Steve's Explanation For Loser's Sex Scene

  • This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.

GNTLGNT

The idiot is IN
Jun 15, 2007
87,651
358,754
62
Cambridge, Ohio
Just wanted to add my two cents what with the remake of the film coming out. (sorry, I am not hopeful it will be good. I fear their will be so many political/social motifs shoehorned into the script)

But about the book, just as many others have, I read it when I was in my teens. It was funny that my parents said "no you can't watch X-files because it is too scary" but this book slipped past their radar. I am 100% positive they would not let me read this book if they knew about this scene.

Personally, considering I have never had sex, I am surprised I always viewed this scene as an important way to hold onto their sanity, and not something to be aroused by. So I definitely would agree with anybody here saying that it has to do with magic + helping them keep their adult-like minds at least until they make it out of the sewers.

But to the people whinging about it being porn, and "completely unnecessary", I can only hope future generations can learn from your misguided views. We currently live in one of the most regressive time periods in history with regards to how we treat teens that are sexually mature. You can see all the stories in other posts here for yourself. When kids are in puberty, they aren't perfect angels with asexual thoughts. Whether a 12 year old girl has full on sex with her peers, or simply plays some type of "touch" game, it shouldn't shock you that this can happen. Does this mean I want more kids doing what Beverly did? No. But not because of uptight conservative reasons. I don't want it simply because our society is very dumb right now about this topic. The last thing I want for a 12 year old girl are tons of psychologists/cops/parents brainwashing her into being a victim. Can you imagine how twisted Beverly might have been if she escaped the sewers to only be called "slut" or "victim" for the rest of her life?

Here is an interesting question though. If this book were real, and it were possible to view these events as they happened (with no danger to yourself). Would you close your eyes during this intimate scene? Or would you embrace it for what it is? See, this is why I like King's books. Whether he wrote this scene during his troubled years or not, it brings the elephant in the room to our attention. If we are okay with reading this scene as an adult, then why should we feel ashamed if we were to see this happen in real life? It really puts a kink in people's beliefs about adults and supposed "perverts". Maybe not all sex is about power and control? Maybe some of it is about unity and love? Maybe not all adults are evil when it comes to teenage sexuality?
....well put and I say welcome!....
 

recitador

Speed Reader
Sep 3, 2016
1,750
8,264
41
Just wanted to add my two cents what with the remake of the film coming out. (sorry, I am not hopeful it will be good. I fear their will be so many political/social motifs shoehorned into the script)

As opposed to the many social motifs in the book? Bullying, abuse, homophobia/acceptance of gays, race relations, etc?

The rest of your post i agree is well put, and welcome to the board
 

darthclide

Member
Aug 25, 2017
8
15
34
As opposed to the many social motifs in the book? Bullying, abuse, homophobia/acceptance of gays, race relations, etc?

The rest of your post i agree is well put, and welcome to the board

As apposed to the fact that the movie made today will add things that aren't in the book. Although I disagree on most of King's views, I just wish people would stay true to his books.

More to the point about his views, I feel that King never did much that was groundbreaking with regards to your list of social motifs. I haven't read all his books, but he definitely seems to do what is socially popular at the time (which is often based around liberal viewpoints). Don't get me wrong, if a person can write a good story, I will enjoy it even if they use current day popular viewpoints. Heck, the scene we are discussing on this post isn't that controversial. If the scene had involved adults in someway, then that would be an eye opening discussion for many.

Thank you for the welcome everyone. I think I will be reading some of his older works again soon.
 

recitador

Speed Reader
Sep 3, 2016
1,750
8,264
41
As apposed to the fact that the movie made today will add things that aren't in the book. Although I disagree on most of King's views, I just wish people would stay true to his books.

More to the point about his views, I feel that King never did much that was groundbreaking with regards to your list of social motifs. I haven't read all his books, but he definitely seems to do what is socially popular at the time (which is often based around liberal viewpoints). Don't get me wrong, if a person can write a good story, I will enjoy it even if they use current day popular viewpoints. Heck, the scene we are discussing on this post isn't that controversial. If the scene had involved adults in someway, then that would be an eye opening discussion for many.

Thank you for the welcome everyone. I think I will be reading some of his older works again soon.


i never claimed they were groundbreaking. just pointing out the book is already rife with social issues. analyzing your potential entertainment through the lens of politics is a surefire way to set yourself up for disappointment. i doubt there's ever going to be an exact adaptation of anything king has done, because many of his books are heavily enhanced by internal dialogue, but the folks involved with this movie appear to be doing their best to keep it to the spirit, even as they change events for movie purposes.
 

darthclide

Member
Aug 25, 2017
8
15
34
i never claimed they were groundbreaking. just pointing out the book is already rife with social issues. analyzing your potential entertainment through the lens of politics is a surefire way to set yourself up for disappointment. i doubt there's ever going to be an exact adaptation of anything king has done, because many of his books are heavily enhanced by internal dialogue, but the folks involved with this movie appear to be doing their best to keep it to the spirit, even as they change events for movie purposes.

I never claimed that you did. What I said still stands true. Theses "social issues" were treated the same way every other movie does it. It could be put under the category "pop culture" in my opinion.

And perhaps our country is struggling right now because too many people put away their "thinking caps" when watching movies. Look, I know I analyze things more than your average person, but when so many people just pretend that movies aren't subversively trying to sway your opinion on things, people swallow movies/tv shows whole without a second's thought about what they just saw. Also, I understand that people need entertainment to unwind once in awhile. We all just need a break sometimes. The problem is that people take a never ending break when watching things on news, youtube, or movies.

I understand most of King's works are adapted to please audiences (heck, the scene in this post was removed for that reason. Imagine the discussion that would happen if it were included though?) but it doesn't change the fact that I enjoy a King movie more if it is closer to the book.
 
  • Like
Reactions: do1you9love?

recitador

Speed Reader
Sep 3, 2016
1,750
8,264
41
And perhaps our country is struggling right now because too many people put away their "thinking caps" when watching movies. Look, I know I analyze things more than your average person, but when so many people just pretend that movies aren't subversively trying to sway your opinion on things, people swallow movies/tv shows whole without a second's thought about what they just saw. Also, I understand that people need entertainment to unwind once in awhile. We all just need a break sometimes. The problem is that people take a never ending break when watching things on news, youtube, or movies.

that's a bit of a cynical and paranoid approach to movie watching. i don't think most people suddenly lose their thinking faculties and ability to form their own opinions because they saw stuff in a movie or tv show. portrayal of things that real people have to deal with, that some watchers never have, doesn't automatically equate to subliminal messaging. moves, tv shows, and yes, even books, are great ways to walk in other people's shoes and see their worldviews and viewpoints. vince flynn novels push a bit hard on certain ideas that i disagree with, but i don't think he was trying to brainwash me, and i still enjoy them. now programs that are supposedly based on reality, or that exist to inform on reality, yes, those are ripe for subversion tactics (which is about all i can say on that subject, because this isn't the hot topics section, and it's not something we can delve deep into without running afoul of board rules).

EDIT: advanced apologies to mods because i've probably already gotten a little close for comfort. i'm trying to be good, i promise.
 
Last edited:

Robert Gray

Well-Known Member
As apposed to the fact that the movie made today will add things that aren't in the book. Although I disagree on most of King's views, I just wish people would stay true to his books.

Ok, we can agree on that. I wish they were more faithful in making adaptations too.

I feel that King never did much that was groundbreaking with regards to your list of social motifs. I haven't read all his books, but he definitely seems to do what is socially popular at the time (which is often based around liberal viewpoints). Don't get me wrong, if a person can write a good story, I will enjoy it even if they use current day popular viewpoints. Heck, the scene we are discussing on this post isn't that controversial. If the scene had involved adults in someway, then that would be an eye opening discussion for many.

Yes and no. Stephen King is a storyteller. That is what he sets out to do. He doesn't sit down and say to himself, "I'm going to write a story to teach a lesson about social justice today." Very few writers do. Animal Farm is a successful story of that type, i.e. where the the lesson informed the book. So no, Stephen King doesn't intend to do anything groundbreaking in regards to social motifs. :) It just kind of happens. Good stories are about people. We tend to relate to good people more than we do bad (or at least most of us do). Every single one of Stephen King's books are cautionary tales, social commentaries, and guideposts for how a life should be lived. They are particularly effective ones because they don't preach, but we simply watch events unfold and the subtle lessons and views creep in. They are commonsense, by in large, and so clean that even if you intellectually THINK you disagree with most of King's views, you clearly don't. :) Stephen King isn't trying to sell anyone on any positions. He is just telling stories, but in doing so honestly telling lies about fictional people, ideas and positions are transmitted. There is no escaping it.

I've always found Sai King's books deeply fulfilling because they do focus on character and they speak to character, ethics, and faith in a real, applied way rather than in some esoteric, intellectual way. We are a part of everyone we have met, and we are a part of them. Books are a uniquely telepathic medium, a mainline into your thought processes. It is one of the reasons many fascist and dictator types ban books or try to control them. Information is a virus. ;) So it is true that each time you read a Stephen King book part of him is forever lodged in your operating system. That certainly isn't Stephen King's intent, but it is a fact just the same. I, personally, think the world is a better place for it.
 

The Blood Meridan

New Member
Sep 6, 2017
1
6
42
I have, myself, never really gave this scene a LOT of thought. Granted, I believe I first read "IT" in 7th grade? 1993/1994. I loved it; and was freaked out enormously. There are many scenes that WERE schocking to me: The boys at the dump, the switch blade to Henry Bowers dad's throat, most of the scene's involving Mike Hanlon's torment by Henry. The one scene I remember my friends and I being UTTERLY shocked by was the witch in Beverly's house. I had never read the word c**t in a book, and the witch talking to her, spewing that filth, I knew that it was bad (and being a 12 or 13 year old, loved every moment of "naughty" things). Re-examining the 80's, which I did not grow up in (Born in 1981), I think our society, for better or worse, has taken a step back from what is/was acceptable. I would say its a mixed bag; porn is everywhere, and far more shocking than that small part in the book. Do people remember the movie "Over the Edge", by Jonathan Kaplan? Or Christine F. (junkie 14 year old prostitutes in West Berlin)? I don't think that subject matter of those movies would be touched with a ten foot pole in this current era.

Now, is that good or bad? I can't say, honestly. I am not a cultural critic. Thinking back to when I did read the novel, both of the sex scenes stuck out like sore thumbs to me. Now, having two children and aging 24 years, I can understand (but not really buy the reasoning, and still feel repulsed by the scene itself) of the emotional aspect/connection Mr. King was trying to get across. Shortly after the sex scene, they also take a blood oath. Perhaps the sex scene was put in so Mr. King wasn't being redundant (rather silly, IMHO). The blood oath has always been more bonding in Mr. King's books; retrospectively, I think that should have been enough of a bond, especially with children protagonists.

Mr. King has gone on record as being a terrible editor of himself (aren't we all?). The Stand involves a man masturbating another man with a gun up his anus, a short description of a woman getting herself wiped in a private area with barbed wire, and (as a young person reading, this bugged me the most) a child falling down a well and dying of pain and starvation. And fancier, more Pedigreed writers such as Thomas Pynchon, have scenes of Corpophagia, etc.

So, in conclusion, I don't think any explanation would make sense in today's culture. Should it be in there? Yes, it's part of the story. Was it necessary? I don't think so, but hindsight is 20/20. I love the book, and don't think any less of it for either sex scene. Stephen King taught me to love literature, and I am eternally grateful to him for that. I think placing too much meaning on the "connection/bonding" aspect of the scene is wrong-headed. Is it wrong, in of itself? No. I never thought it was an important part of the story.

Sorry for going on so long! I am a terrible editor myself! I am trying my best to keep my expectations of the movie low, even though it is getting great reviews. I want to love it as much as I loved the book. Which is a tall order! haha.
 

Jade Santosmoris

New Member
Sep 6, 2017
2
5
40
I have read this book over fifty times since my first reading it in second grade. This scene has never bothered me.

And I think the main reason is that I firmly believe as a reader we should go on the journey the author takes us on, and accept it the way they presented it.

To look back 31 years later and judge tiny sections of a huge story just doesn't make any sense to me.

Sometimes a swamp is just a swamp and an act of love is just an act of love; be it carnal or for unity.
 

GNTLGNT

The idiot is IN
Jun 15, 2007
87,651
358,754
62
Cambridge, Ohio
I have, myself, never really gave this scene a LOT of thought. Granted, I believe I first read "IT" in 7th grade? 1993/1994. I loved it; and was freaked out enormously. There are many scenes that WERE schocking to me: The boys at the dump, the switch blade to Henry Bowers dad's throat, most of the scene's involving Mike Hanlon's torment by Henry. The one scene I remember my friends and I being UTTERLY shocked by was the witch in Beverly's house. I had never read the word c**t in a book, and the witch talking to her, spewing that filth, I knew that it was bad (and being a 12 or 13 year old, loved every moment of "naughty" things). Re-examining the 80's, which I did not grow up in (Born in 1981), I think our society, for better or worse, has taken a step back from what is/was acceptable. I would say its a mixed bag; porn is everywhere, and far more shocking than that small part in the book. Do people remember the movie "Over the Edge", by Jonathan Kaplan? Or Christine F. (junkie 14 year old prostitutes in West Berlin)? I don't think that subject matter of those movies would be touched with a ten foot pole in this current era.

Now, is that good or bad? I can't say, honestly. I am not a cultural critic. Thinking back to when I did read the novel, both of the sex scenes stuck out like sore thumbs to me. Now, having two children and aging 24 years, I can understand (but not really buy the reasoning, and still feel repulsed by the scene itself) of the emotional aspect/connection Mr. King was trying to get across. Shortly after the sex scene, they also take a blood oath. Perhaps the sex scene was put in so Mr. King wasn't being redundant (rather silly, IMHO). The blood oath has always been more bonding in Mr. King's books; retrospectively, I think that should have been enough of a bond, especially with children protagonists.

Mr. King has gone on record as being a terrible editor of himself (aren't we all?). The Stand involves a man masturbating another man with a gun up his anus, a short description of a woman getting herself wiped in a private area with barbed wire, and (as a young person reading, this bugged me the most) a child falling down a well and dying of pain and starvation. And fancier, more Pedigreed writers such as Thomas Pynchon, have scenes of Corpophagia, etc.

So, in conclusion, I don't think any explanation would make sense in today's culture. Should it be in there? Yes, it's part of the story. Was it necessary? I don't think so, but hindsight is 20/20. I love the book, and don't think any less of it for either sex scene. Stephen King taught me to love literature, and I am eternally grateful to him for that. I think placing too much meaning on the "connection/bonding" aspect of the scene is wrong-headed. Is it wrong, in of itself? No. I never thought it was an important part of the story.

Sorry for going on so long! I am a terrible editor myself! I am trying my best to keep my expectations of the movie low, even though it is getting great reviews. I want to love it as much as I loved the book. Which is a tall order! haha.
...welcome man!.....and that is well stated and said.....thank you for that....
 

vixx

New Member
Sep 6, 2017
3
9
95
I think read this differently than some -

I dated a girl with a upbringing worse than Beverly's in college - let that sink in a bit ...

One of the first things that's perverted is how simple, joyous and wonderful the act of consensual sex is -

You can see earlier in the book that her dad is doing a number on her self esteem and short circuiting her value ...

Later in the book it's clear she knows what sex is; enough to worry about rape and assult and feel powerless

That path is walked by many - and often is as simple as trading what you have, and don't necessarily see as valuable, worthy or special - for what you do value ... Something most grow up with an abundance of.

By ones late teens or twenties - it can lead to a sad situation

With Bev - there was no magic turtle power that gave her a perfect life rising from the ashes

But this scene - startling in its sudden placement - let her make choices, let her experience something used to control and break her down as a positive, and when it was over - all the guys treated her well ...

She may not remember the details, but I think it helped her regain some of what her dad had removed.

Sure - she didn't have the best love life; but she was able to leave (with some Devine assistance) and be haunted, rather than controlled, by the ghost of her dad and other men that treated her like all she'd ever be good for is as some degenerates sex toy.
 

César Hernández-Meraz

Wants to be Nick, ends up as Larry
May 19, 2015
605
4,416
44
Aguascalientes, Mexico
Granted, I believe I first read "IT" in 7th grade? 1993/1994.

(and being a 12 or 13 year old, loved every moment of "naughty" things).

(Born in 1981)

Now, having two children and aging 24 years

Since you are 36, these sentences had me scratching my head until I realized you meant 24 years after you read the book. :D
 

GNTLGNT

The idiot is IN
Jun 15, 2007
87,651
358,754
62
Cambridge, Ohio
I think read this differently than some -

I dated a girl with a upbringing worse than Beverly's in college - let that sink in a bit ...

One of the first things that's perverted is how simple, joyous and wonderful the act of consensual sex is -

You can see earlier in the book that her dad is doing a number on her self esteem and short circuiting her value ...

Later in the book it's clear she knows what sex is; enough to worry about rape and assult and feel powerless

That path is walked by many - and often is as simple as trading what you have, and don't necessarily see as valuable, worthy or special - for what you do value ... Something most grow up with an abundance of.

By ones late teens or twenties - it can lead to a sad situation

With Bev - there was no magic turtle power that gave her a perfect life rising from the ashes

But this scene - startling in its sudden placement - let her make choices, let her experience something used to control and break her down as a positive, and when it was over - all the guys treated her well ...

She may not remember the details, but I think it helped her regain some of what her dad had removed.

Sure - she didn't have the best love life; but she was able to leave (with some Devine assistance) and be haunted, rather than controlled, by the ghost of her dad and other men that treated her like all she'd ever be good for is as some degenerates sex toy.
.....nicely said Vixx, and welcome to the Board.....BTW, love your Vapo Rub......:biggrin2:
 
  • Like
Reactions: kingricefan

John13

Active Member
Sep 25, 2016
39
149
38
I think this was a fail from the side of King. The scene would work better if he put Bev doing something with two boys and not six. A girl doing something with two boys is rear but happens. And the point would be the same the writer wants to make with the homosexual scene(that these things happen even if we us adults dont want to accept it)
 

recitador

Speed Reader
Sep 3, 2016
1,750
8,264
41
I think this was a fail from the side of King. The scene would work better if he put Bev doing something with two boys and not six. A girl doing something with two boys is rear but happens. And the point would be the same the writer wants to make with the homosexual scene(that these things happen even if we us adults dont want to accept it)

having her do it with only 2 instead of all of them would have actually cheapened it and made it worse, because then it would have been sex with no deeper meaning. and if you think there's not women out there with more than two . . ."friends" . . . then i think i have some disappointing news for you. although in those real life cases it's definitely only about the sex.
 

wem3

Member
Sep 7, 2017
5
14
40
I had to look up the word cropophagia (it's misspelled up above) and I will now never read a book by Thomas Pynchon. :icon_eek::barf::facepalm_smiley:

It's never super classy to correct someone's spelling, but if you're gonna do it, actually be correct.

The word is "coprophagia."
 
  • Like
Reactions: kingricefan

Tery

Say hello to my fishy buddy
Moderator
Apr 12, 2006
15,304
44,712
Bremerton, Washington, United States
It's never super classy to correct someone's spelling, but if you're gonna do it, actually be correct.

The word is "coprophagia."

1791d1348536119-any-one-else-think-spelling_police.jpg


;)