993)

This is a letter to the editor of Time magazine, regarding Christopher John Farley’s review of

Garth Brooks’ album American Honky-Tonk Bar Association . Here King disagrees with the

reviewer’s interpretation of the tone of the album, calling it satiric instead of serious. Also, King

references a bad review of Scott Smith’s novel A Simple Plan. He closes the letter by claiming this is

‘more cutting-edge arts criticism from Time.’

The letter appeared in the October 11, 1993 issue of Time magazine. Copies can be obtained

from the usual sources for older and used magazines. If all one wants is a photocopy of this piece, any

significant library should have back issues.

Flight of Fancy (November 3, 1994)

This is a short letter to the editor in reference to a November 1, 1994 cover story in USA Today

that claimed King and his family fled their house to avoid trick or treaters on Halloween. King

corrects the error, saying he was away that year and ‘the idea that we could be driven out of our

home, even for an evening, by little ballerinas, pirates and Power Rangers, is just ridiculous.’

The piece was printed in the November 3, 1994 issue of the Bangor Daily News.

Coastal Filming a Study in Patience Grown Thinner (January 8, 1996)

King begins this article: ‘As a rule, I don’t believe there’s much truth in regional stereotypes—

the courtly, hospitable southerner, the strong and silent westerner, all that—but every now and then

you see a reversion to type that makes you understand how such stereotypes get started in the first

place. The reaction of some Camden residents, many of them merchants, to the filming of “Thinner” in

their community last summer, is a case in point.’ King writes of the business owners’ hostile attitude

toward outsiders making a film in their town and counters each of their points with his own

arguments. He concludes that he’ll ‘continue supporting film in Maine—it’s honest, nonpolluting

work, for the most part.’

The article was originally published in the January 8, 1996 issue of the Bangor Daily News.

‘Shining’ Correspondence (September 1996)

This is a very short letter, which King wrote from the set of his miniseries version of The

Shining in Estes Park, Colorado. He mentions some other cast members who are fans of Fangoria

and signs this letter ‘yours from the dark side of Colorado.’

The letter was published in Fangoria magazine (Issue No. 156) for September 1996. Copies of

this magazine can be obtained from used magazine sources, particularly those that specialize in horror

publications.

The Spirit of Maine (May 16, 1997)

There isn’t really much to say about this letter to the editor, written in poetic form, as it is only a

couple of sentences long. It asks if a pregnant cigarette-smoking teenager is perhaps a better image for

the state of Maine as it enters the twenty-first century than is a chickadee or a lighthouse. The tone of

the letter comes across as sarcastic, angry, and resigned.

The letter was originally printed in the May 16, 1997 issue of the Bangor Daily News.

Book in Progress (November 7, 1997)

This is a letter to the editor in regard to an article, Getting Spooked by King’s Tactic , in the

November 5, 1997 edition of The New York Times . King is upset because the author of the article

discussed his new publishing deal with Simon & Schuster and his then in progress novel Bag of

Bones. He writes, ‘It’s embarrassing to read about one’s financial dealings in your paper, but what’s

most painful is to read unkind assessments of one’s work in progress by editors you quote who are

brave enough to give their opinions but not their names.’

The letter was originally published in the November 7, 1997 edition of The New York Times

newspaper. It is easy to obtain a copy from microfilm at larger libraries.

Letter (March 1998)

This letter is in response to the statement by Adair Lara in a previous issue of Locus magazine

that ‘writers never look right.’ King says he agrees and that only a handful of writers have actually

looked the way we might wish. King writes, ‘the woman whose work makes you cry shows up with

her slip showing, and the man who made your mind thrum like an overtuned tuning fork wears his

pants highwater and has eczema around his nose.’

The letter appeared in the March 1998 issue of Locus magazine. The easiest way to obtain this

piece is through the usual used magazine resources.

Remainders Rock On (May 14, 1998)

This is a letter to the editor in which King thanks everyone who attended the Rock Bottom

Remainders concert in Bangor the previous week and writes that Shaw House, a local charity, will

probably see a pretty good amount after all is said and done. He also thanks the Bangor Daily News

and a local television station for lending some of their personnel for the event. Other members of the

band have included Dave Barry, Tad Bartimus, Roy Blount, Jr., Michael Dorris, Robert Fulghum,

Kathi Goldmark, Matt Groening, Barbara Kingsolver, Al Kooper, Greil Marcus, Ridley Pearson, Joel

Selvin, and Amy Tan (see The Neighborhood of the Beast in our Miscellany chapter).

The letter was printed in the May 14, 1998 edition of the Bangor Daily News.

Painful First Lesson (November 19, 1998)

This letter to the editor is in response to an article on the first page of the sports section of the

Bangor Daily News regarding the arrest of a University student over an alcohol-related incident.

King relates that, ‘as someone who was busted twice by the Orono police for alcohol-related

misbehavior when I was 21 and a student at the University of Maine, my heart went out to Matt

Kinney166 when I read the report of his arrest...I’m very grateful I didn’t have the burden of fame

while I was still learning to be a grown-up, and I don’t have much respect for the Bangor Daily

News’ handling of this particular tale.’

The letter appeared in the November 19, 1998 edition of the Bangor Daily News.

Watch ‘Witch’ Again (August 11, 1999)

King wrote this letter in response to Christopher Smith’s review of The Blair Witch Project. He

disagreed with the reviewer in regard to the film’s ending. It is interesting to note that, while King

was confined to bed after the accident he suffered in June of 1999, Artisan Films sent him a copy of

the film on videocassette. He advises viewers who didn’t like or agree with the end of the film to

give it a second chance; and that the second time he watched it, he ‘picked up a small but vital clue in

the first 15 minutes of the film that has changed my understanding of the end completely.’ He also

takes the opportunity to thank everyone in the Bangor area who had wished him well in recovering

from his accident.

This letter was printed in the August 11, 1999 issue of King’s hometown newspaper, the Bangor

Daily News.

What is Stephen King Trying to Prove? (September 10, 2000)

In this letter to the editor King apologizes for things he said in a previously published interview

(“What is Stephen King Trying to Prove?” by Stephen J. Dubner in The New York Times Magazine

for August 13, 2000): ‘The chief hazard of the interview process is that there is never a chance for a

second draft, where one may revise or delete badly expressed and sometimes downright idiotic

comments.’

The letter was published in the September 10, 2000 issue of The New York Times Magazine ,

which is distributed as part of the Sunday edition of The New York Times . The magazine should be

included in the microfilm of the newspaper, so should be relatively easy to secure at any larger

library.

How I Got That Story (December 18, 2000)

In this article, King writes about his experience with the electronic serialized publication of his

novel The Plant, as that week’s Viewpoint section of Time. He deals with the business aspect of this

new form of publishing and the media’s response to it, ‘Am I displeased with how things turned out?

Nope. I’ve had terrific fun working on The Plant.’

The Plant was published electronically in six monthly installments, initially offered for $1

apiece on the honor system. King had said that he would pull the plug if too many people were simply

stealing the work. ‘The real test of The Plant’s marketplace viability may come in late December and

January, when Philtrum Press—my publishing company, which has offered books at odd intervals for

almost 20 years—will e-market all six parts ( The Plant, Book One: The Rise of Zenith) for $7, about

the price of a paperback. And for that, my friend, you’ll need your credit card. My mamma didn’t

raise no fools.’ When combined as an e-book, the title actually became The Plant, Book One: Zenith

Rising.

This article appeared in the December 18, 2000 issue of Time magazine. Copies can be obtained

from the usual sources for older and used magazines. If all one wants is a photocopy, larger libraries

will hold back issues.

She’s Got Mail: Symposium on the Nature of Genre and Pleasure in the 21stCentury

(February 2002)

This article by Emma Straub (Peter Straub’s daughter) contains Straub’s letters to writers, and

their responses—including King’s. King makes some interesting points, for example: ‘There is a

simple fact of life in English-speaking literature, and it’s this: a huge rock cropped up in the second

half of the 18th century, and the river of literature split into two streams around it: popular fiction

and literature.’ King also makes an important statement about himself and his craft: ‘I would do this

for nothing, and continue to do it until all the fuel in the tank is burned. And what would I do then?

Nothing but die happy, beautiful. Nothing but die happy.’

The article was published in The Spook in February 2002. The Spook is a free monthly

electronic publication, available on the Internet for download in .pdf file format.

Untitled (2004)

This is a letter to fan (and, later, King expert), Bev Vincent (dated December 1, 1983) regarding

the publication of The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger . Like many King fans who had seen the limited

edition book listed for the first time in the ‘Also by’ page of King’s then recently published novel Pet

Sematary, Vincent wrote to King asking how to obtain a copy. The author replied he had given

Donald M. Grant the right to print another 10,000 copies of the book and that if Vincent still wanted a

copy he could photocopy the letter and place a request for Grant to reserve him one.

Bev Vincent reprints the letter in his The Road to the Dark Tower: Exploring Stephen King’s

Magnum Opus167. Copies of the trade paperback edition of this book can be found in most good

bookstores. In late 2005, Cemetery Dance published limited numbered and lettered editions of this

study, one of the most important books about King’s work yet published.

Man in Love (December 25, 2005)

King writes, ‘The problem with Francine Prose’s review of D. H. Lawrence: The Life of an

Outsider (Dec. 4) isn’t that she came to Lawrence through a book (“Lady Chatterley’s Lover”) she

glommed from her Dad’s sock drawer, or that she seems not to have renewed her acquaintance with

Lawrence’s work since her undergraduate days; the problem is her not uncommon assumption that she

may be better able to understand a great writer by reading about him than by reading him.’

The letter to the editor appeared in the December 25, 2005 edition of the Book Review section in

TheNew York Times . It should be quite easy to copy this from microfilm, which is easily accessible

from the archives of larger libraries.

These letters to the editor and guest columns are revelatory both of King’s opinions and his

short-term concerns and even gripes. Most anyone who has written a letter to the editor will know it

is often in annoyance at some event, generally that reported in the publication. Such letters are

generally short and therefore lack the substance and broad argument that we see more clearly in the

guest pieces and columns reviewed here.

There is little doubt King will continue to write both letters to the editor, when something

concerns him, and to offer more in-depth analysis of issues.

OPINION—RADIO, MUSIC,

FILM AND TELEVISION

When we were young enough to believe that rock ‘n’ roll would live forever, we believed the

same of ourselves.

—From Between Rock and a Soft Place.

This chapter deals with opinion pieces on various forms of entertainment media—radio, music,

film and television. Throughout the years King has commented on all media and he continues to do so

in the guise of his The Pop of King column in Entertainment Weekly magazine. Those columns are

the subject of a separate chapter, Later Columns—The Pop of King.

Included here are King’s reviews of films and commentaries on television shows and even the

radio; and many best and worst of lists for films spanning the course of his life and career. Our

purpose here is to help inform the avid King reader as to the man’s tastes and shed light on how these

likes and dislikes may influence his body of work.

‘No Vietnamese Ever Called Me Nigger’ (October 23, 1969)

Published as by “Steve King”, like most of his college-era work, this is a short movie review

for The Maine Campus, the student newspaper for the University of Maine at Orono. King reviews a

film titled No Vietnamese Ever Called Me Nigger (which played at the University on Moratorium

Day) and begins by describing a couple of scenes from the movie in detail. While King obviously

agrees with the Anti-Vietnam War sentiments expressed in this film, he finds it lacking: ‘The veterans

are telling the truth, but it is a truth that has been dinned into our ears for years now. The spectators’

reactions to the march are predictable. And in the end the most valuable lesson the movie may teach

is that the truth can become dull, and that there is a tendency to not hear it, to overlook it.’

This piece was originally published in the October 23, 1969 issue of The Maine Campus. Re-

discovered in September 2005 by Rocky Wood, the only way to track down a copy is by taking a trip

to the University’s library and making a copy from the microfilm in their archives.

Violence on Television—Too Much or Too Little? (January 17, 1976)

This is one of the first non-fiction pieces regarding a subject King will often discuss: violence

and the media. He sets forth four major arguments against violence on television: ‘It has been

theorized that TV violence causes aggressive behavior, especially in children. That it causes

indifference to real life violence. That it makes us all feel more afraid, even in circumstances where

we don’t have to. Finally, that TV violence has contributed to the general climate of violence we have

lived in since that day in Dallas 13 years ago168. ’

King goes on to state the likely sentiment of most Americans: that television news is just as

horrifying as any fictional programming available. While he doesn’t seem here to be a huge fan of

television, he does defend it against attackers and ends the article: ‘I think we need to remember that

TV is slaveringly eager to give us what we want to see. What we are. So the next time you turn on

‘S.W.A.T.’ just remember that you’re looking into a mirror. How do you look, brothers and sisters?’

The piece was first printed in the January 17, 1976 issue of the Bangor Daily News. Copies of

Bangor Daily News articles may be secured from the microfiche files at the Fogler Library of the

University of Maine at Orono (at no charge, if you actually visit), from the newspaper direct (at a

significant fee), or from visiting the Maine State Library in Augusta.

The Horrors of ’79 (December 27, 1979)

This is an essay about what magazine reviewers called the ‘scary summer’—essentially a recent

focusing on horror movies by filmmakers. King suggests the idea of horror as a kind of catharsis,

stating that ‘in the 1930s, when Depression-ridden Americans drank deeply at the black cup to forget

the all-too-real horrors of their daily situation (and in the process made household names of Boris

Karloff, Bela Lugosi, and Lon Chaney, as well as Gable and Lombard), Americans in 1979 were

ready to indulge their blacker expectations to the fullest.’ He continues with then current worldwide

troubles: ‘In a year that saw buck-a-gallon gasoline, rock’s first fifteen-dollar double album

(Fleetwood Mac’s Tusk), the fall of the shah in Iran and Jimmy Carter in the polls, the nuclear

excursion in Pennsylvania and the crash of a loaded American Airlines DC-10 jetliner in Chicago,

both the average moviegoer and the Great American Filmmaker had a lot of anxiety to get rid of.’

King has commented extensively on the Vietnam War and here delineates between the ‘real

world’ horror of Vietnam movies that year, such as Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now and The

Deer Hunter and the ‘unreal horrors’ of the supernatural or science-fiction that were also seen in

1979. ‘Offhand, I can’t think of another year when one had to be so careful to separate the real horror

movies from the fantasy horror movies.’

He deals specifically with the more famous horror films of the year: George Romero’s Dawn of

the Dead, Alien, Prophecy, The Amityville Horror, and states that Dawn of the Dead is, in fact, the

best horror film of the year and even the decade! At the end of the piece, he includes a ten best and ten

worst list of movies for the year stating, ‘I hate an end-of-the-year movie essay that cops out and

refuses to offer a ten-best, ten-worst list and so let me offer mine by way of conclusion, with no

editorial comment.’

The eight-page original manuscript exists and is deposited in Box 2702 of The Stephen Edwin

King Collection (Special Collections Unit, Raymond H. Fogler Library, University of Maine, Orono).

The original title was The Nightmare Boom of ’79.

This article appeared in Rolling Stone magazine’s December 27, 1979-January 10, 1980 issue;

and in an Australian edition of the magazine that carried the same date. Many larger libraries will

have back issues, as Rolling Stone is an important cultural magazine. Copies can be obtained from

used magazine outlets.

Some Notes onTales of the Vampyre(Fall 1980)

This extremely rare piece consists of King’s program notes to a stage production of Tales of the

Vampyre, printed on two unnumbered pages of a program booklet. Tales of the Vampyre is a

Marschner-Wohlbruck opera based on the short story, TheVampyre by John Polidori.

It was published in a program book titled Opera New England of Northern Maine, in the Fall of

1980. To date, the authors have not been able to track down a photocopy of this piece or an actual

copy of the publication in which it appears. King’s office does not have a copy and Tyson Blue

appears to be the only one in the King community to have seen it. According to his book The Unseen

King, King’s former assistant, Stephanie Leonard, ran across this piece and gave Blue a copy.

According to Blue, King writes briefly about the short story and a period in Polidori’s life. King

closes the piece, ‘And that is how a rainy June in 1816 brought about the play filled with darkness,

monsters, and music which we bring to you tonight.’ Of King’s piece Blue writes, ‘While not a

definitive nor detailed analysis of the play, these notes serve admirably to inform the audience of the

opera about the origins of this obscure work, brought to them by someone most eminently qualified to

do so, and in a format which is ideally suited to be read while waiting for the show to begin.’

Stephen King’s Guilty Pleasures (May/June 1981)

King argues, ‘If I have anything to be guilty about in regard to the movies, it’s probably that I’ve

never felt guilty at all. The best films leave me feeling nearly exalted with pleasure; the worst send

me from the theater bemused, feeling a little like Alice when she finally awoke—“Really, I’ve had

the most peculiar dream.” The only movies that really offend me are the boring ones, the ones where

you realize, halfway through, that you are rocking the seat in front of you down with your feet in a

kind of masochistic contest to see if you can get it all the way down safely or if your feet are going to

get a really wicked pinch.’

King’s writes of each of nine films he guiltily likes: Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia ,

Bloody Mamma, Killers Three, Sorcerer, The Horror of Party Beach, The Amityville Horror, The

Wild Angels, Suspiria, and Night of the Juggler. In addition, he lists other ‘gems’ such as Robot

Monster, Mountain Family Robinson, Zombie, You Light Up My Life , and The Other Side of the

Mountain. He closes, ‘This is the last night in my town for The Final Conflict, and I don’t want to

miss it.’

This article was published in the May/June, 1981 issue of Film Comment magazine. Some

university libraries have back issues, and it should be possible to obtain a copy from used magazine

or King dealers.

When Is TV Too Scary For Children?: Now You Take ‘Bambi’ Or ‘Snow White’—That’s

Scary (June 13-19, 1981)

King starts by telling a modernized version of the fairy tale ‘Hansel and Gretel’ and asking if

readers recognize the story. He does this to illustrate a point about television programming that some

would consider inappropriate for children: ‘I’m sometimes asked what I allow my kids to watch on

the tube, for two reasons: first, my three children, at 10, 8 and 4, are still young enough to be in the

age group that opponents of TV violence and horror consider to be particularly impressionable and at

risk; and second, my seven novels have been popularly classified as ‘horror stories.’ People tend to

think those two facts contradictory. But...I’m not sure that they are.’

In the article, he once again makes his opinions on censorship (particularly in regard to children)

very clear: ‘Do I believe that all violent or horrifying programming should be banned from network

TV? No, I do not. Do I believe it should be telecast only in the later evening hours, TV’s version of

the ‘high shelf?’ Yes, I do. Do I believe that children should be forbidden all violent or horrifying

programs? No, I do not. Like their elders, children have a right to experience the entire spectrum of

drama, from such warm and mostly unthreatening programs as Little House on the Prairie or The

Waltons to scarier fare.’

The six page original manuscript of this piece exists and is deposited in Box 2702 of The

Stephen Edwin King Collection (Special Collections Unit, Raymond H. Fogler Library, University of

Maine, Orono). The original title was Tots and Terror.

This article first appeared in the June 13-19, 1981 issue of TV Guide magazine; and was

reprinted as If You Really Want To Be Scared, Start With ‘Hansel And Gretel’ in the Canadian

edition of TV Guide for September 5-11, 1981 (we are reporting the existence of this piece here for

the first time, as it was previously unknown in the King community). Copies of TV Guide are

generally available from used magazine or King resellers. The piece was also reprinted as Now You

Take ‘Bambi’ Or ‘Snow White’—That’s Scary! in Popular Writing in America: The Interaction of

Style and Audience, Fourth Edition169; in Writing Fiction: A Guide to Narrative Craft, Fifth

Edition; and abridged in Elements of Literature with Readings in World Literature, Fourth Course .

These books can easily be obtained from the usual used book resources or textbook dealers.

Stephen King’s List of the 6 Scariest Scenes Ever Captured on Film (1981)

This is a short list of the six scariest scenes from films by King in which he writes about a scene

from each of: Wait Until Dark , Carrie, I Bury the Living, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre , Night of

the Living Dead, and Psycho.

The piece was first published in The Book of Movie Lists; and reprinted as Stephen King’s 6

Scariest Scenes Ever Captured on Film in The People’s Almanac Presents the Book of Lists: The

’90s Edition. They can be obtained from the usual used book resources.

Between Rock and a Soft Place (January 1982)

This lengthy and important essay is about rock music and its place on radio. King relates a story

of driving outside Boston and trying to listen to rock on his rental car’s AM radio. Unable to find

anything suitable on the dial, ‘that was when I began to worry—to seriously worry—about rock ‘n’

roll.’

He discusses the punk rock movement in the United Kingdom and the United States and

specifically the infamous band, the Sex Pistols: ‘In a way, the political commentary, the working-

class-hero bullshit, the pins in the ears and the nihilism got in the way, obscured the fact that, above

and beyond all else, the Pistols—and the punk music of which they were a part—were making

incredibly good, incredibly powerful rock ‘n’ roll.’ He continues, ‘American rock fans, as they have

moved from AM to FM, have lost their love for the primitive, driving sound.’

With this King posits a reason for the decline of real rock and roll on AM radio stations, along

with some commentary on aging: ‘Maybe what happened to AM is perfectly simple: It got old. It hung

in there through Woodstock and then it started to run out of gas. Even Dick Clark is starting to show

signs of his age. It’s a sad thought, and it’s a little startling, but it fits and it has its own comforting

logic. None of us thought we were going to get old when we were 15, and look what happened. If it

has to be FM, it has to be—the same way a guy like me says, if it has to be 33 going on 34, with all-

of-a-sudden white in the beard and those funny little wrinkles around the corners of the eyes, it has to

be. When we were young enough to believe that rock ‘n’ roll would live forever, we believed the

same of ourselves.’

A sidebar, Visit With an Endangered Species , accompanied this article (see directly below).

The two pieces were once combined under the title Mighty John Marshall and the Death of Rock n’

Roll, in a 25-page double-spaced manuscript, deposited in Box 2702 of The Stephen Edwin King

Collection (Special Collections Unit, Raymond H. Fogler Library, University of Maine, Orono).

Playboy published Between Rock and a Soft Place in January 1982. Copies of this magazine

can be obtained through used magazine dealers and, as this is one of the better known non-fiction

pieces in the King community, stores that specialize in King often have it in stock.

Visit With an Endangered Species (January 1982)

‘Mighty John Marshall, who may well be the last great AM rock jock in America, lives with his

wife and three kids in a tract-style house in Brewer, Maine. He drives a mongrel of a van, which is

always full of sound equipment; most of it looks as if it had seen better days’, King writes. After the

experience King relates in the main article (see Between Rock and a Soft Place directly above), a DJ

like Marshall is quite a relief!

Mighty John Marshall worked at WACZ in Bangor and King seems to have become good friends

with him in the process of writing these pieces, as the content of this sidebar mainly consists of fond

descriptions of the man and re-telling of some of King’s encounters with him. In fact, the article

closes with King quoting Marshall: ‘‘‘I’m gonna be rocking when I’m 80,” he says. “They’ll have to

carry me out of the booth. He hesitates and then quotes Ry Cooder. “I’m gonna bop till I drop.’’’

Visit With an Endangered Species was published in Playboy for January 1982, alongside

Between Rock and a Soft Place.

Favorite Films (June 24, 1982)

This is list a of King’s then five favorite films of all time, with a sentence or two about each. His

five choices in descending order are: E. T. , The Godfather II, Psycho, The Wild Bunch and The

Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

The piece was published in the June 24, 1982 edition of The Washington Post and is easily

accessed, as larger libraries carry back issues of this major newspaper on microfilm or microfiche.

Digging The Boogens (July 1982)

This is a review of Taft International’s film The Boogens, directed by James L. Conway. King

calls it an ‘old fashioned pretty good low-budget horror movie’; and describes the plot: ‘A Colorado

silver mine is closed by a series of explosions and cave-ins in 1912; miners are trapped, and most of

them die (all of this background is elegantly presented over the credits in a series of frontier-style

newspaper headlines and gorgeous sepia photographs). Seventy years later, a mining company

reopens the mine. What else do you need?’170

King likes the film, but he knows it is one of his beloved B movies—he even goes so far as to

say that the plot, acting and special effects are subpar! ‘Now, don’t get me wrong; this is not a work

of genius on a low budget. It doesn’t have the elusive class of a film like Martin, the bleak vision of a

film like Eraserhead, or even the manic, somehow ominous energy of Don Coscorelli’s Phantasm,’

King writes. We know that King loves this type of movie and has since childhood; he believes the

average moviegoer would too: ‘I still had a pretty good time. I think you will, too, and so I

recommend The Boogens to you cheerfully and heartily.’

This piece appeared in Twilight Zone Magazine for July 1982. Back issues can be obtained

fairly easily from the usual sources for older and used magazines.

Horrors! (30 October—November 5, 1982)

In this piece King lists the ten best horror videocassettes/laserdiscs (this was 1982, remember!)

to rent for Halloween and provides a paragraph-long description for each. The ten (from 10-1) are:

The Toolbox Murders, The Fog, Dead of Night, Wolfen, Rabid, The Shining, The Thing, Invasion ofthe Body Snatchers, An American Werewolf In London and Night of the Living Dead. George

Romero’s Night of the Living Dead has always been one of King’s favorites (see the Untitled

laserdisc and DVD liner notes in this chapter). It would become a classic cult film, and spawn

several sequels.

This article was originally titled Creepy Tapes for Halloween . The five-page double-spaced

manuscript is deposited in Box 2702 of The Stephen Edwin King Collection (Special Collections

Unit, Raymond H. Fogler Library, University of Maine, Orono).

It first appeared in the October 30-November 5, 1982 issue of TV Guide magazine. Copies are

probably available from the usual used magazine or King sources. The Canadian edition of TV Guide

for the same week retitled the piece Creature Features.

The Evil Dead:Why You Haven’t Seen It Yet...and Why You Ought To (November 1982)

Sam Raimi’s horror film The Evil Dead opened to standing ovations at the Cannes Film Festival

in May of 1982. King was at that year’s festival, met the director, saw the film and raved about it.

‘ The Evil Dead has the simple, stupid power of a good campfire story—but its simplicity is not a

side effect. It is something carefully crafted by Raimi, who is anything but stupid.’ Why, then, should

such a good film not be available for moviegoing audiences to see and judge? King believes that ‘the

smart Hollywood thinking is that the day of the “raw horror film” has passed.’

This is an important article, as King calls for The Evil Dead to be picked up by an American

distributor and because, like The Night of the Living Dead, another of his favorites, The Evil Dead

went on to achieve cult status worldwide and spawn several sequels.

The article appeared in Twilight Zone Magazine for November 1982. Back issues can be

obtained from the usual sources for older and used magazines. It was excerpted as A Note from

Steven [ sic] King in Evil Dead: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack (1982)—these liner notes

appear in the compact disc version of the soundtrack available from some stores.

Playboy Guide People (1982)171

This piece was the Playboy Guide People department for the Fall/Winter issue of Playboy

Guide: Electronic Entertainment. It consists of different celebrities saying which movies they would

like to see preserved on videotape. Other contributors to the article include Malcolm McDowell,

Marilyn Chambers, Terry Gilliam and Tony Bill.

King’s choices include: Invasion of the Body Snatchers, The Wild Bunch, Bring Me the Head

of Alfredo Garcia, Dirty Harry, The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, The Brood and Star Wars.

This piece and the magazine are very difficult to secure. A photocopy was made available for

the purposes of our research in early 2005, and this was the first copy we had ever seen. Copies may

appear on eBay from time to time.

His Creepiest Movies (August 27, 1985)

This article appeared in the August 27, 1985 edition of the USA Today newspaper. The authors

have not been able to track a copy down.

According to Collings172 this is ‘One of King’s “lists that matter”’, four others of which were

published: Lists That Matter, Lists That Matter (Number 7), Lists That Matter (Number 8) and

Lists That Matter (No. 14), all in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter. Note that all other

‘Lists That Matter’ pieces remain unpublished (see Lists That Matter in our King’s Unpublished

Non-Fiction chapter).

Lists That Matter (Number 7) (August 1985)

‘I think a person has to be serious—fairly serious, anyway—when it comes to the ten best

movies of all time. I’m not saying that movies are as important as American foreign policy, or the

trade deficit, or even how good the Red Sox will be next year. But about some things a person should

tell the truth. So here’s my honest-to-goodness ten-best-of-all-time list.’ Unlike King’s other film

lists, this appearance is more of an article than an annotated list, with a couple of paragraphs for

almost every film. In 1985 King’s ten favorite films in descending order were: Casablanca, E.T. , The

Godfather, Part II, West Side Story, The Haunting, Psycho, Stagecoach, Sorcerer, Cool Hand Luke

and The Wizard of Oz.

Four other Lists That Matter articles were published: Lists That Matter; Lists That Matter

(Number 8) and Lists That Matter (No. 14) in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter; and His

Creepiest Movies in USA Today . All other Lists That Matter pieces remain unpublished (see Lists

That Matter in our King’s Unpublished Non-Fiction chapter for full details).

This piece appeared in the August 1985 edition of Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter.

Castle Rock was an official King-related monthly newsletter edited by Christopher Spruce173 and

Stephanie Leonard174. It ran from January 1985 to December 1989. Issues can be secured from the

usual King-related sources.

Lists That Matter (Number 8) (September 1985)

This time around King lists what he believes are the ten worst movies of all time. ‘I’ve

compiled the list, but at the risk of my own sanity. You just don’t realize how many bad movies there

have been until you start to think about them. And once you start, it’s hard to stop.’

His list of the ten worst films of all-time (in descending order) are: Blood Feast, Plan Nine

from Outer Space, Teenage Monster , Old Yeller , Missing in Action, Children of the Corn, Bring

Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia , Love Story, The Gauntlet and Ocean’s Eleven . It is interesting to

note that Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia was listed as a film he wanted preserved on

videocassette in the Playboy Guide People piece; he also writes of this film in Stephen King’s

Guilty Pleasures (see above for both).

This piece appeared in the September 1985 edition of Castle Rock: The Stephen King

Newsletter.

Hello Mary Lou, Goodbye Rick (April 1986)

Popular sixties singer Rick Nelson died in a plane crash on December 31, 1985; King writes an

appreciation and notes his importance to rock music. He once again shows an expert knowledge of

music history and rock in particular: ‘Nelson was somnolent on some of his hits, but he could and did

get excited. When he sang “Be-Bop Baby” or “My Bucket’s Got a Hole in It” there was an excited

jive in his voice that matches the go-for-it rockabilly sound of the band he and Ozzie put together. In

the end, rock is rock, whether it comes from a black kid in a ghetto or a white one from Bel Air—it is

a great leveler.’

Nelson’s sudden death came as a shock to everyone, including King, who more than most

appreciated the man’s artistry. ‘What I’m trying to say is that he just rocked until God stopped him,

and that’s OK. So hello Mary Lou, and goodbye Rick. You were one of the good guys.’

This article appeared in the April 1986 issue of Spin magazine. Spin isn’t as well-known as the

other big rock magazine, Rolling Stone, and therefore it isn’t likely many libraries will archive it.

However, copies will be available on occasion at used magazine or King dealers.

Let’s Scare Dick and Jane (May 11, 1986)

‘The final reductio ad absurdum of my generation’s odd belief that a person who would put his

or her creative talents to work scaring children is only one step above a person who would molest

them was the brief national trauma that took place last year over The Day After’, King opens this

piece. The plot summary from imdb.com of this movie states: ‘A graphic, disturbing film about the

effects of a devastating nuclear holocaust on small-town residents of central Kansas.’

Again, we find King exploring violence or horror on television or in the visual medium. He

specifically explores the exposure of children to this type of programming, as he had previously, as

well as another recurrent theme: horror as a catharsis. ‘Children need make-believe fears in their

lives. They understand that there are real boogeymen out there as well as—and sometimes better than

—their parents.’

This article first appeared in the May 11, 1986 edition of the Washington Post Book World; and

was reprinted in Volume XIII, Number 2 of The Creative Child and Adult Quarterly in 1988. Those

looking for the original appearance should be able to copy it from the microfilm/microfiche archives

of any large library. TheCreative Child and Adult Quarterly will be more difficult to find, as it is a

scholarly journal, and may only be available at university libraries.

What I Watch (November 27—December 3, 1993)

This short piece is bylined, ‘Stephen King, Horrormeister.’ He very briefly writes of the

television shows he currently enjoyed, including: Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea and Dark

Shadows (both on the Sci-Fi Channel); NYPD Blue (see also See for Yourself in our Letters to the

Editor, Guest Columns chapter); Picket Fences; and Beavis and Butt-Head (MTV).

It appeared in the November 27-December 3, 1993 issue of TV Guide magazine. Copies are

generally available from used magazine or King sources.

Setting the End of the World to Music (1994)

This piece is King’s appreciation of W.G. Snuffy Walden’s original soundtrack score to the

miniseries adaptation of his widely loved apocalyptic novel: ‘I wanted music throughout The Stand

which sounded as though three or four fellows could have played it on some back porch in

Appalachia.’ He’d been very impressed by Walden’s scores for other movies and television shows

such as I’ll Fly Away and The Chase.

King believes Walden gave him everything he wanted and did an outstanding job of it at that.

‘It’s one of the best soundtracks I’ve ever heard—instrumentally sparse, emotionally full, beautifully

textured. It is a record, in the sense that it can exist quite nicely apart from the show it was created to

support...but in a very real way, you are feeling the show as you listen to the music. Best of all, it’s

definitely not a record you’ll get tired of.’ Walden’s soundtrack also evokes strong responses: ‘I’ll

never forget the thrill I felt when I first heard your score for Mother Abigail, or for Stu Redman’s

panicked flight from the Stovington Disease Center. It was a pleasure to work with you, and it’s a joy

to have this music.’

This piece appeared in the liner notes for Stephen King’s The Stand: Original Television

Soundtrack, by W.G. Snuffy Walden, released by Varese Records in May 1994. The album is now

out of print but used copies can be obtained online or in record stores.

Untitled (1994; 2002)

These are King’s liner notes for the laserdisc of George Romero’s film Night of the Living

Dead. He opens with vivid description: ‘They stagger out of the dark and toward the farmhouse, dull

eyes informed by nothing but hunger, hands outstretched. There is no reasoning with them, no pleading

with them. They will rip the lips off your face, gouge the eyes out of your sockets, pull your guts from

your living belly. You will watch yourself eaten by them as you die...and then, after an all-too-brief

period of darkness, you too will rise...and search...and feed....’

King puts things into perspective, with specific regard to when the film first appeared: ‘This

was the black vision a young filmmaker named George Romero sprang upon an unsuspecting public in

the post-Kennedy ’60s, a nightmare in grainy black and white that changed the course of horror films

forever.’

He closes with the movie’s importance in the history of both film and the horror genre: ‘ Night of

the Living Dead energized-galvanized a generation of young filmmakers (Sam Raimi and John

Carpenter among them), and opened up the horror film in a way that suggested it could do a lot more

than just administer a few polite scares. Romero’s groundbreaking film was like a box of rattlesnakes

delivered to a tea party, and all the shrieks of surprised horror have not yet died today. It is a VERY

important film, perhaps one of the most important to be released in the years since World War II, and

it is good to have this definitive edition. Just one word of warning: “They’re coming for you...there’s

one now.”’

This piece first appeared in the booklet for Night of the Living Dead: 25thAnniversary

Collector’s Edition laserdisc released in 1994. Laserdisc is pretty much a defunct technology;

therefore tracking down this original appearance is difficult. Fortunately, King’s notes were reprinted

in the 2002 DVD release, Night of the Living Dead: Millennium Edition. This edition is freely

available.

Untitled (1994)

King opens these liner notes, ‘Let’s get the only thing that really matters right up front: this is a

great record. I knew it might be when Al told me the concept—thirteen trax, all music, no waiting—

because I’d heard him play with Jimmy Vivino’s band at Downtime in New York (Jimmy plays guitar

on most entries in this scenic selection of soul souvenirs).’ Always an observer and critic of the

music scene, King notes, ‘There’s not much soul of any kind to be found in the video graveyard of pop

music these days, I’m sorry to say.’

He closes with an obscure (but completely apropos) Kooper reference, which then turns into a

compliment: ‘A lot of years ago, Al Kooper played on Tom Rush’s first electric album, and penned

the liner notes. Of the song “Too Much Monkey Business” he wrote simply, “Just a helluva lot of fun

—God bless Chuck Berry.” The same could be said of ReKooperation: just a helluva lot of fun. God

bless Al Kooper.’

This piece appears only in the liner notes to ReKooperation—A Nonverbal Scenic Selection of

Soul Souvenirs, an album by Al Kooper. It was issued on compact disc by BMG in 1994 and is freely

available.

Kitschin’ à la King (May 12, 1995)

In this article King talks briefly (two paragraphs) about the programming he watches on

television. ‘I watch sports and sports. Let me see, do I watch anything else? Sleazy USA suspense

movies...I’ll also watch MTV Unplugged and Beavis and Butt-Head. Sometimes I watch that show

on Fox, 902-whatever...I like stupid TV like that or Baywatch.’

This piece appeared in the May 12, 1995 issue of Entertainment Weekly magazine. Copies can

be obtained from used magazine and King dealers.

Untitled (1996)

King writes about his own introduction to Michael McDermott’s work in these liner notes,

saying his son Owen bought him a copy of McDermott’s second album, Gethsemane as a gift. ‘My

first listen to Gethsemane is one of the great events of my life as a rock music fan. It wasn’t so much

the record itself, good as it was, as the man on the record.’ King has the highest compliments for

McDermott’s work: ‘I have listened to some of the songs on this new album go from rough demos to

finished tracks, and the result—I’m only speaking for myself, you know—is one of the three or four

most remarkable albums I’ve ever heard. That’s not a critical judgement ( sic), mind you, but one that

comes direct from my heart—and my nerve-endings. Like the man said, “I ain’t no monkey and I know

what I like.”’

He closes: ‘I’m always startled by the inability of words to express how good really good rock

and roll music can be, but I always know it when I hear it...and besides, words are all I have. So let

me say it simple: Michael McDermott is a great artist, and this is a great album. Listen and see if you

don’t agree.’

This piece appears only in the liner notes to Michael McDermott, an album by Michael

McDermott, issued in 1996 by EMD/Capitol on compact disc. It is freely available.

My Favorite Movies (September 27, 1998)

This short piece is another of King’s movie lists. He writes a sentence or two for each of his

five favorite movies of all time. The list, from one to five: The Godfather, Part II (we’ve already

seen this one on some King movie lists), The Hitcher, Near Dark, Silverado, and They Came to

Cordura. King ends the piece with his pick for ‘favorite movie snack: Popcorn with lots of butter and

salt.’

It appeared in the September 27, 1998 edition of The New York Post. Libraries in the New York

area may have copies on file, but it isn’t likely that many out-of-state libraries will archive this

publication.

Rock Band (May/June 1999)

This is a very short piece in which King lists what he believes to be the most overrated and

underrated bands in music. He believes The Beatles are the most overrated band and that Creedence

Clearwater Revival is the exact opposite: ‘Keep it short, keep it loud, and make sure the audience can

dance to it’, he argues.

This article first appeared in the May/June 1999 issue of American Heritage magazine. It may

be archived at some libraries and issues may be available from used magazine and King dealers.

The Reel Stephen King (December 10, 1999)

In this article, King covers his favorite film adaptations of his own works. His top ten are: The

Green Mile, Stand by Me, Storm of the Century, The Shawshank Redemption, Cujo, Misery, TheStand, Dolores Claiborne, Christine and Pet Sematary. An honorable mention goes to Cat’s Eye.

It appeared in the December 10, 1999 issue of Entertainment Weekly magazine. Copies can be

obtained from the usual used magazine dealers.

Ramones (2003)

This piece is part of the liner notes for a Ramones tribute album and is written in a completely

uncharacteristic style (well, for King). Certainly intentional, it can only be described as the literary

equivalent of punk rock...specifically the type of punk rock the Ramones played.

King talks about how punk rock and disco arose at the same time, but compares disco to

‘musical kudzu’ and says the Ramones are real rock and roll artists: ‘The Ramones were about

screaming until your lungs popped out your nose and just sort of hung there pulsing on your upper lip

and banging your head until your f***in’ ears bled.’ He also quickly relates meeting and having

dinner with Joey Ramone.

The piece was printed in the liner notes to We’re A Happy Family , a Ramones tribute album

featuring various artists, released by Sony Music in February 2003. New and used copies can be

found on the Internet or at local record stores.

My Favorite Movies of 2002-2003 (September/October 2003)

This extremely short piece lists King’s favorite movies of the period. He names five films of the

past two years he likes and provides a couple of sentences about each: Wrong Turn, The Good Thief,

Spellbound, Dark Blue and The Quiet American.

For a movie list, it was published in the unusual venue of Book magazine for September/October

2003. Copies can easily be found online or from the usual sources for used magazines.

Now Hear This (June 11, 2004)

In the The Pop of King: Lines to Live By (June 11, 2004 issue of Enter-tainment Weekly), King

had challenged readers to send in their favorite lines from movies (see our Later Columns—The Pop

of King chapter). This piece is a response to that article, though oddly it was not published as a Pop

of King column. King said he was expecting a couple dozen responses; both he and the magazine

were shocked to get 3000! This will come as no surprise to King fans, some of whom buy the

magazine just for King’s column!

‘The all-time champion line, by your letters, was written by the great William Goldman175,

whose body of work was mentioned in the responses to my column again and again: “Hello. My name

is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.”—Inigo Montoya (Mandy Patinkin) in The

Princess Bride’. He also briefly introduces several different categories of lines sent in by the

readers, including: women, lines spoken by women in Stephen King adaptations, and baseball.

Finally, King contributes four of his personal favorites and closes, ‘Do we remember what we

see in the movies? You bet. But if this little landslide of responses proves anything, it proves that we

also remember what we hear in them.’

This piece appeared in the July 30, 2004 issue of Entertainment Weekly magazine, copies of

which can be obtained from used magazine dealers.

Stephen King’s Playlist (2005)

This piece consists of King writing a sentence or two on each of the fifteen tracks to appear as

part of a personal compilation:

1. Alan Jackson—“Drive (For Daddy Gene)”

2. Slobberbone—“Gimme Back My Dog”

3. Michael McDermott—“Dance With Me”

4. Alejandro Escovedo—“Castanets”

5. The Beach Boys—“Don’t Worry Baby”

6. Chuck Prophet—“Rise”

7. Cross Canadian Ragweed—“Wanna Rock ‘n’ Roll”

8. Donna the Buffalo—“Love and Gasoline”

9. Henry Mancini—“Peter Gunn”

10. The Inmates—“Turn Back the Hands of Time”

11. The Raveonettes—“Love in a Trashcan”

12. James McMurtry—“See the Elephant”

13. Spoon—“I Summon You”

14. Tim Easton—“Carry Me”

15. Ollabelle—“All Is Well”

There is an interesting story behind this compilation—it is an Internet link accessible only

through Apple’s iTunes music software. First posted on October 4, 2005, it will probably not be

available in the distant future. The easiest way to access it is to download the free software, search

for Stephen King and see if the page comes up. From there one can do a screen grab, print the page,

and file it away in your King archives! When the item is taken offline copies will be accessible

within the King community, remembering that, as the copyright is King’s, money should not change

hands.

The popular media covered in this chapter and the forms of entertainment it covers represent a

large chunk of King’s personal entertainment (along with reading and baseball). In recent years the

outlet of his The Pop of King column has served as a forum for most of his published views in these

areas but we can confidently predict he will continue to deliver opinions about these forms for many

years to come.

OPINION—

VENTURING INTO POLITICS

‘Frank Norris, who wrote The Pit , McTeague , and other naturalistic novels that were banned,

said: “I don’t fear: I don’t apologize because I know in my heart that I never lied; I never

truckled. I told the truth .” And I think that the real truth of fiction is that fiction is the truth; moral

fiction is the truth inside the lie. And if you lie in your fiction, you are immoral and have no

business writing at all.’

—From Banned Books and Other Concerns: The Virginia Beach Lecture.

King often includes political commentary, or simple statements of his own views, in broader

articles, including some of the Garbage Truck columns and even a Pop of King piece, Shut Up ’n

Play Yer Guitar.

However, this chapter deals only with seventeen pieces that are totally dedicated to politics,

very often the touchy issue of censorship. We are aware that even the definition of politics is slippery

and have tried to include here the pieces that have strong political thrust, whether they represent King

taking a partisan political position (for instance, in support of Gary Hart) or in the broader realms of

referenda or constitutional issues.

Opinion (November 16, 1967)

King’s first published political commentary, this piece was unknown to the King community until

rediscovered by Rocky Wood during a research trip to Maine in September 2005. It was also King’s

first piece in The Maine Campus, the student newspaper for the University of Maine at Orono

(UMO). He would go on to contribute letters to the editor (see our Letters to the Editor, Guest

Columns chapter), a number of articles, a western serialized satire ( Slade) and forty-six columns (see

our chapter, Early Columns—King’s Garbage Truck).

Written by ‘Steve King’, this piece appeared on the ‘op-ed’ page of The Maine Campus for

November 16, 1967, and supports the American troops fighting in Vietnam. King, then beginning his

second year at UMO, would later become ‘radicalized’ by his University experience, changing from a

Republican Yankee (the New England Republicans of the 1950s and 1960s were proudly self-reliant,

and relatively liberal when compared to the Christian Right of today’s Republican Party—in fact

New England Republicans still have a strong centrist streak) to a liberal Democrat. This piece is

therefore a very rare glimpse of the pre-liberal King and is extremely valuable in that context (of

course King was not the only person whose views were changed during this critical period in

American political and socio-cultural history).

He opens by arguing perhaps ‘the main reason that our involvement in Vietnam is such a bitter

pill for many people to swallow is that America...has been weaned on the idea that America and all

Americans...are the Good Guys. We wear the white hats, or we always have. We have been a

dignified and respectful nation that does not interfere where it does not belong. The trouble is that

many have not realized that being a Good Guy takes more than a bumbling urge to live and let live—it

takes moral guts and a lot of backbone.’ He goes on that the ‘grist from the dovish American

propaganda mill...unthinkingly’ advocates ‘trying to take the guts out of the Good Guy in Vietnam.’ He

acknowledges America’s position there did not ‘look good’, that ‘innocent people have been maimed

and killed because we are there’ but that these ‘ugly facts...must be faced squarely and with courage,

not with this backdoor cravenness that says we should get out of Vietnam.../ It’s time to stop smelling

flowers and having “love-ins” and reading Allen Ginsberg and get on with the business of carrying

out our responsibilities.’

He then argues both the game and ‘the facts are brutal’: while the ‘war in Vietnam is not an

honorable war on either side...No one can believe any longer that we are trying to crush the “heroic”

North Vietnamese’ who ‘have sold out to the Soviet Government...the fact is that both South and

North Vietnam are now pawns’ in the US-Soviet Cold War. ‘Ignoring this fact may seem noble, but it

is only cowardly...’ Five of King’s last six paragraphs in this piece begin, ‘The game is brutal...,’ a

strong indication of his growing powers as a writer as he delivers his message. ‘The game is brutal,

and too often being a Good Guy is a brutal business’; ‘... if we stay in Vietnam, perhaps our children

can smell the flowers and link hands in trust and love. But if we refuse to be Good Guys and remain

content to stay mealy-mouthed hypocrites, our children may not be around to smell the flowers at all’;

‘... it’s time we realized that we are fighting for our lives, because Vietnam is only the first step in

Southeast Asia. If we don’t draw the line in Vietnam— for our own good and safety— we may never

be able to draw the line at all. / The game is brutal. It’s time we became Good Guys—real good guys

—and faced up to the fact.’

Copies of this piece may be made from microfiche at the Raymond H. Fogler Library of the

University of Maine at Orono.

A Possible Fairy Tale (May 8, 1970)

King’s next dedicated political piece appeared in The Paper, a special edition of the University

of Maine at Orono’s student newspaper, The Maine Campus, for May 8, 1970. The Maine Campus

had been published the previous day and King’s penultimate Garbage Truck column appeared in that

issue. Also on 7 May the UMO student senate, in the presence of some 2000 students, had voted 63-4

in favor of a student strike, joining campuses nationwide. While a specific reason for the strike at

UMO was not elucidated it was generally to protest ‘the war in Southeast Asia and the killing of the

four students Monday at Kent State University’, according to an article by Russ Van Arsdale in that

single issue of The Paper.

King’s contribution is wonderful satire, in the mold of Philip Roth’s now obscure but incredibly

biting 1971 ‘novel’, Our Gang (which lampooned Nixon’s administration). He opens, ‘The following

little piece is fictional—a fairy tale, if you like.’ The balance of the piece is a futurist diary,

beginning with that day—May 8, 1970 when the ‘University of Maine joins hundreds of other

campuses on strike.’ On May 9th a ‘million people sit in at the White House’, refusing to move until

America withdraws from Vietnam; by May 11 th the Teamsters Union joined the strike; on the

following day National Guardsmen at Berkeley ‘throw down their weapons’ and twelve platoons

refuse to ‘get on helicopters scheduled to fly them into Cambodia.’

Getting on a roll King has more unions join the strike, Nixon appearing on the ‘boob-tube’

claiming millions supporting his policy, and growing calls for the impeachment of Vice-President

Spiro Agnew. By May 17th, ‘a haggard Pres. Nixon goes on nationwide TV and tells the country he is

withdrawing’ troops from Vietnam and Cambodia, with all to be out by the end of June. The

following day Soviet leader, Alexi ( sic) Kosygin calls Nixon to congratulate him and requests a

summit to consider complete disarmament. ‘So there’s your fairy tale, complete with happily-ever-

after ending. It would be nice if things could turn out that way, but I doubt that it will’, King

concludes. Readers will note that enormous change in King’s views since his piece supporting

America’s position in Vietnam as a bulwark against Soviet expansionism (see Opinion above).

Copies of this piece may be made from microfiche at the Raymond H. Fogler Library of the

University of Maine in Orono.

The Land of Lunacy (April 15, 1982)

This guest column is an angry reaction piece by King regarding the often-taboo subject of

abortion. ‘I don’t believe I have ever been so distressed or disgusted by an opinion column in the

Bangor Daily News as I was with that written by Terence J. Hughes (BDN, April 13).’ King is

primarily upset at the way Hughes’ article portrays his opinions as ‘Plain Abortion Facts.’

King has always been articulate when expressing his opinions on difficult or complex issues; at

the same time he respects freedom of speech: ‘I am not suggesting that Hughes has no right to express

his opinion, or even that his opinion is wrong, although most thinking Christians must support the right

to obtain a legalized abortion because of the free will concept. If free choice is removed by law the

decisions God meant us to make are abrogated by the state, and that of course is immoral—a word

which perfectly describes most of the current anti-abortion fundamentalist sects.’

He ends with a plea to the editors of the newspaper: ‘Please—the next time the editors of the

News decide to give column space to someone on either side of the abortion issue, ask them to give it

to someone who will aim a little higher than the gag reflex of twelve-year-old children.’ This last part

is in reference to Hughes’ reporting of his wife showing slides of aborted fetuses to her sixth grade

class.

The piece was originally published in King’s hometown newspaper, the Bangor Daily News for

April 15, 1982. While citations for a piece about the abortion issue had been made in various King

publications in the past, no real information about this piece (title, content, etc.) seemed to exist.

Rocky Wood was able to track it down on a trip to Maine in the Fall of 2005.

Copies of Bangor Daily News articles (there are a number in this chapter) may be secured from

the microfiche files at the Fogler Library of the University of Maine at Orono (at no charge, if you

actually visit), from the newspaper direct (at a significant fee), and from visiting the Maine State

Library in Augusta.

Giant Skull and Crossbones for Maine Yankee (September 29, 1982)

Another of King’s fiery opinion pieces from the Bangor Daily News, this is a guest column

regarding the debate over closing Maine Yankee, a nuclear power plant in Wiscasset, Maine. A

referendum was being held in regard to the plant and King wanted to make his opinion known to the

informed and voting public: ‘So I hope that when you vote on the Maine Yankee referendum, you’ll

remember that there are two issues. One is the economy. The other is poison. If I had my way there

would be a giant skull and crossbones on the side of the Maine Yankee containment, a skull and

crossbones 30 feet high. Cesium-134 and Cesium-133: poison. Strontium-89 and Strontium-90:

poison. Thorium: poison.’

While Maine Yankee didn’t close down in the early 1980s, it was progressively shut down

between 1996 and 1998 in a wave of power plant closings.

King is trying to show he understands the longterm effects that could come from the plant but

also understands that the economic issue is significant: ‘People have a tendency to vote their

pocketbooks. This is not ignoble; just practical. But people must also vote the odds and balance next

month’s power bill against transuranic wastes which will retain their killer potential for the next

10,000 years. No human society on the face of the earth has lasted that long.’

See The Land of Lunacy (above) for detail on securing Bangor Daily News articles.

A Watt Post-Mortem (October 14, 1983)

King reinforces our view of his political evolution in the opening paragraph of this ‘guest

column’ in the Bangor Daily News for October 14, 1983: ‘In the late ‘60s I might really have hated

James Watt—but the times were hotter then, and so was I. Time has gone by and I’ve moved from my

’60s position of just-short-of-radical to that of a rather moderate liberal.’

James Watt was President Ronald Reagan’s first Secretary of the Interior. His views about

environmental issues and the use of public land, and the overlay of his religious views on his public

duties were very controversial. Watt famously banned The Beach Boys from performing a 1983

concert on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. on the grounds that rock concerts drew ‘an

undesirable element’! King says he may be older and mellower but he ‘never liked Watt’s

philosophies or policies’, nor what he sees as Watt’s basing decisions on ‘his belief that Jesus Christ

the Lord will be coming again soon’, which he then links to Watt’s support for oil leases on public

land.

‘All the same I’m not glad Watt’s gone,’ King writes in response to Watt’s resignation (over an

allegedly racist and offensive jibe), as ‘there’s no assurance that President Reagan won’t replace him

with a man whose views are even more Neanderthal’. True to his own beliefs, he is concerned that

Watt was dismissed not for his policies but for making an offensive remark. King has a total belief in

freedom of speech and wonders how many of those calling for Watt’s head had themselves told

tasteless or racist jokes. ‘I support not a single thing that James Watt stood for as Secretary of the

Interior...but please don’t number me among the smarmy neo-Victorians who brought him down.’

Here we see an almost visceral King—a man who stands for all his beliefs with consistency. It

has become the fashion to decry the political views of one’s opponents by the use of personal attack

rather than through reasoned debate. King argues cogently here for free speech; even for a person

whose political views are as far from one’s own as is possible.

See The Land of Lunacy (above) for detail on securing Bangor Daily News articles.

Why I Am For Gary Hart (June 4, 1984)

This opinion piece, sub-titled ‘Only one man can beat Reagan’ appeared in the liberal magazine

The New Republic for June 4, 1984. King relates that he and his wife Tabitha had voted for one of the

1984 Democratic Presidential nomination’s dark-horse candidates, ‘in his first canvass for national

office back in 1974’: ‘That man was Gary Hart, and he was running for one of Colorado’s two Senate

seats. / We were transplanted easterners who had gone to Colorado so I could write a novel called

The Shining....’ In 1984 the Kings ‘wanted a candidate who could beat the incumbent President

[Reagan]’ because of what they perceived were his Administration’s ‘shortsighted and cruel

domestic policies, its dangerous foreign policy....’ Considering only Hart of the Democrat contenders

to have the ‘octane’ needed to beat Reagan they contacted the Maine Hart organization and King

ended up ‘introducing and endorsing Hart at a Bangor press conference’. 176

Questioning Hart directly as to whether he could beat Reagan in the unlikely event he secured his

Party’s nomination King was convinced by the look on the candidate’s face and his self-belief: ‘It

was impossible not to believe him. I can remember feeling a sense of great excitement coupled with a

surprising sense of fear, because I suddenly felt I might be close to something that might actually

make a difference.’ Drawn in by the man King campaigned for Hart in New Hampshire (Hart won the

primary in a major political shock). At the time of writing King went so far as to compare him to

Kennedy and Lincoln as disinterested campaigners and said boldly: ‘Gary Hart merits serious

consideration simply because he is not interested in winning the Presidency; he is interested in being

President.’

King concludes that if the Democratic Party nominated Hart’s opponent, former Vice President

Walter Mondale, he would ‘carefully place a MONDALE FOR PRESIDENT bumper sticker over the

Hart sticker on my car the very next day’. His reasoning for becoming involved in the political

process was, ‘simply put, that Ronald Reagan is a bad President and must be turned out of office.’

Then again, since his University days it is hard to find a good word King has written about a

Republican President or presidential candidate, so this view is totally consistent with nearly forty

years of political thought. As an historical aside it should be noted that Mondale did win the

nomination and went on to one of the greatest political defeats in American presidential history. One

of the front-runners for the 1988 Democratic nomination, Hart’s candidacy was derailed by ‘the

Donna Rice affair’, which effectively ended his political career.

The New Republic is an important magazine and many major libraries will hold back-copies or

microfiche, so copies can be easily accessed.

Say ‘No’ to the Enforcers (June 1, 1986)

This article first appeared in the Portland Maine Sunday Telegram for 1 June 1986 and was

reprinted in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter for August 1986.

King has always been against censorship and this piece makes reasoned argument against an

upcoming initiative promoted by the Maine Christian League. He sees why one might be opposed to

the ‘plague-zone in a lot of Maine bookstores and newsstands, a plague-zone where for a ten-spot you

can purchase books and magazines depicting bondage, rape, sexual relations with children...Is this

stuff good for anyone? Probably not. / But you have to ask yourself a question before voting on

Maine’s obscenity initiative on June 10. The question is just this: Whose responsibility is it to

regulate this crud—the citizens or the police? / In 1936 the Germans opted for the police. / It didn’t

work out so great.’ He argues that once such a law is passed, ‘the question of what’s obscene passes

out of your hands once and for all; you’ve given up your freedom to judge for yourself ...’ and points

out that Easy Rider had been banned in North Carolina, as had Huckleberry Finn.

On the subject of North Carolina King related his experiences in that State the previous July,

while making Maximum Overdrive. After an anti-obscenity law went into effect girlie magazines

disappeared ‘as if the Porn Fairy had visited in the middle of the night.’ King was ‘scared’ to find a

cop on duty perusing calendars in a bookshop for ‘topless’ photographs! He tells of seeing a sign

‘taped to the glass door of a shabby downtown drugstore’ in Wilmington: ‘PENTHOUSE ON SALE

HERE / TO PEOPLE OVER 21 / I THINK PENTHOUSE IS A DIRTY / MAGAZINE BUT I WILL

SELL IT / UNLESS THEY ARREST ME / I AM NOT A NAZI’. King not only bought a Penthouse

there but his entire drugstore needs for the balance of his stay: ‘No one arrested him, at least while I

was there, and no one confiscated the magazines. / Maybe they were too ashamed. / I hope they were.

Because they damn straight deserve to be.’

In Banned Books and Other Concerns: The Virginia Beach Lecture (see below) King relates

the Maine referendum was defeated. Copies of the Maine Sunday Telegram article may be copied

from microfiche at the Raymond H. Fogler Library of the University of Maine’s Orono campus. The

newspaper is also archived in other locations, including the Maine State Library in Augusta. Copies

of Castle Rock appear regularly on eBay and at King resellers.

The Dreaded X (December 1986)

The Dreaded X, a lengthy anti-censorship essay first appeared in Castle Rock: The Stephen

King Newsletter for December 1986/January 1987. Unusually for a King non-fiction piece (but

certainly not for his fiction177), he revised it in 1990 for a 1991 appearance in Gauntlet (see below).

This is an important, if slightly dated article, and would be worthy of reprint and further wide

circulation.

Starting with a deleted scene from the one movie he directed, Maximum Overdrive, King

compares the American and British movie ratings systems and comments on the effect ratings can

have on ticket sales—in America a ‘Dreaded X’ would keep a movie from widespread distribution,

an R gains the right level of interest and sales for a horror movie, but a PG-13 rating for a King movie

would cause the audience to decide ‘it wasn’t scary and stay away’. In Britain, King says, they ‘rate

according to quality and effect. / We Americans, on the other hand, count. / What do we count? Heads

(if they roll, that is); breasts; nipples; pubic thatches; blood-bags; profanity; mutilation; acts of

violence.’ And while many think the system works well King doesn’t—not if it leads to an X-rating,

anyhow (he even points out the ratings board counted 123.5 ‘fucks’ uttered in Scarface, the half

representing Pacino being interrupted by another character!) He then points out that even the counting

system can be cheated—through an appeals system that seems to give credit to intellectual directors

(Woody Allen) or moneymakers such as Stephen Spielberg who had, to that time, not one mega-hit R

rating (‘let alone the Dreaded X’) despite some very violent and confronting content.

Moving to the subject of the X-rating King notes that it had become the preserve of ‘Fucking. /

Sucking. / Humping. / Stiff dicks and hot licks. / That’s the problem, you see. It was never—at least in

the beginning—meant to be that way.../ The push for a ratings code was always tangled up in movie

depictions of what society views as aberrant behavior, and that means both sex and violence.’ After

the introduction of ratings in 1968 King says, ‘X meant “for adults only,” and “for adults only” did not

necessarily mean porn; it meant exactly what the term says: content not easily understandable to young

people.’ He recalls that X ‘became The Dreaded X because scuzzy (but far-sighted) little film

entrepreneurs...saw beyond the worded meaning of the rating to its real meaning: you could show

most anything.’ Quickly, the X that had applied to largely non-pornographic material as Midnight

Cowboy and Last Tango in Paris was appropriated by the porn industry. Almost instantly mainstream

producers would cut and cut just to get an R—as was the case for Scarface, a movie by Brian

DePalma, director of King adaptation, Carrie.

Continuing his review of the development of the ratings system King relates that in George

Romero’s178 Night of the Living Dead, ‘… the violence was, for the time, unbelievable....’; it was released ‘unrated even after the advent of the ratings code, and it was the first time that graphic

violence rather than graphic sex became the focus of the evolving frankness in motion pictures.’ Why

was it unrated? To avoid ‘the Dreaded X’: the implication that a movie is pornography. King points

out that most Americans think the ratings system is compulsory (as it is in many countries) but that the

system is only a ‘code’ agreed uponby the major studios. Why? ‘My god, how could such a law ever

be passed? It would be like taking a shit on the first amendment!’ Even more interesting, as producers

must pay a ‘substantial rating fee each time the board looks at a specific picture’ almost all X-rated

movies are actually unrated (to avoid the fee) but ‘simply appropriate’ the X. The result, of course, is

that major studios and distributors will not touch an unrated picture as ‘X-rated and unrated mean

exactly the same thing’ in their minds. As an inevitable consequence officially unrated movies that are

not pornographic get no mass release.

At this point King moves to the difference between censorship of books and movies, where such

restrictions do not apply (or at least not as baldly): ‘The result has been part of the secret of my

success as a writer of novels and part of the reason for my failure—at least in terms of box-office—in

the cinema. Readers who pick up one of my novels are uneasily aware of one principal fact: This

crazy fucker might do anything. Anything at all. ’ Closing, King pitches for his own recommended

ratings system, which would be mandatory. He wants to eliminate unrated pictures and argues for a

Government mandated system (which appears to be at odds with his broader non-Government

interference arguments published elsewhere—see for instance Say ‘No’ to the Enforcers above), and

even proposes making outright pornography ‘uneconomic’ by imposing huge ratings fees on these

low-budget creations (he does not address the key issue against that argument— who determines what

is pornography in a free society?)

A revised version of the article (written on April 17, 1990) appeared in Gauntlet: Exploring

the Limits of Free Expression (Number 2, April 1991). In this piece King adds a new closing section

(numbered ‘17’ in the magazine; the original sections ‘16’ and ‘17’ from Castle Rock having been

combined) of six paragraphs. He notes the ‘video revolution’ (now long since displaced by the DVD

revolution) had allowed some films to be released with the inclusion of scenes cut from theatre

release versions but that ‘the prudes and the blue-noses’ had caught up, severely restricting the

‘availability of X-rated and unrated videotapes’ in several states. King still argues for a revised

rating system although now he clarifies, ‘Legislating art has never been a very good idea, and one can

only salute the courage of those who made The Cook [, The Thief, His Wife, and Her Lover] and

Henry [ : Portrait of a Serial Killer]...and also the courage of those who have shepherded these films

through to some sort of public recognition, limited as it may be.’ The American rating system has

since been revised and King’s current take would make interesting reading.

There were significant problems placing this essay, as King records in a follow up piece

reviewed in the next section of this chapter. There, he notes The Dreaded X ‘had been bounced

everywhere my agent tried to place it, from Film Comment to The Atlantic Monthly.’ King’s

secretary of the time, Stephanie Leonard, on discovering it had never been published, had secured

King’s permission to include it in the Castle Rock newsletter she also edited. King considered the

follow-up piece, A Postscript to ‘Overdrive’, might interest readers in how the story of the particular

deleted scene (of a child being run down by a rogue steamroller) and the movie itself came out. He

was right; these two pieces should be read consecutively to achieve the full effect.

Gauntlet magazine was actually published in an edition more like a paperback book, at 402

pages and of trade paperback size; and was later reprinted by Borderlands Press as Gauntlet 2 in a

hardback limited edition of 500, signed by 33 contributors, including King. Both included articles

about King by Michael Collings, George Beahm and Stephen Spignesi, among others (an editorial

note reads, ‘GAUNTLET’s Stephen King section is dedicated to readers of Castle Rock: The

Stephen King Newsletter, which published from 1985-1989. Readers of Castle Rock were the core

of GAUNTLET’s subscribers last year, and if not for them there would be no second issue.’ The

‘magazine’ appears regularly at King resellers but the hardback is more difficult to secure. Copies of

Castle Rock appear regularly on eBay and at King resellers.

A Postscript to Overdrive (February 1987)

This piece is King’s update for the readers of Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter of The

Dreaded X (see the section directly above). After his secretary (also the editor of Castle Rock,

Stephanie Leonard) asked if she could run The Dreaded X in that newspaper King ‘read it over with

some interest and a lot of perspective—the kind which time alone can lend (and which is so often

rueful as a result; show me a man or woman who responds “Nothing” in answer to the question “If

you had your life to live over again, what would you change?”, and I will show you a goddamned

outrageous liar).’

King says Angus Young of band AC/DC (who scored King’s movie, Maximum Overdrive)

reacted viscerally to the scene cut from the movie (of a boy being run down by a steamroller) because

he had not expected to see it. ‘Angus, nobody’s fool, had unknowingly stated the thesis of my

essay...without reading it and with all the excessive verbiage cut away. He was talking about the

curse of X-pectation.’ He relates that even George Romero (of the Living Dead movie series fame

and a master of the gory) had gasped at the scene ‘and turned aside. / My only shining moment as a

director, I think.’

He says that of thirty-one areas of concern the ratings board had with Maximum Overdrive they

were finally satisfied with ‘three cuts to avoid The Dreaded X. They totaled fifteen seconds...but

changed the movie significantly.’ The three sections were ‘six seconds of the Dixie-Boy shoot-out.

Too many blood-bags. I told you the board does a lot of counting. / Second, a six-second close-up in

which a traveling salesman who has earlier been hit by a truck abruptly sits up, grabs a kid by the

ankle...and then half his face sort of falls off into his lap. / Third—the last three seconds of the

steamroller scene—the three seconds that make George Romero look away....” The removal of these

scenes left the movie with no scenes viewers had not expected and King feels this alone killed it.

Copies of Castle Rock appear regularly on eBay and at King resellers. This edition also

includes King’s Why I Wrote The Eyes of the Dragon (reviewed in our Miscellany chapter).

What’s Scaring Stephen King (February 1987)

As we saw in the previous two pieces censorship was much on King’s mind in this period. In

February 1987 Omni magazine published another of his anti-censorship articles, What’s Scaring

Stephen King, in its Forum section. This one-page piece opens, ‘Every book that I’ve ever published,

with the exception of two, has been banned from one public-high-school library or another. Cujo has

been banned so often now that it is on the ACLU’s list of top ten banned books. And I’m very proud

of that, because I’m never going to win a Nobel Prize or a National Book Award. But being on that

list of banned books, I’m in the company of greats: Flannery O’Connor, Harper Lee, J.D. Salinger,

and John Updike.’ In fact, while King has still yet to win a National Book Award (or a Nobel or

Pulitzer Prize) he was awarded the 2003 Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters

by the National Book Foundation, the organization that gives out the National Book Award.

King repeats the line he uses often about books banned from school libraries: ‘“...let them jerk it.

Just make sure to tell the kids that whatever is taken off the shelves is probably what they need to

know the most.” That will get their asses running to a public library or bookstore. When a book gets

banned, kids will read it.’ But outside the school system he is adamant: ‘I’m not going to let them take

my books out of public libraries or bookstores...I’d like to have one [a bumper sticker] that says,

“YOU’LL TAKE MY BOOK WHEN YOU PRY IT FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS.” Nobody

tells me what to read; nobody tells me what I can look at.’ He ‘resents people who take the attitude

that says, “I know more about this than you do, sonnybuns. I’ll tell you what you can read and what

you can’t read.” That’s fascism.’

Turning to his own books King argues that Hansel and Gretel contains far more child abuse than

The Shining—‘a stepmother orders her husband to disembowel his own children and bring her their

hearts...The children arrive at a witch’s house, and it’s stated she’s going to fucking eat them! That’s

cannibalism! The Shining is not all right for kids, but “Hansel and Gretel” is—it’s staple reading.’

Opposing the path to censorship King concludes, ‘If we start censoring...What’s down the road

for us? On “Crystal Night” in 1939, when people started getting rid of the decadent literature in

Berlin, they ended up burning all the philosophy books and then went on to destroy all the bookshops

run by Jews...That’s what’s always down the road when you begin to censor: Crystal Night.’179

Omni magazines were collectable and copies of this edition appear regularly at King resellers

and Internet outlets.

Banned Books and Other Concerns: The Virginia Beach Lecture (1989)

King’s concern with censorship was such that on September 22, 1986 he gave a speech

addressing the issue at the Virginia Beach Public Library in Virginia Beach, Virginia for a Friends of

the Library benefit. The speech was ‘recorded and transcribed’ by King expert George Beahm and

reproduced in his The Stephen King Companion180.

It was also published in the Book-of-the-Month Club collection of King pieces, Secret

Windows: Essays and Fiction on the Craft of Writing (2000). This version is different from

Beahm’s—for instance Secret Windows does not include a section about King playing the part of

Jordy Verrill in Creepshow, nor a later reference to Peyton Place. There are a number of other minor

differences.

King says he is ‘bored with Banned Books and the whole discussion on Banned Books’.

Illustrating a point he’s made that fiction should reflect real life, even when that offends some readers

he notes: ‘Frank Norris, who wrote The Pit, McTeague, and other naturalistic novels that were

banned, said: “I don’t fear: I don’t apologize because I know in my heart that I never lied; I never

truckled. I told the truth.” And I think that the real truth of fiction is that fiction is the truth; moral

fiction is the truth inside the lie. And if you lie in your fiction, you are immoral and have no business

writing at all.’ King relates that the mother of a Pittsburgh student was horrified to find her son

reading Studs Terkel’s Working, which includes ‘words that rhymed with shuck’ and demanded its

banning from high-school libraries. By the time the book was temporarily banned another 62 students

had taken it out, even though the original student had been the first to do so in three years!

He also relates he had campaigned against an anti-obscenity referendum in Maine, which was

ultimately ‘voted down, 70 percent to 30 percent’ because voters ‘realized that obscene is one of

those words that exists in the eye of the beholder’ (see Say ‘No’ to the Enforcers above). Relating

that democracy is a ‘two-edged sword’ King says he loves the no motorcycle helmet law in Maine:

‘... as far as I’m concerned it gets a lot of dreck out of the gene pool, because these guys hit the wall

and they’re gone, baby. If they’re not smart enough to wear a helmet, screw them....” (it seems this

point was delivered with some irony and yet with a degree of seriousness; King would come back to

the subject in Helmetless Bikers Have Fallen in Love with an Image, see below). His concern lies

with those who want to turn the double-edged sword of freedom and democracy to a single-edge at a

point—‘and that point occurs when their own personal sensibilities are offended’, using

fundamentalist preachers such as Jimmy Swaggart and Pat Robertson as examples.

King’s conclusion deals with the concept of in loco parentis: ‘And if there’s a consensus that

decides a book should be taken out of a [school] library, I believe they should take that book out. / I

have no problem...if they take Cujo or Salem’s Lot out of a public school...I would just say to you as

students who are supposed to be learning, that as soon as the book is gone from the library, do not

walk— run to your nearestpublic library or bookseller and find out what your elders don’t want

you to know, because that’s what you need to know! / Don’t let them bullshit you and don’t let them

guide your mind, because once it starts, it never stops. Some of our most famous leaders have been

book-banners, like Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin.’

Copies of The Stephen King Companion and Secret Windows are easily acquired from King

resellers and other sources such as eBay and online booksellers.

Helmetless Bikers Have Fallen in Love with an Image (October 16, 1991)

Having served it up to those who believe the right to ride a motorbike without a helmet is more

important than the need to avoid serious injury in a 1986 lecture (see Banned Books and Other

Concerns: The Virginia Beach Lecture above) King returns to the subject in a guest column for the

October 16, 1991 issue of the Bangor Daily News.

He opens his position on the debate over Maine’s no-helmet motorcycle law by admitting he

will be seen as a hypocrite. ‘Why do I fear a charge of hypocrisy? Because there will be people—

plenty of them—reading this who have seen me tooling around town or buzzing down the turnpike

without a helmet. The fact is, I hate the damned things...but I can tell you this: You won’t see me

riding without one next year. I’m 44 now and my reflexes are a lot slower than they were at eighteen,

but that isn’t the major deal. The major deal is that 44 is just too old to behave in such a consistently

stupid way.’

He argues that most who won’t wear helmets feel the way they do because ‘if their buddies see

them wearing a helmet (“brain-bucket” is the usual term of contempt), they’ll look like wimps. Like

scaredy-cats...And don’t tell me it’s not true...I know it is, because I feel that way myself, every time I

look at the red Bell helmet on the wall of my garage.’ King dismisses other arguments for not wanting

to wear helmets with what he sees as the core issue: ‘Bikers who ride without helmets are in love

with an image.’

He reveals that ‘when it comes to such laws, I am a complete conservative, believing in

America, people who are willing to die in order to look cool have the absolute right to do so.’ So,

what’s his solution? ‘Since the majority of accidents occur during the first year of riding...why not

make it illegal for anyone to operate a motorcycle without a helmet until he or she has had [a] license

for a year? Maybe even two years to be safe?’

See The Land of Lunacy (above) for detail on securing Bangor Daily News articles.

Houston: So Normal It Was Weird (August 23, 1992)

This short piece appeared on the ‘Op-Ed’ page of The New York Times for August 23, 1992.

Ironically the headline for an adjacent piece reads Bush Gets Tough on Iraq , referring of course to

the first President Bush, at that time seeking re-election. King refers to Republican Senator Bob

Dole’s joking reference at the Houston Republican National Convention that King must have crafted

the Democratic Party’s platform—“a real horror story.”

The key to King’s criticism in this piece is not so much his dislike for Republican policies but

what he sees as ‘ceaseless and almost instinctive search for what I would call “normative behavior”’

by delegates. He says, ‘Houston was once again normality—the Republican version of it, at any rate

—on a pedestal, normality as the Holy Grail.’ This is perhaps one of the least important of King’s

non-fiction efforts, little more than a frivolous jab at his political foes.

As most major libraries archive copies of The New York Times copies are easily accessed.

Stephen King on Censorship (1993)

This ‘article’ is unusual in that King did not actually ‘write’ it and it almost certainly was not

intended for publication. Noted King expert George Beahm included it in his book, War of Words:

The Censorship Debate, although the text is ‘From a videotaped interview conducted by New

American Library for its sales force, 1989.’ Consisting of only three paragraphs the piece opens, ‘As

far as censorship goes, with my books or with anyone else’s books, I think that censorship is always a

power trip.’ King argues the power trip is about people who believe their ‘point of view is more

valid than your point of view’. He refers to ‘the censorship initiative’ and it may therefore be

presumed King was answering a specific question about an initiative or referendum of the time. The

last two paragraphs are a close duplicate of the concluding paragraphs to the Secret Windows version

of Banned Books and Other Concerns: The Virginia Beach Lecture (see above). Overall this piece

may be regarded as one of the least important of those reviewed in this book.

Beahm’s book is obscure and appears only rarely at King resellers and other sources. Copies

may be available via interlibrary loan.

To date, King’s latest word on censorship (or at least movie censorship) is 2004’s The Pop of

King: The Rating Game (see the Later Columns—The Pop of King chapter).

That is the Question (November 3, 1995)

This brief letter to the editor, published in the November 3, 1995 issue of King’s hometown

newspaper, the Bangor Daily News, urges Maine residents to vote ‘no’ on Question 1 in an upcoming

election.

State Referendum Question 1 ‘…doesn’t mention gay rights per se, but rather limits protected

special groups to the categories already listed in the Maine Human Rights Act: race, color, sex,

physical or mental disability, religion, age, ancestry, national origin, familial status and marital

status.’ King asserts that ‘no one deserves to be treated badly because they think a certain way or live

a certain way. A “yes” vote on Question 1 would go against everything I believe in, and that includes

sticking my nose into the way other people live.’

See The Land of Lunacy (above) for detail on securing Bangor Daily News articles.

Sloudge (2004)

This unusual piece consists of a humorous definition King contributed to a highly political

‘dictionary’. Many authors and other high-profile people, mostly of a ‘liberal’ bent contributed

definitions of newly invented words. King’s was ‘sloudge’: ‘the hours of analysis, usually on high-

cable news networks, which follows breaking news, i.e. events which have just happened and which

usually (but not always) follow the high-cable news dictum “if it bleeds, it leads.”’ His example of

usage: ‘The President’s press conference was followed by over three hours of sloudge on MSNBC

and an hour of sloudge on Fox-TV.’

It appeared in The Future Dictionary of America, edited by Jonathan Safran Foer, Dave Eggers,

Nicole Krauss and Eli Horowitz, a 2004 hardcover from McSweeney’s Books181. At the time of

writing it is readily available both in bookstores and online.

A Special Message from Stephen (January 18, 2005)

This brief message urged readers to join in supporting ‘Not One Damn Dime Day’, a political

boycott on spending to protest ‘the bloated cost of President Bush’s Inauguration ceremonies, which

are now estimated in the $40 million range.’

It was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on January 18, 2005 and lead to some minor

negative reaction from the King fans who supported Bush or voted for the President the previous

November. Older posts are no longer accessible online but copies circulate in the King community.

Although the author’s views of politics are strongly held and supported King has not overdone

the use of his influence, in the way certain Hollywood celebrities have been accused of doing in

recent years. He seems to step in only when he feels very strongly about a particular issue, or

candidate. Even then he has limited his diatribes on these matters in recent years.

For a country that has perhaps the strongest constitutional (and therefore, legal) defenses to

freedom of speech of any in the world, America is home to large numbers of people and organizations

(on all sides of varying political divides) that have scant respect for those freedoms when exercised

by those they oppose. This ensures that stepping into the minefield of political opinion is doubly

dangerous. It is, perhaps, the strength of King’s work, and his strong connection with his readers, both

Constant and casual, that has allowed him to carefully step around these dangers.

We can expect more political opinion, if perhaps not totally dedicated articles, as time passes.

Politics is part of the human experience and, as we know, King remains fully engaged in American

life and culture.

MISCELLANY

Romantics compare the cycle of the seasons to the cycle of human life, a comparison I have

never really trusted. And yet now, at the age of fifty-one, I find something in it, after all. Sooner or

later, life takes in its breath, pauses, and then tilts toward winter. I sense that tilt approaching.

When the idea threatens to become oppressive, I think of the woods in New England tilting into

winter—how you can see the whole expanse of the lake, not just the occasional wink through the

trees, and hear every movement on the land that slopes down to the water. You can hear every

living thing, no matter how cunning, before snow comes to muffle the world.

—From Leaf-Peepers.

This chapter covers King’s non-fiction pieces that do not fit into the broader categories covered

so far in this book. Many of these pieces are just as important, if not more so, than the ones we have

already covered. A short section on King’s ‘juvenilia’ opens the chapter, discussing in detail the

discovery and importance of these few pieces. Other works in this chapter cover such subjects as

smoking; appreciations of other artists; speeches; musings on his work; and there are many humorous

pieces. Most are well worth the effort required to secure them, either for the obsessive collector or

the average King fan.

The Drum, The Enterprise and The Village Vomit—Tales of a Young Writer

In early 2003 the authors of The Complete Guide to the Works of Stephen King 182 revealed two

new Stephen King stories had been discovered. Rocky Wood was researching the Guide in Bangor,

Maine in December 2002 when Stu Tinker, proprietor of the specialist King bookshop Betts

Bookstore, mentioned he’d heard an unknown story from King’s high school days had come onto the

market. After some months of research Wood finally made contact with Kerry Johnson, who provided

a copy and the provenance of Code Name: Mousetrap.

One of King’s earliest published works, Code Name: Mousetrap was printed in the Lisbon High

School newspaper, The Drum, for October 27, 1965. King was a senior and had been on the

newspaper staff for three years. That academic year Ms Prudence Grant was in her first year of

teaching and her extra-curricular assignment was advisor to The Drum. Ms Grant retired in June 2002

and while cleaning her files ran across some original copies of the newspaper, including the one

containing Code Name: Mousetrap. Kerry Johnson purchased it from her through eBay.

When Wood revealed the story’s existence he stated that this ‘… was King’s only piece of

fiction in the paper.’ He was surprised and delighted when shortly thereafter another collector, Bob

Jackson, contacted him advising he’d bought a different copy of The Drum from Ms Grant, also over

eBay, and provided both a copy and the provenance of that story, The 43rdDream, published in the

29 January 1966 edition. A more detailed description of the discovery and the stories appears in

Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished. 183

In September and October of 2005 Wood returned to Maine on a research trip largely to gather

materials for this book. As the only editions of The Drum known to the King community were the two

mentioned above it was likely other editions had been published and quite possible that material with

King’s by-line would have been included. Of these it was clear there was an issue published while

King was editor-in-chief, of which he had written: ‘… during my sophomore year at Lisbon High I

became editor of our school newspaper, The Drum. I don’t recall being given any choice in this

matter; I think I was simply appointed. The Drum did not prosper under my editorship. Then as now, I

tend to go through periods of idleness followed by periods of workaholic frenzy. In the schoolyear

1963-1964, The Drum published just one issue, but that one was a monster thicker than the Lisbon

Falls telephone book.’184

Approaches to Lisbon High School for copies were rebuffed (quite rudely, it must be said) by

staff who stated no copies of The Drum from King’s time are held by the school library or elsewhere

at the institution, nor did they know of any other source.

King also related in On Writing his first professional writing experience—doing sports reports

for John Gould, editor of The Enterprise, a local Lisbon newspaper; but his first mention of this and

The Village Vomit debacle (see below) was in his popular article, Everything You Need to Know

About Writing Successfully—In Ten Minutes 185 (see our chapter, Opinion—The Craft of Writing).

No one in the King research community had ever seen the published articles from The Enterprise. In

On Writing King says of the first article he submitted to Gould, ‘I wish I still had the piece—it

deserves to be framed, editorial corrections and all....’

Wood determined to find copies of The Enterprise—many libraries keep microfiche (and

sometimes original copies) of newspapers—national, state and even local. His first stop in

September 2005 was the Maine State Library in Augusta, where the very helpful staff has original

copies of The Enterprise (‘A Weekly Paper for All of Maine’), a four-page broadsheet published

‘each Thursday at Lisbon Falls, Maine’. Copies covering the years 1962-1964 were brought in from

storage but not a single article by King was to be found in any copy. How could this be? The mystery

was solved when one edition included a two-page reprint from the local edition of the newspaper. It

turned out that Gould published both a statewide edition and a local edition of The Enterprise (‘A

Weekly Paper for The Lisbon Area’)! The Maine State Library had been unaware of this anomaly.

There is a catalog of Maine newspapers held in various libraries, historical societies and so on but a

call to each of these institutions revealed their holdings to be patchy (and then only of the statewide

edition).

Driving to Lisbon Falls from Bangor in early October 2005, Wood got in touch with the

delightful and very helpful Secretary and Curator of the Lisbon Historical Society, Dorothy Smith,

who offered to assist in his search for copies of The Enterprise. He visited the Society’s Offices and

Archives, in an old school building in Lisbon Falls and met Smith, Bill Barr and a number of the

Society’s other members, all of whom were friendly and happy to assist (Smith’s promotion of the

official state drink—Moxie—is admirable).

A veritable cornucopia of material about Lisbon Falls and the surrounding district (covering

King’s home town of Durham) is held in their archives, including original Civil War memorabilia.

Although the Society has only an incomplete run of The Enterprise they do have two editions that

include material with King’s by-line, and these articles are clearly not those mentioned in On Writing

(those are still to be found). Copies were obtained and arrangements made by the Society to secure

these invaluable originals against damage or theft.

The articles are Progno For Tourney Go , sub-titled ‘Steve Thinks Chances Slim’ by ‘Steve

King’, which appeared on page 1A of the February 20, 1964 edition; and Tit For Tat At Tourney ,

sub-titled ‘Lisbon High Hot And Cold’, on page 1A of the February 27, 1964 edition.

The Village Vomit (1963-1964)

King also tells of his efforts as the editor of The Drum and his mis-adventure with a satirical

equivalent, in On Writing186: ‘… during my sophomore year at Lisbon High I became editor of our

school newspaper, The Drum. I don’t recall being given any choice in this matter; I think I was

simply appointed. The Drum did not prosper under my editorship ... One night—sick to death of

Class Reports, Cheerleading Updates, and some lamebrain’s efforts to write a school poem—I

created a satiric high school newspaper of my own when I should have been captioning photographs

for The Drum. What resulted was a four-sheet which I called The Village Vomit. The boxed motto in

the upper lefthand corner was not “All the News That’s Fit to Print” but “All the Shit That Will

Stick.” That piece of dimwit humor got me into the only real trouble of my high school career. It also

led me to the most useful writing lesson I ever got. In typical Mad magazine style (“What, me

worry?”), I filled the Vomit with fictional tidbits about the LHS faculty, using teacher nicknames the

student body would immediately recognize.’

Taking the Vomit to school for his friends to ‘bust a collective gut’ over, King was caught when

a copy was confiscated by one of the teachers lampooned in the paper, on which King had, ‘… either

out of over-weening pride or almost unbelievable naiveté, put my name as Editor in Chief & Grand

High Poobah, and at the close of school I was for the second time in my student career summoned to

the office on account of something I had written.’ One teacher (‘Maggot’ Margitan) took enormous

offence at her description and demanded King be disciplined. ‘In the end, Miss Margitan settled for a

formal apology and two weeks of detention for the bad boy who had dared call her Maggot in print. If

it makes any difference, my apology was heartfelt. Miss Margitan really had been hurt by what I

wrote, and that much I could understand. I doubt that she hated me—she was probably too busy—but

she was the National Honor Society advisor at LHS, and when my name showed up on the candidate

list two years later, she vetoed me. The Honor Society did not need boys “of his type,” she said. I

have come to believe she was right. A boy who once wiped his ass with poison ivy probably doesn’t

belong in a smart people’s club. I haven’t trucked much with satire since then.’

While visiting Lisbon Falls (the Lisbon Falls Library has some interesting material about King,

including older newspaper articles; one can visit the Children’s Library, largely funded by a generous

donation from Stephen and Tabitha King) and Durham, Rocky Wood was able to speak briefly by

phone with King’s high school English teacher, Merton Ricker (mentioned in On Writing in relation

to The Village Vomit incident187). Ricker was not able to meet Wood during his short sojourn but, in

early 2006, allowed Bill Barr from the Lisbon Historical Society to make copies of some previously

inaccessible copies of The Drum. One precious edition carries a King byline, for a short article,

Band Uniforms in the May 29, 1964 issue. There are pieces in the other editions that may be by King

but there are no other bylines and no independent confirmation that these pieces are indeed by our

subject.

These editions were:

November 27, 1963 (but a few short days after President Kennedy’s assassination, it is

dedicated to his memory; King was ‘News Editor’; it is listed as ‘Volume 1, Number 1’, presumably

indicating this was the first issue)

December 20, 1963 (King was still ‘News Editor’)

March 20, 1964 (King was still ‘News Editor’)

May 29, 1964 (see Band Uniforms below)

It is likely other issues were published during King’s time at Lisbon High School—the ‘one

issue, but that one was a monster thicker than the Lisbon Falls telephone book’ King mentions in On

Writing has yet to come to light. It appears he actually edited that issue in the 1964-65 school year

(the 1965 Lisbon High School Yearbook lists King as ‘Editor in Chief’ in his junior year). Perhaps

these issues will come to light as they may still be in the hands of fellow Lisbon High students, faculty

or their families.

The authors wish to thank Dorothy Smith, Bill Barr, Merton Ricker and the members of the

Lisbon Historical Society for their assistance in securing this material.

Progno For Tourney Go: Steve Thinks Chances Slim (February 20, 1964)

Progno For Tourney Go by ‘Steve King’ is but two paragraphs in length and appeared in the

bottom center of the front page of The Enterprise for February 20, 1964. King notes that two years

previously Lisbon High’s basketball team, the Greyhounds, had been ‘booted out’ of the Class L

tournament in the first round, ‘a severe blow to all the dedicated Lisbon High School boosters....’ As

a result many were skeptical of the squad’s chances this time around. ‘LHS principal Earle Higgins,

who is doing the bookwork for all the Western Maine schoolboy teams’ reported Lisbon currently

held fourth place. King projected they would likely play Mexico or Camden in the first round of the

playoffs—‘if previous wins over Mexico mean anything’ that team would be easily beaten. ‘After

that, who can say?’

Tit For Tat At Tourney: Lisbon High Hot And Cold (February 27, 1964)

A week later King reported on the tournament mentioned in the 20 February 1964 article. This

piece, Tit For Tat At Tourney , subtitled ‘Lisbon High Hot And Cold’, ‘by Steve King’, was the lead

piece on the front page of that week’s edition and featured photographs of nine Lisbon players and

coach Stan Doughty. According to our intrepid reporter, ‘The Lisbon Greyhounds participated in two

slaughters at the Lewiston Armory last week; Tuesday the 18th they slaughtered the Mexico Pintos,

86-46, and Thursday the 20th they were slaughtered by the unbeaten Winthrop Ramblers, 70-44.

Neither game was much of a surprise, and that was the State Final for Lisbon.’

The entire article encompasses five paragraphs. The second deals with quarter-by-quarter

scoring in the Mexico game: ‘In the second quarter the Pintos seemed about to break loose, but their

rally never got off the ground....’; and the third with individual tallies, including ‘Big Bob Ransone,

with 26’ points. The fourth paragraph, under the subtitle ‘Winthrop’ deals with that game, ‘a different

story. The Lisbon offense was completely neutralized....’ Closing, King gives the individual point

scoring records for the Greyhounds, lead by ‘George Ferguson with 15 points, Tom Fortin and Bob

Ransone had 10.’

In response to King’s wish that he still had a copy of the first article he submitted to Gould for

editing, Wood sent King copies of both these rediscovered pieces. The only way to secure copies of

these two articles is to visit the Lisbon Historical Society at the MTM Center, 18 School Street,

Lisbon Falls (enter via the rear of the building). The Society is open from 1-4 pm on Thursdays or by

appointment. Staff will make copies for a nominal fee. As the Society is run entirely by volunteers

and receives no external funding the authors have made donations of our books and monies to assist in

upkeep. We suggest other visitors may also wish to consider donating.

Band Uniforms (May 29,1964)

This two-paragraph piece is the only bylined piece of King’s non-fiction in The Drum that has

so far come to light. It appears on the second (after the cover) but unnumbered page of this edition, as

‘by Steve King’. King relates that thanks to a number of community groups, ‘the band has finally

accumulated enough filthy lucre to purchase band uniforms....’ He reports the uniform ‘decided upon

is plain black with red and white trim.’

Title unknown (1964)

As mentioned earlier King tells of the first pieces he wrote for Gould in subsection 20 of the

C.V. section of On Writing: ‘The first two pieces I turned in had to do with a basketball game in

which an LHS player broke the school scoring record. One was a straight piece of reporting. The

other was a sidebar about Robert Ransom’s record-breaking performance.’ (According to King’s 27

February 1964 article the player’s name is actually Robert Ransone—‘Big Bob’ was 6’5” tall.)

So, the first piece for The Enterprise is the news item, probably written and published in

January or February of 1964. In On Writing King presents his recollection of the article as he

originally submitted it to Gould and Gould’s editing, which he describes as ‘pure revelation’. The

short piece King recalls for us, as edited, reads: ‘Last night, in the gymnasium of Lisbon High School,

partisans and Jay Hills fans alike were stunned by an athletic performance unequalled in school

history. Bob Ransom scored thirty-seven points. Yes, you heard me right. He did it with grace,

speed...and with an odd courtesy as well, committing only two personal fouls in his quest for a record

which has eluded Lisbon players since 1953....’ In Everything You Need to Know About Writing

Successfully—In Ten Minutes King has a slightly different ending: ‘… eluded Lisbon’s basketball

team since 1953....’

Title unknown (1964)

King’s second piece for The Enterprise was, of course, the ‘sidebar about Robert Ransom’s

record-breaking performance’; which is described in Everything You Need to Know About Writing

Successfully—In Ten Minutes as ‘...a feature article.’ He relates nothing of this sidebar/feature

article in either source.

The two pieces King mentions in On Writing have yet to be discovered but we have not given up

hope that copies sit moldering in attics, filing cabinets, boxes or elsewhere in homes, offices or

libraries somewhere in Maine. Should any reader come across these missing items the authors would

appreciate them contacting us via the publisher.

So there we have it—two non-fiction articles from The Enterprise and one from The Drum,

each previously unknown; along with King’s first sports reporting and the infamous Village Vomit; all

adding to our understanding of Steve King, the high school writer.

Someone Shouted J’accuse (July 2, 1970)

This article, headlined Someone shouted j’accuse, appeared in The Summer Campus for July 2,

1970, a few months after King’s graduation from the University of Maine at Orono (UMO). At UMO

he’d contributed forty-six King’s Garbage Truck columns and a number of other articles and letters

to the editor to The Maine Campus (also published as The Summer Campus or The Maine Summer

Campus). For details of all those pieces see our Early Columns—King’s Garbage Truck chapter.

As a result of these contributions and King’s involvement in a number of campus issues,

including the anti-War movement, he had graduated with minor celebrity status. It is therefore of little

surprise that his arrest and subsequent not guilty verdict would make headlines in The Summer

Campus. Indeed, the lead article on the front page of the same issue, Student innocent of drunk

charge by Margie Rode, covered the story in detail: ‘On the night of June 18, King was arrested by

Orono policeman Richard Leland after leaving the University Motor Inn and he was taken to the

Orono police station. After his bail of $60 was posted, King was released and told to appear in court

the next morning. King and his hurriedly obtained legal counsel, David Cox of Bangor, were allowed

to continue the case until Tuesday, June 30 when King was found “not guilty” by Judge Ian

MacInnis.../...When Judge MacInnis passed down the “not guilty” verdict, he said that intoxication

was a hard thing to determine because it is all a matter of degree. The charge of intoxication carries a

“great moral interpretitude” ( sic), MacInnis added, “banning the accused from civil service work.”’

Rode concluded her report noting that officer Leland ‘did not seem displeased with the verdict’ and

that King, although ‘pleased with the outcome’ would have preferred ‘the Orono police hadn’t chose

to push the thing in the first place.’

King opens his piece on the events, ‘Happiness is having the judge tell you you’re not guilty—I

think. The only fly in the ointment is the question persists in my own mind: Why did I have to go

through the whole affair in the first place?’ He is concerned prospective employers will see little

difference between arrest and conviction. He rails against the indignity of the arrest and bail process.

But most of all he hates that ‘some unknown Orono citizen complained to the police but, as in Kafka’s

The Trial, whoever shouted j’accuse didn’t care enough to show up in court and testify.’ He wonders

if he was reported because he was bearded and had long hair? He wonders if the officer would have

arrested Pat Farnsworth (owner/operator of Farnsworth’s Café, an Orono feature, now still in the

family but operating as Pat’s Pizza) if found ‘making his way home under the influence?’ King

concludes, ‘But perhaps the Orono police might do well to keep in mind an old saying which, if

reworded, might go something like this: If everyone who ever had too much to drink were arrested,

who would keep the jails?’

King was convicted of an offence that same year—see Cone Head later in this chapter. Both

King’s article and Rode’s news report may be copied from microfiche at the Raymond H. Fogler

Library of the University of Maine’s Orono campus.

Ghostmaster General (31 October 1978)

King’s reputation as America’s premier horror novelist began hounding him very early in his

career. Of course, the author of Carrie and The Shining would be the ideal writer to pen a humorous

article about keeping safe on Halloween for the local newspaper. In fact, such a belief is how this

piece got its name. ‘As a parent, as well as (by virtue—or lack of it—of my books) a person who

might be termed Maine’s Ghostmaster General, I would like to offer some advice to the parents of

those ghosts and goblins and ghoulies.’

King gives five tips for a safe holiday and briefly discusses each: ‘First, remember that while

there is no full moon this Halloween, werewolves still become extraordinarily active on this night

(and the two or three preceding it!)’; ‘Second, please remember that vampires are always active.’;

‘Third, the ever-present problem of witches.’; ‘Fourth, the annoying number of empty house demons.’;

and ‘Finally, the more serious problem of trolls.’ He closes with the following message: ‘If parents

and children keep these very important things in mind, I am sure it will be a safe and happy

Halloween for all.’

This article was first published in King’s local newspaper, the Bangor Daily News for October

31, 1978; and was reprinted in the October 1985 issue of Castle Rock: The Stephen King

Newsletter. Copies of Bangor Daily News articles may be secured from the microfiche files at the

Fogler Library of the University of Maine at Orono (at no charge, if you actually visit), from the

newspaper direct (at a significant fee), or from visiting the Maine State Library in Augusta. Back

issues of Castle Rock are readily available from the usual King sources.

How to Scare a Woman to Death (1979)

King opens this rather tongue-in-cheek piece with an explanation of what he wants to do in this

essay...and why he wants to do it: ‘Who would want to scare a nice lady half to death, keep her up

most of the night, make her race to shut doors, close windows, and then lie awake shivering,

perspiring even in her lightest nightgown? Well, me for one. Just the thought raises a grin that, though

I cannot see it since I have no mirror, feels wonderfully sadistic. As the little street urchin in Oliver

Twist says, I only wants to make yer flesh creep...and it’s been my experience that ladies like a good

scare as well as anyone. So if you’re an apprentice flesh-creeper (or even if you aren’t), let me offer

some hints on throwing a jolt into what some of us still refer to as the fairer sex.’

King starts each paragraph with an italicized introductory sentence. The first, ‘ Who’s minding

the kids?’ discusses ‘children in jeopardy’ and the motherly instinct to protect them. ‘ Pretty dark out

here, isn’t it, Maude? ’ starts a section about women as a particular, if somewhat easy, target for

being terrified. The third section begins, ‘ My, it’s getting close in here ’ and deals with feelings of

claustrophobia. The next section opens, ‘ Oh dear, I don’t know what that is, but it’s not chopped

liver! ’ and deals with slimy, squishy, disgusting, but not necessarily identifiable things. The next

section begins with this sentence: ‘ What happened to the lights, Jane? ’ and offers ‘fear of the dark

and what might live there.’ King starts the last section simply: ‘The dead’, which is self-explanatory.

Later, he feels the need to further explain himself, ‘For me, scaring women is all part of the job, but in

this case I admit with no shame at all that my business is also my pleasure.’

This piece only appears in the book, Murderess Ink: The Better Half of the Mystery , edited by

Dilys Winn. Bell Publishing released a hardcover in 1979 and Workman Publishing a trade

paperback the same year. The book also carries a piece by King’s wife Tabitha, Living with the

Bogeyman, a two-page article about the King family, particularly their son Joe Hill. 188 Copies of this

book can easily be secured from King resellers and online booksellers.

Remembering John (December 13/14, 1980)

The killing of former Beatle John Lennon on December 8, 1980 shocked the world. The 40-year-

old was shot outside his apartment, the Dakota Building, on Manhattan’s Upper West Side. As a fan

of both The Beatles and music in general, King had to have been deeply moved by what occurred. He

wrote this very touching article only a couple of days after Lennon’s death and quotes from A Day in

the Life, a song from the album Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band , at the head of the article: ‘I

read the news today oh boy/About the lucky man who made the grade....’

He goes on to list some of his reminiscences of The Beatles, Lennon and rock music. He also

offers some important social commentary: ‘We make a business here, apparently, of dining upon the

bodies of those who have given us the most pleasure and some of our fondest memories, first we

lionize them, and then we eat them.’ He closes with these moving words: ‘He was a cynic, a poet, a

public figure, a songwriter, a singer. But the Lennon that still lives in those grooves is a rocker, and

maybe that’s what matters most to me. No one can shoot that John Lennon down; that one rocks too

loud and moves too fast. So keep rocking, John. Stay up on that rooftop where you’re safe and keep

rocking.’

This piece only appeared in the December 13/14, 1980 edition of the Bangor Daily News but is

clearly worthy of reprint and a wider audience. Copies of Bangor Daily News articles may be

secured from the microfiche files at the Fogler Library of the University of Maine at Orono (at no

charge, if you actually visit), from the newspaper direct (at a significant fee), or from visiting the

Maine State Library in Augusta.

Untitled (Summer 1981)

This is a one-paragraph recurring dream/nightmare King recorded and contributed to a journal.

He opens, ‘I don’t have many dreams or nightmares. If I dream I don’t usually remember them.’189 He

goes on to describe the dream, which features a mad woman in the attic of an old house who tries to

kill him. While this piece is certainly minor, it is interesting nonetheless and is worth tracking down

if just for fun.

It only appeared in the Summer 1981 issue of Dreamworks, ‘an interdisciplinary quarterly on the

art of dreaming,’ published by Human Sciences Press in New York and the Occidental College in Los

Angeles. Originals are very difficult to obtain and appear at King resellers only rarely. The best

opportunity to make a copy may be through interlibrary loan.

Quitting Smoking: The Toughest Part is Deciding to Try (September 15, 1981)

King starts this piece with the good year he has had with both Firestarter and Cujo being on the

bestseller lists; the release of his film Creepshow; and his children. Quickly getting to the point of this

rather serious piece, he writes: ‘But all of those things are almost secondary to the real reasons it’s

been a hell of a good year. You see, I lost forty-five pounds and have pruned my cigarette habit back

from a disastrous two-and-a-half to three packs a day to a more moderate half a pack.’ This after

warnings from a physician.

The article closes with a list of reasons to quit smoking (aside from the obvious health benefits).

King writes about how good it feels to have the type of self-control it takes to kick the habit: ‘The

trick isn’t to give something up; the trick is to agree with yourself to try, and then make the bet public.

People may laugh, or roll their eyes sarcastically heavenward...or just look at you, silently saying I’m

from Missouri. Show me. The rest of it’s tough, but not that tough. They say things smell better when

you quit smoking. They do. They say food tastes better when you quit smoking. It does. They say sex

is more rewarding if you quit smoking and lose weight. It is. They say that exercising—walking,

running, just climbing a flight of stairs—is easier, and probably safer. I’m sure. But I think the best

reward is that confirmation of self...being able to think of yourself as strong, as one of the good guys.’

The article appeared in the September 15, 1981 issue of the Bangor Daily News, one of many

contributions to this publication. Copies of Bangor Daily News articles may be secured from the

microfiche files at the Fogler Library of the University of Maine at Orono (at no charge, if you

actually visit), from the newspaper direct (at a significant fee), or from visiting the Maine State

Library in Augusta.

My High School Horrors (1982)

Stephen King taught high school English between 1971 and 1973 and opens this humorous piece

telling us of some of the terrors of the high school classroom: ‘I liked teaching a lot and most of my

high school terrors were small ones. If they were filmed, they’d be grade B movies. See if any of

these horrors sound familiar.’ The article then divides into sections, each with a heading and a few

paragraphs explaining specific terrors: The Thing That Wouldn’t Shut Up; The Classroom of the

Living Dead; The Smell from Hell; The Incredible Osculating Creature; The Horror of the Unknown

Noises; and The Monster That Wouldn’t Turn Off Its Radio (all, of course, varying types of annoying

student).

He closes, ‘Those are some high school horrors I remember from my days of labor in the groves

of academe; occasionally there were more serious problems, but these are the ones kids rarely think

about but that regularly put a gotcha! into a teacher’s day. I just thought you should know. Now...what

have I left out?’

This piece was first published in Sourcebook: The Magazine for Seniors, a publication of the

13-30 Corporation, distributed freely to high school seniors in 1982. It was reprinted as High School

Horrors in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter for February 1986; and under its original title

in the Fall 1993 issue of Georgia Biology, ‘a life science journal prepared by high school students.’

The Castle Rock appearance is the easiest to obtain, as back copies are freely available from the

usual King sources. The other two appearances were journals for high school students and as such are

obscure, appearing for sale on rare occasions. The Sourcebook appearance also contained a short

interview with King, titled rather unimaginatively ‘The King of Terror’.

Peter Straub: An Informal Appreciation (1982)

King begins this appreciation of one of horror’s leading writers with a humorous but spot on

description of some fantasy convention attendees, noting his friend Peter Straub doesn’t fit into this

crowd: ‘Peter Straub always looks out of place at fantasy conventions. Most convention-goers

wander around in a wild variety of t-shirts (my most memorable con t-shirts include BEAT ME,

DADDY, EIGHT TO THE BAR, RUGBY PLAYERS EAT THEIR DEAD, and WILL SOMEBODY

PLEASE BEAM RONALD REAGAN UP?), strange headgear, weird footwear, eccentric jewelry,

and actual costumes—it is not unusual to see a giant tribble drifting softly down a post-midnight

hallway at one of these shindigs, or a gentleman in a silver leisure suit who apparently has antennae

growing not only from his temples but from his nipples and navel as well.’

He relates events from the 1980 World Fantasy Convention in which Straub and others

inadvertently scared two old women by making chainsaw noises in a discussion about The Texas

Chainsaw Massacre: ‘Peter Straub looks like somebody who must be terribly conservative, an

upholder of the system, the status quo, Things As They Have Been as well as Things As They Are.

Hearing chainsaw sounds emanating from a gent of such respectable appearance could indeed

be...well, unsettling.’ This article is more of an appreciation of the man than his writing, although

King argues, ‘Peter Straub’s books smack neither of tired academic ennui or foolish self-indulgence.

Instead there is the clean enthusiasm of the authentic crazy human being—the sort of dudes who

staggered back from the wilderness with the skin around their eyes blasted black by the sun of visions

and a scorpion or two crawling in their hair. And I don’t suppose it matters if the prophet in question

came back from those lonely places where ordinary people are afraid to go in a lice-infested robe or

a suit from Paul Stuart. The look is the same, the intelligence just as mind-popping.’

Straub was, of course, King’s co-author in the ‘The Territories’ novels— The Talisman and

Black House, both published after this piece. At some point we can expect these two leading

exponents of dark fiction to complete the chronicles of Jack Sawyer’s life with one final installment.

This article appeared in World Fantasy Convention ’82 , edited by Kennedy Poyser, a trade

paperback that formed the program book for The Eighth World Fantasy Convention held in New

Haven, Connecticut. The booklet appears at King resellers but only rarely.

A Novelist’s Perspective on Bangor (March 1983)

King opens: ‘Since my wife and family and I came to Bangor in 1979, I have been asked time

and time again why I want to live here. I live in Maine because I was born in Maine and it’s my home

place. The reasons for living in Bangor are not so simple.’ They are, according to the author: his

house, a neighborhood school, the ‘graceful Victorian homes’ on West Broadway, and so on. ‘Those

are personal things, and I promised you a novelist’s perspective,’ King writes. ‘You may be

disappointed, because that may not actually exist—it may be more sell than substance. Nevertheless,

it was as much the novelist as the man who wanted to come to Bangor. I had a very long book in

mind, a book which I hoped would deal with the way myths and dreams and stories—stories, most of

all—become a part of the everyday life of a small American city. I had done something like this

before, but with the sort of small rural town in which I had grown up. That book was Salem’s Lot .

The novel about the small city—a city named Derry which any native of this city will recognize

almost at once as Bangor—is now written, in first draft, at least, and will be the basis of any coherent

remarks I have to offer today (and when I run out of such remarks, I can always read from the novel

itself—which may or may not be more coherent than any extempore remarks I am able to muster). I’m

fairly happy with it—as happy as one can be with a first draft, I suppose—because the stories are

there.’ The novel King refers to is the classic, It, which appropriately enough was originally titled

Derry, and would not be published for a further three years.

Still, the question of why Bangor was the Kings’ small city of choice remained and King notes,

‘The real answer is that no, not any small American city would have done. Portland certainly

wouldn’t have done. And no, I don’t know why. Maybe the book itself will answer the question (but

if it does, I suspect the answer will lie in the narrow white spaces between the lines). If there really

is such a “novelist’s perspective” (or, more properly, “a Steve King novelist’s perspective,” because

I suppose each novelist must have a different way of looking at things), then it is a matter of heart and

instinct.’ The King family’s main home remains in Bangor to this day, although they also own a lake

house in Western Maine and a home in Florida. Their time now tends to be split between the three.

The piece only appeared in a paperback booklet called Black Magic and Music, issued by The

Bangor Historical Society to accompany a benefit held on March 27, 1983. It was later reprinted in a

version that omits the advertisements contained in the first printing. Copies of either edition are very

difficult to secure and will most likely appear at specialist King resellers, if anywhere.

Stephen King’s 10 Favorite Horror Books or Short Stories (1983)

This piece contains no explanatory text by King, simply a list of his ten favorite horror

books/short stories. They are: Ghost Story, by Peter Straub; Dracula, by Bram Stoker; The Haunting

( sic), by Shirley Jackson; Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde , by R. L. Stevenson; Burnt Offerings, by Robert

Marasco; Casting the Runes, by M. R. James; Two Bottles of Relish, by Lord Dunsany; The Great

God Pan, by Arthur Machen; The Color Out of Space, by H. P. Lovecraft and The Upper Berth by F.

Marion Crawford.

The list exclusively in Stephen King’s 10 Favorite Horror Books or Short Stories was

published in The Book of Lists #3, compiled by Amy Wallace, David Wallechinsky, and Irving

Wallace in a hardcover released by William Morrow in 1983, and a book club edition the same year.

Elm Tree Books published it in the United Kingdom in 1983; a Bantam mass-market paperback

edition was released that December.

Dear Walden People (August 1983)

The novellas that make up King’s collection Different Seasons contain some of his finest writing

and, for the most part, are not traditional horror tales. In fact, two of King’s best and most successful

film adaptations ( The Shawshank Redemption and Stand by Me) are based on stories from this

collection. It is unsurprising that the issue of tales outside his branding as ‘The King of Horror’ came

up around the time of the book’s publication. ‘I’ve been asked if Different Seasons, my book of four

short novels, means that I’ve reached the end of my interest in such uplifting and mentally edifying

subjects as ghouls, ghosts, vampires, and unspeakable things lurking in the closets of little kids. After

all, these questioners point out, three of the four novellas deal with nonhorror themes—prison escape,

little boys whose curiosity is perhaps too big for their own good, more little boys on an unlikely—but

all too possible—quest. My response is to point out that the fourth story in Different Seasons (which

my youngest son, Owen, persists in calling Different Sneezes) is pretty gruesome. It concerns a

doctor, a rather peculiar men’s club, and an unwed mother who is extremely determined to give birth

to her baby,’ King related, referring to The Breathing Method.

Closing in traditional style, he confesses: ‘I had fun with ’em, and that’s usually a pretty good

sign that the reader will have some fun too. I hope so, anyway. That’s enough for now, I guess, so let

me close with just a cordial word of warning: remember that when you turn out the light this evening

and climb into your bed, anything could be under it—anything at all.’

This piece, published to coincide with the Signet mass-market paperback edition of Different

Seasons, originally appeared in the August 1983 edition of Waldenbooks Book Notes , a free

newsletter distributed at the chain bookstore’s locations. Original copies appear rarely at specialist

King resellers. In 1988 it was reprinted as With Waldenbooks in Bare Bones: Conversations on

Terror with Stephen King , edited by Tim Underwood and Chuck Miller (that book went through

many printings in both the United States and the United Kingdom); and finally under the original title

in The Stephen King Companion by George Beahm, which also went through numerous printings in

both countries. The latter appearances are readily available through online and traditional

secondhand book dealers.

A Profile of Robert Bloch (October 1983)

This appreciation of Robert Bloch (King also dedicated Danse Macabre to this author, among

others) is written in the humorous style we see quite often in King’s non-fiction, that is—tongue

planted firmly in cheek. Early and by way of an explanatory note regarding the style in which the

article is written, King says: ‘I had intended to do a warm and lovely appreciation of Bob Bloch—

about fifty pages of uplifting phrases and inspiring subordinate clauses—but I suddenly realized last

night that the dreaded deadline had almost arrived. I therefore called the proper people this morning

(collect—you always called collect) and explained about how my mother had rabies and my dog had

been run over by a city bus: I sounded sincere as hell to myself but I must not have been too

convincing, because I was not given six weeks of grace but only three days.’

The piece is divided into a lot of very short sections: Birth; Early Schooling; University

Training; Graduate Studies; A Letter Bloch Probably Regrets; A Flowery Debut; He Hasn’t Been to

Cleveland Since; Early Fiction; Something about Hair; A Novel Appraisal; The Fix May Have Been

In; The Director’s Name Slips My Mind; Bob is Just Grateful No One Has Told the National

Enquirer Yet; and Final Appraisal. King concludes his subject ‘is witty, personable, and gently ( sic)

—as a writer he is the pro’s pro, as a conversationalist he is the sort of person you always hope you

will run into in a bar (and to whom you so seldom do), as a friend he is nonpareil.’

This piece appears only in World Fantasy Convention 1983 , edited by Robert Weinberg, a

trade paperback program booklet printed by Weird Tales Ltd for the Ninth World Fantasy

Convention, held in October 1983. Copies of this booklet are difficult to find and are best sourced

from the usual King resellers or online secondhand sources.

Stephen King (December 1983)

This very short autobiographical piece is written in the third person. King speaks briefly of his

birth, high school, and university careers and his marriage and children. The last paragraph reads:

‘Mr. King has written several novels and short stories and many of his novels have been made into

movies. He has an excellent imagination and writes about things which are sometimes scary.’

This rare item appears only in a trade paperback book, A Gift From Maine. It was written by

‘Maine’s Foremost Artists and Writers and James Plummer’s Sixth Grade Class’ and published by

Portland, Maine-based Guy Gannet Publishing Co. It appears irregularly at King resellers, on eBay

and such sources as abebooks.com.

A short poem about ‘what scares me most’ by Chris Bradbury (aged 11) is included on the same

page as King’s piece as both illustration and direction for the reader to ‘write a poem of what scares

you most.’

Bernie Wrightson: An Appreciation (1983)

King begins here echoing a similar sentiment to that expressed in his appreciation of J. K.

Potter’s work (see On J. K. Potter: The Art of the Morph in our Introducing the Work of Others

chapter). ‘Writing about pictures—from the highest art to the lowliest caricature—makes me

uncomfortable. As a writer, I see pictures in my head and am able to translate what I see tolerably

well to the page190. ..but in words. What my readers see they see between the lines. As a maker of

actual images, I am able to produce stick-men, stick-women, and stick-animals that even my six-year-

old looks at with barely concealed contempt. As a result, I would no more try to critique Bernie

Wrightson’s work than I would try to obtain a grant from The National Endowment Committee for the

Arts on the basis of my doodles (mostly what I doodle are eyes). I cannot critique because I cannot

do: my abysmal unpreparedness for such a task is compounded by the fact that I have never studied.’

As King fans know, Wrightson is one of the author’s favorites. He is responsible for the artwork

i n Creepshow, Cycle of the Werewolf , The Stand: The Complete & Uncut Edition, the limited

edition of From A Buick 8 and The Dark Tower V: Wolves of the Calla . Cycle of the Werewolf

started off as a project for a calendar where King would write the text for each month and Wrightson

would do the artwork. It quickly outgrew that form but the two remained collaborators on the project.

King was very pleased with the outcome: ‘The results of this partnership of story and image have

been greatly gratifying to me...and I hope they have been to you, as well. Thanks, Bernie. I ain’t no

monkey, but I know what I like.’

This very rare piece only appears in TheCycle of the Werewolf Portfolio , published by The

Land of Enchantment in 1983, in a limited edition of 350 numbered copies signed by both King and

Wrightson. These portfolios were given away with the deluxe limited edition of Cycle of the

Werewolf, also published by The Land of Enchantment in 1983. They almost never appear on the

market and even then at high prices. Readers wishing to secure a copy should contact dedicated King

resellers.

The Limits of Violence (1983)

This is King’s short contribution to a collection of authors’ views regarding the limits of

violence. He eloquently makes his point, especially with regard to scenes of violence in his own

work: ‘In other words, violence directed toward some point is perfectly acceptable. But I don’t think

I would be in this business if I didn’t sort of gravitate toward violence for its own sake. All the things

about violence that we remark as questionable—to be titillated by violence, to be excited by violence

—have got to play a part as well. I just try to keep it under control; because if I weren’t that way, I’d

be writing Barbara Cartland romances....’

This piece first appeared in Shadowings: The Reader’s Guide to Horror Fiction, 1981-82 ,

edited by Douglas E. Winter, released in both hardcover and trade paperback by Starmont House. It

was reprinted as Horror and the Limits of Violence in the Fall 1986 issue of American Fantasy

magazine. The book is generally available from the specialist King resellers; and the magazine can be

secured, with some difficulty, from the same sources and used magazine outlets.

The Irish King (March 16, 1984)

King opens, ‘I just tell people it’s because I’m Irish. That I’m prolific, I mean. Just lately I keep

getting rapped with that word—as in “the tiresomely prolific Stephen King,” or “the endlessly

prolific Mr. King,” or...supply your own adverb. I even had one exasperated critic wish a case of

terminal dyslexia on my poor head.’ This article quickly becomes one of King’s humorous pieces: ‘If

my endless spate of words ended with my own work, that would be one thing. Unfortunately, it does

not end there. I keep having these meddlesome Irish ideas about how to improve—or at least warp—

the work of others. I herewith offer a few of these freely and with no strings attached; I’m sure the

authors mentioned have plenty ideas of their own, but one never knows—after all, they might not be

Irish.’

He then suggests ridiculous book ideas for Stephen Donaldson, Rosemary Rogers, Robert

Ludlum, Dorris Lessing, V. S. Naipaul, Dick Francis and James Michener. For instance, ‘The Muppet

Repository, by Robert Ludlum’: ‘A retired CIA agent with a tireless libido and a penchant for

malapropisms discovers the final secret of Darkest Africa—not the fabled Elephant Graveyard but a

Muppet Graveyard in which the prehistoric forebears of Kermit, Miss Piggy, Yoda, and Gonzo the

Great lie desiccated but marvelously preserved by the arid climate. The hero’s problems are

complicated by his love for a Muppet Archaeologist who may (or may not) work for the NKVD.’ He

also has a suggestion for himself: ‘Well, what about “The Molting”? This would be a sequel to—hold

the phone, Hollywood!—end all sequels. Danny Torrance, the precognitive kid from “The Shining,”

meets Charlie McGee, the pyrotechnic kid from “Firestarter.” They marry and have a kid who knows

when he’s going to light fires!! Gosh, being Irish is great, and being prolific is even better. Now,

let’s see...Harold Robbins....’

This piece was originally titled Some Irish Ideas; the three-page manuscript under this title is

held in Box 2702 of The Stephen Edwin King Collection in the Special Collections unit of the

Raymond H. Fogler Library at the University of Maine at Orono.

In published form The Irish King only appeared in the March 16, 1984 edition of The New York

Daily News. The easiest ways to secure a photocopy of this piece are through an interlibrary article

request, or by attending one of the New York libraries that archive this publication.

1984: A Bad Year If You Fear Friday the 13th(April 12, 1984)

In another humorous piece we discover: ‘A Triskaidekaphobe is one who fears the number 13,

and this it not a good year for the triskies, of which I am one. Living through a year with such a

reputation as George Orwell has given this one is bad enough, but consider this added fillip—for

only the 27th time since the year 1800, we are living a year with three Friday the 13ths, the maximum

possible. One fell in January, one falls in April (note, that’s tomorrow) and the third occurs in July.’

King goes on to list terrible and unlucky events in history that happened on Friday the 13th.

He ends with a warning or two: ‘So if you know a triskie and you find that he or she has adopted

a bomb-shelter mentality this year, be kind—after all, there won’t be another until 1987, and that’s

three phobia-free years. And spare a sympathetic thought for your faithful correspondent, who is

doing the best he can under circumstances that would give even the hardest triskie fits: not only is it a

triple-whammy year, but I have been married 13 years this year, have a daughter 13 years old and

have published 13 books. Even so, the year I’m really dreading is 1998. In that triple-whammy year

I’ll be 49. 191 Can you add 4 and 9? As Mr. Rogers says, “I knew you could.” That’s the year I may

really spend in a bomb shelter.’

This article first appeared in the April 12, 1984 edition of The New York Times and is relatively

easy to obtain, as major libraries archive that publication. It was reprinted as The Triple Whammy in

the November 1987 (that year, as mentioned, being the next with a triple Friday 13th) issue of Castle

Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter. Back issues of this newsletter are easily obtained from the usual

King resources.

Dr. Seuss and the Two Faces of Fantasy (June 1984)

This essay represents a guest of honor address given to the International Conference on the

Fantastic in the Arts, on March 24, 1984 in Boca Raton, Florida. It is not a transcription of the speech

King gave, but another version he had previously written. For the transcription of the actual speech

see Title unknown in our King’s Unpublished Non-Fiction chapter.

King sets guidelines early and explains why he works within specialized genres. Then, ‘I

decided that what remained was to talk briefly about the influences—literary and otherwise—that

called out to me as a child and helped to form me as a writer. Such a topic has a rather conceited

undertone, I realize—it suggests that people must care enough about my present work to also care

about what I read or saw at the movies when I was a kid. But I think such a discussion has its useful

side, even if you are impatient with my work, as many critics are. The usefulness comes from the

certainty—mine and that of most of the other writers I know who make fantasies—that the urge to

write fantasy is not something the writer creates. One of the questions I’m most frequently asked is,

“Why do you write that stuff?” My response, first in an essay called “On Becoming a Brand Name”

and later incorporated in Danse Macabre, my barroom rant masquerading as scholarship, was:

“What makes you think I have any choice?”’

King also writes of the beloved children’s author Dr. Seuss, specifically dealing with two

works: The 500 Hats of Bartholomew Cubbins and McElligot’s Pool. He goes on to discuss the dark

elements of these fantasies and closes by tying the darker themes in Seuss’ work to his own: ‘I am not

about to conclude by saying something really sappy—a plea for world unification through horror

movies, for instance—but I want to suggest that both Bartholomew and the boy by the pool,

representatives of dark fantasy and its brighter counterpart, bear the stupefied expressions of people

touching the unknown. For me I think it’s always been that, more than anything else, to which the

interior compass needle responded.’

An important essay for those who wish to understand King and his work, its only appearance is

the June 1984 issue of Fantasy Review magazine. Copies of this edition can be obtained from

specialist used magazine dealers and King resellers, although it is fairly rare.

My First Car (July 1984)

This is King’s part of a larger article under the umbrella title My First Car. Other contributors

include Roy Blount, Jr. and Johnny Carson. He says, ‘It was a 1964 Galaxie. Sharp. I was about 17. I

bought it from my brother for $250; he had gotten it as junk.’ Though this piece is only a few

paragraphs King gets his point across: ‘It was a beautiful car. It had a bright red vinyl interior.

Although, I’m thinking, you know, this car would probably look like shit to me now. It’s just in my

memory that it seems great.’

The article appeared in the July 1984 issue of Gentlemen’s Quarterly . Copies of this magazine

are often archived in libraries and that may be the best source for obtaining a copy of the piece. As

the magazine is collectable used magazine dealers and King resellers will also make copies available

from time to time.

Theodore Sturgeon—1918-1985 (May 26, 1985)

Author Theodore Sturgeon died on May 8, 1985; several days later, King wrote this touching

eulogy, which opens with the place Sturgeon occupied in literature: ‘Not many newspapers have

Sunday book sections these days; a couple of brief reviews courtesy of the wire services is usually

the extent of it. Not many of those that do have such sections will have anything to say about the work

of Theodore Sturgeon, who died of lung disease last week. Sturgeon, after all, was only a science-

fiction writer. In the pantheon of modern fiction, where distinctions of subject have hardened into a

critical mindset almost as arbitrary and complete as the Hindu caste system, that means Sturgeon

occupied a place on the literary ladder one rung above the writers of westerns and one rung below

the writers of mysteries.’

Of his subject King mourns, ‘Perhaps the best comment on how quietly such a fine writer can

pass from us—like an intelligent and witty guest who slips from a party where many less interesting

folk are claiming greater attention by virtue of greater volume—is this: Book World okayed a piece

by Ray Bradbury, Harlan Ellison or me. By someone better known than Ted himself. A noisy party

guest.’

He closes with a heartfelt wish for future generations to enjoy Sturgeon’s work: ‘Considering the

fact that he was only a science-fiction writer, Theodore Sturgeon left exceedingly fine work behind

him. Who knows? That work may be read and enjoyed long after the category itself has ceased to

guarantee instant dismissal. That would be very fine.’

This piece first appeared in the May 26, 1985 edition of TheWashington Post Book World .

Copies can easily be obtained from major libraries that archive this important newspaper. It was

reprinted in the Summer 1985 issue of SFWA Bulletin; and finally as Viewpoint: Theodore Sturgeon

—1918-1985 in the January 1986 edition of Isaac Asimov’s science-fiction Magazine . Copies of the

former magazine are difficult to secure, although used magazine dealers, particularly those

specializing in science-fiction will generally have the Asimov magazine in stock.

Famous First Words: Well Begun is Half Done (June 2, 1985)

The New York Times Book Review asked several writers: ‘What is your favorite passage in a

work of literature and why?’ King’s answer formed part of this article. Other authors featured include

Elmore Leonard, Frank Herbert and Herman Wouk. All of the contributing authors’ pieces are

extremely brief.

King describes this passage in Robert Penn Warren’s All The King’s Men and states he likes it

because of the way that it ‘invites the reader in’: ‘To get there you follow Highway 58...You look up

the highway and it is straight for miles...with the black line down the center coming at you and at

you...and the heat dazzles up from the white slab so that only the black line is clear, coming at

you...and if you don’t quit staring at that line and don’t take a few breaths and slap yourself hard on

the back of the neck you’ll hypnotize yourself and you’ll come to just at the moment when the right

front wheel hooks over into the black dirt shoulder off the slab...and maybe you’ll try to reach to turn

off the ignition just as she starts to dive. But you won’t make it, of course.’

This piece appeared in the June 2, 1985 edition of The New York Times Book Review. This is an

important publication and many significant libraries hold microfilm or microfiche copies in their

archives.

The Politics of Limited Editions (June-July 1985)

This two-part essay explains that booksellers are angry with King for offering limited-edition

only books, especially considering his ‘brand name’ status: ‘I want to tell you why a lot of

booksellers in the United States are currently pissed off with me, and I want to tell you why I think it

is wrong for them to feel that way, and most of all I want to talk about the amazing way in which we

have come to perceive books—but first I need to tell you a story. In fact, I need to tell you three

stories. The conclusion of each of these little tales provides one-third of the reason for the current

state of piss-off among booksellers, at least as regards your humble correspondent.’

The article deals mainly with the reasons each of the three books discussed was published in a

limited edition format. King starts with The Dark Tower I: The Gunslinger and explains he published

this book for several reasons: ‘First, the five stories had been well-received in their magazine

publication192; second, I thought the entire story would make more sense when read as a whole; third,

Don Grant is exclusively a fantasy publisher with strong ties to the fantasy and science-fiction

community, and I wanted to say thank you to that community, which has provided me with creative

nourishment since my earliest youth and for all of my life as a writer. There were also at least three

reasons for doing it expressly as a limited edition: First, it was an oddity—set in a world more like

the perfervid Hyperborean landscape of Robert E. Howard than the common rural/suburban mileu

( sic) of the archetypal Stephen King novel. Second, I believed then and believe now that more

general readers would feel both shocked and cheated by the book’s lack of resolution—it is, after all,

the first section of a much longer work...Third, my mass-market publishers—New American Library

and Viking Press—had become increasingly uneasy about overexposure in the marketplace.’

Next, King talks about the limited edition of Cycle of the Werewolf. He relates the project began

as an idea for a calendar, with twelve vignettes written to cover each month of the year, but quickly

grew into a short novel, which The Land of Enchantment Press published as a limited. He felt Cycle,

like The Gunslinger wasn’t what his fans would expect. He then moves on to The Eyes of the

Dragon published by his own imprint, Philtrum Press and relates how this work was originally

conceived: it ‘began as a story for my daughter, who likes fantasy fiction but cares not at all for tales

of horror. She’s read little of my work, and quite simply put, I wanted to please her, and reach her. I

had an idea for something like a fairy tale—but because my daughter is 14 and a fairly sophisticated

reader, it was a fairy tale with teeth.’

In the second part of this lengthy and important essay, King defends his decisions and the idea of

limited editions in general. Closing with this theme he argues, ‘A real limited edition, far from being

an expensive autograph stapled to a novel, is a treasure. And like all treasures do, it transforms the

responsible owner into a caretaker, and being a caretaker of something as fragile and easily destroyed

as ideas and images is not a bad thing but a good one...and so is the reevaluation of what books are

and what they do that necessarily follows. So: that is why I did it...and why I may well do it again.

And again.’ As most King fans will know, King has continued to do it, most notably with the limited-

edition only collection Six Stories; and many limited editions of other novels, which were also

published in trade editions. With the exception of the original version of The Plant all King’s limited

edition fiction has seen print in a mass-market version; and the vast majority of the original The Plant

was included when the Internet edition of that tale was released.

This article was published over two parts in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter, in the

June and July 1985 issues. Back issues of Castle Rock can be obtained relatively easily from sources

that specialize in King publications.

Lists That Matter (No. 14) (October 1985)

Lists That Matter was a series of five-minute radio spots recorded for King’s Bangor, Maine

radio station, WZON in 1985 (see our King’s Unpublished Non-Fiction chapter for the story behind

these features). (No.14) opens: ‘It occurred to me the other day that in least one way I’m quite a bit

more fortunate than other men. Women, even in our liberated society, are sometimes allowed to show

fear, but men are supposed to be rough and macho no matter what. If you admit you’re frightened in

some situation, you are labeled a wimp or a scaredy-cat. But because I write scary stuff for a living,

I’m allowed to admit that I’m sometimes afraid. In fact, today I’d like to share ten of my fears with

you—and if you’ve ever shivered inwardly at one of these things, join the club.’

The ten fears are: being halfway across the ocean during a transcontinental flight; checking the

circuit breaker in a dark cellar; being hit by lightning; showering and thinking about the infamous

scene from Psycho; elevators; contracting a terrible disease from a street vendor; someone in the

backseat of a vehicle; getting a telephone call late at night; being on top of a skyscraper and hearing

the building creak on a windy day; and he leaves the last fear blank for the reader (or, as this was

broadcast on WZON Radio before it was printed, listener) to fill in.

Four other Lists That Matter articles were published: Lists That Matter (see below); Lists That

Matter (Number 7) and Lists That Matter (Number 8) (both covered in our Opinion—Radio, Music,

Film and Television chapter), all in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter; and His Creepiest

Movies ( Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television chapter), in USA Today.

This piece appeared in the October 1985 edition of Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter;

copies are easily secured from specialist King resellers.

What Ails the U.S. Male: Fire and Ice Cream (November 1985)

While King is often witty and entertaining in his non-fiction, he is serious here and opens: ‘Men

need all kinds of things from women. We need to be mothered—sometimes even by our mothers. We

need to be challenged, and to be pushed, occasionally, to do our best. We need love from women—

and we need admiration. And I think that women give us an outlet through which we can explore our

more tender emotions.’ This piece of only a few paragraphs carries important insights and closes, ‘In

fact, I think women are very glad to be able to offer a man a little comfort, a little rest. But they also

know there are a lot of times when it’s a bunch of bullshit.’

This piece appeared in the November 1985 issue of Mademoiselle magazine, copies of which

may be secured from used magazine sources and King resellers. It is also archived by some libraries.

My Say: Stephen King (December 20, 1985)

Here King responds to a ‘My Say’ column by Ron Busch (published in the November 15, 1985

issue of Publishers Weekly ): ‘It’s wonderful that Ron Busch has had some time to think about the

problems in paperback publishing...He has pinpointed the problem, but has missed the clearest

cause.’

As a major author and after some years of involvement with the publishing business, King shows

he understands the ins and outs of the matter of declining paperback sales. Offering his own solution

to the problem he writes, ‘Sales potential exists now. Realization of that potential depends upon the

willingness of paperback publishers to develop their own stable of reliable, salable writers (and this,

as Busch indicates, depends to a large degree on the willingness of houses who sell both hard and

soft to separate their trade and to drum into the heads of all concerned an 11th commandment: Thou

Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Scribbler) and to widen their commitment to sell books not already

pre-sold, either by the name of the writer or by their own megabuck investments.’

King concludes, ‘Paperback publishers need to go back to the beginning and start looking not

just for bucks but for good writers; to form a supportive bond with these writers. In the past,

paperback publishers have been reapers. Now they must begin to plant and cultivate as well.’

This article first appeared in the December 20, 1985 issue of Publishers Weekly magazine; and

is reprinted in The Stephen King Companion, edited by George Beahm; and in The Lost Work of

Stephen King by Stephen J. Spignesi. Publishers Weekly may be secured from secondhand magazine

sources and these issues often appear on eBay and at specialist King resellers. Also, many libraries

archive the journal.

Lists That Matter (January 1986)

This unnumbered installment of King’s Lists That Matter begins: ‘Today it’s time to accentuate

the positive by beginning to enumerate the Best Things in Life—not necessarily free, but definitely the

best. There are certain universals when it comes to the best things, but for today I’d ask you to chew

on this: isn’t a person’s idea of the best there is really a function of that person’s age? I’m positive

that it is. A kid’s idea of the best TV show might be Masters of the Universe, but it’s very unlikely

that his father would list the same show as the best thing on the tube. It’s not impossible—it’s

possible to be a dad and still have the brain of a retarded Chihuahua dog, I suppose—but unlikely. So

with that idea in mind, I’d like to offer my list of the ten best things at the ten ages of a person’s life.’

These ages are: seven, fourteen, twenty-one, twenty-eight, thirty-five, forty-two, forty-nine, fifty-

six, sixty-three and seventy. For the age of seven, King claims, ‘the best thing is an ice cream cone,

especially if it’s your favorite flavor and a double-dip.’ At the other end of the spectrum, at seventy

the best thing is ‘to still be alive, healthy, and with most of your brain-cells still working. Man, if I

make it that far I’m gonna throw the biggest party of my life.’ He concludes, ‘We could go on—the

bests don’t stop at 70—but it makes a convenient place to pack it in. As for me, I hope that today

you’re having the best day of the best year of a remarkably fine life.’

Four other Lists That Matter articles were published: Lists That Matter (Number 14) (see

above); Lists That Matter (Number 7) and Lists That Matter (Number 8) (both covered in our

Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television chapter); all in Castle Rock: The Stephen King

Newsletter; and His Creepiest Movies (see our Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television

chapter), in USA Today.

This article appeared in the January 1986 edition of Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter.

Copies of the newsletter are easily secured from specialist King resellers.

Tough Talk and Tootsies, Just 25 Cents (May 23, 1986)

King wonders: ‘ Was there a Golden Age for paperback originals—that is, books that were never

published as hardbacks before they appeared in softcovers? Part of me wants to deny the idea

(Confucius says: When a man begins to believe in golden ages, he is on his way to being a golden

ager). A larger part, however, insists there was such an age.’ King fondly recalls certain hard-boiled

crime novelists whose names recur frequently in his writing and to whom he owes a debt of both

inspiration and entertainment—John D. MacDonald, Donald E. Westlake 193, and Evan Hunter/Ed

McBain194.

Regarding paperback originals by these and similar authors: ‘And they don’t cost a quarter

anymore. Fancy foil lettering has in many cases replaced the illustrations of tough men and willing

women, and publishers of paperback originals continue their retreat from the arena of the general

novel and into the safe pens of such genres as romance, science-fiction, mystery, and horror. But there

was a time when you could have...well, the girl, the gold watch, and everything. Which just happens

to be the name of a John D. MacDonald paperback original which sold for...Yeah, you guessed it.’ (In

that theme this piece was originally titled Escape for a Quarter.)

King has always had an interest in the hard-boiled crime story. In fact, when asked to write a

blurb for editor Charles Ardai’s series of mass-market paperback crime originals under the Hard

Case Crime imprint, King instead turned in the short novel The Colorado Kid, which Ardai published

in the fall of 2005.

This piece (and its sidebar, The Camus of Crime, discussed below) both appeared in the May

23, 1986 issue of USA Today . Only a few major libraries archive this newspaper. Original copies

appear, although rarely, on eBay and with King resellers.

The Camus of Crime (May 23, 1986)

This extremely short piece (a sidebar to Tough Talk and Tootsies, Just 25 Cents , discussed

above) is about crime novelist Jim Thompson, one of King’s favorites195. He writes fondly: ‘Most

paperback originals of that time (like most of today’s) were schlock—but behind some of those garish

covers lurked talents that would be overlooked for years; in the case of some, until long after the

writers were dead. The greatest may have been Jim Thompson, who died in 1977.’

Stephen King Comments onIT(July 1986)

Here King responds to an article by Michael R. Collings— IT: Stephen King’s Comprehensive

Masterpiece, printed in the same publication. Collings is a noted King critic and author of several

King books, including: The Shorter Works of Stephen King , The Stephen King Phenomenon,

Stephen King as Richard Bachman, and Horror Plum’d: An International Stephen King

Bibliography and Guide—1960-2000.

He opens: ‘Dear Michael, Thank you for your kind letter and the accompanying essay. I’m

pleased that you liked the book so well. Actually, I like it pretty well myself, but when I saw that

ludicrous stack of manuscript pages, I immediately fell into a defensive crouch. I think the days when

any novel as long as this gets much of a critical reading are gone. I suspect part of my defensiveness

comes from the expectation of poor reviews, partly from my own feeling that that book really is too

long.’

King describes the genesis of It, one of his most widely loved novels (discussed in more detail

in How IT Happened, below); and details comparisons of the fictional city in the novel, Derry to his

hometown of Bangor, Maine. King had discussed this before, in A Novelist’s Perspective on Bangor

(see above). ‘Derry is no more Bangor than Gordie Lachance in The Body is the young Steve King.

Derry 1985 has the characteristics of Bangor, geographically, but Derry 1958 is Stratford,

Connecticut, where I was eleven,’ he writes and closes, ‘Well, the hour groweth late and the dog

needeth to be walked. So I close. But thanks. And I’ll be around if you want to pull my chain.’

This important article only appeared in the July 1986 issue of Castle Rock: The Stephen King

Newsletter and is deserving of a wider audience. Back issues may be obtained from the usual King

dealers.

Solving the Mystery of Bobby’s Return toDallas(August 30—September 5, 1986)

TV Guide asked several people (including Roy Blount, Jr., Judith Krantz, Cyra McFadden and

Erich Segal) to give their theories on Bobby Ewing’s return to the television show, Dallas (a major

media event in the network TV of the time). King’s answer was part of this article. His contribution

was only one paragraph and, as with all the other contributors, is very tongue-in-cheek: ‘The answer

to the question of how Bobby Ewing comes back is very simple. Bobby Ewing is still dead. He has

been reanimated, probably by enemies of J. R.’s with access to certain arcane books and rituals.’

This piece appeared in the August 30-September 5, 1986 issue of TV Guide. Back issues of this

magazine may be found at various online magazine dealers and occasionally from the usual King

sellers and eBay. As millions of these magazines are printed each week the original is not rare and

collectors should not have to pay more than a small fee.

The Novelist Sounds Off (October 6, 1986)

This short article consists of nine different areas on which King gives his brief opinion (a

paragraph or less for each): On ‘important’ fiction; On childhood; On exorcism; On writing; On

horror; On psychoanalysis; On Success; On the competition; and On his own novels. The response to

this last area is a self-deprecating description oft used by the author and of his own making: ‘The

literary equivalent of a Big Mac and a large fries from McDonald’s.’ It should be noted that King has,

in more recent years, accepted at least some of his deserved position in the recent literary pantheon

and generally desisted from comparing his work to fast food.

The piece appeared in the October 6, 1986 issue of Time magazine. As this magazine is a major

publication most significant libraries will archive bound hard copies or issues on

microfilm/microfiche. If readers wish to own the original magazine the issue is generally available

from a variety of secondhand and online resources.

Untitled (October 31, 1986)

Unusually, this piece is an advertisement the Kings took out in their local newspaper notifying

people the family would not be at home that Halloween. One sentence of text accompanies a

Halloween-themed drawing of their Bangor home. It appeared in the October 31, 1986 edition of the

Bangor Daily News newspaper. Copies of Bangor Daily News pieces may be secured from the

microfiche files at the Fogler Library of the University of Maine at Orono (at no charge, if you

actually visit), from the newspaper direct (at a significant fee), or from visiting the Maine State

Library in Augusta.

HowITHappened (October 1986)

In this piece, King explains where the ideas for his stories originate (even though, as we well

know, this is a difficult question to answer). More specifically, he deals with the genesis of his

blockbuster novel It: ‘When an idea comes, it comes all at once. It’s so bright it blinds you like a

flashbulb in a darkroom. Without reflection—which is to say, a close look at the after-image—it’s

meaningless. I thought of the fairy tale called “The Three Billy-Goat’s Gruff” and wondered what I

would do if a troll called out from beneath me, “Who is trip-trapping upon my bridge?” All of a

sudden I wanted to write a novel about a real troll under a real bridge. I stopped, thinking of a line by

Marianne Moore, something about “real toads in imaginary gardens,” only it came out “real trolls in

imaginary gardens.”’

One of the major themes King has dealt with throughout his career is childhood. More so than

perhaps any of his other works, It tackles this subject: ‘I started to remember Stratford, Connecticut,

where I had lived as a kid. In Stratford there was a library where the adult section and children’s

section were connected by a short corridor. The architecture of the adult section was Victorian; that

of the children’s library was 1950s modern. I decided that the corridor was also a bridge, one across

which every goat of a child must risk trip-trapping to become an adult.’

This important piece first appeared in the October 1986 issue of Book-of-the-Month Club News

and was later excerpted as Writing the #1 Bestseller...How IT Happened in the April 1987 edition of

The Writer magazine. Perhaps in recognition of its importance King allowed a reprint of the full

article in the Book-of-the-Month Club collection Secret Windows: Essays and Fiction on the Craft

of Writing. While the original appearance is difficult to secure (King resellers are the best option)

The Writer is collectable and appears regularly at used magazine sources and King resellers. Secret

Windows is often offered for sale at used booksellers and King resellers.

Why I WroteThe Eyes of the Dragon(February 1987)

King explains here he wrote The Eyes of the Dragon for his daughter, Naomi. He had

previously explained his reasons when this novel was only available in a limited edition, in The

Politics of Limited Editions, covered earlier in this chapter. He says: ‘I’m afraid I don’t make the

Top Ten on her list of favorites; in fact, I think I can say with some conviction that I’m not even on the

Top Forty. She’s made it clear that she loves me, but has very little interest in my vampires, ghoulies,

and slushy crawling things. Very well. I decided that if the mountain would not go to Mohammed, then

Mohammed must go to the mountain...except that my daughter is no more a mountain than I am a

prophet. I sat down one night in our western Maine house to start this story, which was started out

( sic) being called The Napkins. It was the perfect time and place to start such a story: I was alone in

the house, there was a screaming northeaster blowing snow across the frozen lake outside, and I was

sitting in front of the woodstove with a yellow legal pad in my hand and a cold beer on the table.’

It is clear from this essay that Eyes is close to King’s heart. It may have been a departure from

his usual output but, as we have seen in the past (and will continue to see in the future), such

departures are nothing new to this particular author. He closes: ‘Writing The Eyes of the Dragon was

a satisfying and exciting act; like Naomi, I was a little sorry to see it end. If I hadn’t wanted to please

her I would have missed that excitement and satisfaction, so I guess that’s one I owe the kid, isn’t it?’

This important piece appeared in the February 1987 edition of Castle Rock: The Stephen King

Newsletter and is deserving of a wider audience. Back issues of Castle Rock may be obtained from

the usual King dealers. A Postscript to ‘Overdrive’ (see our Opinion—Venturing into Politics

chapter) also appeared in this issue.

Turning the Thumbscrews on the Reader (June 1987)

Writers and writing has been a theme in King’s work from the very beginning (in fact, in recent

years he has suffered some criticism for allegedly ‘over-using’ writer characters). Prominent

examples of King merging his own craft into his fiction include The Shining, The Dark Half, Secret

Window, Secret Garden and Bag of Bones. This short essay was published close to the release of

another of his works dealing heavily with the subject: ‘I got done with Misery and I could hardly

believe what I’d done. I’d written a book that consisted of two characters in one room. In some ways,

I worked harder on that book than on anything before. It’s not like anything I ever wrote. In a lot of my

other books there are characters who are writers, but the books are not about writing; Misery is.’

Obviously, prose is King’s forte and he accepts as much in other non-fiction pieces, including

On Writing (see also our Opinion—The Craft of Writing chapter). Although he has dabbled in

directing ( Maximum Overdrive), movie and TV production, a proposed stage show, and even rock

music (he was a member of a band of writers and critics, The Rock Bottom Remainders) he knows

where home is. King writes of his place in life and compares himself to Misery’s protagonist as this

piece ends: ‘Writing books is the only thing I know how to do really. I’m like Paul, the hero in

Misery, in that way. I lead a fairly boring life, except when I write. And when I write, man, I have

wonderful adventures.’

This notable piece first appeared in the June 1987 issue of Book-of-the-Month Club News and

was reprinted in the Book-of-the-Month Club collection Secret Windows: Essays and Fiction on the

Craft of Writing. While the original appearance is difficult to secure (King resellers are the best

option) Secret Windows is often offered for sale at used booksellers and King resellers.

On John D. MacDonald (1987)

If readers don’t know John D. MacDonald from his novels (and the many times King has written

of him and his work) they may well have noticed his Introduction to King’s early collection, Night

Shift. In this piece, King recalls the editing process for Night Shift and his editor, Bill Thompson,

asking whom he would want to write the introduction. King’s answer—John D. MacDonald: ‘His

agreement to do that introduction and its prompt arrival a couple of weeks later pleased and

impressed me more than the kind things the essay itself had to say about my work; MacDonald’s

generosity to a young writer who he’d never met helped to keep that young writer open to the needs—

and wistful hopes—of other young writers, and I have tried to pay him back for his kindness by

passing it on. In other words, I’ve tried to heed the dictum to go and do thou likewise.’ Indeed King

has written many introductions and similar pieces for other writers; see our chapter Introducing the

Work of Others.

King delivers some of the most heartfelt words he’s ever written in appreciation of a fellow

author: ‘The death of a writer who has spoken so clearly from his own heart into your own is always

a painful, scouring thing, and I’m in a little too much grief to find any uplifting conclusion (although,

as John would have pointed out, you sure could if the editor was screaming for it over the phone at

the same time your wife was screaming for a loaf of bread from the kitchen). It doesn’t seem right to

me, somehow, that a voice like that should ever be stilled...Man, he was a good writer, wasn’t he?

When you went out to the drugstore to grab a paperback, most times you got a bologna sandwich.

With John, you got the whole fucking delicatessen. And man, he was a good man. Jesus, John. I miss

you.’

This obscure but important piece, deserving of reprint and a broader circulation, appears only in

The Mystery Scene Reader: A Special Tribute to John D. MacDonald, edited by Ed Gorman. That

book was published in a limited edition (of 1500) in trade paperback format by Fedora in 1987.

Copies appear from time to time at Internet based used booksellers and King resellers.

Entering the Rock Zone, Or, How I Happened to Marry a Rock Station from Outer Space

(October 1987)

King begins this oddly titled piece, ‘I ended up owning a small AM rock and roll station in my

hometown about the same way most people get married: one happy accident followed by a chain of

circumstances, followed by the preacher and the vows. In my case, the happy accident was getting a

rental car which only had an AM radio at Logan Airport in Boston. I protested this vigorously and got

nowhere.’ He also recounts that story, along with a lengthy discussion of the death of rock and roll on

radio, in Between Rock and a Soft Place (see our Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television

chapter). The views expressed in that essay became a large part of what led him to buy the radio

station.

The author cum radio station owner closes by recounting a conversation he had with a stranger

who had heard the station (WZON in Bangor, Maine) and liked it: ‘Guy walked up to me on the street

the other day, maybe forty. “I like your station,” he said shyly. “The song about the outlaw [I’m pretty

sure he meant “Gunslinger Man,” by The Long Ryders] is great. It reminds me of Credence ( sic).” He

looked wistful and rubbed the top of his head. There was a lot of skin up there to rub. “When

Credence ( sic) was playing, I had a lot more hair,” he said. “Well, are you still rockin” I asked.

“Yeah,” he said. “Then I guess it doesn’t matter,” I said. “So’s Fogerty. So am I. You keep rockin’

and I’ll keep rockin’.” “Good deal,” he said. And for me, that’s just what the Rock Zone has been: a

damn good deal.’

This piece appeared in the October 1987 edition of Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter.

Back issues are generally available from King resellers.

‘Ever Et Raw Meat?’ and Other Weird Questions (December 6, 1987)

King opens: ‘It seems to me that, in the minds of readers, writers actually exist to serve two

purposes, and the more important may not be the writing of books and stories. The primary function of

writers, it seems, is to answer readers’ questions. These fall into three categories. The third is the one

that fascinates me most, but I’ll identify the other two first.’

The first category is, ‘The One-of-a-Kind Questions.’ As example King references the title of

this piece: ‘From Raymond R. in Mississippi: “Ever et raw meat?” (It’s the laconic ones like this that

really get me.)’ The second category: ‘The Old Standards’ of which he goes through several,

including: ‘Where do you get your ideas? (I get mine in Utica.)’; and ‘How do you get an agent? (Sell

your soul to the Devil.)’ The final category covers ‘The Real Weirdies.’ An example: ‘Having an

answer for “You writing any good books lately?” is a good thing, but I’d be lying if I said it solves

the problem of what the question means. It is the inability on my part to make sense of this odd query,

which reminds me of that Zen riddle—“Why is a mouse when it runs?”—that leaves me feeling

mentally shaken and impotent. You see, it isn’t just one question; it’s a bundle of questions, cunningly

wrapped up in one package.’

As is the case with a good deal of King’s non-fiction writing this piece is very humorous. It is

also important as it deals with the author, his fans and their relationship. He closes: ‘Do I mind these

questions? Yes...and no. Anyone minds questions that have no real answers and thus expose the

fellow being questioned to be not a real doctor but a sort of witch doctor. But no one—at least no one

with a modicum of simple human kindness—resents questions from people who honestly want

answers. And now and then someone will ask a really interesting question, like, Do you write in the

nude? The answer...: I don’t think I ever have, but if it works, I’m willing to try it.’

This piece was published in the December 6, 1987 edition of The New York Times Book

Review; and reprinted in both the June 1988 edition of The Twilight Zone Magazine and the July

1988 edition of The Writer magazine. That year it was also published as a limited edition broadsheet

from Lord John Press as Letters from Hell; and under that title in Castle Rock: The Stephen King

Newsletter for December 1988. It has since been reprinted in several textbooks196 and in King’s

Book-of-the-Month Club collection Secret Windows . That book is readily available from the usual

King resources; and the magazine and textbook appearances are not difficult to obtain through online

sources. The original Lord John Press broadsheet sells at quite high prices.

My Ten Favorite Fantasy-Horror Novels (1987)

This piece and My Ten Favorite Fantasy-Horror Short Stories or Novellas (see directly

below) consist of nothing more than a list of King’s ten favorite works in these categories. His ten

favorite fantasy or horror novels: Something Wicked This Way Comes , by Ray Bradbury; The Doll

Who Ate His Mother, by Ramsey Campbell; The Body Snatchers, by Jack Finney; The Haunting of

Hill House, by Shirley Jackson; The Ceremonies, by T. E. D. Klein; Burnt Offerings, by Robert

Marasco; I Am Legend, by Richard Matheson; Interview with the Vampire , by Anne Rice;

Donovan’s Brain, by Curt Siodmak; and Ghost Story, by Peter Straub.

A note from the editors after these two pieces includes some quotes by King. King’s list is in

alphabetical order and ‘of course excluded H. P. Lovecraft on the basis of your chronological cutoff

point.’ He wishes that he could include more but: ‘I’ll stand by these...and probably hang by them.’

This piece appears only in How to Write Tales of Horror, Fantasy, and science-fiction , edited

by J.N. Williamson, published in hardcover by Writer’s Digest Books in 1987; and reprinted in a

1996 trade paperback.

My Ten Favorite Fantasy-Horror Short Stories or Novellas (1987)

Following on from My Ten Favorite Fantasy-Horror Novels (see directly above) King’s ten

favorite fantasy or horror short stories: In the Hill, the Cities by Clive Barker; Sweets to the Sweet

by Robert Bloch; Small Assassin by Ray Bradbury; Slime by Joseph Payne Brennan; The Companion

by Ramsey Campbell; The Lottery by Shirley Jackson; Children of the Kingdom by T. E. D. Klein;

The Pale Brown Thing by Fritz Leiber; Prey by Richard Matheson; and Nightcrawlers by Robert R.

McCammon.

This piece appears only in How to Write Tales of Horror, Fantasy, and science-fiction , as

noted above.

SK Criticized for References to Blacks: Stephen King Replies (March 1988)

This is King’s reasoned reply to a fan letter in which it is alleged: ‘In just about every one of

your books, somewhere in the storyline, there is some derogatory comment about a black person.’ His

response, Stephen King Replies, is part of the larger article, containing both the letter and this piece,

SK Criticized for References to Blacks.

King has this to say: ‘Yes, I have used the standard racial epithets in my books. But they are

always used by idiots and bigots, and have been employed in the belief that a realistic depiction of

racial incidents expose ( sic) rather than promote ( sic) racism. Those who believe I hold prejudices

against blacks, for instance, might reflect on this: if I hadn’t created black protagonists in a number of

books (Dick Hallorann in The Shining, Mother Abigail in The Stand, Mike Hanlon in IT, for

instance), there could be no charge of prejudice because the subject would never come up.’

One sentence, serving as his definitive word on the subject, closes the article: ‘In the meantime,

those few readers who have come to the conclusion that I’m a racist have read one fiction and

translated it into another in their minds.’

This piece appeared in the March 1988 edition of Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter.

Back issues can easily be obtained from the usual King sources.

An Evening at the Billerica (Massachusetts) Library (April 1988)

This is a transcription of a wide-ranging and interesting lecture King gave in 1983 at the

Billerica, Massachusetts Library. The speaker claims he does not know how to lecture—‘the most I

can do is chautauqua, a fine old word that means you babble on for a while about the thing that you do

and then you sit down and let people get on to the serious drinking.’

He says this about his relationship as writer to the reader: ‘I want to be your friend. I want to

come up to you and put my arm around you and say, “Hey, you want to see something? It’s great. Wait

till you see it! You’ll really like this thing.” Then I get them really interested and lead them up the

street and take ‘em around the corner and into the alley where there’s this awful thing, and keep them

there until they’re screaming! It’s just fun. I know how sadistic that must sound but you have to tell

the truth.’ He ranges over why he writes horror; why fans read it; subtext in horror books and movies;

that horror fiction follows a conservative formula (‘It has that effect of reconfirming values, of

reconfirming self-image and our good feelings about ourselves’); his ‘Last reason for reading horror:

it’s a rehearsal for death’; a list of the many things that scare him; and the inspiration for Here There

Be Tygers (prosaic as it turns out to be).

This piece was first published in Bare Bones: Conversations on Terror with Stephen King ,

edited by Tim Underwood and Chuck Miller, in 1988 limited and trade hardcover editions, and later

reprinted in both the United States and the United Kingdom. It also appeared in the Book-of-the-

Month Club collection of King works, Secret Windows . Both appearances include the speech,

followed by material from the subsequent question and answer session. The latter book is easily

obtainable, while the former appears at abebooks.com and King resellers.

Titles Unknown (May 11, May 18, May 25 and June 1, 1988)

These four pieces appeared in editions of The Register, a newspaper King’s brother-in-law

Christopher Spruce ran for a short period in the Bangor, Maine area. Despite intense efforts by the

authors and major collectors no copies of any of King’s five contributions (see also The Ultimate

Catalogue below) have ever come to light. King’s office does not have copies and no libraries in

Maine archive it. Apparently the best that can now be hoped for is that copies are found stored in

some obscure location and offered at eBay or similar sources. If any reader is able to track them

down, please contact the authors via the publisher.

The following is relevant text representing what is known of these articles, which appeared in

Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter for July 1988 (at the time Tabitha King’s sister Stephanie

Leonard was ‘Editor-Publisher’); from Leonard’s Editor’s Column:

‘...Christopher Spruce, Castle Rock’s managing editor, recently bought a local weekly paper,

The Register. As they have often done for the daily paper, the Bangor Daily News, the Kings have

written a number of pieces for this paper as well, and probably will continue to do so...Articles of

possible interest to Castle Rock readers so far include columns by SK on drunk driving (May 11);

tabloids (May 18); cocaine (May 25) and Elvis (June 1) and by TK on How to take a UFO photo

(May 18) and reviews of the movies “Shakedown” and “Colors” (May 11), Willow and Friday the

13th, Part VII (June 1).’

SK Clarifies Gardner Reference (May-June 1988)

King sometimes pokes fun at the so-called serious novelist (mostly those who take their own

work way too seriously), especially in comparison to more down-to-earth types. King and co-author,

Peter Straub slipped a couple of such references into The Talisman for sharp-eyed readers. He

explains: ‘I was amused by Bob Fenster’s letter in the last issue of Castle Rock, and thought readers

would be equally amused by a combined clarification and amplification. Bob notes correctly that two

of the characters in The Talisman, Smokey Updike and Sunlight Gardener, have suspiciously literary

names. Peter Straub and I were having a little fun by naming two of the principal heavies in the book

after two supposedly “serious” novelists...working out these childish jealousies really feels

amazingly good sometimes.’ The ‘serious’ novelists were John Gardener and John Updike.

He also writes about what appears to be another literary allusion, by John Gardner in his James

Bond novel Nobody Lives Forever: ‘Bob Fenster is also probably correct in guessing that in Nobody

Lives Forever, the treacherous Steve Quinn and his lovely wife, Tabitha, got their names from the

not-so-treacherous Steve King and his lovely wife, Tabitha. His conclusion that Gardner’s use of

familiar names was the second shot in a war of words, however, is probably wrong’; and goes on to

point out that Gardner was not the serious novelist that King was poking fun at, rather he was aiming

at the deceased John Gardener.

This piece appeared in the May-June 1988 edition of Castle Rock: The Stephen King

Newsletter. Back issues are easily obtained from King resellers.

The Ultimate Catalogue (June 1988)

King starts with the subject of chain letters, whose popularity has since dwindled (only to be

replaced by chain e-mails!) While, ‘The heyday of the chain letter seems to have passed, but they

have been replaced by an 80s hybrid, I am speaking, of course, of the Great American Catalogue. The

way these things snowball has always seemed a little errie ( sic) to me...but there’s nothing magic

about it. These catalogue folks simply swap their mailing lists around...and the result is a modern

chain letter.’

We all know how annoying it is to receive unreasonable amounts of junk mail, as well as useless

and ridiculous catalogues. King uses the remainder of this piece to poke fun at some of the more

ludicrous items for sale, inventing a fictional catalogue for a company called Life Force Technologies

—the ‘ultimate catalogue’: As example: ‘My absolute favorite, however, is the Trochillidae (Latin

for hummingbird, we are informed) on the cover. It looks like a chair which sits on sled-runners, but

it is actually a helicopter powered by Hydrogen Peroxide. It comes with a disposable motor weighing

three pounds each which delivers 110 horsepower. The Trochillidae, which would come in handy

any time you are being pursued across the Chamberlain Bridge by KGB agents or trying to escape

hired killers from SMERSH at the Mall, weighs 125 pounds, has a flight-range of 150-300 miles, and

costs a mere $35,000. Presumably, one could use it for night-flights, if one went aloft equipped with

one’s Dark Invader snooperscope ... I felt a lot more at home—and a lot more comfortable—with the

stuff you find in the envelope from Sears and Roebuck.’

This piece first appeared in a June 1988 edition of The Register, a newspaper King’s brother-

in-law Christopher Spruce ran for a short period in the Bangor, Maine area. The actual date is

unknown, as the authors have been unable to track down any back issues of this newspaper to locate

this piece, or the other four pieces that appeared there (for more detail see Titles Unknown in May

and June 1988, earlier in this chapter). The article was reprinted in the June 1989 edition of Castle

Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter, which is easily secured.

Nightmares in the Sky (1988)

Debate has raged in the King community about whether Nightmares in the Sky is actually ‘a

King book’, with many experts forming the view it is not, others adamant it is. This coffee table-sized

publication is a collection of photographs of gargoyles, mostly by ‘renowned photographer’ F-stop

Fitzgerald, with ‘text’ by Stephen King. Whether or not King’s ten thousand word essay, written in

Bangor, qualifies this volume as ‘a King book’, it is one of his most important non-fiction pieces.

He opens by explaining how Marc Glimcher197 convinced him to write the piece, which

comprises eight sections. Here, King is in the self-disparaging mode which often marked his (humble)

opinion of his own work through the 1970s, 1980s and even into the following decade. Fortunately,

he has since come to a realization that his work is somewhat better than the simple ‘typing’ he

intimates here when saying, ‘… some might claim I’ve got a hell of a nerve even suggesting that what

I do bears any resemblance to art.’ He claims, ‘I’m only saying that what I write comes from my gut

instead of my head, from intuition rather than intellect.’ And, another interesting comment: ‘… my

head is in some way an odd trash-compactor of cultural garbage’.

Of gargoyles generally King tells of walking Madison Avenue in New York, and later cruising

83rd Street while peering through the sun-roof of a limo to get a closer look, then again down

Madison Avenue, before delivering a tiny classic: ‘[I] could almost swear there were less along that

thirty-block stretch than when I walked it the first time...the mind is a monkey...and mine keeps trying

to think that there really were thousands that first time, and most of them either hid or flew away when

they saw me coming back for a second look. / It’s utterly ridiculous of course, but suppose.../ Well,

suppose they don’t like people watching them.’ He then wonders if the remaining gargoyles are the

dead ones. As to the rest, ‘But isn’t that what we’re really afraid of? That a really close examination

will prove our worst nightmares to be reality? That those monstrosities are alive? ’

Turning to the pictures in the book King argues the subjects are indeed alive; not in the sense of

living, breathing creatures, but in the way the sky might be said to be alive, or in the manner of a

beautiful vase or other work of art. After a short history of the purpose of the gargoyle (a fancy

opening for a drain-pipe) he broadly concludes ‘that the gargoyles you will come upon in this book

may continue to perform their original function: to drain away that which might otherwise cause rot or

erosion. Their horrible stony faces offer unique catharsis; when we look upon them and shudder, we

create the exact reversal of the Medusa myth: we are not flesh turned to stone, but flesh proving it is

flesh still....’

It has been noted elsewhere that King never refers in his essay to the photographer (in contrast,

he specifically refers to Harry Connelly, the photographer in his Life photo-essay, Diamonds Are

Forever, covered in our Baseball—Faithful, Head Down and the Red Sox Obsession chapter).

Perhaps he did not know, as he writes, ‘The photos you will now look upon are undoubtedly the work

of artists....’

He concludes with typical power: ‘Look closely, because we see these ominous lares of the

human psyche so seldom. They are there, these nightmares, but they are in the sky. Look closely,

because even when you don’t see them.../... they are watching you.’

A number of King critics have praised this volume. Tyson Blue wrote, ‘… its quiet beauty and

grotesquerie is sure to haunt readers who venture into its strange and aerial world.... ”198; and

Collings says King’s ‘essay is of considerable interest and the photographs, particularly in the

haunting tone they create, are both excellent and appropriate.’199 The essay is undoubtedly one of

King’s more important non-fiction pieces, perfectly summarized by Stephen Spignesi: ‘...[it] contains

autobiographical musings, thoughts on writing and fear, reflections on TV and movies, and some

genuinely intuitive ideas about morality and mythology. ’200

Nightmares in the Sky was originally published as a hardback in a US printing of some 250,000

copies, so large in fact that the book was widely remaindered; and in a UK edition. One presumes the

print run was a result of King’s publisher at the time, Viking Penguin, having expectations that the

simple inclusion of King’s piece and name on the cover of what is effectively a photo-essay book

would alone create significant sales. Although a paperback version has been mooted, the mediocre

sales of the hardback appear to have put paid to that proposal. The lesson here is that King’s fans will

pay good money for his fiction, and entire volumes of non-fiction, but not for one piece of non-fiction,

in this case packaged up at the 1988 retail price of $24.95. An excerpt from this essay (titled Stephen

King’sNightmares in the Sky) appeared in Penthouse for September 1988, two months before the

book was released.

Fitzgerald’s work has appeared in a number of books, including Pillars of the Almighty, Weird

Angle and Dead Kennedys: The Unauthorized Version . Nightmares in the Sky can be readily

purchased from online and secondhand booksellers, usually for an insignificant sum.

What Stephen King Does For Love (April 1990)

The fiction editor of Seventeen, Adrian LeBlanc asked King if he wanted to say anything about

books and reading for the magazine, telling him their readers saw a difference between reading for

pleasure and reading for school. ‘Talk about a heavy blast from the retro-boosters. Man, that took me

right back to high school, to the guilty pleasures of period-four study hall—where I could read what I

wanted—and the horrors of period-seven English, where I had to read what they wanted. In those

days, all printed matter was divided into those two groups, as far as I was concerned. My stuff and

their stuff.’

King closes with heartfelt advice to the young readers of the publication: ‘I think it is these

opposing lines of force, these paradoxes of heart and head, that have created the ocean between the

continents of Wanna Read and Gotta Read. I think the passage between the two will always be stormy

and the ferry service always intermittent. One of the greatest pleasures of my life was reading

Hamlet, discovering it was great, and discoveringit on my own. You may make similar discoveries

of your own as the years pass. In the meantime, read what you have to read for love. Do more than

enjoy it; swim in that heady brew, fly in that intoxicating ether. Why not? The heart has its own mind,

and its business is joy. For me, those two things—joy and reading—have always gone together, and

another of my life’s great pleasures was discovering that sometimes they mature together. When that

happens, all the final exams are held in the happiest of all places: one’s own heart.’

This piece first appeared in the April 1990 issue of Seventeen magazine; and was reprinted in

the Book-of-the-Month Club collection, Secret Windows. Some libraries archive Seventeen; or check

the usual used magazine sources. The book is available from abebooks.com and King resources.

Stephen King’s Desert Island (July 1990)

Here King ponders the question: ‘If you were stranded on a desert island, what one book would

you take with you?’ He says, ‘The most peculiar thing about this question is that it seems—at first

glance, anyway—to be perfectly reasonable. I have responded to it six or seven times before thinking

about the question rather than the answer, and realizing what a really weird question it was.’ While

not actually answering the question, he describes a fictional scenario—what he would do while

marooned on a desert island in the South Pacific—eat fresh mangoes, swim in an untouched pond, lie

on the beach, etc.

Like many other writers, he would choose to write even if he weren’t publishing. This article,

though humorous, is a case in point: ‘So maybe the real question would be this: “What would you

write if you were marooned on a desert island?” And the answer—for me at least—would be,

“Everything I could.” And I wouldn’t stop eating those great-tasting mangoes or allow myself to be

rescued until I had it right.’

This article appeared in the July 1990 issue of Condé Nast Traveler, published by the same

company as The New Yorker . Back issues are unavailable and used issues of this magazine appear to

be quite rare. Check the usual used magazine resources, eBay and specialist King sellers.

Memo from Stephen King (1990)

This short piece discusses a rejection letter King received for one of his early novels. He talks

about a science-fiction novel (probably The Long Walk ) he’d submitted in partial format (three

chapters and an outline) to a publisher and received a rejection note that read simply, ‘We are not

interested in science-fiction which deals with negative utopias. They do not sell.’

It appears in an anthology, Rotten Rejections: A Literary Companion, edited by Andre Bernard,

and published in a 1990 hardcover by Wainscott, New York-based Pushcart Press. Copies appear at

secondhand book sources.

Scare Tactics (November 1990)

This item is an extremely brief excerpt (printed as part of the Personal Glimpses section of the

magazine) from a King interview collected in Bare Bones: Conversations on Terror with Stephen

King: ‘One of the reasons I write horror is because it’s a kind of psychological protection. It’s like

drawing a magic circle around myself and my family. My mother always used to say, “If you think the

worst, it can’t come true.”’

It appeared in the November 1990 edition of Reader’s Digest and there is debate as to whether

it is actually ‘by’ Stephen King, or simply a quote. Some libraries archive Reader’s Digest ; and the

usual used magazine sources will have copies.

My New Years201 Resolution (Or Look What Dave’s Got Us Doing Now!) (Winter 1990)

This is a very short piece (only a few sentences) in which King lays down three New Year’s

resolutions: writing The Dark Tower III: The Waste Lands ; paying his HWA (Horror Writers

Association) dues on time; and sharing his toys (‘even the ones I really like.’)

It appeared in the Winter 1990 edition of The Overlook Connection, a free newsletter/catalogue

for Dave Hinchberger’s small press/bookstore/Stephen King-specialty store based in Georgia. Back

issues of this newsletter are next to impossible to obtain.

How I CreatedGolden Years... and Spooked Dozens of TV Executives (2 August 1991)

King begins by explaining he was offered his own anthology-type TV program in which he

would introduce a different story each week. While this offer was made several times, he wanted to

write his own story—and eventually came up with the idea for Golden Years . After the network

executives showed interest: ‘Well, I said through my agent, don’t think of this as a miniseries; think of

it as a regular series that just happens to run only one year. But at that point, rational discussions

pretty much broke down. TV executives, it seems, find it as impossible to understand the concept of a

regular series that ends as I am to understand the ramifications of Einstein’s theory of relativity. Yeah,

they said, but what if it’s a success? Then we do it again next year, I replied. You mean we continue

the story? they asked, sounding puzzled but a little hopeful. No, I said. We tell a different story in the

same way. All new characters. All new situations. All new plot. All new conclusion. But TV people,

I learned, are extremely uncomfortable with any concept that includes the idea “all new,” and so the

proposal lapsed.’

Eventually, due to the success of the miniseries adaptation of King’s novel IT, the original

concept, Stephen King’s Golden Years was picked by and aired by ABC, although dumped mid-

season202 ( Kingdom Hospital suffered a not dissimilar fate). He closes this piece, written before the

season flopped, with the highest hopes for the series and for that type of lengthy, serialized story: ‘I’m

hoping people will like Golden Years well enough to bring it back for a full run. What is a full run,

anyway? Well, I still believe there’s a place on TV for long, complex stories—electronic novels, if

you will—that exist in that medium alone and have a beginning, a middle, and an end. Who knows;

maybe they will be some of the bestsellers of the 21st century. I can hear the literary critics screaming

now.’ As it happens, Golden Years may have been ahead of its time, as serialized drama now has a

much larger place in the television market. When King tried again with Kingdom Hospital in 2004, he

suffered similar results—constant programming shifts, a mid-season suspension and cancellation after

the first season; and made similar arguments as to the reason (see Kingdom Come in this chapter; and

A Kingdom That Didn’t Come in The Later Columns—The Pop of King chapter).

This important article appeared in the August 2, 1991 edition of Entertainment Weekly

magazine. Back issues are available from used magazine sites on the Internet, eBay and the usual

King-related resources.

Horrors! (October 25, 1991)

This piece consists of six celebrities— Vincent Price, Linda Blair, Diane Ladd, Stephen King,

Chucky (the killer doll in the movie Child’s Play , ‘via creator-screenwriter Don Mancini’) and

David Ellefson—talking about movies and books that scare them. In his section of only a paragraph

King mentions the films Night of the Living Dead and Dementia 13; and the novel, William

Golding’s Lord of the Flies.

It appeared in the October 25, 1991 edition of Entertainment Weekly magazine. Back issues are

easily secured at various Internet and used magazine sources.

Dream Team: Just Another Horror Show (August 9, 1992)

This longish article is about America’s Olympic basketball ‘Dream Team’ and specifically the

behavior of Team members around the 1992 Barcelona Olympics. King again proves he has a sharp

eye for American culture, specifically underlining certain shortcomings: ‘I’d go so far as to say that

these high-salaried, promotion-conscious pros, with their baggage of bad court habits, loud mouths,

and absolutely staggering basketball skills, can serve as a perfectly apt epilogue to the last twelve

years of American life, when the almighty buck swamped just about everyone’s principles, when the

deal became more important than the game, and any sane discussion of athletics and what they mean

disappeared into a welter of Chroma-Key effects, slow motion, and game-diagram supers, all before

fading into the next beer ad, naturally.’ He is appalled by super athletes squabbling over brand names

and staying in Monte Carlo hotels, while poor nation team members slept in gymnasiums while

preparing for the honor of representing their country.

He closes: ‘It was a bad idea. No one likes to risk sounding like a Boy Scout by coming right out

and saying it, but I will, just this once: Sliding away from sound ideals in favor of fast results is

always a bad idea. Whether it’s basketball or bonds, junk is still junk, and a sellout is still a sellout. /

It was a bad idea, a bad dream, if you will. Let’s not do it again.’

This article appeared in the August 9, 1992 edition of The New York Times and is relatively

easy to obtain, as major libraries archive the newspaper.

Untitled (October 1992)

Author Fritz Leiber died on September 5, 1992. King’s deeply touching and heartfelt

appreciation was published as part of a collection of retrospectives. He shows both his sorrow at

Leiber’s death and an understanding of the loss of any notable individual: ‘The sense of shock at Fritz

Leiber’s death will be, I think, mercifully short-lived. He had not been in the best of health in recent

years (although you could not tell that from reading his work; it remained as witty, as interesting, and

as idiosyncratic as ever), and he was eighty-two years old. Yet shock is not really what the loss of

our old comrades and colleagues is about, I think—it’s sorrow and that sense of displacement that

comes with consideration of a world where that person’s living influence no longer exists. Yes, we

can be grateful that Fritz was not cut down in mid-flight, as was Charles Beaumont or Henry Kuttner

or H. P. Lovecraft, but that’s not apt to lessen the sense of loss, and it certainly will not fill the empty

place in our ranks that was once filled by Fritz’s long-shouldered form, and intelligent, civilized

face.’

King recounts meeting Leiber in 1982, buying him a (non-alcoholic) drink at a hotel bar and

closes: ‘Goodbye, Fritz. If there is another side, I hope you’ll let me buy you a drink or two,

alcoholic or otherwise, when I get there. In the meantime, all your old comrades and colleagues miss

you. There was never a writer like you, and never will be.’

This piece first appeared in the October 1992 issue of Locus magazine. It next appeared as part

of a piece simply titled, Fritz Leiber in Gummitch and Friends, Special Edition by Fritz Leiber,

published in a deluxe limited edition of 1000 copies by Donald M. Grant in 1992 (that edition

includes 36 pages of tributes by King and others that are not available in the trade edition). Finally, it

was reprinted as A World Without Fritz in Nebula Awards 28: SFWA’s Choices for the Best

science-fiction and Fantasy of the Year , edited by James Morrow and published in hardcover and

trade paperback by Harcourt & Brace in 1994. The deluxe limited edition is the hardest and most

expensive way to obtain this piece. Back issues of Locus are relatively easy to obtain, as are copies

of the Morrow anthology.

Son of Best Seller Stalks the Moors (June 6, 1993)

King has often shown an acute awareness of the businesses in which he has been directly

involved—publishing and movies. This article deals with a trend of the time—publishers hiring

authors to write sequels to classic novels by long-dead writers! He opens: ‘The book business, which

hardly used to be a business at all, has in the last 10 years begun to search for The Next Big Thing

with a zeal once found only in the movie business. And what is The Next Big Thing in the book biz?

Oh honey-chickie-baby, have I got an answer for you. Ready? O.K.: Sequel rights. Did you get it?

Good.’

From his earliest days as a ‘brand name’ King has consistently stood up for the little known

artist. He knows that there are multitudes of unheard of artists working in their respective crafts who

have no way or means of breaking through: ‘The point is: There are good writers out there telling

good stories— stories no one has ever read before! —and a lot of these writers and stories are not

finding their audiences. Some could be “broken out” by dedicated publishers and publicity

departments, but the money isn’t there, nor is the commitment. What the publishers want is

blockbusters. They want Stephen King, Tom Clancy, Danielle Steel, but if they can’t have us they can

at least chase after the dead with those two words— sequel rights! sequel rights! —flashing ahead of

them like poison-green neon. What the book biz wants is words that won’t disturb, outrage or

frighten.’

This article appeared in the June 6, 1993 edition of The New York Times Book Review , which is

easy to obtain, as larger libraries archive the newspaper.

Stephen King (June 1993)

This piece, in which King discusses dreams and the writing process, appeared in Writers

Dreaming: Twenty-six Writers Talk about Their Dreams and the Creative Process , by Naomi Epel.

Carol Southern Books published the book in a 1993 hardcover; a trade paperback book club edition

appeared the same year; and Vintage Books released a further trade paperback in 1994. Copies can

be secured from secondhand book sources such as abebooks.

The chapters of the book consist of interviews about dreams and writing. Of course, the

workings of the subconscious have been the basis for many writers’ work, and King is a prime

example: ‘One of the things that I’ve been able to use dreams for in my stories is to show things in a

symbolic way that I wouldn’t want to come right out and say directly. I’ve always used dreams the

way you’d use mirrors to look at something you couldn’t see head-on—the way that you use a mirror

to look at your hair in the back. To me that’s what dreams are supposed to do. I think that dreams are

a way that people’s minds illustrate the nature of their problems. Or maybe even illustrate the

answers to their problems in symbolic language.’ He describes some of his dreams and applies them

to his writing, including those that inspired specific scenes in IT (the junkyard), ’Salem’s Lot (the

Marsten house), and The Body (the leeches).

We all have dreams but rarely remember them for long after wakening and only some are very

clear. King’s take on this: ‘The dreams that I remember most clearly are almost always early dreams.

And they’re not always bad dreams. I don’t want to give you that impression. I can remember one

very clearly. It was a flying dream. I was over the turnpike and I was flying along wearing a pair of

pajama bottoms. I didn’t have any shirt on. I’m just buzzing along under overpasses— kazipp—and

I’m reminding myself in the dream to stay high enough so that I don’t get disemboweled by car

antennas sticking up from the cars. That’s a fairly mechanistic detail but when I woke up from this

dream my feeling was not fear or loathing but just real exhilaration, pleasure, and happiness. It wasn’t

an out of control flying dream. I can remember as a kid, having a lot of falling dreams but this is the

only flying dream that I can remember in detail.’

He also describes the same repeating dream/nightmare he described in a short untitled piece for

Dreamworks journal, in 1981 (see Untitled above).

The Neighborhood of the Beast (August 1994)

This important and lengthy piece is King’s chapter in the book released by a band of which he

was a member for some years (he played guitar and sang—his rendition of Stand By Me is an

experience). The Rock Bottom Remainders is a group of writers and critics (with help from

professional musicians from time to time) and is involved in raising funds for literary charities. King

has not participated in a gig since his 1999 accident. Other members over the years have included

Dave Barry, Tad Bartimus, Roy Blount, Jr., Michael Dorris, Robert Fulghum, Kathi Goldmark, Matt

Groening, Barbara Kingsolver, Al Kooper, Greil Marcus, Ridley Pearson 203 , Joel Selvin and Amy

Tan.

King begins with a memory that came back to him while he was ‘holed up in one of two

incredibly grotty backstage bathrooms at a honkytonk Nashville nightspot called 328 Performance

Hall.’ This memory was of a day in 1971 when he almost drowned. After recalling this incident, he

realized that if ‘I’d screamed for help I would have panicked. And if I’d panicked, I really might have

drowned.’ All this recollecting occurred shortly before King was supposed to appear on stage, but he

was stuck in the bathroom with a bad case of diarrhea!

To help calm his nerves he decided to study the graffiti on the walls of the bathroom stall: ‘My

favorite...was dead ahead, written on the back of the bathroom door, and exactly on a level with my

eyes as I sat there fifteen hundred miles from home, sick as a yellow dog, and wondering how I ever

could have been mad enough to let myself in for this in the first place. This graffiti, as ominous as it

was clever, said: 664/668: THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE BEAST.’ The author later revealed he

keeps a notebook of interesting graffiti and used that as inspiration for his tale, All That You Love

Will Be Carried Away.

Eventually, King realized he’d be able to appear: ‘That little nerve down there went hot again

for a second or two, and my thoughts returned briefly to that long, long swim back to the beach at

Peaks-Kenny in June of 1971. Here we go again, I thought, and realized the weirdest thing: sick

stomach or not, hungry crowd or not, scared or not, I was really happy.’

There is a long discussion about guitar bar chords and King’s trying to learn them from Jamie

Chesley, brother of Chris Chesley (his co-author for their juvenilia collection, People, Places and

Things). ‘My best moment on the tour? Easy. It didn’t come at Nashville, or at any of the gigs. It came

during the first rehearsal at Musician’s Wharf in Boston. Al Kooper came up to me and asked if I’d

been practicing my bar chords. And I, with the insane nonchalance one can muster only after finally

learning (or partially learning, in my case) a skill that has eluded him over many long years, ripped

off the rapid bar G’s and bar C’s that constitute the chorus of “634.” Al’s eyes widened in an entirely

unaffected expression of surprise, a look I will be able to remember—and treasure—even if I live to

be as old as George Burns.’

King’s chapter appeared in Mid-Life Confidential: The Rock Bottom Remainders Tour

America with Three Chords and an Attitude, edited by Dave Marsh (photographs by Tabitha King).

Viking published the book in a 1994 hardcover; as did Hodder & Stoughton in the United Kingdom

the following year, when a US trade paperback was also released. King’s chapter was excerpted in

an advance promotional booklet in 1994; and as Rockin’ with the Remainders in Playboy magazine

for September 1994. Editions of the book can easily be sourced online, as can Playboy. For the

completist, sources for the booklet include King resellers and eBay.

Untitled (October 6, 1994)

This Internet post was placed from a bookstore at Cornell University, a stop on King’s cross-

country motorcycle tour promoting his novel Insomnia. ‘The new book is Insomnia, and that’s what

I’m promoting. I’m glad so many people liked Frank’s version of Shawshank, and I hope to see many

of you on my tour...if the Harley doesn’t break down...or if I don’t break down. The question that

occurs is whether or not the people reading this will believe I’m me. It really is, but if I put in

something only I would know in order to prove it, everybody would know it.’ King tries to prove his

identity by updating Constant Readers on upcoming projects: ‘Oh, I think I DO know how to prove

I’m me. First, the next book is called Rose Madder—June of 1995 from Viking. Second, it will be

Eddie, not Roland, who saves the party of travellers ( sic) from Blaine the Mono. Joe Bob sez “Check

it out. Catch ya on the flip-flop.”’

This is the first of two King posts to appear on the Internet newsgroup alt.books.stephen-king

and was posted on October 6, 1994 (it is easily found through a search engine). It also appeared in

The Lost Work of Stephen King by Stephen J. Spignesi, published in hardcover by Birch Lane Press

in 1998. The Overlook Connection published an expanded edition that year; and in 2002 Citadel

Press reprinted that edition in trade paperback.

Robert Bloch: An Appreciation (November 1994)

In this appreciation of author Robert Bloch, who passed away on 23 September 1994, King

writes of Bloch’s talent and kindness while recalling the first time they met: ‘He was a fine writer

and an even finer human being. I remember how pleased I was—aw, tell the truth, how star-struck I

was—when I first met him in California, and how quickly he set me at ease, telling stories about

movie stars (we were in L. A. at the time), and cracking me up by referring to Forest Lawn Cemetery

as “the Disneyland of the Dead.” Some years later, at the World Fantasy Convention in Maryland,

Bob showed up beside me at a raucous room-party and said, “Kirby McCauley [then King’s agent]

says I’m supposed to tell you some stories about how it was in the old days. Do you want to hear?”’

Of course, King did!

He also addresses a Bloch quote he often uses: ‘“I actually have the heart of a young boy,” Bob

liked to say. “I keep it in a jar on my desk.” It was a line I used often, always attributing it to

Bob...because it has a sly sort of charm...There’s a comic subtlety in the line that Bob could almost

have trademarked. But he didn’t have the heart of a small boy; he had the heart of a kind, imaginative

man whose vision was keenly attuned to the fantasy community, and he’ll be missed by yours truly,

Steve the Ripper, in a much more personal sense. Even now, I can’t believe that his spooky, sarcastic

voice has been silenced. There is no voice on the contemporary scene which can replace it, and that

is a great loss.’

This piece first appeared in Locus magazine for November 1994. It was reprinted in Robert

Bloch: Appreciations of the Master, edited by Richard Matheson and Ricia Mainhardt, published in

a 1995 hardcover and 1997 trade paperback by Tor. The magazine and the book may be secured from

the usual secondhand or King resources.

Title unknown (November 1994)

Stephen King participated in this article, in which thirty authors write about what they did on

April 22, 1994. It was published in le nouvel Observateur, a French newspaper, in a November

1994 ‘Special Edition.’ No further information is known about this piece, including if there is a more

specific date of publication. King’s office has it listed on their official bibliography, but they do not

have a copy. If any reader is able to track this piece down, please contact the authors via the

publisher.

A Note from Stephen King (1994; 1999)

King begins this four-page letter to members of The Book-of-the-Month Club’s Stephen King

Library writing of his early career and specifically of the experience selling Carrie. He is allowing

the Library to offer his books because ‘I still want to report on the things I see beyond the edge of the

world, and I still want to take Constant Reader with me, if he or she wants to come. Looking back

over those previous trips to the brink is like reading a map in progress, a charting of a strange

countryside where cars sometimes drive themselves, where vampires prowl the night (sometimes in

polyester leisure suits), where madness is as close as a kiss.’

He closes: ‘In my novels The Dark Half and Needful Things, there is a county sheriff named

Alan Pangborn who uses his hands to create parades of shadow animals on the wall whenever he is

deep in thought. It is a habit that I sympathize with and understand. This body of work, as

unremarkable as it may be in purely literary sense, is my parade of shadow animals: lions and tigers

and bears, oh my. It is wonderful to see them all together, and I am grateful to Book-of-the-Month

Club for according me—and those readers who may want to catch up on those previous stories—that

unexpected privilege.’

The letter was distributed in both 1994 and 1999 to those who joined The Stephen King Library,

a series of the author’s books available through The Book-of-the-Month Club. The chances of

obtaining a copy are slim, excepting through another member of the King community. From the Desk

of Stephen King temporarily replaced this letter in 1998 (see below, along with A Word From

Stephen King).

My Little Serrated Security Blanket (December 1995)

This article first appeared in the December 1995 issue of Outside magazine. Some libraries

keep back issues in their archives. It was also reprinted in The Stephen King Desk Calendar 2007.

Stephen King kindly allowed the authors to reprint this entertaining and difficult to find article

here, for which we are profoundly grateful.

My Little Serrated Security Blanket

By Stephen King

This is not the sort of gadget to inspire nursery rhymes. I look at the

DMM Predator ice ax and I think of murder. I take it out into the

garage, find a piece of scrap wood, and drive the pick end into the

grain, trying not to envision how easily this same tip could penetrate

the skull and skewer the soft gray matter beneath. It makes a solid,

satisfying chuk. This, I believe, makes the electroshock devices, the

cans of pepper gas, and the ninja throwing stars in the pawnshop

window look minor league. You could do some big damage with

this. Real big damage.

The pick end is sharpened along the top and pointed at the tip. It is

serrated beneath, presumably to keep it from slipping out once it’s

been plunged in, and when I examine the holes in the wood, I see

that they are not the punch-points I expected—like a child’s

oversize, drawn periods, but lozenge-shaped, like cough drops.

Looking at these holes, I am helpless not to imagine them peppered

over the human body. I keep seeing the ax swung at the gut, the

throat, the forehead. I keep seeing it buried all the way to its

eleventh serration in the nape of the neck or the orbit of an eyeball.

Boy, I think, you are one sick American.

Or maybe I’m not. Like many tools—hammers, screwdrivers, drills,

augers, and chisels come to mind—the Predator ice ax has a certain

gallows fascination, a bleak beauty with a sternness so extreme that

it seems almost neurotic. But study it and you see there’s no part of

the ax that doesn’t work, from the rough-hewn butt end with its

wrist-loop strap to the arched line of the handle to its wicked,

burrowing tip. I’m not sure what the thing on the other end is for, the

piece of metal looks like Paul Bunyan’s bottle opener, but I’m sure

it has a clear purpose, which those dedicated enough—and mad

enough—to put their lives at risk climbing mountains and ice falls

readily understand and utilize.

This brings me to a new conclusion: What I really feel when I hold

this in my hand isn’t so much the possibility of murder as the gravity

of mortal things. It speaks to me of the vulnerability of human flesh,

but also of the resilience and determination of the human mind:

Lying on my desk, it whispers, “If you need me, I’ll be there. If you

need to hang all 215 pounds of you off me, I won’t let go—if, that

is, you plant me deep.”

I have no plans to go climbing; I get vertigo when I ascend to the

top of a stepladder. But I keep the Predator under my bed. Why not?

One never knows when one might need a good tool, the sort of thing

that might make the difference between life and death.

© Stephen King, 1995

Stephen King (1996)

This two-paragraph note consists of explanatory text for a photo showing King at his writing

desk. He outlines his writing schedule: three hours of important work in the mornings and a “toy

truck” story (for fun, could be published or not) in the afternoons. His self-disparaging streak comes

out: ‘I don’t take notes; I don’t outline; I don’t do anything like that. I just flail away at the goddamned

thing...I’m a salami writer. I try to write good salami, but salami is salami. You can’t sell it as

caviar.’

This piece appears only in The Writer’s Desk by Jill Krementz. Published by Random House in

a 1996 hardcover, copies are easily secured via secondhand dealers.

Untitled (November 21, 1996)

This is a newsgroup post about the Dark Tower IV: Wizard and Glass preview booklet

distributed with copies of The Regulators and Desperation when bought together in bookstores, and

serves as a response to those who were complaining about not being able to get it. The booklet was

given away in lieu of a “Keep You Up All Night” book light the publisher ran out of during the sales

run of the two novels: ‘The booklet was my idea, not the publisher’s.’ King advises fans to show the

bookstore their receipt and request a copy of the booklet if they bought both books individually

because there were no gift packs combining the two novels available. ‘If you’re just jacked because

you want to read the first two chapters of Wizard and Glass, wait until the whole thing comes out. Or

put it on your T. S. List and give it to the chaplain. In any case, those of you who are yelling and

stamping your feet, please stop. If you’re old enough to read, you’re old enough to behave.’ Prefatory

text to the message explains King posted through someone who worked at Penguin USA.

This is the second of two King messages to appear on the Internet newsgroup alt.books.stephen-

king and was posted on 21 November 1996. Internet-savvy readers will easily find it on the web. It

was reprinted in the March 1997 issue of Phantasmagoria, a Stephen King “fanzine” published by

noted King scholar George Beahm; in The Lost Work of Stephen King by Stephen J. Spignesi,

released in a number of editions from 1998; and in The Road to the Dark Tower: Exploring Stephen

King’s Magnum Opus by King newsgroup moderator Bev Vincent, published in a trade paperback in

2004 and in a limited edition by Cemetery Dance in 2005.

This UMaine Grad Happy to Give Something Back (March 16, 1997)

‘In spite of seemingly endless rounds of budget cuts and morale as low as I have ever seen it, the

University of Maine continues to do its job and turn out valuable citizens who often elect to remain in

the state they love,’ King says in this article. It’s no secret that King is a philanthropist; in February

1997, he made a large donation to the University of Maine, his alma mater. Here he recounts how one

of his English professors, Burton Hatlen, helped him when he was in danger of losing part of his

student aid: ‘So maybe it was fitting that it was Burt Hatlen—now dean of UMO’s arts and humanities

program—who accepted my check for a million dollars last month. If I had a guiding light during my

years at Maine, Burt was it. And he is a good man to have in the administration right now, because the

weather for public education in the state of Maine has turned decidedly nasty.’

This sets the tone for the piece, which at its heart, is a call for citizens to try and do their part in

deciding the fate of publicly funded education: ‘What I wish is very simple and very direct, and that

is for every person whose eyes have tracked this far to pick up a pen and write a very simple message

to Gov. King in Augusta: As a voterand a taxpayer, I want you to support and promote higher

education in Maine. Angus King is really not part of the problem, but he must be part of the

solution. / I hope the people of Maine will make it clear that that’s what they want him to be, and that

these last three years of the 20th century can be years of recommitment to higher education and state

support of higher education here in Maine.’

This article appeared in the Maine Sunday Telegram on March 16, 1997. The best way to

obtain a copy of this article is to visit a major Maine library, such as that provided free-of-charge to

Maine residents and visitors at the University of Maine’s Orono campus. Alternatively make an

interlibrary article request, which sometimes costs as much as $15 per article.

Uncle Clayton (July 1997)

This very brief excerpt from King’s 1983 Playboy interview with Eric Norden was published in

Dancing with the Dark: True Encounters with the Paranormal by the Masters of the Macabre ,

edited by Stephen Jones. As an interview excerpt, it is arguably not an article by King. When the

author was young he used to listen to ghost stories and local legends, usually related by his Uncle

Clayton, who had a special gift: ‘Uncle Clayt had another talent, too: he was a dowser. He could find

water with a piece of forked wood. How and why I’m not sure, but he did it. I was sceptical ( sic)

about dowsing at first, until I actually saw it and experienced it—when Uncle Clayt defied all the

experts and found a well in our front yard.’

The book in which the piece appears was published in the United Kingdom by Vista in 1997;

and in the United States by Caroll & Graf in 1999.

King Comments (Summer 1997)

This piece was posted on a promotional website as publicity for the Signet mass-market

paperback editions of Desperation and The Regulators—these novels use the same character names

in completely different roles and circumstances. The books were originally released in hardcover on

the same day; the first published by Viking under King’s name, the other by Dutton under his Bachman

pseudonym. In fact, if the US hardbacks are laid side by side the covers form one large picture. Much

was said about this unusual publishing move at the time of the hardcover releases and, a year later,

we find King commenting: ‘It doesn’t matter which [book people] read first. And, frankly, it doesn’t

matter if they read them both. There’s not a secret in Desperation that can only be unlocked if you

read The Regulators, and there’s not a secret in The Regulators that you could only unlock if you

read Desperation. But still, the two books illuminate each other in a strange way. They really are like

identical twins.’

King deals briefly with the inspiration for Desperation—he drove through a deserted town in

Oregon wondering what happened to all the people (he eventually set the book in a small Nevada

desert town). He also claims his editor Chuck Verrill sent him Richard Bachman’s manuscript for

The Regulators; his reaction: ‘I don’t know if it’s a good novel or not. But the most interesting thing

about The Regulators is that he and I must have been on exactly the same psychic wavelength. It’s

almost as though we were twins, in a funny way...nasty man, though he was, and I’m glad that he’s

dead.’

He also leaves hope we might yet see another work published under the Bachman name,

claiming the widow, Claudia Inez Bachman204 , had found more manuscripts: ‘I really haven’t looked

through them, so I don’t know how good they are or how bad they are. I see that one of them is a novel

about a sexual vampire, actually, which looks sort of interesting. But I got a lot to read so I haven’t

been up to Bachman’s stuff yet. The Regulators is an interesting book though.’

This entertaining post appeared on an official Penguin Putnam promotional web site in Summer

1997. The actual title of this piece may be King’s Comments but, for now, this cannot be confirmed.

The chances of obtaining a copy depend largely on knowing someone in the King community who can

provide a copy, as it is no longer online.

Alan D. Williams: An Appreciation (July 1998)

This piece is King’s short obituary for Alan D. Williams, who edited seven of King’s books for

Viking (including Different Seasons, The Dead Zone and Christine). He says Williams was ‘a

writer’s editor, the rare sort who can make himself a vessel for whatever sort of work his current

author is best able to do. He didn’t want me or any other writer to do different work: he wanted the

writer’s book, but written to Alan’s own high standards, which were always expressed gently but

clearly and insistently.’

King talks of Williams as a person and specifically of their working relationship: ‘I missed him

when he left Viking, and I miss him more now that he has died. It was good to have worked with a

man of such wit and intelligence and unfailing cheer. Damn, but I liked him. And in our professional

relationship, what I liked best was his good sense. If something was bad but necessary, he figured out

how to fix it. If something was bad and unnecessary, he told you to throw it out. And if it was working

—if the kids would, in his judgment, understand—he helped it to grow. He never touched his pencil

to anything of mine that wasn’t better for the touch. And I feel the same about having known him.’

This piece appeared in the July 1998 edition of Locus magazine. While some libraries may

archive this publication, the best way to obtain copies is through used magazine sources.

Secrets, Lies, and‘Bag of Bones’(Fall 1998)

King opens with a definition of community: ‘Community interests us, I think, in fiction, in

movies, and on the stage because it interests us in our lives. Community interests us because it’s part

of an organization that we belong to. That’s true whether you live in a city or whether you’re in the

country. I don’t mean to wax sociological about this, but if you live in an apartment building in New

York City, that’s a community.’

Community, especially in small town Maine, plays an important role in King’s novel Bag of

Bones (and the majority of his other works). King writes of the small town mindset, especially

feelings about outsiders: ‘I think that the smaller the community, the more tight-knit the community.

And the more the community is isolated from the wider world, the more the tendency is to say, “We

take care of our own. We look after our own. When things go wrong, that’s our business, that’s not

your business if you’re from the outside.”’

This article, deserving of wider circulation, appeared in an e-mail sent to Amazon.com Delivers

subscribers in the Fall of 1998. Copies sometimes circulate in the King community.

Leaf-Peepers (December 28, 1998—January 4, 1999)

King uses the term ‘leaf-peepers’ in this short but important essay as descriptor for the tourists

who go up to New England (and more specifically, Maine) in the month of October to check out the

beautiful foliage. He claims they reappear in January as ‘ski bums’ and goes on to describe the beauty

of winter in his part of Maine.

He closes with perhaps some of the most poignant writing of his entire career: ‘Romantics

compare the cycle of the seasons to the cycle of human life, a comparison I have never really trusted.

And yet now, at the age of fifty-one, I find something in it, after all. Sooner or later, life takes in its

breath, pauses, and then tilts toward winter. I sense that tilt approaching. When the idea threatens to

become oppressive, I think of the woods in New England tilting into winter—how you can see the

whole expanse of the lake, not just the occasional wink through the trees, and hear every movement on

the land that slopes down to the water. You can hear every living thing, no matter how cunning, before

snow comes to muffle the world.’

This piece appeared in the December 28, 1998-January 4, 1999 issue of The New Yorker . Many

libraries will archive this iconic magazine, which has carried quite a lot of King’s short fiction; older

issues are easy to secure online. It was reprinted in The Stephen King Desk Calendar 2006, an item

that appears for sale regularly on eBay.

From the Desk of Stephen King (1998)

This is a one-page letter to members of The Book-of-the-Month Club’s Stephen King Library.

King opens this very short (three paragraphs) letter, ‘One of the best things about The Stephen King

Library, besides getting all the terror you need, is the guarantee that you’ll never get a book you don’t

want.’ Referencing this buying method, in which the reader chooses the books they want from a list,

King closes, ‘The choice is yours...if you dare!’

This letter was distributed when members joined The Stephen King Library, a series of the

author’s books available through The Book-of-the-Month Club. It was used in both 1998 and 2005.

The chances of obtaining a copy are slim, excepting through another member of the King community.

A Word From Stephen King replaced it in 2000 (see below), as indeed this had replaced an earlier

version—see A Note From Stephen King above.

Untitled (March 1999)

This is a cover letter to readers and reviewers about King’s The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon .

He opens with the genesis of this short novel: ‘If books were babies, I’d call The Girl Who Loved

Tom Gordon the result of an unplanned pregnancy. I got the idea—during a game at Fenway Park,

naturally—last July, resisted it for six weeks or so, and finally gave up. The story wanted to be

written, that was all. I knew it was going to take up most of the R & R I’d been looking forward to

after two years of almost nonstop writing ( Bag of Bones, Hearts in Atlantis), and I knew it would be

a difficult journey, but none of that mattered to the story. It never does. Stories want only one thing: to

be born. If that’s inconvenient, too bad.’

The battle between good and evil has been a constant theme in King’s work. More specifically,

the subjects of faith and God appear from time to time: ‘I have been writing about God—the

possibility of God and the consequences for humans if God does exist—for twenty years now, ever

since The Stand. I have no interest in preaching or in organized religion, and no patience with zealots

who claim to have the one true pipeline to the Big Guy...but it seems to me that a little girl lost in the

millions of square acres of forest west of Augusta would need someone or something to come in and

at least try to get the save on her behalf. Hence the story that you will soon be reading.’

The letter was distributed with review copies of The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon ; and also as

part of an e-mail to subscribers of Simon & Schuster’s Stephen King mailing list; both in March

1999. Copies circulate in the King community.

Ghoulies, Ghosties, and Girls (June 28, 1999)

This very short piece retells the near mythical story of how King had written two pages of a

short story he regarded as a failure and then threw away. His wife, Tabitha, dug them out, and urged

him to continue. He began working again and, at that point, thought that he might be able to sell the

story to Cavalier magazine. But it quickly outgrew the short story form and eventually became his

first published novel, Carrie.

Closing, King writes: ‘I sold the book to Doubleday for $2,500. They thought it [might be a

sleeper like] “The Parallax View,” a novel they had published a year or two previous. The book’s

reception floored everyone, I think, except my wife. Looking back on it, I’d have to say that Carrie

White was the original riot grrrl.’

This piece was published in the June 28, 1999 issue of Newsweek. As an important magazine,

any significant library will have back copies available. For those looking for an original, copies

appear at used magazine and King resellers from time to time.

Untitled / Letter From King (June 1999)

This four-page note to readers concerns King’s then forthcoming book Hearts in Atlantis. He

begins, ‘Dear Constant Reader, I hope Bag of Bones gave you at least one sleepless night. Sorry ‘bout

that; it’s just the way I am. It gave me one or two, and ever since writing it I’m nervous about going

down cellar—part of me keeps expecting the door to slam, the lights to go out, and the knocking to

start. But for me, at least, that’s also part of the fun. If that makes me sick, hey, don’t call the doctor.’

King says he has a three-book deal with Simon & Schuster, for Bag of Bones, On Writing, and a

collection of stories, which was to include many of his recently published stories and would have

been titled One Headlight. When actually published in 2002 the title became Everything’s Eventual .

He also talks about writing the novella Hearts in Atlantis, then eventually Low Men in Yellow Coats

and Why We’re in Vietnam , and combining these with a pre-existing short story, Blind Willie (the

collection’s fifth story, Heavenly Shades of Night Are Falling was added at the last minute).

Closing this interesting piece, King writes: ‘ Hearts in Atlantis will be available from Scribner

in September. If you were in your teens when the platform shoe was king and there actually were

groups with names like The Strawberry Alarm Clock, maybe it will remind you of what you were,

what you had, what you lost, and what you gained. If you came later, Hearts in Atlantis might explain

a little bit about just what we were and why we turned out the way we did. I hope you’ll read it and

tell me what you think. In the meantime...peace, dude.’

This article appeared in the Pocket Books mass-market paperback edition of Bag of Bones, first

printed in June 1999. It was republished later that year as Letter from King on Simon & Schuster’s

official web site. That version is somewhat longer than the original appearance.

The Bogeyboys (1999)

This is a transcription of the keynote address King gave at the Vermont Library Conference on

May 26, 1999. He tackles the serious subject of violence in the United States, opening: ‘When I speak

in public, a thing I do as rarely as possible, I usually don’t speak from a prepared text and I hardly

ever try to say anything serious; to misquote Mark Twain, I feel that anyone looking for a moral

should be hung and anyone looking for a plot should be shot. Today, though, I want to talk about

something very serious indeed: adolescent violence in American schools. This outbreak has become

so serious that a bus driver from Conyers, Georgia, interviewed last week on the CBS Evening News,

suggested that the slang term “going postal” may soon be changed to “going pupil.” I suggest that a

great many parts of American society have contributed to creating this problem, and that we must all

work together to alleviate it ... and I use the word “alleviate” rather than “cure” because I don’t think

any cure, at least in the sense of a quick fix—that is what Americans usually mean by cure; fast-fast-

fast relief, as the aspirin commercials used to say—I don’t think that sort of cure is possible. This is a

violent society. Law enforcement statistics suggest it may not be as violent now as it was fifteen years

ago, but it’s really too early to tell; we may only be witnessing a blip on the graph.’

At the time, the Columbine murders were still fresh in everyone’s minds. King addresses that

outrage specifically and references the title of his speech: ‘And yes, there needs to be a re-

examination of America’s violent culture of the imagination. It needs to be done soberly and calmly; a

witch-hunt won’t help...let’s go beyond the question of whether or not the next crop of natural born

killers are currently honing their skills in Arcade 2000 at the local mall. It’s time for an examination

of why Americans of all ages are so drawn to armed conflict ( Rambo), unarmed conflict (World

Federation Wrestling), and images of violence. These things are not just speaking to potential teenage

killers, but to a great many of us. Their hold on the national psyche has progressed to a point where

the Columbine murders dominate our headlines and possess our thoughts to the exclusion of much

else...Harris and Klebold are dead and in their graves, but we are in terror of them all the same; they

are the Red Death in our richly appointed castle...They are our bogeyboys, and perhaps the real first

step in making them go away is to decide what it is about them that frightens us so much. It is a

discussion which must begin in families, schools, libraries, and in public forums such as this. Which

is why I have begged your attention and your indulgence on such an unappetizing subject.’

Clearly, this is an important opinion piece, deserving of much broader circulation. It appeared

on the VEMA (Vermont Educational Media Association) website. According to one source, ‘King’s

entire presentation was videotaped by the Regional Educational Television Network, which is

making King’s speech available to cable access channels throughout the state for cablecast and for

use in encouraging discussion.’ In the same year the author, clearly concerned by attempts to link

school shootings to his work, withdrew his early Bachman novel Rage (which features gun violence

in the classroom) from publication.

The piece appeared on VEMA’s official web page in 1999 and may now be found at a number

of other web sites through the use of a good search engine.

Untitled (7 June 2000)

The Plant is an epistolary novel King began publishing in the 1980s in limited edition format,

and then ceased after three installments. In 2000, he decided to revise the tale and publish it in

installments on his official website, using the honor system for payments. The early sections cost a

dollar each, and King vowed to stop publishing them if too many people did not pay up. He proposes

this concept by telling readers of this letter: ‘If this idea interests you, will you e-mail the web site

and say so? By the same token, if it sounds like a bad idea, will you tell me that?’

King writes he decided to undertake this project because he was ‘intrigued by the success of

“Riding the Bullet” (stunned would probably be a more accurate word), and since then have been

anxious to try something similar, but I’ve also been puzzling over issues of ownership when it comes

to creative work.’ Riding the Bullet was originally published on King’s web site in a non-printable

PDF file for $2.50; and some web sites (including amazon.com) gave it away, leading to a near

meltdown of servers worldwide. King closes: ‘So tell me what you think, keeping in mind that The

Plant is an unfinished work (although I reserve the right to continue the story, and to continue posting

further installments, if the feedback is positive) and I can’t guarantee you an ending, either happy or

sad. And I reserve the right to cease publication if a lot of people steal the story...but I just don’t

believe that will happen. I mean, we’re talking a buck a pop here, right?’

This piece was posted at Stephen King’s official web site on June 7, 2000. Older posts are no

longer accessible online but copies circulate in the King community. There would be quite a number

of posts about this project over the following months (see below).

Untitled (14 June 2000)

In this two-paragraph piece King informs readers responses to the question of whether or not to

publish The Plant online (see directly above) were very positive, and that he is going to go ahead. He

closes with a subtle reference to the honor system he proposes for payments: ‘remember the Philtrum

Press motto: “It takes a really bad guy to steal from a blind newsboy.”’

This piece was posted at Stephen King’s official web site on June 14, 2000 and the first online

installment of The Plant appeared the following month. Further posts on this subject are discussed

below.

Will We Close the Book on Books? (June 19, 2000)

This three-paragraph article was part of a lengthy special feature in Time magazine dealing with

the future of technology and titled Visions 21. King mentions his eBook experiment Riding the Bullet

and weighs in on the question posed in the title: ‘I suspect that the growth of the Internet has actually

been something of a boon when it comes to reading: people with more Beanie Babies than books on

their shelves spend more time reading than they used to as they surf from site to site. But it’s not a

book, dammit, that perfect object that speaks without speaking, needs no batteries and never crashes

unless you throw it in the corner. So, yes, there’ll be books. Speaking personally, you can have my

gun, but you’ll take my book when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the binding.’ The last is a pet

saying of this serial promoter of the written word.

The piece was published in the June 19, 2000 issue of Time magazine. As Time is an important

magazine any major library will hold back copies. Collectors looking for an original will find copies

at online used magazine outlets.

Untitled (July 11, 2000)

This is a further update to the Plant eBook project. A ‘To’ heading at the top of the page reads,

‘Constant Reader/Constant Webhead’; and the ‘Subject’ heading reads: ‘ The Plant Update’.

The piece is split into subject headings with explanatory text for each: ‘What It Is’; ‘Depends on

What?’; ‘How Much’; ‘What I Promise’; ‘What You Promise’; ‘What We’ll Have’; ‘If You Have

Other Questions’; ‘If You’re Not Satisfied’; ‘Will It Work?’; and ‘Is This The End of Publishing?’

He’d answered this last question in more detail in Will We Close the Book on Books? (see directly

above). King closes, ‘I hope this answers your questions. Now go be good to someone, and

remember: this ain’t Napster. Take what you want...and pay for it.’

It was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on July 11, 2000 and is part of a series of such

items covered both above and below.

Steve’s Comments (July 25, 2000)

King starts this brief update by thanking readers for their response to The Plant. He says

payment rates by credit card were around 75%; that they are hoping for between 85-90% pay-through;

and promises an update of the figures on July 31, 2000. He says he is not going to be talking to the

press about the matter for awhile as he prefers discourse with his readers: ‘Good or bad, you deserve

the news first, you deserve to read it here, and that’s the way it is going to play out. For the time

being, just let me reiterate this experiment seems to be working. I am delighted. Thank you. Tell your

friends.’

This piece was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on July 25, 2000 as part of a series of

such items covered both above and below.

Steve’s Comments (Post #2) (July 25, 2000)

In King’s second post of the day, he reveals more of his thoughts regarding The Plant project:

‘Here’s the truth: When I made a decision to post the first two installments of The Plant, my hopes of

success weren’t very high. Publicly, I have always expressed a great deal of confidence in human

nature, but in private I have wondered if anybody would ever pay for anything on the Net. It now

looks as though people will, and I am faced with the real possibility of finishing The Plant.’ Next, he

outlines a planned future for the tale, indicating there would be longer installments for episodes two

and three; and an increase in price for installment four, which would be considerably longer than any

previous section.

Steve’s Comments (July 31, 2000)

This is the update promised in the Steve’s Comments post for July 25, 2000: ‘I promised

visitors at this site—not to mention interested media types—an update on how we’re doing as of

7/31. This is that update. I have been as honest and specific as I can be, believing that’s the best way

to spike rumors.’ Similar in style to the untitled July 11, 2000 post, King divides this piece into

subcategories: ‘How many downloads so far?’; ‘How many have paid?’; ‘Costs to you, as of Part

1?’; ‘A lot fewer downloads than “Riding the Bullet.” Disappointed?’; ‘Do you expect more

downloads of Part 1?’; ‘Are you go for Part 3 in September?’; ‘Are you working on The Plant

again?’; ‘Will people continue to come back?’; ‘And if the downloads don’t stay up?’; then, finally,

‘If I have other questions?’

This piece was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on July 31, 2000 as part of a series of

such items covered both above and below.

Steve’s Comments (August 25, 2000)

This is another update regarding King’s online experiment with the publication of The Plant.

Downloads for Part Two were down as compared to Part One; and that the pay-through rate has

dropped. Although he’s written more, a decision about whether or not to continue will come after Part

Three is released in September; and he addresses other minor issues such as pricing for the remaining

parts, and complaints received about the cost of ink and paper when printing these pieces out (one

cannot help but be amazed!)

‘In closing, I just want to add that I appreciate all the support you have shown me thus far, and to

add that the profit-motive was never the principal force driving this amusing exploration, and that is

not what’s driving it now. We are exploring a new continent, that’s all, and so far it has been fun.’

This piece was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on August 25, 2000 as part of a

series of such items covered both above and below.

Clarifications (September 5, 2000)

This one paragraph piece clarifies a mistake by The New York Times about King accepting

unsolicited manuscripts. The author points out he does not do so, and that in On Writing he had asked

readers to submit a short sample via his official web site if they felt inclined to do so. It was posted

on Stephen King’s official web site on September 5, 2000. Older posts are no longer accessible

online but copies circulate in the King community.

My Favorite Things (September 2000)

In this very short aside of only a couple of sentences King names his favorite object, which is,

allegedly, his 2000 Dodge Ram pickup truck. It appeared in the September 2000 issue of Men’s

Journal magazine. Copies of this publication are available from the usual used magazine resources.

Stephen King (2000)

This is an excerpt from King’s 1988 Commencement speech at the University of Maine. He’d

opened in typically humorous style: ‘I am not addressing you, because you are not letters. Even if you

were put in a large package and could be sent bulk mail, I would have nowhere to send you. I am not

commencing anything. I did that when I began to talk. You are not commencing anything, at least in the

aggregate; I am aware that individuals are always commencing something: some of you are

commencing respiration, commencing efforts to stifle yawns, commencing to feel the need for a beer.

But as a group, you’re just sitting there, and you commenced that already....’

King closes: ‘ There is no metaphor for your life. There is only one single man and one single

woman living a life with the earth under and the sky over and all the worlds of possibility in the head

existing between the two. You want to know what is going to happen to you? You want to know what

to do next? I don’t know the answer to either question. But I know as surely as I know summer

follows spring that you can, and that most of you will.’

This piece appears in Onward!: Twenty-Five Years of Advice, Exhortation, and Inspiration

from America’s Best Commencement Speeches , edited by Peter J. Smith. Published in hardcover by

Scribner in 2000, copies are available through abebooks.com, Amazon.com and other online

booksellers.

Stephen’s Comments (December 4, 2000)

King ceased publication of The Plant in December 2000 with Part Six of the story. He says this

final part concludes the first major section of the novel; and that The Plant is not finished online—‘it

is only on hiatus.’ The hiatus now appears permanent; as he told fans in 2006 it wasn’t likely he’d

ever go back and finish this twice-halted tale.

He also provides a link to a New York Times editorial on The Plant, and his response, The

Plant: Getting a Little Goofy (see directly below). Then, in apparent frustration: ‘May I scold for a

minute? This whole discussion is beside the point. My job is not to comment on art and fiction. I am

not a critic. If anything has discouraged me about the course of The Plant from July until December, it

has been the almost total lack of discussion of the story. Let’s get back to that and try to stay there.’

This piece was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on December 4, 2000 as part of a

series of such items covered both above and below.

The Plant: Getting a Little Goofy (December 4, 2000)

This post responds to an editorial in The New York Times for 1 December 2000 titled King

Closure. Amazingly, the newspaper refused to print King’s response and he was left with placing it

on his official web site, asking fans to read both in order to form their own opinion on the matter. One

of the uninformed statements in this editorial was this clanger: ‘… one reads Stephen King novels in a

single gulp. Their chief effect is suspense of a kind that cannot be drawn out over months.’ In

response, King mentions his serialized novel The Green Mile and the fact that all six parts appeared

on the newspaper’s paperback bestseller list at the same time!

He declares that he’s learned a lot from this online experiment. Once the dust had settled, he was

able to identify issues with the project: ‘I see three large problems. One is that most Internet users

seem to have the attention span of grasshoppers. Another is that Internet users have gotten used to the

idea that most of what’s available to them on the Net is either free or should be. The third—and

biggest—is that book-readers don’t regard electronic books as real books.’ The latter statements are

clearly still the case.

King closes philosophically: ‘None of this is a bad thing or a good thing. Neither is any of it a

sure-fire thing. Like the more traditional artistic endeavors, it’s a goofy thing. A fun thing. Neither the

sums generated nor the future of publishing is the point. The point is trying some new things; pushing

some new buttons and seeing what happens.’ (This last sentence very much describes King’s method

throughout his entire career—consider such examples as Cycle of the Werewolf , The Green Mile,

revising The Stand, and publishing deleted scenes from ’Salem’s Lot).

This piece was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on December 4, 2000 as the last of a

series of such items on The Plant, each covered above.

A Word from Stephen King (2000)

This two-paragraph letter was sent to members of The Book-of-the-Month Club’s Stephen King

Library: ‘Looking back on these previous trips to the brink is like reading a map in progress...they are

all still friends of mine, from Carrie, the ugly duckling, to Johnny Smith, the reluctant seer, to George

Stark, the psychotic writer. I have known all these people, have lived with them, and have wanted

more than anything else for others to live with them, too.’

The letter was first distributed in 2000 to new members of The Stephen King Library, a series of

the author’s books available through The Book-of-the-Month Club, replacing two earlier versions— A

Note From Stephen King and From The Desk of Stephen King (see above). The chances of obtaining

a copy are slim, excepting through another member of the King community, or if the Library is still

using this introductory letter and readers choose to join (warning: The Stephen King Library has a

reputation for poor service and communication).

An Evening with Stephen King (2000)

This is a transcript of the speech King gave to a ‘University of Vermont audience’ on March 30,

1999. The author notes ‘Tony’ Magistrale (a noted King academic), who ‘kicked my ass in tennis this

afternoon’, had invited him. He begins in a jocular manner, mucking around and putting on his Uncle

Stevie mask: ‘… I want to remind you to check the backseat of your car before you get in. It wouldn’t

hurt to check the trunk. And you wouldn’t want to get onto one of these country roads and get halfway

home and see that face come up in the rearview mirror. You realize that anybody who hid in the

backseat of your car...would have to be insane. They’d have to be dangerous, right?...When you get

home and you get into the bathroom, you might ask yourself, was the shower curtain pulled when I

left?’

He says many people ask of his writing, ‘How much of it do you believe? How much of this stuff

is supported by your personal belief system?’ His reply: ‘...I don’t know about other writers, but I

believe everything.’ He goes on to claim he is ‘the most totally gullible person in the world’, giving

examples that are best described as interesting!

He finally gets down to his theme—‘The whole question of exploration of belief is probably the

only way in which pop fiction can be serious. I believe that exposition of belief remains its greatest

strength even more so than the social issues, which always seem to get the lion’s share of the credit

when it comes to critical analysis. Belief and the exposition of belief shows an amazing utility when

it’s merged with a good story.’

King says, ‘I have expressed the things that I believe as well as I can in some of the books I’ve

written. In The Stand and The Tommyknockers ...the belief expressed underneath the story is that

technology is a blown horse...In Cujo and Storm of the Century...I tried to express the belief that

sometimes good people do not win. Sometimes good people die. Sometimes good people are

corrupted...In Misery and Bag of Bones, I think I was trying to say that writing is not life...In books

like Pet Sematary and “The Dark Tower” series, I try to express my belief that love is deaf...Love is

the best we have. We’re stuck with it when things get dark. Without love in the dark, we’d go mad.’

He continues, ‘ Tom Gordon is a book about God....’; and ‘Last but not least I have expressed in

several books my belief in some insensate force—not necessarily God—I’m not sure I believe in that

in a personal way, but in the sort of way that William Wordsworth talked about and then later in his

prose, John Steinbeck, when they talked about an oversoul. In my books, I’ve called that “the coming

of the white”’. The speech closes with King declaiming, ‘A novel should exist—a story should exist

—as story but there ought to be something more going on. There ought to be more ticking there than

simply story. There ought to be some expression of belief. It makes it more fun and textures the work

in a way that otherwise you don’t get.’

This fifteen-page article, which is particularly important to an understanding of King and his

work, appears only in King’s Book-of-the-Month Club collection, Secret Windows: Essays and

Fiction on the Craft of Writing, published in 2000. This book can be easily obtained from

secondhand book sources.

Horror! (March 2001)

This is King’s short contribution to a broader article (in which a collection of different people

recount the most frightening moments of their lives), specifically in a sidebar titled The Most

Frightened I’ve Ever Been... King briefly tells of meeting Vincent Price in line at the grocery store,

and his declaring, ‘I understand how intimidating I am for a young fellow like you.’ Other

contributors include Norman Schwarzkopf, Rick Mears, Mike Ditka, Robbie Knievel, Oscar De La

Hoya, Tino Wallenda and Chuck Yeager.

The piece appeared in the March 2001 issue of Men’s Health magazine. Copies can be secured

through online used magazine resources.

On Ed McBain (March 2001)

This is King’s portion of a larger article from many contributors, A Tribute to Evan Hunter/Ed

McBain. King opens his section with Hunter/McBain’s contributions to literature: ‘In essence, there

is this: Ed McBain injected the sort of reality into the police procedural novel that Dashiell Hammett

and Raymond Chandler had injected into the private eye novel in the 30s and 40s. It can be argued

(I’ll do the arguing if no one else wants to) that what McBain did was more important, because cops,

both of the uniform and plainclothes variety, are real people and private eyes—the sort epitomized by

Sam Spade and Philip Marlowe, at least—are not. They are romantic knights errant placed against a

realistic background, no more than that. That McBain would be the one to create this naturalistic

subgenre (and to revitalize the entire genre by doing so) should come as no surprise. Before he was

Ed McBain he was Evan Hunter, a serious mainstream novelist whose works have spanned almost

three generations.’

He closes with a concise view of what Hunter/McBain had done for readers: ‘A veteran of the

pulps and the paperback originals, he has always felt that the paying public has one unalienable right:

to be entertained. It is a service he has performed with élan and brio for nearly 50 years. For this I

salute him and thank him with all my heart.’ King’s tributes to Hunter/McBain continued in an untitled

October 15, 2005 piece (see below).

This article appeared in the March 2001 issue of Mystery Scene magazine, copies of which can

be found at used magazine resources online and, sometimes, eBay.

Vassar Commencement Speech (2001)

King gave the Commencement Speech at Vassar College in New York on May 20, 2001. He gets

off to a typically humorous start: ‘Last week, this week, next week; all over America young men and

women—and some not so young—in caps and gowns are listening to scholars, politicians, eminent

thinkers, and probably Oprah Winfrey send them forth into their lives. You here at Vassar have

invited the man most commonly seen as America’s Bogeyman to do that, and I have to ask you...What

were you thinking? What in God’s name were you thinking?’

After the laughter died down he spoke of death, and considering the amazing future of medicine,

the question of who in attendance could still be around for a reunion in 100 years: ‘Human life is

brief when placed in time’s wider perspective is something we all know. I am asking you to consider

it on a more visceral level, that’s all. Thinking of all those empty chairs a hundred years from now is

frightening. Yet it also offers some valuable perspective.’

All this talk of mortality has a point and it is from this section that Family Circle would draw

the title of its article excerpting the speech: ‘Should you give away what you have? Of course you

should. I want you to consider making your lives one long gift to others, and why not? All you have is

on loan, anyway. All you want to get at the getting place, from the Maserati you may dream about to

the retirement fund some broker will try to sell you on, none of that is real. All that lasts is what you

pass on. The rest is smoke and mirrors.’

Most readers will know the Kings have long been philanthropists but, in this speech, he is

unusually outspoken about the matter, announcing a donation of $20,000 to a local charity and

encouraging those in attendance to ‘help to match that amount...Each strictly according to his or her

resources; nobody gets hurt.’ King didn’t ask this to ‘… solve the problem of hunger and want in

Poughkeepsie or Dutchess County, let alone in the whole world, but because you’ll enjoy your own

coming meal more fully knowing that you shared your joy and your good fortune in having been a part

of this happy occasion. And don’t let it be a one-shot. Let it be the beginning of a life’s giving, not just

of money but of time and spirit.’

This important speech was originally posted at Stephen King’s official website in 2001 but is no

longer accessible there. At the time of writing it was available at Vassar’s web site:

http://www.vassar.edu/go2001/speech.html. Edited excerpts were printed in the November 1, 2001

issue of Family Circle magazine as Full Circle: What You Pass On . Frankly, the piece could do with

wider circulation.

Untitled (August 21, 2001; August 28, 2001)

This letter, posted on King’s official Internet site, discusses the electronic pre-publication of an

excerpt from The Dark Tower V: Wolves of the Calla . He opens this short piece: ‘Roland of Gilead

—also known as the gunslinger—has finally saddled up again’, and informs readers his plans are to

finish the final three Dark Tower novels at the same time. He then urges fans to read the excerpt, The

Dark Tower V—Prologue: Calla Bryn Sturgis 205; and closes: ‘Roland, Eddie, Susannah, Jake, and

Oy all wish you well. So do I. And as the residents of the Calla might say, may this do ya fine, tell

God thankee.’

Updating the piece a week later King briefly adds he was pleased to find some readers had

picked up on the homage in Calla Bryn Sturgis to Akira Kurosawa’s film Seven Samurai and says

the reference will become clearer in the finished novel, as indeed it did (along with the reference to

director John Sturges).

This piece was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on August 21, 2001 and was updated

on August 28, 2001. Older posts are no longer accessible online but copies circulate in the King

community.

Elements of Tragedy: The Weapon ( September 23, 2001)

This short piece contains some of King’s thoughts about the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks

on the United States. ‘People keep saying “like a movie,” “like a book,” “like a war zone,” and I keep

thinking: No, not at all like a movie or a book—that’s no computer-generated image, because you

can’t see any wash or blur in the background. This is what it really looks like when an actual plane

filled with actual human beings and loaded with jet fuel hits a skyscraper. This is the truth.’ He also

says that the events were not like a book or a movie because the terrorists simply used box cutters,

and the speed and surprise of the attack, to accomplish their goal.

He closes with these chilling words: ‘It could happen again. And now that crazos the world over

see that it’s possible to get 72 hours of uninterrupted air time on a budget, it will almost certainly

happen again.’ King’s sad take on survivor guilt as a result of these terrible events is worked out in

his 2005 short story, The Things They Left Behind, first published in the Ed McBain edited

anthology, Transgressions.

The piece appeared in the September 23, 2001 edition of The New York Times Magazine , a free

publication included in Sunday editions of The New York Times . Any major library will have copies

of the newspaper on microfilm/microfiche and this magazine supplement should be included.

Untitled (October 30, 2001)

This letter, posted on King’s official Internet site, discusses the top five winning entries in the

United States On Writing contest (a separate contest was held in the United Kingdom: in that case the

winner’s story was printed in the mass-market paperback edition of On Writing). King opines, ‘I

think a lot of people harbor the secret dream of being a fiction writer. Why not? You don’t need any

special tools, brushes, or even classes. All you’ve got to do is power up your laptop and you are

ready to go’; and says he received over 1000 entries through his web site, but most of the submissions

were bad (!). The exceptions included the five, which were posted on the site: ‘Read and enjoy.

Better yet, get in touch with these people and tell them what you think about their work or what you

didn’t. Like the human beings who create it, writing does not exist in a vacuum.’

This piece was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on October 30, 2001. Older posts are

no longer accessible online but copies circulate in the King community. Despite instructions to the

contrary in the ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ page on King’s website readers of On Writing still

query about submitting entries!

Jack’s Back: Stephen King’s Thoughts on the Sequel (September 2001)

Black House was the sequel to The Talisman , both collaborative efforts by Stephen King and

Peter Straub. King describes some of the discussions the co-authors had about the new novel: ‘Little

by little, we built up the underpinning of a story—a plausible history of Jack Sawyer, the Missing

Years. While we were writing The Talisman, Peter had mentioned—half joking, half not—that if we

ever wanted to revisit Jack Sawyer, we could write the ultimate haunted-house story. Books are

slippery things, though; while the haunted-house thing was certainly part of the plan when we started

work on Black House, it quickly became secondary to the monster who’d built the haunted house. But

that’s okay. If a book comes alive, it tells you what it wants...and Black House was very lively, even

when it was nothing but a letter and a number— T2.’

Black House, like its predecessor, is a novel of both fantasy and horror. But: ‘In the end, we

tried to write the kind of page-turning suspense novel that readers will like. And in order to do that,

we had to please ourselves. It should be enough to say that in this case, we did. It was a complete

pleasure to revisit Jack Sawyer and to revisit the Territories.’

This piece was first included in a US promotional Black House press kit in September 2001. It

also appeared as Jack’s Back at the official UK Black House web site that same month. Finally, it

was included as Jack’s Back: Thoughts on the Sequel in the eBook version of the novel, published

by Random House in September 2001, which included other extra material including notes by Straub

and editor Lee Boudreaux. This is yet another important piece that deserves wider circulation.

Building A Haunted House (January 26—February 1, 2002)

King sold a screenplay about a haunted house to Steven Spielberg in 1995, and then

incorporated Spielberg’s suggested changes into the screenplay several different times. Finally the

script was so different from the original idea that the project was abandoned after the third draft.

Later, King expanded the concept into a miniseries for ABC— Rose Red, aired in early 2002. He

relates this background and deals with another influence: the infamous Winchester mansion.

Sarah Winchester, the widow of Oliver Winchester (owner of the namesake rifle manufacturer)

had been told during a séance she would not die while her mansion was being built. She therefore

ceaselessly added to it and King says: ‘At some point, years and years after reading this fascinating

tidbit, it occurred to me that there might be a really good novel in the story of the never-ending

mansion. “Suppose,” I thought, “that at some point the house took over... and started building

itself? ” 206 I loved the idea of a house that was somehow bigger on the inside than on the outside.’

He ends the piece: ‘We went on to film a novel-length miniseries that I think fulfills Mr.

Spielberg’s original ambition: to make the scariest haunted-house picture of all time. If you like it,

thank that Steven. If you’re too scared to watch the final 30 minutes and have to switch over to that

wimpy doctor program, blame this Stephen.’

This piece appeared in the January 26-February 1, 2002 issue of TV Guide magazine. Copies

are relatively easy to secure through online used magazine dealers.

Cone Head (April 22—29, 2002)

In this short but revelatory article King explains why, in the spring of 1970, he was arrested for

stealing dozens of traffic cones! While driving home, he ran into one of the cones, which dislodged

the muffler of his older model Ford station wagon. He tried to collect all the cones he could (on the

theory this would avoid damage to other vehicles) and was eventually pulled over. He was found

guilty of petty larceny and fined one hundred dollars. At risk of being sent to County Jail due to his

inability to pay the fine, the young writer was saved by a check he received from Adam magazine for

a story he’d submitted, The Float. In two interesting links King tells the Adam part of the story in the

Notes to Skeleton Crew (see our Author’s Notes and Introductions to His Own Work chapter, where

he claims to have been fined $250); and, in Someone Shouted J’accuse, deals with his arrest and

subsequent exoneration on a charge of intoxication in the same year as the cones incident.

King closes: ‘And that is how I found myself unemployed and with a criminal record a month

shy of my twenty-third birthday. I began wondering if I was going to turn out to be a Really Bad

Person. Being a Really Bad Person is a shitty job, but somebody has to do it, I reasoned. Perhaps

stealing traffic cones was only my first step downward. I think that was the summer I realized that we

are really not all stars of our own show, and that happy endings—even happy middles, for God’s sake

—are absolutely in doubt.’

This article appeared in the April 22/29, 2002 issue of The New Yorker magazine. Most major

libraries archive this title. Original copies of the magazine can be found online easily and cheaply.

An Interview with Stephen King (June 6, 2002)

This is a humorous self interview posted on King’s official website to update fans: ‘Stephen

King sat down with himself on the evening of June 3, 2002, to discuss his progress on the last three

Dark Tower novels, and to talk a little bit about what readers can expect. And when. The interview

ended with the Red Sox game still in progress, but it can be noted here that they went on to lose. But

then, so did the Yankees.’

He talks about what he has been listening to (Eminem) and what he has been watching

( Unfaithful); then about when each subsequent Dark Tower novel will be published, who is doing the

artwork, and also drops some hints about events in the last three installments.

It appeared on Stephen King’s official web site on June 6, 2002. Older posts are no longer

accessible online but copies circulate in the King comm-unity.

National Book Awards 2003 Acceptance Speech (2003)

This transcription is of the speech King gave at the 2003 National Book Awards on November

19 that year. Several literary critics, including the infamous Harold Bloom had negative things to say

about King receiving the 2003 Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters. He

responded to this during his acceptance speech: ‘There’s been a certain amount of grumbling about

the decision to give the award to me and since so much of this speech has been about my wife, I

wanted to give you her opinion on the subject. She’s read everything I’ve written, making her

something of an expert, and her view of my work is loving but unsentimental. Tabby says I deserve

the medal not just because some good movies were made from my stories or because I’ve provided

high motivational reading material for slow learners, she says I deserve the medal because I am a,

quote, “Damn good writer.”’ Smiles all round!

For years, King has talked about the difference between “popular” and “literary” writing but

never has he been so clear-cut as here, where it matters most. One of the world’s most widely read

authors is receiving one of the most prestigious literary awards and is rightly proud of the fact: ‘I’ve

tried to improve myself with every book and find the truth inside the lie. Sometimes I have succeeded.

I salute the National Book Foundation Board, who took a huge risk in giving this award to a man

many people see as a rich hack. For far too long the so-called popular writers of this country and the

so-called literary writers have stared at each other with animosity and a willful lack of

understanding. This is the way it has always been. Witness my childish resentment of anyone who

ever got a Guggenheim.’

This piece appeared on The National Book Foundation’s official web site in 2003 and is

deserving

of

wider

circulation.

At

the

time

of

writing

it

was

posted

at

http://www.nationalbook.org/nbaacceptspeech_sking.html.

An

excerpt

appeared

as The

Distinguished Contributor in The Stephen King Desk Calendar 2006, an item exclusive to

Doubleday Book Club members that resells on eBay.

Untitled (2003)

This rare piece of a few sentences is a personalized fiftieth birthday greeting from King to

Stephen Jones, a widely respected British horror commentator, writer and anthologist.

It was printed in a limited edition (200 copies) chapbook, The Mammoth Book of Stephen,

edited by Val Edwards, and printed by PS Publishing to celebrate Jones’ 50th birthday in 2003. It

was distributed freely to those attending the celebratory party held at Mike and Paula Marshall

Smith’s house in London. Copies of this item almost never appear for resale. Keep an eye on eBay

and check with specialist King resellers.

Untitled (April 2004)

King drew a headstone for his own grave, with the epitaph: ‘He tried to be better than he was.’

The drawing is signed, ‘Dear Larry: Here’s an epitaph—Stephen King.’

It is printed in a collection, Remember Me When I’m Gone, compiled by Larry King and

published in a 2004 hardcover by Nan A. Talese, an imprint of Doubleday. At the time of writing it is

readily available both in bookstores and online.

Kingdom Come (October 2004)

This two-page essay is about King’s second original series for television, Kingdom Hospital.

He opens with a little medical humor and introduces us to some of the main characters: ‘Call me a

hypochondriac if you want to, but I loved the time I spent in Kingdom Hospital. It was one of the

more satisfying periods of my creative life. If that sounds strange to you, then you probably haven’t

yet met Peter, Dr. Hook, Mrs. Druse, sweet but scary Mary, and her lumbering, magical friend with

the sleek brown fur, the watchful black eyes, and the long, sharp teeth. Once you have, I think you’ll

understand. There’s never been anything like them before on television; there probably won’t be

again.’

The piece closes with King trying to place the mood and feeling of the series in perspective for

the reader/viewer: ‘To the seriously ill and the dying, no world is as surreal as that of modern

medicine and the modern hospital. We have tried to convey some of that surrealism—some of the

fright and some of the dark hilarity—while never losing our main thread: good people, rational

people, coming to grips with the fact that there is another world just below them, a vastly malign

place full of black voices and ungulate spirits. Chief among them is a little girl named Mary, and her

friend, Antubis, “who eats disease...who cures and kills.” Rarest of all in television as it now exists,

the interwoven stories of these characters come to a resolution. I think you’ll enjoy it. I know you’ll

never forget it. And, as always: pleasant dreams.’

This piece only appears in the liner notes to the DVD release of Kingdom Hospital. The entire

first (and only) season was issued by Columbia TriStar Home in October 2004 and should be

available from the usual outlets.

Comments onDesperationfrom Stephen King (February 23, 2005)

In this very brief piece, King states he doesn’t usually comment in advance on film adaptations

of his works but was making an exception here because Mick Garris is involved in the project. As

King fans know, Garris also directed Sleepwalkers, The Stand, Quicksilver Highway (King’s

segment was based on his short story Chattery Teeth ), the miniseries adaptation of The Shining and

Riding the Bullet.

King says of the upcoming TV movie Desperation: ‘One word of warning: this is TV and it’s

impossible to tell in advance how much of a given piece of work will be cut. The version of

Desperation I saw was graphic and very frightening. This may make the network uneasy.’

The piece was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on February 23, 2005. Older posts are

no longer accessible online but copies circulate in the King community.

Stephen King’s Commencement Address (2005)

This transcription is of King’s May 7, 2005 commencement address at his alma mater, the

University of Maine.

He had given commencement addresses in the past (also at the University of Maine, in 1988—

see Stephen King (2000) above; see also Vassar Commencement Speech above), and knows the

important factors that come into play on these occasions: a good theme, humor and so on: ‘Delivering

a good graduation speech is difficult, and delivering a memorable one is close to Mission Impossible.

In striving for eloquence at an important moment of passage like this one, most speakers are able to

assemble only the usual bunch of platitudes—row, don’t drift (that’s for the phys ed majors); a penny

saved is a penny earned (for the economics majors); a good man is hard to find (for the sociology

majors); to be or not to be (for the English majors); and for the superstition majors, like me, step on a

crack, break your mother’s back. Very few people past the age of forty can remember who spoke at

their college commencement exercises, and almost no one can remember who spoke at their high

school graduations. That’s probably a good thing.’

Taking to his theme King exhorts the assembled graduates to ‘Stay in Maine’, in fact four times

in a row: ‘I promised I wouldn’t keep you long, that I’d cut to the chase, and so I will. The place to

start giving back is the place where you are right now. This can be home if you want it to be. That

Maine needs you is something you will hear frequently, because with your new skills, your new

education, your youth, your energy, and your enthusiasm, you are a valuable and sought-after

commodity. You will be wooed enthusiastically. What you will hear less frequently—and need to

hear, I think—is that you need it, as well. If you leave Maine, you’ll miss it. It slips into your mind. It

becomes part of your dreams and inhabits your heart. Five years after going, maybe only three, you’ll

be either planning your first vacation back—they don’t call it Vacationland for nothing—or scheming

a way to get back for good. So why don’t you cut to the chase? Just skip the going-away part and stay

here from the beginning? This is the ground floor. This is the good place. Good to live in, good to

work in, good to raise a family in. Of all the places in the United States, God touches Maine with the

sunlight first each day. Some people think it’s so we’ll get up early. I’ve always thought it’s because

He likes us best.’

A touching piece, putting on public display King’s love of his home State, it was posted on

Stephen King’s official web site in 2005. Again, this is a piece deserving of wider circulation,

especially among King fans, many of whom harbor a secret love of Maine, created through King’s

fiction, and often supplemented by actual visits. An excerpt of the speech was published as Don’t

Leave Home Without ... Well, Just Don’t Leave Home in The Stephen King Desk Calendar 2006, an

item exclusive to Doubleday Book Club members but which appears regularly on eBay.

A Man with a Child’s Embrace of the Questions (May 30, 2005)

This is King’s very fond remembrance of Stephen Jay Gould (who died May 20, 2002), the pre-

eminent American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science. King tells readers

he once wrote ‘a vernacular version of the Book of Genesis (“The Street Kid’s Genesis,” I called it)’

and sent it to Gould, who termed the version ‘a fascinating study of nomenclature.’ He remembers

Gould’s gaze was ‘brilliant and full of unapologetic curiosity. About everything.’

Once, on a flight from Boston with Gould, he [Gould] pointed out the lights of the city and

started a conversation King remembers clearly and poignantly: ‘ “If there was a God,” he said, “he’d

be in that pattern. Think of all the intersecting lives it represents!” “And parallel ones, too,” I replied.

He considered it, then laughed and pushed the forelock off his brow. “Yes,” he said, “All those that

never touch at any point. Those, too.” It wasn’t the last time I saw him, but it’s probably the one I

remember best: discussing the lighted fingerprint of God at 10,000 feet over Boston. He was a man

with a child’s embrace of the questions. I’m glad that my life touched his life and am sorry that his

light has gone out.’

This article, strongly deserving of reprint and a wider audience, was originally published in the

May 30, 2005 edition of The Boston Globe. Microfiche copies are available at larger US libraries;

or a copy can be procured from major Massachusetts libraries, although this could cost up to $15.

The Sideshow Has Left Town (June 24—July 1, 2005)

Pop star Michael Jackson underwent a lengthy trial in 2005 on charges of child molestation. The

way the world media and the American public focused on this trial is best described by the term

‘media circus’. King breathed a sigh of relief when the trial finally concluded (with a ‘not guilty’

verdict).

Entertainment Weekly gave the author space to express his opinion on the matter, and outside

his usual The Pop of King venue at that: ‘It’s finally over. Can I be any clearer about my amazed

disgust at the amount of ink and TV time this show-trial consumed? At the amount of intellectual

house-room it took up? Thank God it’s over, how’s that? On the night of the verdict, the network news

programs devoted a significant percentage of their paltry 30-minute spans first to the verdicts, then to

analysis of the verdicts—as though not guilty needs analysis. The cable-news buzzards (Nancy Grace,

Larry King, Mercedes Colwin, and Pat Lalama of Celebrity Justice to name just a few of the plumper

ones) were all over it. Not-guilty roadkill isn’t quite as tasty—or as bloody—as guilty roadkill, but

it’ll do.’

King ends with weary cynicism: ‘Ah, but it doesn’t matter now. The Pale Peculiarity has floated

out of the courthouse to his black SUV for the last time. The sideshow has moved on...There’ll be

another sideshow eventually, but probably not one this good for a while. The best comment might

have been by a Jackson supporter, responding to a TV reporter after the verdict. Maybe I misheard it,

maybe it was just a particularly apropos malapropism, but it sure sounded like “You guys really hit

the jackal-pot.” Amen, brother.’

This opinion piece appeared in the June 24/July 1, 2005 issue of Entertainment Weekly

magazine; and was reprinted as The Pop of King: The Sideshow Has Left Town in the July 4, 2005

issue of Who, an Australian entertainment magazine (both are owned by Time Warner). Back copies

o f EW are freely available at used magazine sources, on eBay and at King resellers; the Who

appearance is more difficult to secure, but does appear on eBay irregularly.

Continuity Clarification from Stephen (October 7, 2005)

This very short note from King addresses an alleged mistake in his novel, The Colorado Kid,

pointed out in a USA Today review. He claims his placement of a Starbucks in the Denver of 1980 is

not a continuity error but a clue that Dark Tower fans might pick up on. (Neither author of this volume

is convinced, by the way!)

It was posted on Stephen King’s official web site on October 7, 2005. Older posts are no longer

accessible online but copies circulate in the King community.

Untitled (October 15, 2005)

This is a one-paragraph tribute to Ed McBain (a pseudonym of Evan Hunter), following his

death (see also On Ed McBain above). Hunter was a respected friend and fellow writer: ‘He will be

remembered for bringing the so-called “police procedural” into the modern age, but he did so much

more than that. And he was one hell of a nice man. His passing leaves a hole that cannot be filled.’

The tribute appeared in A Celebration of the Life and Achievements of Evan Hunter A.K.A. Ed

McBain, a paperback program booklet for the tribute held at the New York Society of Ethical Culture

in New York, New York on October 15, 2005. The chances of obtaining an actual copy are extremely

slim (keep an eye on eBay), but as of this writing, the text was still available electronically at

http://www.edmcbain.com/.

Message From Stephen RegardingCell(March 24, 2006)

In this very brief post King makes a point about the ending to his most recent novel, Cell. As it

contains a major ‘spoiler’, readers should finish the novel first! It was posted on Stephen King’s

official web site on March 24, 2006. Older posts are no longer accessible online but copies circulate

in the King community.

This chapter, with scores of unrelated messages, essays, posts, tributes and articles is perhaps

the best way for us to end the section of this book covering King’s published non-fiction. It shows

again how broad are his interests, how compelling and consistent his opinions and how much he has

contributed to American culture.

KING’S UNPUBLISHED NON-FICTION

The point to make about my mother is that, enthusiastic American as she was, she was also a

New Englander, a Mainer to be more specific, and she recognized the fact that a young boy’s

course to manhood in America is lined and heaped with all the things that made Pinocchio’s nose

grow long.

— From Culch, an unpublished manuscript.

Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished207 covered over fifty of King’s unpublished fiction

pieces and nearly as many ‘uncollected’ works of fiction, those that have never been included in a

mainstream King volume such as Night Shift. These works include novels, short fiction, poems and

screenplays.

There are at least fifty-one unpublished works of King fiction in existence that may be accessed

by researchers, either in King’s papers held at his alma mater, the University of Maine in Orono, or

through other means. In addition, there are at least another two-dozen pieces of fiction King is known

to have written but which have never surfaced. These are also covered in detail in a chapter of

Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished.

Here, we will concentrate on twenty-four pieces of unpublished non-fiction, from as early as the

1960s and King’s school days.

Why I Love the Beatles Essay

According to Brian Hall, a friend from King’s childhood in Durham, Maine King won a writing

contest and read his ‘Why I Love the Beetles ( sic) Essay’ over the air on a Portland, Maine radio

station. 208 This almost certainly occurred while King was attending Lisbon High School in Lisbon

Falls, Maine (1962-1966).

Culch

This four-page, 2400-word piece was originally intended to appear in a collection of King’s

non-fiction essays, which was to have been dedicated to his mother, Ruth Pillsbury King. It is dated

January 28, 1975 (although a handwritten note across the top of the first page reads ‘Sept. 1975’).

The manuscript is held in Box 1010 of the Stephen Edwin King papers at the Special Collections

Department of the Raymond H. Fogler Library at the University of Maine at Orono. Written

permission is required to access this work. King kindly provided that permission to the authors,

allowing the compilation of the following review.

This endearing essay is part love letter to his mother, part reflection on his youth. It brings to

mind King stories such as The Body, It and Low Men in Yellow Coats, and his near-legendary ability

to put readers back into the mindset of their own childhood.

Hence King opens, ‘My mother, my brother, and I lived in the town of Stratford, Connecticut

from 1954 to 1958, the years I spent from six to ten. These are the years when a child makes his first

serious expeditions into his environment, the first leapings and climbings on the splintery yet

fascinating hurdle between childhood and something else.’ He argues, ‘… And if you are like me, you

will draw your own conclusions at eight, your teacher’s conclusions at eighteen, and your parents’

conclusions at twenty-eight. God help you if your parents’ conclusions are dreck—that’s most of the

trouble with the world today.’ King says he was ‘very lucky. My brother and I had only one parent,

but she was right at least sixty percent of the time. And that’s twenty percent better than the rest of the

human race, I figure. When I say “right”, I don’t necessarily mean right about my brother or right

about me. Or about herself, for that matter—she was very dark on those subjects. / But she was right

about the world.’

To illustrate, King takes us to the Stratford F.W. Woolworths store in 1956 or ’57, where Ruth

King had taken her boys to buy new shoes. When they asked what a certain machine in the store was

she described it as ‘culch’. The X-Ray machine showed the bones of one’s foot inside a shoe,

supposedly indicating the fit was right but, considering it unsafe and no more than a gimmick ‘to draw

the know-nothing trade,’ Mrs. King refused to let the brothers use it.

Of course, boys will be boys, and Dave and Steve King slipped back one Saturday afternoon

(they were supposed to be at the movies showing at the Stratford Theater—‘We would go in, watch

sixteen Warner Brothers cartoons, and come out with our eyes dripping Technicolor and those

talismanic words, “That’s All, Folks!” ringing in our benighted ears. After a Saturday Kiddy Matinee,

the whole world looked like B-movie black-and-white for at least two hours.’ They used the machine

but were left with a sense of ‘unease’ (the machines were indeed unsafe and ‘hustled out of the shoe

stores’ at the end of the decade).

But on to ‘culch’: ‘Culch (pronounced cul-tch) was my mother’s word for junk. This is an exact

translation, but like any translation of slang into straight language, it is flavorless. Culch and junk are

synonymous, but culch has certain overtones—undertones too, for that matter.’ He believes the word

is specific to his family, as fellow Mainer Tabitha King was not familiar with it, nor could he find it

in a dictionary of slang terms. Another such term was ‘… push, which as children was our word for

the evacuation of the bowels—the result of said evacuation was known as pushings.’

He provides a lengthy list of items that are culch, from penny candy through discarded cans on

the side of the road and on to the Johnny Carson Show, reruns of certain sitcoms, the ‘movies of

Raquel Welch’, ‘the pardon of Richard Nixon’, ‘Richard Nixon’ and re-heated pizza.

He believes that of all the things his mother gave him the word ‘culch’ has proved to be ‘one of

the most enduring and most useful.’ King declaims that, despite the fact his mother was a Republican

who ‘believed in America and the American system’ (‘so do I’), he had become a Democrat, at least

partly on the basis that ‘most of the things the Republicans stand for are culch. On the other hand, only

half the things the Democrats stand for are culch.’

‘The point to make about my mother is that, enthusiastic American as she was, she was also a

New Englander, a Mainer to be more specific, and she recognized the fact that a young boy’s course

to manhood in America is lined and heaped with all the things that made Pinocchio’s nose grow long.

In order to grow up satisfactorily while in such a culture (culch-ure?), some yardstick word was

necessary. Shoes were necessary. Futuristic X-ray machines, however, were not.’ King says Ruth

Pillsbury King understood ‘the attraction of culch, its necessity even.’ While she ‘damned’

Halloween candy she allowed her sons to collect it; she thought most movies were culch, especially

the violent ones, ‘but she allowed me to go and see such things...because she sensed somehow that for

me it was necessary.’

It is a shame the proposed book of essays was never completed, as this was King’s closing

paragraph: ‘So this book of essays, if it is ever completed, is lovingly dedicated to my mother, who

died of cancer some fourteen months ago. I think much of it would have amused her. More important

to me, I think she would have agreed with much of the substance, if not always with the inelegant

mode of expression. So this is for you, mom. At least sixty percent of it.’

Culch is a valuable, well-written, almost elegiac piece and it is to be hoped that one day King

might allow its publication.

Your Kind of Place

This four-page, 2200-word piece was also intended to appear in the collection of King’s non-

fiction essays that was to be dedicated to his mother. A handwritten note across the top of the first

page reads ‘1975’. The manuscript is held in Box 1010 of the Stephen Edwin King papers at the

Special Collections Department of the Raymond H. Fogler Library at the University of Maine at

Orono. Written permission is required to access this work. King kindly provided that permission to

the authors, allowing the compilation of the following review.

Without once using the word ‘culch’ (see above for our review of King’s essay, Culch) King

describes the history of Ray Kroc, the McDonald’s fast-food chain and his own family’s passion for

their product (‘God help me, I love it.’)

After a review of both the founding of the McDonald’s brand by Richard and Maurice

McDonald and Ray Kroc’s initial success (in the milkshake mixer business) King relates the

fortuitous discovery by Kroc of the McDonald’s system and his purchase of franchise rights. Although

the brothers finally sold out to Kroc they retained the original San Bernardino, California store, so:

‘Kroc opened his own McDonald’s right across the street. Since he had bought their name, the

McDonald brothers were forced to rename their own restaurant. They called it Mac’s Place. Kroc ran

them out of business, and the McDonalds, Richard and Maurice, retired to Bedford, New Hampshire.’

King continues to describe the massive success of the corporation (with a number of side and snide

remarks about the varying US Presidents over the period described) and poses this ironic question:

‘If there had been a McDonald’s in Mei Lai, would those dead villagers be alive today? Would

Lieutenant Calley and his men have grinned, lowered their weapons, and decided that these particular

villagers deserved a break that day?’

King describes his family’s love affair with the brand and its fare: ‘I love McDonald’s; I am

hopeless. My children love it. Even my wife, who is cynical about many things, will not withhold

McDonald’s from her children...One morning not long ago, my wife had a painful wisdom tooth

extraction. The tooth’s roots were curved, the nerve was impacted, it was an all-round bitch. Ten

shots of novocaine ( sic). No, she couldn’t eat. She couldn’t even talk. Her poor face looked as if Joe

Frazier had taken a swing at it. I took the kids to McDonald’s, of course. She came along to have a

milkshake and ended up picking a double cheeseburger apart piecemeal. She ate it all, too. And said

it tasted wonderful. The shake just wasn’t enough.’

Of interest is that King closes with an environmentally conscious plea, noting the massive

amount of packaging thrown away (or sometimes recycled) from each McDonald’s meal. Times have

changed and the company has significantly reduced packaging and decreased its environmental impact

but this point still has resonance: ‘The beer can beside the road, America’s symbol of litter for many

years, now has a partner: the blowing yellow hamburger wrapper, branded with the golden arches,

which you see lying in the weeds or fluttering on the soft shoulder of the highway.’

Unfortunately this piece is now dated (in 1975 the McDonald’s background story was little

known, but the bestselling McDonald’s: Behind The Arches by John F Love and Grinding It Out:

The Making Of McDonald’s by Kroc himself, along with myriad business magazine articles have

solved that issue) and certain critics might like to make fun of both King and his family’s simple joy

in consuming McDonald’s products. It is therefore very unlikely this essay will ever be published.

That Stuff

The manuscript for this six-page, double-spaced essay is held in Box 2702 of the Stephen Edwin

King papers at the Special Collections Department of the Raymond H. Fogler Library at the

University of Maine at Orono. The public can therefore read it by attending the Library and requesting

the Box, which is not restricted. It was almost certainly written in 1979209; and is headed ‘C/O Kirby

McCauley Literary Agency’ (Kirby McCauley was King’s agent from 1977 to 1988).

King describes ‘That Stuff’ as ‘the constant questioning’ of authors about why they write their

genre material: ‘Just lately, I find myself asked That Stuff more and more...And then there are all the

questions of social taste, of moral taste, and of course, that morbid curiosity about what’s going down

the public gullet and why.’

He is willing to talk about That Stuff—an interviewer once asked if his writing was ‘a moral

way of living’, given that he’d agreed he was ‘feeding off the fears of all the people who read my

books.’ King’s answer is that his work serves a need: ‘the idea of catharsis is as new as the

psychiatrist’s couch and as old as the idea of drama...itself, and for a very good reason—if you deny

the existence of such a thing, it seems to me you deny the morality of all dramatic fiction, from The

Iliad to James Joyce’s Ulysses.’ He even argues the ‘denial of the cathartic idea pulls the entire

foundation from beneath the idea of fiction....’

According to King this ‘works for writer’ as well as reader: ‘I never met a horror writer that

was not tormented by fears or at least partially enslaved by his or her own peculiarities and

fantasies’—only poets beat horror writers for ‘downright weirdness’; the writer ‘begins with That

Stuff in an effort to save his own sanity.’ In the end, King’s aim as an author is to ‘get the reader. I

want to lay hands upon him...I want you to burn your husband’s supper because you gotta find out

what happens next...My goals are humble yet ambitious; basically I want to scare the living Jesus out

of you.’

Refusing to make the case for the morality of horror fiction, he says he ‘will speak briefly about

honor’: ‘at its most fundamental level, all of That Stuff is an honorable wager between Constant

Reader and Constant Writer...,” with the Reader wanting to be scared, and the Writer trying to

deliver.

In closing, King argues that ‘the history of the great American novel has been (with the exception

of a few cases which may or may not prove the rule) the suspense novel’, with The Scarlet Letter,

Moby-Dick and An American Tragedy as examples; and more modern efforts, such as Catch-22

(‘will Yossarian actually survive World War II intact?’), The Catcher in the Rye (‘will Holden

Caulfield survive New York City intact?’) and The World According to Garp (‘can Garp actually get

out of this crazyhouse alive? It turns out he can’t’). He contends that ‘the horror novel...is the

suspense novel stripped of its Dead Weight’, constantly groping for the Reader’s ‘emotional pressure

points and atavistic loopholes’.

An interesting yet somehow disengaged essay, That Stuff is now dated and would require

rework before King might consider publication. The themes contained are well-expressed elsewhere

in his non-fiction canon, so there seems little chance it will appear in print.

Why I Blurb Books

The manuscript for this nine-page double-spaced essay is held in Box 2702 of the Stephen

Edwin King papers at the Special Collections Department of the Raymond H. Fogler Library at the

University of Maine at Orono. The public can therefore read it by attending the Library and requesting

the Box, which is not restricted. It is unclear when the piece was written, although it seems most

likely to be about 1981. It is headed ‘C/O Kirby McCauley Literary Agency’.

King had been warned about blurbing by a friend in a University English Department and another

in the publishing business: ‘ “Quit it, Steve,” he said. “You’re getting a name.” / What sort of name? I

asked. “Slut,” he said.”’ A reporter insultingly asked him if he’d ‘really read all the books I had

blurbed’, implying King was ‘accepting bribes’.

He provides a definition of the blurb: ‘...a piece of advertising copy for a book written for free

by another writer.’ Describing how blurbs are solicited he also puts the arguments for and against

their effectiveness. Analyzing why authors provide blurbs at all, he says he can only speak for

himself, arguing that ‘a good novel is something to shout about...There just aren’t many of them

around’ (according to his count he’d blurbed only 27 of the 400 or so he’d been sent over the years—

and four of those were by one author—Peter Straub210); and states, ‘I like books’, so much so he’s

willing to give most some sort of a chance and will read fifty pages of ‘even the worst’.

King says the book he was sent to blurb that most gave him ‘that feeling of having my socks

blown off’ was Straub’s Ghost Story, the opening of which Tabitha King read aloud during a car trip:

‘My wife and I spent the rest of the day raping that manuscript, wallowing in it.’

Overall the piece is a little disappointing, written without King’s normal clarity. While his

position is clear (after all this is an opinion piece) some of the arguments need work. In the unlikely

event King decided to publish the essay he would likely undertake a significant, if not total, rewrite.

The Dark Tower: A Cautionary Tale

This is a very obscure piece, apparently written in 1983211. Almost all that is known about it

comes from Douglas Winter’s early King biography, Stephen King: The Art of Darkness. The

following quotes are from the 1986 ‘Revised and Expanded’ version.

Winter quotes from the manuscript in Chapter Two of his book: ‘I ... packed all my worldly

possessions into a pair of shopping bags, moved into a sleazy Orono, Maine apartment and started

what I hoped would be a very long fantasy novel called The Dark Tower . I had recently seen a

bigger-than-life Sergio Leone western, and it had gotten me wondering what would happen if you

brought two very distinct genres together: heroic fantasy and the Western ...’ 212 Also, footnote 44 to

Chapter Two reads: ‘ “The Dark Tower: A Cautionary Tale”, unpublished manuscript, p1.’213

Footnote 29 to Chapter Six reads: ‘ The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger (West Kingston, RI:

Donald M. Grant, 1982). The original printing of this book was limited to a ten-thousand-copy first

edition, plus a small deluxe, signed and slipcased edition; it went quietly and quickly out of print.

When the book was listed along with Stephen King’s other works in the front matter of Pet Sematary,

Donald M. Grant, King, and all of King’s publishers were besieged with letters and calls from

readers attempting to obtain copies. The demand was so great that a special edition was printed in

1984; it is now also out of print. King has written about the experience in the as-yet unpublished

essay “The Dark Tower: A Cautionary Tale”. 214

It may well be that this essay was a precursor to King’s The Politics of Limited Editions,

published in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter for June and July 1985.

Title Unknown

George Beahm, in his seminal work, The Stephen King Story215, tells of an unpublished speech

in these terms: ‘[A book about King] Dr Seuss and the Two Facesof Fantasy...has been cancelled. It

would have reprinted the speech King gave at the Fifth Annual Swanncon in 1984 along with the

transcript of a speech he intended to give, with commentary by Carroll F. Terrell.’ Terrell, one of

King’s professors at the University of Maine and author of Stephen King: Man and Artist216, stated

the speech would appear in another, ‘as yet untitled book’, but it never has.

A speech King did deliver, to the International Conference on the Fantastic in the Arts, on March

24, 1984 in Boca Raton, Florida, was published, also as Dr. Seuss and the Two Faces of Fantasy , in

Fantasy Review for June 1984 (see our Miscellany chapter).

Foreword (toGlory Days)

This piece was intended to be used in Dave Marsh’s217 Glory Days, a biography of Bruce

Springsteen, but was submitted too late for publication (although a revised edition of the book

appeared nearly a decade later there was still no sign of King’s piece). A King collector owns the

original two-page handwritten manuscript, on which a handwritten note appears indicating it was

written in New York City on April 14, 1987.

King is effusive about both Dave Marsh (‘… rock’s best writer...just happened to be on

board...to serve as Springsteen’s Boswell’); and Springsteen (‘...a cultural phenomenon of the

’80s...Springsteen is a genuine artist, one who has kept rock and roll alive, who has changed the

music for the better, and who may be its last great voice as the generation that created it moves

inexorably towards Social Security.’)

He concludes the book ‘is the remarkable and remarkably entertaining chronicle of a remarkable

man—a man who may epitomize all that Americans were and could yet be. It works on every level.

Good golly, Miss Molly, what a book.’

Lists That Matter

Lists That Matter was a series of five-minute radio spots recorded for King’s Bangor, Maine

radio station, WZON in 1985218. King’s sister-in-law and editor of Castle Rock: The Stephen King

Newsletter, Stephanie Leonard, had this to say about the columns in the August 1985 issue: ‘Also note

in this issue the first of a number of SK’s “Lists That Matter.” The “Lists” were first written and aired

on WZON in March and April of this year. Stephen graciously consented to allow Castle Rock to

print a number of the “Lists” in this and future issues.’

Mark Wellman of WZON told Tyson Blue for his The Unseen King: “The Lists That Matter

were funny, whimsical little shows that were intended primarily as light entertainment for the folks in

Bangor...Basically, they were a way of attracting listeners to the station.’ 219 Wellman also told Blue

that at one point it was intended to syndicate the columns but they were far too long, at five minutes.

Blue also says: ‘About twenty shows were recorded—although some are continuations of preceding

lists—and aired....’

The following ‘Lists’ were published in 1985 and 1986: Lists That Matter and Lists That

Matter (No. 14) 220, Lists That Matter (Number 7) and Lists That Matter (Number 8)221; all in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter; and His Creepiest Movies, in USA Today (see our

Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television chapter). As five of the pieces appeared in print it

seems that some fifteen remain unpublished. Nothing appears to be known about the subject matter of

these ‘lost’ pieces.

Untitled (forThe Pop of King)

In an interview with Mark Hinson, published at www.tallahassee.com (the website of the

Tallahassee Democrat )222 King revealed that Entertainment Weekly had only knocked back one of

his The Pop of King columns. From Hinson’s report we find, ‘“The only column they ever bounced

was one I wrote about the whole Tom Cruise-Scientology thing a little while back,” King said. “No

one really knows what Scientology is, so I decided to explain it for people. It’s no crazier than

Mormonism or several other religions I could name ... As it turned out that there’s been a running

lawsuit between L. Ron Hubbard and Time Warner, the company that owns the magazine, since 1992.

I didn’t know that but the lawyers sure did.” / The magazine wasn’t going to slap that hornet’s nest

again. They expected King to quit over the column kill. / He didn’t. / “I just did a different column. In

fact, I think it was the one I did about waiting in movie lines and it turned out to be one of my most

popular columns. ... So, a little ego deflation is not a bad thing.”’

So, that’s the little we know of King’s unpublished non-fiction. As with his fiction, there are

sure to be many more pieces he began and abandoned; or that were completed but have not been

published. As there is nowhere near the focus on these ‘lost’ works as there is with his fiction, they

will come to light much less regularly, and will generally carry less importance in his canon.

However, they are part of the master’s overall body of work and, as we can see with Culch and Why

I Blurb Books, are often of no less importance than those that have been published.

ADDENDUM

The following pieces, listed chronologically, came to our notice or were published between

completion of the initial manuscript for this book and October 6, 2006. Each item is briefly described

and citations provided.

Random Notes: An Interview With Stephen King (August 1974)

Cavalier magazine had King interview himself in a slightly more than one-page piece for their

August 1974 edition (which also carried the first appearance of the revised version of Night Surf).

‘Actually, I’ve known the bearded, twenty-six-year-old King all of my life—you might say we grew

up together…King spoke easily to me, indeed, almost as though he were talking to himself.’ The

interviewee talks of his early relationship with Cavalier, a little about the recently published Carrie,

and of writers he admired at that time.

This is the first of three known ‘self interviews’, the others appearing in Writer’s Digest ( The

Writing Life: An Interview with Myself) in 1979, and An Interview with Stephen King at his official

web site in 2002. This edition of Cavalier may be secured at ebay or through King resellers at prices

approaching $100 per copy.

Cavalier (August, 1974): 6, 7.

King Bookmark (April-May 1987)

The April/May 1987 edition of Castle Rock carried a letter to the editor from Gary Buscombe in

which he writes that his bookmark when reading King books is a postcard he received from the

author. He provides the full text from the typewritten card, dated February 25, 1983, in which King

mentions Buscombe’s home state: ‘I get to “the land of fruit and nuts”, as we Yankees call California

(just kidding you, I like it a lot, and I know MOST Californians are straight, good types)…’ King also

notes he is working on ‘ TheTalisman and gotta get back at it…’ Copies of Castle Rock may be

easily secured from King resellers.

Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter (April/May, 1987): 12.

Untitled (Letter) (Spring 1989)

The editors of Midnight Graffiti magazine published the text of a short letter from King offering

them the opportunity to publish his short story Rainy Season for the first time. King says the story is

‘pretty gross’. The magazine carried the story and a review of My Pretty Pony, including a lengthy

excerpt; and can be purchased from King resellers with ease.

Midnight Graffiti (Spring, 1989): 4.

Payment for Stephen King’s The Plant, Installment Four Has Been Sent (October 2000)

Subscribers to Installment Four of the electronic version of The Plant via amazon.com received

an email confirming their payment. Included in the email was this message: ‘Thanks for reading my

story, thanks for your honesty, and thanks for helping us change the face of publishing! / Stephen King’

Email from Amazon.com Payments, October 2000: no pagination

Payment for Stephen King’s The Plant, Installment Five Has Been Sent (November 2000)

Subscribers to Installment Five of the electronic version of The Plant via amazon.com received

an e-mail confirming their payment. Included in the e-mail was the same message as for the previous

installment.

E-mail from Amazon.com Payments (November, 2000): no pagination

Dear Parents (August 2001)

In August 2001 Stephen and Tabitha King posted a three-paragraph message on Simon &

Schuster’s Stephen King bulletin board at www.simonsays.com. Strangely, the piece says the Kings

‘join First Lady Herman, Maine’s Family Literary Task Force, and the Verizon Foundation in

welcoming your child to Kindergarten.’ It goes on to encourage parents to read with and to their

children daily. We speculate this was a message from the Kings first published elsewhere and

reposted on the bulletin board, not necessarily by the two authors.

The post has been deleted from the bulletin board but readers seeking a copy may find it at

www.liljas-library.com.

www.simonsays.com (Stephen King Bulletin Board) (August. 2001): no pagination

Stephen King’s Halloween Picks (October 2003)

The Jacob Burns Film Center of Pleasantville, New York’s calendar for October 2003 included

this piece, which is subtitled ‘In his own words’ and is introduced: ‘When Stephen King came to

JBFC last year and offered to program Halloween week, we jumped at the opportunity. We’ve waited

all year for him to reveal his picks … and here they are.’ King selected six movies and provides

notes for each. The movies are: Cujo (King attended that screening and discussed horror movies

afterward with New York Times critic Janet Maslin in a benefit for the Center); The Texas Chainsaw

Massacre; Night of the Living Dead; The Snake Pit; The Last Man on Earth; and The Changeling.

Thanks go to Michael Coty for bringing this item to our attention (along with some others in this

Addendum section).

October 2003 Calendar. Pleasantville, New York: Jacob Burns Film Center, (October 2003):

8, 9.

Kingdom Hospital a Huge Success (March 8, 2004)

In an e-mail from Stephen King to newsletter subscribers at his official web site, he notes the

‘premiere of Kingdom Hospital did better than any dramatic ABC series in over 5 years!’ He signs

off, ‘Best wishes, / Stephen King.’

StephenKing.com Newsletter (via e-mail) (March 8, 2004): no pagination.

Tune In Tonight (March 17, 2004)

Another email from Stephen King to newsletter subscribers at his official website, this time

encouraging them to start watching Kingdom Hospital at the second episode.

StephenKing.com Newsletter (via e-mail) (March 17, 2004): no pagination.

Kingdom Hospital Update (March 30, 2004)

This e-mail to newsletter subscribers informs them Kingdom Hospital is being moved to a

different day and time.

StephenKing.com Newsletter (via email) (March 30, 2004): no pagination.

Kingdom Hospital (April 2, 2004)

King is angry: ‘ABC may understand what they are doing with the schedule for Kingdom

Hospital; I do not’; and advises the latest programming changes.

StephenKing.com Newsletter (via email) (April 2, 2004): no pagination.

Kingdom Hospital—Final Four (May 15, 2004)

King tells his newsletter subscribers what the last four episodes of Kingdom Hospital will be

and when they will air.

StephenKing.com Newsletter (via email) (May 15, 2004): no pagination.

The Official Stephen King Newsletter (December 21, 2004)

King has this to say to his newsletter subscribers: ‘Thanks for all your support. It’s been a great

year!’ Cover shots of The Dark Tower, The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon: A Pop Up Book , Faithful

and a Kingdom Hospital shot precede the closing line, ‘With thanks and best wishes for a healthy,

happy New Year! / Stephen King’.

StephenKing.com Newsletter (via e-mail) (December 21, 2004): no pagination.

The Pop of King: My Morning People (April 28/May 5, 2006)

Undoubtedly one of the lesser of these columns, in which King declares his early morning TV

viewing is taken up by Robin Meade’s Robin & Company on CNN’s Headline News Channel.

Entertainment Weekly No. 874/5 (April 28/May 5, 2006): 144.

The Pop of King: Summer Hits and Misses (May 12, 2006)

King returns to predicting the coming summer’s hit (and miss) movies, this time providing Shane

Leonard’s predictions (see The Pop of King for 3 June 2005) only, with just one sleeper offering by

the author, Snakes on a Plane. Likely hits: The Da Vinci Code, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead

Man’s Chest , X-Men: The Last Stand, Poseidon and Mission: Impossible III. Likely flops: The

Omen, An American Haunting, The Break-Up, Clerks II and Lady in the Water . Leonard’s sleepers:

Nacho Libre and Monster House.

1. Entertainment Weekly No. 876 (May 12, 2006): 90.

2. Who [magazine; Australia] as “Hits and Misses” (May 22, 2006): 85.

Dear Web Site Visitors (May 18, 2006)

Here, the author is ‘bitter’ with ABC-TV for scheduling the movie version of Desperation

(‘probably the best TV movie to be made from my work’) against the American Idol Finals: ‘One can

truly say with friends like this, one doesn’t need enemas.’ He then jokes around with visitors to his

official web site but he is clearly outraged yet again by an ABC decision (one wonders why he

doesn’t boycott them and move to HBO?)

This piece was ‘Reprinted by permission of stephenking.com’ in email from Cemetery Dance

Publications to subscribers of their Stephen King Newsletter the following week.

www.stephenking.com News Post (May 18, 2006): no pagination.

Stephen King Newsletter [Cemetery Dance Publications] (May 24, 2006): no pagination.

Authors Share Faves (May 25, 2006)

The national newspaper USA Today asked a number of writers what they would be reading in

the summer. King nominated eight books, including older works by Herman Melville and Robert Penn

Warren, and those by his regular favorites Michael Connelly and Donald E. Westlake. Asked ‘Why

these authors?’: ‘Because they’re good!’

USA Today (May 25, 2006): 5D.

The Pop of King: Summer Book Awards (June 2, 2006)

King launches the ‘First Annual Stephen King Summer Book Awards’ with a series of Bests,

such as ‘Best Movie Tie-In’ ( All the King’s Men ), concluding with ‘The Book of the Summer’ –

Scott Smith’s The Ruins (‘Smith intends to scare the bejabbers out of you, and succeeds.’) When

reprinted in Australia’s Who magazine all references to ‘Summer’, including such terms as ‘pre-

beach visits to the bookshop’ were removed or altered.

Entertainment Weekly No. 879 (June 2, 2006): 92.

Revised in Who [magazine; Australia] as “My First Annual Book Awards” (June 19, 2006): 85.

Volume 6—Tabitha’s Book Release (A Message from Stephen) (June 3, 2006)

On June 3, 2006 subscribers to King’s official website newsletter received this message:

‘CANDLES BURNING, a unique collaboration between Tabitha King (my wife) and the late Michael

McDowell (creator of BEETLEJUICE and screenwriter of THINNER, not to mention the frightening

BLACKWATER series), is available in bookstores now. This one will put the ice in your summer

drink—and I’d be telling you that even if the lady in question WASN’T my wife! / Steve’.

StephenKing.com Newsletter (via e-mail) (June 3, 2006): no pagination.

A little message from Stephen (June 14, 2006)

On June 3, 2006 subscribers to King’s official website newsletter received this message:

‘CANDLES BURNING, a unique collaboration between Tabitha King (my wife) and the late Michael

McDowell (creator of BEETLEJUICE and screenwriter of THINNER, not to mention the frightening

BLACKWATER series), is available in bookstores now. This one will put the ice in your summer

drink—and I’d be telling you that even if the lady in question WASN’T my wife! / Steve’

www.stephenking.com News Post (June 14, 2006): no pagination

The Pop of King: Ready or Not (16 June 2006)

The very first ‘The Pop of King’ column, in August, 2003 was subtitled, ‘Ready or Not, Here I

Come’.

Four months after seeing the movie United 93 King is ‘angry’ over the vast majority of the

reviews, of which ‘all but two or three raised the question of whether or not it was still “too soon” to

make a movie about the events of 9/11’ and conclude that would-be viewers should approach with

caution. He feels such reviews ‘infantilise the American public’.

Entertainment Weekly No. 882 (June 16, 2006): 82.

Who [magazine; Australia] (August 28, 2006): 85.

Guest Reviewer: Stephen King (June 2006)

In mid-June 2006 an unheralded review by King of Scott Smith’s upcoming novel The Ruins

appeared at that book’s page on www.amazon.com. The reviewer says boldly the book ‘is going to

be America’s literary shock-show this summer, doing for vacations in Mexico what Jaws did for

beach weekends on Long Island.’

www.amazon.com (June 2006): no pagination.

The Pop of King: The Princess and the Paparazzi(14 July 2006)

King gives his comments on and feelings about ‘blouse-y, gum-chewing matron’ and pop

celebrity Britney Spears’ interview with Matt Lauer on NBC’s Dateline; all the while handing the

paparazzi their just due.

Entertainment Weekly No. 886 (July 14, 2006): 88.

Who [magazine; Australia] (July 31, 2006): 89.

The Pop of King: The Terror Diet(August 4, 2006)

King is resigned to being ‘the Horror Guy’ but ‘I wonder from time to time (don’t you dare

laugh) what my life would have been like if I’d decided to write about food instead of monsters.’

Considering cookbooks ‘too disciplined’ he hits upon the success of diet books and wonders why

there is no diet ‘ that tried to scare people thin’ – his ‘Terror Diet’. The rules include not eating beef,

pork, chicken and salad, or drinking milk or water (with scary reasons provided).

Entertainment Weekly No. 889 (August 4, 2006): 88.

Who [magazine; Australia] (August 14, 2006): 85.

Untitled (September 2006)

This single-paragraph piece, printed in the Book-of-the Month Club’s The Stephen King Desk

Calendar 2007 appears to have been extracted from an interview King gave before ‘my forthcoming

book’ Pet Sematary was published.

The Stephen King Desk Calendar 2007. New York: Madison Park Press, (September) 2006: p.

March 1-4.

The Pop of King: Setting Off A ‘Wire’ Alarm(September 1, 2006)

Here King praises HBO’s upcoming Season 4 of The Wire , ‘a dazzling three-ring circus of

interwoven plot threads’, including a gang war, the victims of which are stored in a decaying row

house. King is drawn to detective Lester Freamon’s simple statement: ‘ “This is a tomb,” he says.’

And to the fact that the program is ‘smart too, but never too smart for its own good.’ He says, the

show ‘has made the final jump form great TV to classic TV – put it right up there with The Prisoner

and the first three seasons of The Sopranos.’

Entertainment Weekly No. 894 (September 1, 2006): 86.

The Wonder Of It All (September 29, 2006)

In this two-page piece (which was not published as a The Pop of King column) King writes he

‘had the pleasure of a most excellent roundtable discussion with the exec producers of Lost’, the hit

TV program King strongly admires. We learn almost nothing about the upcoming third season (no

surprise there) but King himself had ‘a hell of a good time. Writers rarely get a chance to sit around

and shoot the bull about what they do … This was a rare opportunity to relax and do just that.’

Entertainment Weekly No. 899 (29 September, 2006): 22-23 (of pull-out section).

Author’s Statement (October 2006)

King says ‘there really is a pool where we – and in this case I mean the vast majority of readers

and writers—go down to drink and cast our nets.’ He then lists a number of the stories and songs that

he wishes to acknowledge. He thanks Tabitha (to whom the book is dedicated): ‘She’s not Lisey

Landon, nor are her sisters Lisey’s sisters, but I have enjoyed watching Tabitha, Margaret, Anne,

Catherine, Stephanie, and Marcella do the sister thing for the last thirty years.’

The final acknowledgement is to Burton Hatlen, ‘…the greatest English teacher I ever had. It

was he who first showed me the way to the pool, which he called “the language-pool, the myth-pool,

where we all go down to drink.”’

Lisey’s Story, by Stephen King. New York, NY: Scribner (October, 2006): p. 511-512.

Remembering Charlie (October 2006)

A sad farewell to speculative fiction anthologist, Charles L. Grant, in which King remembers

Grant’s ‘kindness’ in welcoming him to the fold at the 1979 World Fantasy Convention; and recalls

the ‘gentleman’ always signed his correspondence, ‘ Peace, Charlie’, which is now what he wishes

his friend.

Locus magazine (October, 2006): 80-81.

The Writing Life (October 1, 2006)

King uses a scene from Lisey’s Story to bring up the subject of what it is to live as a writer,

although: ‘Lisey could probably have done a better job on that subject than her late husband…Most

writers are actually pretty punk when it comes to explicating what they do or how it makes them

feel....’ A fascinating take by one of the world’s greatest storytellers on the process behind actually

delivering a tale (and the ‘creature’, as he calls his muse), this is one well worth a reprint—you’ll

love his answer to the question of whether writing classes are a help!

The Washington Post Book World (October 1, 2006): 10.

The Pop of King: Graceless and Tasteless(October 6, 2006)

In an unusually aggressive mood, King lambasts CNN anchor Nancy Grace, whose controversial

style King characterises as ‘ugly and shameful. As journalism, it’s immoral, and as entertainment, it’s

outright pimpery. Thirty-five years ago I wrote a novel called The Running Man, in which viewers

watched fugitives run until they were executed on national television. I never expected to see anything

remotely like it for real, but I never imagined Nancy Grace…and I’ve got a pretty nasty imagination.’

Entertainment Weekly No. 900 (October 6, 2006): 86.

A Final Argument

Some authors ‘just’ write fiction; some great writers only work in the realm of non-fiction. We

are lucky that Stephen King, son of Ruth, husband of Tabitha, parent, grandparent and writer, chooses

to do both.

He once wrote, ‘I think that the real truth of fiction is that fiction is the truth; moral fiction is the

truth inside the lie. And if you lie in your fiction, you are immoral and have no business writing at

all.’ This is no less the case for King when penning non-fiction, and has proved to be so in all he has

written over four decades and more. We might therefore misquote the scribbler from Maine thus:

‘Non-fiction is truth; moral non-fiction exposes the truth, or the lie. And if you lie in your non-fiction,

you are immoral and have no business writing at all.’

In making his point, King exposes one of the great themes of his canon—morality. Throughout his

career King has proven to be a truly moral writer—exposing issues of good and evil (the White vs.

the Red, if you will); faith; cowardice and bravery; and the ills of child abuse, spousal abuse, racism

and intolerance in all forms.

Stephen King’s non-fiction, as do his stories and characters, simply ask of the Constant Reader

that we each take a stand.

Throughout this book we have dealt with King’s influence on American culture. During the early

decades of his life Stephen King was profoundly influenced by that culture—through the printed

word, radio, television, the movies and small-town life in a relatively poor backwater State. On

campus he found new influences, profoundly changing his views in a number of areas. And, from the

time he became a ‘brand-name’ author in the mid-1970s, he began to influence the culture, through his

characters, his tales and force of his intellect. At the turn of the last century, with the author just past

his own half-century mark, few people in the English-speaking world (and well beyond) had not

heard of a girl named Carrie, a dog called Cujo or enjoyed movies such as The Shining, The

Shawshank Redemption or The Green Mile.

The ever-faster growth of globalization and massive change in technologies (DVD, Pay-TV, the

Internet to name a few) has allowed an even stronger American flavor to invade (or ‘pollute’, as the

French would have it) both other English-speaking societies, and those based on other languages and

cultural backgrounds.

The whole concept of a King-isation of world culture, through his tales (whether in text or

moving picture form), would certainly horrify the master storyteller. But, it has certainly occurred to

varying degrees.

King has, most likely without ongoing intent, created something of a balance to his influence in

the world of entertainment through the extensive canon of non-fiction summarized in this volume. We

can understand to a degree his influences, motivations, opinions, foibles, skills, modes of relaxation,

sense of humor, love for his family, home State and country. Above all we see his deep and abiding

respect for the value, power and craft of story telling, whether genre or not.

Writing is at the core of Stephen King. We have seen in this review that he has published around

600 pieces of non-fiction; these supplement his better known body of work—the 200-odd individual

fictional tales that most clearly mark his influence. It is clear he will continue to produce both fiction

(having recently acknowledged he has more novels in him) and non-fiction (whether contracted gigs

like The Pop of King, or more casual contributions).

Constant Readers can therefore look forward to more of that unique King humor, advice on

writing, commentary on genre fiction, book and movie reviews, some political shots, notes on

baseball, personal stories and the further introduction of great books and writers.

FOOTNOTES:

1 Among notable books to include limited reviews of King’s non-fiction are Tyson Blue’s The

Unseen King (Starmont, 1989) and Stephen Spignesi’s The Lost Work of Stephen King (Birch Lane

Press, 1998); and a significant non-fiction Bibliography appeared in Michael Collings’ Horror

Plum’d (Overlook Connection Press, 2002).

2 Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Abingdon, Maryland: Cemetery

Dance Publications, 2006.

3 The Complete Guide to the Works of Stephen King by Rocky Wood, David Rawsthorne and

Norma Blackburn, 2003 and 2004. Copies are available from www.cemeterydance.com,

www.horrorking.com, www.bettsbooks.com and www.shocklines.com among other distributors.

4 Stephen King: A Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most Popular Author by Justin

Brooks. Abingdon, MD: Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

5 The Lost Work of Stephen King by Stephen Spignesi. Secaucus, New Jersey: Birch Lane

Press, 1998, page 232.

6 The eight parts appeared in The Summer Campus for June 11, June 18, June 25, July 2, July 9,

July 23, July 30 and August 6, 1970, all after King graduated.

7 Stephen King: From A to Z by George Beahm. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing,

1998, page 118.

8 Ibid, page 81. Beahm also references the December 6, 1990 Bangor Daily News article on the

controversy.

9 Stephen King: A Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most Popular Author by Justin Brooks.

Abingdon, Maryland: Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

10 In 1988 or 1989, according to Stephen Spignesi in The Lost Work of Stephen King .

Secaucus, NJ: Birch Lane Press, 1998. page 30.

11 Hussey would star as Audra Phillips Denbrough in the 1990 TV adaptation of King’s novel

It. One wonders if King could have dreamed such a thing in the winter of 1969 as he sat in Bangor’s

Westgate Cinema.

1 2 The Stephen King Phenomenon by Michael R. Collings. Mercer Island, Washington:

Starmont House, Inc., 1987, page 108. Collings reviews each Garbage Truck column in chapter six

of this book.

13 Bright, a former reporter, editor, and agriculture columnist for the Bangor Daily News, is

now a computer installation specialist and lives with his second wife, political activist Jean Hay

Bright, in Dixmont, ME. In Red Sox fan crows about team, but may have to eat chicken ( Bangor

Daily News, May 17-18, 1988) King notes ‘I was a UMO Campus columnist who worked for both

Bob and David Bright.’ The Bob is Bob Haskell (see our Baseball chapter for more detail).

1 4 The Stephen King Phenomenon by Michael R. Collings. Mercer Island, WA: Starmont

House, Inc., 1987, page 109.

1 5 The Lost Work of Stephen King by Stephen Spignesi. Secaucus, New Jersey: Birch Lane

Press, 1998, page 36. Spignesi reviews each Garbage Truck column in chapter eight of this book.

16 Of course, Hopkins would play the role of a key King character, Ted Brautigan in Hearts in

Atlantis.

17 Other nominees were Funny Girl and the winner, Oliver! . Hepburn won Best Actress for her

amazing portrayal of Eleanor of Aquitaine, her third such award, in a tie with Barbra Streisand. In an

outstanding year for the silver screen, among other movies nominated in various categories at the

Oscar ceremonies just four days after King’s column were The Producers, 2001: A Space Odyssey,

Rosemary’s Baby, Charly, The Odd Couple, Planet of the Apes and Chitty Chitty Bang Bang!

18 The previous trip appears to be King’s 1966 class trip described in detail (including his

experiment with alcohol) in part 32 of the C.V. section of On Writing, which would make it three

years earlier. Oh well!

19 Covered in depth in The Poems chapter of Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished by

Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn; Abingdon, MD: Cemetery Dance

Publications, 2006.

20 A much forgotten aspect of these protests is the fact that many pro-War or just ‘patriotic’

people confronted the protesters, and on a regular basis. In fact, the UMO Student Senate went so far

as to pass a resolution on May 13, 1969 that deplored ‘the actions of those students who willfully

obstructed the march of the University Coalition for Peace in Vietnam....’

21 See our Opinion—Venturing into Politics chapter.

22 Steve Hughes, King’s target, was ‘the first student ever to be elected a University of Maine

trustee and the first in the country ever to be elected with full voting privileges....”, according to The

Maine Campus for June 12, 1969. King seems to have a point about Hughes wanting to get his own

way—by only the 20 June 1969 issue of The Maine Summer Campus Hughes was reported as saying

that the Trustees would “probably” be forced to resign if the University’s budgetary requests were not

met. By the October 30, 1969 column Hughes was ‘gaining immense political and administrative

experience as a PR man for the House of Representatives.’

23 Robert Bloch: An Appreciation ( Locus, November 1994), see our Miscellany chapter.

24 King, answering a question at a panel on September 24, 2005 at The New Yorker Festival,

according to Cover Boys by Madeleine Murray in The Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney, Australia)

for December 29, 2005.

25 See King’s Introduction: On Being Nineteen (and a Few Other Things) to The Dark Tower:

The Gunslinger (Revised Edition) (2003), where he credits this movie as one of the two major

inspirations for The Dark Tower Cycle, although in that piece he says he was inspired by seeing the

movie ‘in 1970’, giving no indication it was not his first viewing. He may well have mis-remembered

the actual date.

26 See King’s February 27, 1969 column for more detail.

27 King incorrectly states this movie was released in 1954, one year earlier than the actual date.

28 Students for a Democratic Society, a radical Leftist movement of the 1960s.

29 King says the ‘best scene in the movie’ is the confrontation in the diner. Both Collings and

Spignesi, in their reviews of these columns, see this as inspiration for a similar scene in King’s short

story, Nona.

30 In this column King says he’s been told that ‘the readership of this paper averages about

9,000.’ Few must have kept them, as the appearance of The Maine Campus from this period on eBay

and through King resellers is effectively nonexistent.

31 Ironically, King would write many articles and guest columns (as well as letters to the editor)

for this newspaper over future years. Of course, each would reflect his own, less conservative,

views. And David Bright would also join the staff of the Bangor Daily News.

32 This is one of the columns for which the date was incorrectly listed (as November 6) in all

King sources until 2006, when corrected by the authors (using source microfiche from the Fogler

Library). Quite a bit of pagination information had also been incorrect to that time. It is unclear where

these errors began but this does prove the value of original research, where feasible.

33 By Ed Robertson. Los Angeles, California: Pomegranate Press, 1993 (see our Introducing

the Work of Others chapter). The Fugitive’s real name, of course, is Dr. Richard Kimble (ably

played by Harrison Ford in the movie, also released in 1993).

34 After Charles Fort (1874-1932), a failed novelist and one of the first to gather strange and

unexplained phenomena and publish them in book form— Book of the Damned, Lo! , New Lands and

Wild Talents . King refers specifically to events of pyrokinesis reported by Fort in the first two of

these books in his Afterword to Firestarter (see our Author’s Notes and Introductions to His Own

Work chapter).

35 King says this occurred in ‘the late 1890s’ but was actually on 6 August 1930.

36 Photograph by Frank Kadi.

37 Readers probably won’t find it strange that King attended this film on Valentine’s Day.

38 King incorrectly says Lugosi died in 1957—the actual date was August 16, 1956. He also

says an upcoming movie is ‘ Frankenstein Meets The Werewolf ...with Karloff and Lon Chaney.’ The

movie is actually Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man and starred Lugosi and Lon Chaney, Jr., not

Karloff.

39 See the Danse Macabre, On Writing chapter for detail of the teenage King’s novelisation of

this movie; and his critique of it in Danse Macabre.

40 Even though King actually says ‘Last year in May’, strongly implying 1969, it appears he may

actually be referring to 1968, as he says Nixon ‘had begun his drive for the Presidency earlier...in

New Hampshire.’ Nixon was elected in November 1968 and his first term began in January 1969.

41 For more detail see the Opinion—Venturing into Politics chapter.

42 In Robert Bloch: An Appreciation ( Locus, November 1994), published on Bloch’s death,

King gives a wonderful description of Bloch the man and writer (see our Miscellany chapter).

43 The story behind this is related in Stephen King: Unpublished, Uncollected by Rocky Wood,

David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Abingdon, MD: Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

44 In the King’s Garbage Truck column for May 7, 1970 King had stated he ‘was waiting in the

barber shop to get a haircut when that happened’.

45 King uses the generally accepted shortened version of the full title, The Strange Case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

46 It is not widely known that the version commonly published today is in fact the third edition

(first published in 1831), having been heavily revised from the original 1818 edition. King uses the

generally accepted shortening of the full title, Frankenstein or, the Modern Prometheus.

47 Dr. Burton Hatlen, of the English Department at the University of Maine at Orono, was a

mentor to King during his college years. Since 1991 he has served as Director of the National Poetry

Foundation, within the UMO English Department. He has also taught courses on King’s novels and

written of his work.

48 According to The American Heritage®Dictionary of the English Language, (Fourth

Edition), ‘archetype’ is defined as: ‘In Jungian psychology, an inherited pattern of thought or

symbolic imagery derived from the past collective experience and present in the individual

unconscious.’

49 See also the King’s Garbage Truck column for December 18, 1969.

50 At this point King makes no mention of his own screenplay adaptation of the classic work,

written no later than 1978, before Danse Macabre (for more detail see Stephen King: Uncollected,

Unpublished). Indeed, at one point he states that the book has ‘defied the moviemakers’. A movie,

using Bradbury’s own screenplay, would be released in 1983.

51 King extended this story with his own reaction in his Virginia Beach lecture—see Banned

Books and Other Concerns: The Virginia Beach Lecture in our Opinion—Venturing Into Politics

chapter.

52 May 10, 1981; Late City Final Edition: section 7, page 15.

5 3 The Stephen King Universe by Stanley Wiater, Christopher Golden and Hank Wagner.

Abingdon, MD: Cemetery Dance Publications, 2001, page 608.

54 The Essential Stephen King by Stephen Spignesi. Williamsburg, Virginia: GB Books, 2001,

page 120.

5 5 Horror Plum’d by Michael Collings. Woodstock, GA: Overlook Connection Press, 2002,

page 120.

56 The Hugo Awards are given by the World Science Fiction Society and are regarded as the

premier Awards in that genre.

57 The Locus Awards are given as the result of polling by readers of Locus magazine in the

genres of fantasy, science fiction and horror.

58 Full citations for publications including King material referred to in this chapter appear in the

Bibliography.

59 The Rock Bottom Remainders are a band formed largely of authors and critics. King relates

part of their sordid history in The Neighborhood of the Beast, a chapter in Mid-Life Confidential:

The Rock Bottom Remainders Tour America with Three Chords and an Attitude edited by Dave

Marsh. New York, NY: Viking Penguin, 1994. For more detail see our Miscellany chapter.

60 Two King short stories, Code Name: Mousetrap and The 43rdDream appeared there (for

more detail see Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished); along with one non-fiction piece, Band

Uniforms (see our Miscellany chapter).

61 In Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished.

62 From Stephen King by Joel Davison in the Lewiston Maine Sunday-Journal, 25 October

1992, page 4A.

63 The Stokers are awarded annually by the Horror Writers Association.

64 7 October 2000 issue.

65 Scare Tactics in the November 1990 edition, page 20 (see Miscellany chapter).

66 For specific detail see The Complete Guide to the Works of Stephen King by Rocky Wood,

David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Melbourne, Australia: Kanrock Partners, 2004.

67 Full citations for publications including King material referred to in this chapter appear in the

Bibliography.

68 For the novels The Talisman and Black House. King and friend Chris Chesley self-published

People, Places and Things in 1960; and King is credited with unpublished short stories with each of

his two sons (see Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished by Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne

and Norma Blackburn). He has also worked on a stage musical with John Mellencamp; combined

with Rick Dooling to deliver the TV mini-series Kingdom Hospital; and Josef Anderson wrote the

last episode of King’s mini-series Golden Years.

69 From http://www.liljas-library.com/onanint.html.

70 O’Nan originally intended to title the book Dear Stephen King as it takes the form of a

condemned woman telling her life story in writing to King, who did not give permission for his name

to be used in the title. O’Nan says King read the novel and ‘liked it very much.’

71 Also the subject of Curses! (1998) reviewed later in this chapter.

72 See King’s fond remembrance of Gould, A Man with a Child’s Embrace of the Questions , in

our Miscellany chapter.

73 See also Stephen King (1999) later in this chapter.

74 King acknowledges Russ Dorr in The Stand, Pet Sematary and Misery; and Florence Dorr in

Misery; he dedicates Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption to both.

75 Dent hit the run in a one-game playoff to determine which team—his New York Yankees or

the Sox playing in front of a home team crowd of 32,925—would proceed to the American League

(AL) playoffs to determine that League’s representative in the World Series. Perhaps more amazing

was how the two teams had managed to reach this one game tiebreak situation: the Yankees trailed the

Sox in the AL East by 14 games on July 19. After the Yankees’ manager was fired they rallied to a

52-21 record. Meanwhile, the Sox lost 14 of 17 games in September but made a late-season

comeback, winning their last eight games, catching the Yankees on the last day of the regular season

and forcing the historic game. Dent’s strike remains one of the most famous (and, in New England,

reviled) in baseball.

76 The Unseen King by Tyson Blue. Mercer Island, WA: Starmont House, 1989, page 148.

77 In 2004 King would write in Faithful of ‘Ray Slyman, who works for Commonwealth

Limousine and has been driving me and my family to Red Sox games ever since the kids were

small....’ (May 21st entry).

78 In 1965 aged 75 Yankees Manager Casey Stengel was asked about his future in baseball. His

response: “How the hell should I know? Most of the people my age are dead. You could look it up.’

79 It is so listed in Michael Collings’ Horror Plum’d: An International Stephen King

Bibliography and Guide (Woodstock, Georgia: Overlook Connection Press, 2002); and George

Beahm’s Stephen King Collectables: An Illustrated Price Guide (Williamsburg, VA: GB Books,

2000).

80 His first collection, We’re All in this Together: A Novella and Stories was published by

Bloomsbury in July 2005. His official website is http://www.owen-king.com/.

81 See also Painful First Lesson in our Letters to the Editor, Guest Columns chapter.

82 See http://bangorinfo.com/Focus/focus_mansfield_stadium.html.

83 See also the May 21st and June 9th entries in Faithful.

84 Full citations for publications including King material referred to in this chapter appear in the

Bibliography.

85 Stefano wrote the screenplay for the original Psycho and produced the original TV series The

Outer Limits.

86 King incorrectly gives this writer’s surname as Langlahan and describes him as ‘Canadian’.

In fact Langelaan was British. Considering the number of reprints it is interesting this minor error has

never been corrected.

87 ‘Substance-abusing writers are just substance abusers—common garden-variety drunks and

druggies, in other words. Any claims that the drugs and alcohol are necessary to dull a finer

sensibility are just the usual self-serving bullshit...Hemingway and Fitzgerald didn’t drink because

they were creative, alienated, or morally weak. They drank because it’s what alkies are wired up to

do.’ ( On Writing, page 73).

88 King’s other articles in this magazine appeared in the June, July, August, September and

November 1980 issues. There was no October issue that year.

89 See our Miscellany chapter for information about our discovery of two of these pieces. King

correctly identifies the newspaper in this article as The Enterprise but changed it in On Writing to

the incorrect Lisbon Weekly Enterprise . See also the footnote in our Danse Macabre, On Writing

chapter.

90 See Banned Books and Other Concerns: The Virginia Beach Lecture in our chapter,

Opinion—Venturing Into Politics.

91 This is described in George Beahm’s The Stephen King Story. London, England: Little,

Brown and Company, 1993, pages 83-4. Beahm gives the date of the Kings’ stay as October 30,

1974. In Adelina for February 1980, page 45 (see our Opinion—The Craft of Writing chapter) King

writes that the visit occurred in late September that year; but in Whispers for August 1982 he says it

was ‘a lovely October weekend’ in 1974.

92 King expert Stephen Spignesi, inspired by these lines, originally titled a major reference

work The Shape Under The Sheet: The Stephen King Encyclopedia.

93 The Glass Floor for Startling Mystery Stories (Fall 1967); and The Reaper’s Image for the

same magazine’s Spring 1969 issue. King received $35 for each!

94 New York, NY: New American Library, 2004.

95 Notably, King wrote about Fortean phenomena, as the strange phenomena catalogued in the

books of Charles Fort (1874-1932) were once termed, in his Garbage Truck column for December

18, 1969 (see our Early Columns—King’s Garbage Truck chapter).

9 6 Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption as Hope Springs Eternal; Apt Pupil as

Summer of Corruption; The Body as Fall from Innocence; and The Breathing Method as A Winter’s

Tale.

97 For more detail on this novel, which King has attempted at least once to revive, see Stephen

King: Uncollected, Unpublished by Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn.

Abingdon, MD: Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

98 All That You Love Will Be Carried Away , The Death of Jack Hamilton, Harvey’s Dream ,

The Man in the Black Suit and That Feeling, You Can Only Say What It IsIn French.

9 9 Head Down, Cone Head, Leaf-Peepers and On Impact (the last an excerpt from On

Writing).

100 The full title of Browning’s 1855 poem is Childe Roland To The Dark Tower Came . King

had it reproduced after the last lines of the seventh and final novel in the Cycle, The Dark Tower.

101 See Someone Shouted J’accuse in our Miscellany chapter.

102 Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished by Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne and

Norma Blackburn. Abingdon, MD: Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

103 Covered in more detail in the 2002 article Cone Head in The New Yorker (see our

Miscellany chapter), where King claims the fine was $100.

104 Originally published as Do the Dead Sing? in Yankee magazine for November 1981 and

revised for Skeleton Crew.

105 Wrightson did illustrate Cycle of the Werewolf, along with the following King projects: The

Stand: The Complete & Uncut Edition, the Cemetery Dance edition of From a Buick 8, Wolves of

the Calla, Creepshow and King’s pages in Heroes for Hope: Starring the X-Men. King wrote Berni

Wrightson: An Appreciation for the Limited Edition TheCycle of the Werewolf Portfolio . This last

piece is covered in the Miscellany chapter of this book.

106 King mentions the Dorrs (without naming them) in his Faithful August 12th entry.

107 See the Miscellany chapter for King’s appreciation of Gould, A Man with a Child’s

Embrace of the Questions, written after his untimely death in 2002.

108 Stephanie Leonard, Tabitha King’s sister. For a period she was King’s personal assistant

and editor of Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter.

109 The original publication runs in the hundreds of dollars, on the rare occasion it comes to

market. The republication appears more often but has commanded prices near $100. However,

reprints of that republication are now available through www.shocklines.com at a much more

reasonable $12.99 or so.

110 Full detail appears in The Complete Guide to the Works of Stephen King. It is interesting to

note, for instance, that Eddie Dean’s middle name is given as Alan in The Bear, and as Cantor in The

Waste Lands.

111 Stephen King’s The Dark Tower: A Concordance Volume 1 by Robin Furth. London,

England: Hodder & Stoughton, 2003, page 132.

112 This story actually exists in three versions, one of those including further variations. The

first publication of the story was in Marshroots for Fall 1973. That version was republished in

Weird Tales for Summer 1991 with minor variations. There was a significant revision of the story for

its publication in Whispers #17/18 for July 1982 and this represents the second version. A very major

revision (including moving the setting from Harlow to Castle Rock) for its inclusion in Nightmares &

Dreamscapes represents the third version.

113 Book of the Dead, edited by John Skipp and Craig Spector. Willimantic, CT: Mark V.

Ziesing, 1989.

114 A pastiche is defined as, ‘A dramatic, literary, or musical piece openly imitating the

previous works of other artists, often with satirical intent’ ( The American Heritage®Dictionary of

the English Language).

115 See our Miscellany chapter— The Drum, The Enterprise and The Village Vomit—Tales of

a Young Writer for the full story.

116 However, this poem had only been published three times before—once in 1971 in an

obscure literary magazine, Io; then in Tyson Blue’s study, The Unseen King (Mercer Island, WA:

Starmont House/San Bernardino, CA: The Borgo Press, 1989); and finally in The Twentieth-Century

Treasury of Sports, edited by Al Silverman and Brian Silverman (New York, NY: Viking Adult,

1992). It has not been republished since Nightmares & Dreamscapes.

117 The Joy of Stephen King in The Complete Guide to the Works of Stephen King ; and in

Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished.

118 The piece first appeared in the stand-alone editions issued in 1999 by Signet as follows

— The Long Walk (April), Roadwork (June) and The Running Man (August). The Bachman Books,

including all four tales, is still in print in the United Kingdom.

119 It only appears as follows: in US Signet editions of The Bachman Books from 1996-1998

and in the Signet reprints of The Long Walk, Roadwork and The Running Man from 1999 onwards.

120 Daphne Du Maurier’s classic and widely loved gothic, the tale features in Bag of Bones.

121 New York: A Berkley Prime Crime Book, November 1999 (hardcover); January 2001

(paperback).

122 For more detail see Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished by Rocky Wood with David

Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Abingdon, MD: Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

123 Northeastern Writers’ Conference (or ‘Camp Necon’) See www.campnecon.com for more

information.

124 For more detail see Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished; and Untitled: Before the

Play, earlier in this chapter.

125 Coined by Robert Heinlein, this word describes a fictional setting created by writing any

fictional story or series of stories, for instance Oz, Alice’s Wonderland, the Territories or Roland’s

All-World.

126 They also did not appear in the Scribner and Hodder & Stoughton proofs, according to King

collector John Hanic. This may explain their absence in the Cemetery Dance editions.

127 It seems King may have the date wrong—he wrote of having seen the movie in his King’s

Garbage Truck column in The Maine Summer Campus for 18 July 1969 and gives no indication here

that this ‘1970’ viewing was not the first.

128 In the context of the Dark Tower universe it matters, Big Steve, it matters.

129 Stephen King’s The Dark Tower: A Concordance Volume II by Robin Furth. London,

England: Hodder & Stoughton, 2005, page 140.

130 On February 2, 2002 King, Pat Conroy, John Grisham and Peter Straub gave readings at the

New York Town Hall for an audiobook benefiting the Foundation. King read The Revenge of

Lardass Hogan from The Body; and Straub read from Black House. The latest on Muller’s condition

can be found at http://bitchen.com/muller/.

131 The term reaching ‘the clearing at the end of the path’ is synonymous with death in Roland’s

dialect.

132 The Best American Mystery Stories, 2004, edited by Nelson DeMille, series editor, Otto

Penzler. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, October 2004.

133 As noted above, first referred to in the Afterword to the original version of The Gunslinger.

134 In a Q&A session for young readers at www.weeklyreader.com.

135 And wrote two concordances for the Dark Tower Cycle: Stephen King’s The Dark Tower:

A Concordance Volume I (New York, NY: Scribner, 2003) and Volume II (New York, NY:

Scribner, 2005). King wrote a Foreword to the first of these volumes; see our Introducing the Work

of Others chapter.

136 On March 24, 2006 King posted an update about the ending of Cell on his official website

(see our Miscellany chapter).

137 We list these alternate titles at the end of our review of each column.

138 In American political terms States that may ‘swing’ from supporting one party to the other in

a Presidential Election.

139 See THE Introducing the Work of Others chapter.

140 For more on King’s Red Sox fandom and love of the sport see our Baseball chapter.

141 Some weeks, that column ran in EW in place of The Pop of King.

142 For those who don’t, we provide an entire chapter on King’s baseball writings in this book.

143 King provided the liner notes to McDermott’s 1996 album Michael McDermott (see

Untitled (1996) in our Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television chapter).

144 Romero has also directed two King films— Creepshow (1985) and The Dark Half (1993)—

and is slated for The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon and From a Buick 8. He also wrote the

screenplay adaptation of King’s Cat From Hell for Tales From the Darkside: The Movie (1990).

145 King has an interesting history with Dobyns. He wrote a letter supportive of his novel, The

Church of Dead Girls, which was circulated with Advance Readers’ Copies of the book (see

Untitled (March 1997) in our Book Reviews chapter); and dedicated an obscure poem, Dino to this

poet and novelist (for the full story behind the poem see Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished by

Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn).

146 Full citations for publications including King material referred to in this chapter appear in

the Bibliography.

147 The full story may be found in The Killer chapter of Stephen King: Uncollected,

Unpublished by Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Abingdon, Maryland:

Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

148 A “dollar baby” is a short film based on a Stephen King short story, for which he sold the

film rights to the filmmaker(s) for a dollar, on the condition the filmmaker doesn’t profit from the

work.

149 A reprint of the classic King non-fiction piece ‘Ever Et Raw Meat?’ and Other Weird

Questions (see our Miscellany chapter).

150 He has made numerous other such lists, including Stephen King’s Guilty Pleasures ;

Stephen King’s List of the 6 Scariest Scenes Ever Captured on Film ; Favorite Films; Horrors! ; His

Creepiest Movies; Lists That Matter (Number 7); Lists That Matter (Number 8); My Favorite

Movies; The Reel Stephen King; My Favorite Movies of 2002-2003; The Pop of King: 2004: The

Year in Movies; and The Pop of King: My 2005 Picks: Movies.

151 These refer to Berni Wrightson: An Appreciation and Nightmares in the Sky (both covered

in our Miscellany chapter).

152 Note this familiar term, through which King also addresses loyal readers in introducing

many of his novels. In The Dark Tower VI: Song of Susannah he went so far as to describe us as

‘CRs’ in his imaginary Journal!

153 He is currently slated to write and direct an adaptation of King’s novella The Mist.

154 It is an expanded edition of Saturday Night at Moody’s Diner and Other Stories, published

in 1985.

155 A revised version appears in King’s Skeleton Crew collection.

156 Goldman is one of the scriptwriting greats. Apart from also adapting King’s Misery and

Hearts in Atlantis; he was responsible for such classics as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, A

Bridge Too Far , The Princess Bride (adapted from his novel), and The General’s Daughter . His

books on screenwriting, Adventures in the Screen Trade and Which Lie Did I Tell? (which features

his development of Misery) are required reading.

157 These are King’s contributions to Ubris: Here There Be Tygers and Cain Rose Up (short

fiction, Spring 1968); Strawberry Spring (short fiction, Fall 1968); Harrison State Park ’68 (poem,

Fall 1968); Night Surf (short fiction, Spring 1969); Stud City (short fiction, Fall 1969); and The

Dark Man (poem, Fall 1969).

158 See our chapter, Opinion—The Craft of Writing. Also, full citations for publications

including King material referred to in this chapter appear in the Bibliography.

159 King also wrote an introduction for a mass-market paperback printing of When Michael

Calls (see our Introducing the Work of Others chapter).

160 For the full story see Stephen King: Uncollected, Unpublished by Rocky Wood with David

Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Abingdon, Maryland: Cemetery Dance, 2006.

161 King tells of some of his Dave’s Rag experiences in subsection 17 of the C.V. section in On

Writing.

162 The Complete Stephen King Encyclopedia by Stephen J. Spignesi. Ann Arbor, Michigan:

Popular Culture Ink, October 1991.

163 Stephen King: A Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most Popular Author by Justin

Brooks. Abingdon, Maryland: Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

164 See The Neighborhood of the Beast in our Miscellany chapter for Marsh’s relationship

with King through the Rock Bottom Remainders band.

165 Briggs appeared in one of the ‘dollar baby’ movies made from King’s work, as Alfie

Zimmer in James Renner’s superior adaptation of All That You Love Will Be Carried Away.

166 This is the same Matt Kinney King coached in Little League—see Head Down in our

Baseball chapter.

167 The Road to the Dark Tower: Exploring Stephen King’s Magnum Opus by Bev Vincent.

New York, NY: New American Library, 2004.

168 For those who’ve forgotten, the assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963.

169 Full citations for publications including King material referred to in this chapter appear in

the Bibliography.

170 One cannot help but note a superficial connection to events in King’s novels Desperation

and The Regulators; and his unpublished screenplay The Shotgunners. Perhaps this movie partly

inspired them?

171 Many King experts argue this is in fact an interview or series of quotes rather than an actual

article written by King. A number of King authorities consulted for The Complete Guide to the

Works of Stephen King unanimously agreed with this interpretation. Justin Brooks’ Stephen King: A

Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most Popular Author lists the piece as non-fiction and, to

cover all opinions, we have included it here.

172 Horror Plum’d by Michael R. Collings. Woodstock, Georgia: Overlook Connection Press,

2002, page 504.

173 Christopher Spruce is a brother of Tabitha King and Stephanie Leonard. He both assisted in

editing and published the Castle Rock newsletter; for a period ran WZON, a Bangor radio station

King owns; and published the Bangor, Maine newspaper The Register (see our Miscellany chapter).

174 Stephanie Leonard is a sister of Tabitha King and was, for a number of years, King’s

personal assistant.

175 Goldman penned the screenplays for Misery, Hearts in Atlantis and Dreamcatcher.

176 Also, on 12 April 1984 King appeared on Good Morning America to promote the film

version of Children of the Corn and support Hart’s candidacy.

177 See the Variations and Versions in King’s Fiction chapter of Stephen King: Uncollected,

Unpublished by Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Abingdon, Maryland:

Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

178 Romero directed Creepshow and The Dark Half.

179 While King’s logic makes sense the facts are wrong. The Kristallnacht occurred on

November 9, 1938 and into the early hours of November 10. There was a nationwide state-sponsored

pogrom against Jews, synagogues and Jewish businesses in both Germany and Austria but there is no

evidence of book burnings that night. Someone may have pointed at least the date out to King, as in

his I Want to be Typhoid Stevie speech (see Opinion—The Craft of Writing chapter) he concludes:

‘As long as we don’t reach the point where folks are piling so-called subversive books in the

street...and setting them on fire. Family values in Berlin, you understand. Circa 1938.’

180 Kansas City, MO: Andrews and McMeel, September 1989, pages 51 and 53-56. A

transcription of the Question and Answer session following the speech appears on pages 56-61.

181 McSweeney’s has published King short fiction, including The Tale of Gray Dick and Lisey

and the Madman.

182 Rocky Wood, David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Melbourne, Australia: Kanrock

Partners, 2003 and 2004.

183 Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Abingdon, Maryland:

Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

184 On Writing. New York, NY: Scribner, 2000, subsection 19 of the C.V. section.

185 King correctly identifies the newspaper in this article as The Enterprise but changed it in

On Writing to the incorrect Lisbon Weekly Enterprise . In the Notes to Nightmares & Dreamscapes

he identifies it as ‘the weekly Lisbon Enterprise’. See also the footnote in our Danse Macabre, On

Writing chapter.

186 Subsection 19 of the C.V. section.

187 ‘Mr. Ricker, the college-track English teacher (and the school’s most urbane faculty member

—he looked quite a bit like Craig Stevens in Peter Gunn), became Cow Man because his family

owned Ricker Dairy.’

188 The Kings’ oldest son is Joseph Hillstrom King. His pseudonym as a published writer is

‘Joe Hill’. His official website is www.joehillfiction.com/.

189 One King remembers vividly is ‘the hanged man’ dream—see his Garbage Truck column

for December 18, 1969; and our Danse Macabre, On Writing chapter.

190 King underestimates his own skill. Anyone who has ever stood in a location they know is

described in a King book (for instance parts of Durham portrayed in ’ Salem’s Lot ) knows how

brilliantly he can deliver the visual as description.

191 This is an error. King was born on September 21, 1947, and was 50 from September 21,

1997 to September 20, 1998. As one imagines he knew that (!), it was probably a typographical error

at the Newsletter.

192 These tales were originally published in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction:

The Gunslinger (October 1978); The Way Station (April 1980); The Oracle and the Mountains

(February 1981); The Slow Mutants (July 1981); and The Gunslinger and the Dark Man (November

1981).

193 See The Strange Case of the Westlake Stationery in our Introducing the Work of Others

chapter.

194 King wrote these pieces about Hunter/McBain: On Ed McBain and an untitled piece in a

memorial booklet after his death (both covered in this chapter).

195 King also wrote an introduction to Thompson’s novels, Now and On Earth— Big Jim

Thompson: An Appreciation; and The Killer Inside Me—Introduction: WARNING! WARNING!

Hitch-hikers May Be Escaped LUNATICS! (both covered in our Introducing the Work of Others

chapter).

196 Full citations for publications including King material referred to in this chapter appear in

the Bibliography.

197 ‘… evidently an editor at Viking Penguin’, according to Tyson Blue, in Of New Frontiers

and Gargoyles, a review of Nightmares in the Sky in Castle Rock: The Stephen King Newsletter for

November 1988, page 3.

198 Ibid.

199 Horror Plum’d by Michael R. Collings. Woodstock, Georgia: Overlook Connection Press,

2002, page 273.

200 The Lost Work of Stephen King by Stephen Spignesi. Secaucus, New Jersey: Birch Lane

Press, 1998, page 232.

201 ( sic), as published in the original newsletter.

202 King’s first attempt at original series television Golden Years, was cancelled after episode

7 of a 13-episode commitment. Several attempts to finish the series failed and it was eventually

released on video in a condensed version and with an alternate ending written by Josef Anderson.

203 Author of the King tie-in book, The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer.

204 In the Dark Tower mythology the slightly differently named Claudia y Inez Bachman wrote

one version of the book Charlie the Choo-Choo. According to Susannah Dean this made her part of

the Ka-Tet of Nineteen. The Stephen King character in Song of Susannah told Eddie Dean and

Roland Deschain that Claudia was the wife of Richard Bachman.

205 This piece was revised before final inclusion in the novel, see Stephen King: Uncollected,

Unpublished for more detail.

206 This is also the premise of King’s short story, It Grows On You, first published in 1973.

207 Rocky Wood with David Rawsthorne and Norma Blackburn. Abingdon, Maryland:

Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006.

208 Stephen King: Lisbon High’s Most Celebrated Alumnus by Ambra S Watkins, Lisbon

Monthly (November 1986), page 5.

209 King writes, ‘This has been Hollywood’s scary summer ...’; names movies such as Alien,

Prophecy, The Dawn of the Dead and The Amityville Horror; and says Kubrick’s The Shining will

be in movie theatres the following spring. See The Horrors of ’79 in our Opinion—Radio, Music,

Film and Television chapter for likely confirmation of 1979 as the date this manuscript was written.

210 King and Straub would later combine to write The Talisman and Black House.

211 According to King expert Stephen Spignesi, in personal correspondence with Justin Brooks.

212 Stephen King: The Art of Darkness by Douglas Winter. New York, NY: New American

Library, 1986, pages 24-25.

213 Ibid, page 231.

214 Ibid, pages 236-237.

215 The Stephen King Story by George Beahm. Kansas City, MO: Andrews and McMeel, 1991,

page 265.

2 1 6 Stephen King: Man and Artist by Carroll F. Terrell. Orono, ME: Northern Lights

Publishing Company, 1990.

217 Marsh and King were both members of the ‘literary’ band The Rock Bottom Remainders

(see The Neighborhood of the Beast in our Miscellany chapter).

218 In Tyson Blue’s The Unseen King (Mercer Island, WA: Starmont House, 1989, page 156)

he states ‘they were recorded in 1984’, but this appears to be an error.

219 Ibid, page 156.

220 See our Miscellany chapter.

221 See our Opinion—Radio, Music, Film and Television chapter.

222 Posted February 27, 2006.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND INDEX

Notes

The page number on which we begin our review of each piece is indicated to the left of each

entry (e.g., the review of Danse Macabre begins on page47).

Pagination is provided for entries only where this is available.

Certain information, such as ISBNs, are not available or independently confirmed and are

therefore not listed below.

ISBNs are not listed here for short non-fiction in King’s novels and collections (those

requiring this information will find it in Stephen King: A Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most

Popular Author by Justin Brooks. Abingdon, Maryland: Cemetery Dance Publications, 2006).

Where a piece of non-fiction appears in a King novel or collection only the first entry is

listed below (those requiring complete information for each publication will find it in Stephen

King: A Primary Bibliography of the World’s Most Popular Author by Justin Brooks).

The authors would appreciate any updates to this information being forwarded to us via the

publisher.

Section I: Book-Length Works

Danse Macabre—

47 Publication history:

1. New York, NY: Everest House, 1981, 400 pp., hardcover. ISBN: 0-89696-076-5.

2. New York, NY: Everest House, 1981, 400 pp., hardcover. ISBN: 0-89696-076-5. Limited

edition of 250 numbered copies, signed by the author.

2a. New York, NY: Everest House, 1981, 400 pp., hardcover. ISBN: 0-89696-076-5. Limited

edition of 15 lettered copies, signed by the author. These were originally intended for private

distribution.

2b. New York, NY: Everest House, 1981, 400 pp., hardcover. ISBN: 0-89696-076-5. 35

unsigned “publisher’s state” copies.

3. New York, NY: Book of the Month Club [n. d.], 400 pp., hardcover. No ISBN.

4. Excerpted in Playboy (with subsequent reprints in other publications) in January, 1981.

—“Why We Crave Horror Movies”

5. Excerpted in Quest in June, 1981.—“Notes on Horror”

6. London, England: Macdonald Futura Publishers, July 1981, 400 pp., hardcover. ISBN: 0-354-

04646-2.

7. London, England: Macdonald Futura Publishers, July 1981, 400 pp., trade paperback. ISBN:

0-354-04647-0.

8. Excerpted in Book Digest in September, 1981.—“Danse Macabre”

9. Excerpted in Self in September, 1981. —“The Healthy Power of a Good Scream”

10. Excerpted in TV Guide in December, 1981.—“The Sorry State of TV Shows: You Gotta Put

on the Gruesome Mask and Go Booga-Booga”

11. New York, NY: Berkley Books, May 1982, xiv+400 pp., trade paperback. ISBN: 0-425-

05345-8.

12. London, England: Futura Publications, A Division of Macdonald & Co., 1982, 480 pp.,

mass-market paperback. ISBN: 0-7088-2181-2. Note: Reprinted in 1984. This edition does not

contain the “Forenote to the Paperback Edition” carried in the Berkley Books mass-market

paperback.

13. New York, NY: Berkley Books, December 1983, xxi+437 pp., mass-market paperback.

ISBN: 0-425-06462-X. ISBN: 0-425-07984-8. ISBN: 0-451-0433-8. Note: This edition includes

King’s “Forenote to the Paperback Edition” piece.

14. New York, NY: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1983, pp., hardcover. ISBN: . Note: A limited edition

of [25?] slipcased copies given to sales department personnel at Everest House.

15. Excerpted in 1983/1984 Fiction Writer’s Market in 1983.—“Last Waltz: Horror and

Morality, Horror and Magic”

16. Excerpted in The Open Door: When Writers First Learned to Read in 1989. —“Stephen

King”

17. Excerpted as a broadsheet in 1990.—“Danse Macabre”

18. London, England: Warner Books UK, 1992, 479 pp., mass-market paperback. ISBN: 0-

7515-0437-8.

19. Excerpted in “They’re Here…”: Invasion of the Bodysnatchers: A Tribute in 1999.

—“Invasion of the Bodysnatchers”

20. Excerpted in My Favorite Horror Story in 2000.—[Untitled]

21. Excerpted in Secret Windows in 2000.—“Horror Fiction: From Danse Macabre”

22. New York, NY: Berkley Books, September 2001, xiv+400 pp., trade paperback. ISBN: 0-

425-18160-X.

23. London, England: TimeWarner, 2002. 479 pp., mass-market paperback. ISBN: 0-7515-

0437-8.

24. Excerpted in Rosemary’s Baby in [March] 2003.—“Introduction”

25. Excerpted in The Haunting of Hill House in [March] 2003.—“Introduction”

26. Excerpted in Ghost Story in [March] 2003.—“Introduction”

27. Excerpted in The McGraw-Hill Reader: Issues Across the Disciplines, Eighth Edition in

2003.—“My Creature from the Black Lagoon”

28. Excerpted in The House Next Door in 2004.—“Introduction”

Nightmares in the Sky—

384 Publication history:

1. Excerpted in Penthouse in September, 1988.—“Stephen King’s Nightmares in the Sky”

2. New York, NY: Viking Studio Books, November 1988, 128 pp., hardcover. Text by Stephen

King; photographs by f-Stop Fitzgerald. ISBN: 0-670-82307-4.

3. London, England: Viking Penguin Inc., and Penguin Books Ltd., November 1988, 128 pp.,

hardcover. Text by Stephen King, photographs by f-Stop Fitzgerald. ISBN: 0-670-82307-4.

On Writing—

60 Publication history:

1. A pre-publication excerpt was published online in December 1999 as “Selections from On

Writing.”—“Selections from On Writing”

2. Excerpted in The New Yorker in June, 2000.—“On Impact”

3. New York, NY: Scribner, [October] 2000, 288 pp., hardcover. ISBN: 0-684-85352-3.

4. London, England: Hodder & Stoughton, [October] 2000, 384 pp., hardcover. ISBN: 0-340-

76996-3.

5. New York, NY: Scribner, 2000, 431 pp., hardcover. ISBN: 0-743-20436-0. Large print

edition.

6. New York, NY: Pocket Books, June 2001, 288 pp., trade paperback. ISBN: 0-671-02425-6.

7. London, England: New English Library, September 2001, xv+367 pp., mass-market

paperback. ISBN: 0-340-76998-X. Note: This edition includes “Jumper” by Garrett Addams, the

winning story in the United Kingdom On Writing competition.

8. London, England: New English Library, September 2001, xv+367 pp., trade paperback.

ISBN: 0-340-82046-2. Note: This edition includes “Jumper” by Garrett Addams, the winning story in

the United Kingdom On Writing competition.

9. New York, NY: Pocket Books, July 2002, xix+297 pp., mass-market paperback. ISBN: 0-

7434-5596-7.

10. Excerpted in Life: The Observer Magazine in September, 2000.—“The Early Years…”

11. Excerpted in Life: The Observer Magazine in September, 2000.—“The Accident”

12. Excerpted in Life: The Observer Magazine in October, 2000.—“How to Write”

13. Excerpted in National Post in October, 2000.—“Attention Zestful Writers”

14. Excerpted in Reader’s Digest in January, 2001.—“Before He Was Stephen King”

15. Excerpted in Writer’s Digest in April, 2001. —“How to Write 10 Pages a Day”

16. Excerpted in Writer’s Yearbook 2001 in 2001.—“Getting Back to Work”

17. Excerpted in The Writer in January, 2002.—“Plotting Gets You Nowhere”

18. Excerpted in White Lines: Writers on Cocaine in December 2002.—“From On Writing”

19. Excerpted in Strategies for College Writing: A Rhetorical Reader, Second Edition in 2003.

—“On Reading and Writing”

20. Excerpted in Guys Write for Guys Read in May 2005.—“From On Writing”

21. Excerpted in Writing for Teens in October, 2005.—“A Ten-Minute Writing Lesson”

22. Excerpted in The Stephen King Desk Calendar 2006 in [October] 2005.—“Stephen King’s

Library”

23. Excerpted in The New Millennium Reader, Fourth Edition in 2006.—“On Writing”

Faithful: Two Diehard Boston Red Sox Fans Chronicle the 2004 Season—

70 Publication history:

1. New York, NY: Scribner, 2004, 409+[5] pp., hardcover. ISBN: 0-7432-6752-4.

2. Excerpted in Boston in December, 2004.—“The Comeback”

3. London, England: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, Orion Publishing Co., 2005, 384 pp., hardcover.