11/22/63: Stephen King is showing his age, and not just in his unwillingness to edit. His nostalgia for the 1950s and for high school are almost embarrassing. His belief that, for example, a 35-year-old in 2011 would call directory assistance to try to find people, was jarring. There is also no suggestion that same character might miss things like the internet, Indian food, good TV, etc. when living in the past (maybe because the peaches and misogyny taste so good?)
Initially I was drawn in; there was a strong start. But then I thought, "the time travel stuff he's exploring has been more thoughtfully done by lots of sci-fi writers." And then, "why is he describing every single child playing on the street, and giving play-by-plays of boxing matches?" And then, "Why does he imagine the air was cleaner in a mill town after industrialization but before the EPA?" And then, "Is every single woman going to be a trope instead of a person?" And then, "Why is he foreshadowing so awkwardly?" And then, "Making this book twice as long as necessary would be fine if it meant really great character development and increased emotional investment, but since that's not there and the dialogue is so awkward, I could have skipped the entire middle half of the book."
I found the audiobook narrator annoying and could have more easily skimmed or skipped sections on paper, so that format was a bad choice for me. I only finished because it received great reviews (from white Boomers I assume) and I was hoping for a payoff at the end, but that didn't come through either. Just say no to the sunken cost fallacy!
No comments:
Post a Comment