Which SK books are true horror?

[Srbo]

Sometimes I wonder why Steve is hailed as the best horror writer there is...or that he is labeled a horror writer at all.
If it is horror, then it`s horror that actually can and does happen in real life ( abusive husbands, so, Rose Madder or Dolores, sociopaths on power trips, that would be Dead Zone and UtD, just a few examples ).
To me, these novels are true fiction horror he wrote:
-IT
-Pet Sematary
-Salem`s Lot
-The Dark Half
-Thinner
and The Black House, partly, because it is based on a real life serial killer, Albert Fish.

Everything else, to me, are extraordinary psychological novels, with actually a lot more science fiction in them than horror.
And that`s actually why I read and love Stephen King so much, NO ONE makes the characters in a book more real than him, horror or not, sci-fi or not.

What say you, agree, disagree, what novels do you consider to be true horror?
Love and lights.

 

[GNTLGNT]

Sometimes I wonder why Steve is hailed as the best horror writer there is...or that he is labeled a horror writer at all.
If it is horror, then it`s horror that actually can and does happen in real life ( abusive husbands, so, Rose Madder or Dolores, sociopaths on power trips, that would be Dead Zone and UtD, just a few examples ).
To me, these novels are true fiction horror he wrote:
-IT
-Pet Sematary
-Salem`s Lot
-The Dark Half
-Thinner
and The Black House, partly, because it is based on a real life serial killer, Albert Fish.

Everything else, to me, are extraordinary psychological novels, with actually a lot more science fiction in them than horror.
And that`s actually why I read and love Stephen King so much, NO ONE makes the characters in a book more real than him, horror or not, sci-fi or not.

What say you, agree, disagree, what novels do you consider to be true horror?
Love and lights.

...my brother, this all very subjective-because what one person may find horrifying does nothing for another except make them yawn...I think there is common ground on some of his works being horror, otherwise it's all in the psyche of the Constant Reader.....

 

[80sFan]

As a former teenage girl and mother of a former teenage girl, I can say Carrie scared the crap out of me (even not taking into account the supernatural elements).

 

[mal]

I agree Srbo. While GNTLGNT states that this is a subjective list, I definitely see horror vs storyteller. I think of him more as a storyteller, rather than a horror writer.

 

[Great Dane]

Night Shift was a bunch of little horror stories all wrapped up in a nice little package.

 

[Tery]

Good question and good points. I agree with Srbo's list and would add 2 short stories: The Monkey and The Raft.

 

[Demeter]

For me, The Shining qualifies as true horror. It's my favorite, right after Needful Things (which I would also classify as horror but of a more subtle kind). I guess the deeper question here is "What scares you?" Is it vampires, curses, drunks, clowns, haunted hotels, people coming back from the dead? You take your pick. Maybe some folks don't even find The Shining all that scary...

 

[Mr Nobody]

IMO, he's not a horror writer as such. He's more a writer who sometimes/often writes horror. Which may be splitting hairs, but for me there's quite a difference even if there's nothing wrong with being either.
As for how and why he got stuck with the horror writer label, it's pretty obvious from his first books and booksellers and publishers love to be able to put your work into a particular niche (genre).
Carrie - telekinesis/supernatural. Into the Horror section it goes.
'Salem's Lot - vampires, ergo Horror.
The Shining - haunted hotel. Guess where that goes?

By then he was stuck with the tag and, had he started turning in a load of non-horror works, he'd have most likely been dropped by his publishers, agent and - most crucially - readership (as it stood in 1978 or thereabouts).
The fact that even those early books are actually about a lot more than the 'takeaways' isn't really here or there. They needed a label to market him with and that was that.
(Although none of that precludes the idea that he started out purely as a horror writer and his style and storytelling interests have 'simply' evolved and moved him away from that.)

 

[Gerald]

He doesn't see himself as a horrorwriter or a writer of the fantastic strictly, he says somewhere something along the lines that it's 'a wave he rides'.The title "King of Horror' was attributed to him by the press.

There are no strict lines between genres anyway, many overlap. Often stories are comprised of elements of different genres.

You can call the books and stories horror, psychological horror, supernatural thrillers, supernatural suspense. Some are more sci-fi (Firestarter, The Tommyknockers, Under the Dome). And others more fantasy (The Stand, The Talisman, The Dark Tower, Eyes of the Dragon).
I would say 'fantastic fiction' covers it all.

Certainly his early work feels more 'horror' to me than a lot of the later ones. But a sense of the dark and the macabre is underlying in all his work, even the ones you don't strictly would call outright 'horror' - it's just what he returns to all the time, and it is probably this that makes him deserve the title 'King of horror' more than everything fitting neatly into the genre.

 

[Neesy]

Sometimes I wonder why Steve is hailed as the best horror writer there is...or that he is labeled a horror writer at all.
If it is horror, then it`s horror that actually can and does happen in real life ( abusive husbands, so, Rose Madder or Dolores, sociopaths on power trips, that would be Dead Zone and UtD, just a few examples ).
To me, these novels are true fiction horror he wrote:
-IT
-Pet Sematary
-Salem`s Lot
-The Dark Half
-Thinner
and The Black House, partly, because it is based on a real life serial killer, Albert Fish.

Everything else, to me, are extraordinary psychological novels, with actually a lot more science fiction in them than horror.
And that`s actually why I read and love Stephen King so much, NO ONE makes the characters in a book more real than him, horror or not, sci-fi or not.

What say you, agree, disagree, what novels do you consider to be true horror?
Love and lights.

11/22/63

Joyland

Duma Key

The Eyes of the Dragon

Bag of Bones

These are a few that I could think of, off the top of my head, that are NOT horror.

So yes, I agree that while once he was considered the King of Horror, now I just think of him as an excellent writer (period, case closed)

Really looking forward to the new book Sleeping Beauties!

 

[no bounce no play]

The Shining is the scariest horror novel I've ever read. It has ghosts and haunted rooms and shrubbery that made me afraid to walk near a bush for weeks lol.

I will always think of SK as the King of Horror but I don't think of his novels with real life horrors as being horror novels. I think Mr Mercedes is more of a thriller.

 

[Kurben]

Well, you don't have to supernatural beings or phenomena in a book to classify a book as horror. What King Is so good, really the best i ever known, is catching the horror in everyday life situations. Like, for example, a girl getting lost in the woods or a woman tied to her bed when her sexpartner dies and she knows there is noone coming to untie her. Horrifying situations but not supernatural. or a writer getting caught by his biggest fan and force to write or else..... . But of course its true that many of his books are a blend of many genres which just shows how skilled he is as a writer. The reason for the name King of Horror is propably because of the books he wrote under his first decade as an author, say from Carrie to IT most of them, under his own name, most of them could be seen as horror. Carrie, Salems Lot, The Shining, The Stand, Firestarter, Cujo, Christine, Pet Semetary, Cycle of The Werewolf and It can all be seen as horror. That they have other elements in them doesnt exclude them as such. It only means that he incorporates many other things than just the plain scary because he is the excellent storyteller he is. After that the name was stuck. Since then he has branched even more and books like, for instance, Liseys Story, Colorado Kid, Joyland are not horror in the least but of course once a name is stuck it stays. At least thats the way i see it.

 

[doowopgirl]

So many good points made here. I would say more supernatural rather than horror, but I could be splitting hairs again. For me SK has always been the man who puts ordinary people in the most extraordinary situations in such a way it makes you wonder what you would do. And that surpasses genre.

 

[GNTLGNT]

Well, you don't have to supernatural beings or phenomena in a book to classify a book as horror. What King Is so good, really the best i ever known, is catching the horror in everyday life situations. Like, for example, a girl getting lost in the woods or a woman tied to her bed when her sexpartner dies and she knows there is noone coming to untie her. Horrifying situations but not supernatural. or a writer getting caught by his biggest fan and force to write or else..... . But of course its true that many of his books are a blend of many genres which just shows how skilled he is as a writer. The reason for the name King of Horror is propably because of the books he wrote under his first decade as an author, say from Carrie to IT most of them, under his own name, most of them could be seen as horror. Carrie, Salems Lot, The Shining, The Stand, Firestarter, Cujo, Christine, Pet Semetary, Cycle of The Werewolf and It can all be seen as horror. That they have other elements in them doesnt exclude them as such. It only means that he incorporates many other things than just the plain scary because he is the excellent storyteller he is. After that the name was stuck. Since then he has branched even more and books like, for instance, Liseys Story, Colorado Kid, Joyland are not horror in the least but of course once a name is stuck it stays. At least thats the way i see it.

...made me think Kurb, yes you did-and I just realized that his first few years in the business he batted for the cycle amongst the iconic "monsters"....plain as the nose on me face and just never saw it until now.....

 

[Srbo]

I had a very hard time reading The Shining.
Some parts meant real work for me, it was hard to understand what he wanted to say and many times I wasn`t sure if it`s really happening or is it all in Jack`s mind.
Maybe a time for a re-read soon....

 

[Gerald]

Here is the top 10 of the 'pure horror' ones (if there is such a thing) according to Den of Geek:

Stephen King: The Top 10 Pure Horror Novels | Den of Geek

Richard Matheson actually made a distinction between horror and terror. He felt his own work was often in the terror category (hence the title of the 1975 movie based on his stories, Trilogy of Terror), horror being more visceral. Some tend to take horror in a broader sense as anything to do with fear (I tend to do that too), but others (like Matheson) feel horror is when it gets physical.

 

[Srbo]

Here is the top 10 of the 'pure horror' ones (if there is such a thing) according to Den of Geek:

Stephen King: The Top 10 Pure Horror Novels | Den of Geek

Richard Matheson actually made a distinction between horror and terror. He felt his own work was often in the terror category (hence the title of the 1975 movie based on his stories, Trilogy of Terror), horror being more visceral. Some tend to take horror in a broader sense as anything to do with fear (I tend to do that too), but others (like Matheson) feel horror is when it gets physical.

Thanks for the link and comment, much appreciated.

 

[Arkay Lynchpin]

11/22/63

Joyland

Duma Key

The Eyes of the Dragon

Bag of Bones

These are a few that I could think of, off the top of my head, that are NOT horror

Forgive me if I'm getting this wrong, as it's a while since I've read those books, but each definately had an element of horror woven into the story.
If memory serves correctly then these images come to mind:

11/22/63 - Stepping into a wasteland future because you not only screwed the pooch, she told you she'd had better.

Joyland - Serial killer

Duma Key - Haunted house, ghosts, visions of drowning people...

The Eyes of the Dragon - Too long since I've read this one but there'll surely be a hint of the macabre in this story too.

Bag of Bones - Ghosts, lynchings...

 

[Kurben]

T

Forgive me if I'm getting this wrong, as it's a while since I've read those books, but each definately had an element of horror woven into the story.
If memory serves correctly then these images come to mind:

11/22/63 - Stepping into a wasteland future because you not only screwed the pooch, she told you she'd had better.

Joyland - Serial killer

Duma Key - Haunted house, ghosts, visions of drowning people...

The Eyes of the Dragon - Too long since I've read this one but there'll surely be a hint of the macabre in this story too.

Bag of Bones - Ghosts, lynchings...

Thats the difficult thing about trying to put everything in a genre. What is SF, What is Horror? (11/22/63). Are all dystopian novels horror just because it doesnt turn out so well? Are all Crimeliterature involving serialkillers really Horror? Are all ghost stories horror just because there is ghosts? I don't think so personally, you have to judge book for book. For instance i wouldn't dream about calling The Ghost Of Canterville by Oscar Wilde for a horror story but it definitely is a ghoststory. (funniest ghoststory ever written, I always feel a bit sad for the ghost in that story)

And with King in particular he uses the ordinary hallmarks of horror (ghosts etc) as tools to more effectively tell a story. That story does not have to be horror. For me 11/22/63 is a great SF novel of the timetraveling subcathegory. Joyland is a crimeliterature (more lit than crime actually) and the Eyes Of The Dragon is Fantasy. I must shamefully admit that my memories of both Duma Key and Bag Of Bones are a bit hazy so cant say anything about them. With King there is almost almost always gonna be a dark, macabre part in his stories which is just the way his mind works. Does not mean the book can or should be seen as horror. Just my views.

 

[Neesy]

Forgive me if I'm getting this wrong, as it's a while since I've read those books, but each definately had an element of horror woven into the story.
If memory serves correctly then these images come to mind:

11/22/63 - Stepping into a wasteland future because you not only screwed the pooch, she told you she'd had better.

Joyland - Serial killer

Duma Key - Haunted house, ghosts, visions of drowning people...

The Eyes of the Dragon - Too long since I've read this one but there'll surely be a hint of the macabre in this story too.

Bag of Bones - Ghosts, lynchings...

Okay - I didn't say they were nursery rhymes!

By the way you really should read The Eyes of the Dragon - it's very good;

Another one that is not all that horror filled would be The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon;

p.s. For Bag of Bones there was that

Spoiler

gang rape, too

Maybe I'm just not all that easily shocked, I guess