Random thoughts after finishing... (spoilers)

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

Fritz_in_PDX

Member
Jun 14, 2015
7
43
41
I finished the newer edition of The Stand yesterday, and am sorting through thoughts on it, which is why i was seeking out a forum for discussion. I could leave reviews, but it's not the same thing. I should preface to say I've only read two SK novels so far, so am still feeling out his style and habits as an author. SPOILERS for the entirety of the book interspersed ahead!

I'm sure there's hundreds of books out there (now) about apocalyptic, population-smashing plagues. In fact, I read one maybe a year or so ago called The Passage by Justin Cronin (part of a trilogy, though the 3rd book has not released yet). So while I was reading, I kept comparing it to that story, from the 'what would it be like to live in the world if almost everyone else was dead?' view. Cronin's books are also quite similar to The Walking Dead, except instead of all the infected turning into zombies, they turn into vampires, and so all the survivors have to remain in very strictly regimented enclaves... it's neither here nor there. His book was very well-written, but I didn't know it was about vampires until the end, somehow. So, The Stand ended up being what I had hoped The Passage would have been.

As someone who was born in 1982, it was hard for me to get past the really dated ambience from the 70s. Many of the expressions were completely lost on me, and I had to google a few things. It's always going to be hard when you set a book in the future (1990) and then people from a decade or two past that are reading it in hindsight... it's inevitable, so just let it be dated and readers will have to just deal. I did.

But I think the main appeal for these types of post-apocalyptic books, for me at least, is the thought-provoking nature of "Hey, yeah! What WOULD it really be like if that happened?" It was hard to get past all the unimaginable destruction and grief of everyone seeing all their loved ones dying before they too succumb. Would it be better or worse to survive, when all your loved ones died?

I think it'd be a lot harder nowadays on the survivors, since people in this day and age are so used to relying on technology to tell us how and when to do things that we don't bother to learn for ourselves... we'd be lost without the internet or our phones, or GPS.

The first half of the book, I was in love with it, and liked it just as much as 11/22/63. Unfortunately, when the survivors kind of settled into the Free Zone, I found I had started to dislike almost all the main characters, sadly.

I disliked Frannie intensely, especially her scenes when she was serving on the Committe. I thought she was completely useless and pointless and unprofessional--well... unprofessional is a strange charge to level at someone in those circumstances I guess. I just really hated her character. She was so high-strung, and always getting angry over the wrong thing, or crying, or just being generally obnoxious. Yes, I know she was pregnant and that makes people emotional.

Harold and Nadine were unlikeable from the get-go, but they were sort of meant to be, so that's excusable. At least Harold's character made your emotions run high while reading him. I never pitied him. I just wanted to punch him in the face the whole time. Same with Nadine. She knew what she was getting into was Wrong in every sense, but she was too scared to stop and turn back, plus she kind of wanted to be Wrong. I suppose the same could be same for Harold. I was surprised in the way both of them met their ends. I expected a dramatic, climactic end... it didn't happen for either of them. Which, I kind of like.

I'm learning that SK is not predictable in that respect. Somewhat like George R. R. Martin, he doesn't shy away from killing main characters with no warning, so you can't expect all the main characters to 'make it.' Although it's nice when he gives heads up, like with Kojak, lol. I appreciated knowing from the middle of the book that he would live for another, what was it? 16 years? In general, I like Mr. King's hand with forewarning. It's tricky, so you can't take it at face value. But I think it adds the right touch of gravitas to partings or goodbyes, when he says that two characters never saw each other again, or... whatever the case is. It makes the passages deeper.

Stu and Larry, to me, were just kind of generic Everymen heroes, to me. I had a hard time understanding Larry's deeper motivations. And in the end, I found I didn't care. I was sad he died. I felt sorry for him when he had to leave Stu in the desert after he broke his leg, and finally was impressed with this courage to walk into Las Vegas the way they did (which goes for all of those 3 who did it). Stu was OK, but he never won me over to being a huge fan. Probably because he was in love with Frannie, and I have to judge him for that.

The whole subplot to send spies to Las Vegas seemed so stupid to me. I was already not impressed with the "Free Zone" committee, and this didn't impress me at all. You had to figure none of those people were coming back alive. Your adversary has powers to infiltrate your dreams, and even waking realities. You have to figure maybe he would know they were spies. And whatever info they could bring back is the same info the people in Boulder could (and did) probably have theorized in the first place. Tom Cullen was the only one to survive, and by the time he came back, his info was long irrelevant. (The part at the end, describing Tom and Stu and Kojak's journey back to Boulder after the bomb was a really enjoyable part of the book, imo.)

I was sad (and surprised) by the way Nick died. I thought Mother Abagail had indicated that she knew he would be "the one" from the first time she met him, or something like that. Something that indicated he would be a leader after she was gone. Well, that didn't really happen.

Glen Bateman's character was ok, he didn't bother me as much as someone of the others. My main issue with him was that he initially left Kojak behind. Super lame. I would never, ever have done that. Especially since there's fewer dogs left than people it seemed like, and a lot would probably starve to death with no easy food sources and people to feed them. Don't tell me they don't have motorcycle sidecars back in the 70s? He was a smart dog. Strap him in, he'd have been fine. I would have found a way.

I liked the character of Mother Abagail a lot, and also thought the way that she died was a little strange. She felt she had made some kind of sin of Pride and so exiles herself and that's pretty much that, in essence. That whole subplot was a little murky to me.

Looking back, I do wish that this book didn't contain the Randall Flagg aspect at all. I'd like to read a book that just talks about the survival of mankind after something like this happens. 'This' meaning a supervirus or something similar. No zombie, no vampires, no demons trying to rule humanity. I think it would be interesting to read how they go about surviving, scavenging from what they find lying around. It would probably be a hard book for an author to write though. It would require tons of research and knowledge. There was so much I wondered about while reading this book. You could fill another book the same size just answering those types of questions.

So yeah... I wasn't crazy about most of the characters by the end, but it was a really interesting book, tugged on all the emotions. Thinking back now, there were so many little side parts of the story that didn't affect the major outcome, which I'm sure some critics felt should have been cut or left out of the story, but I'm glad each part was in it. If it's a good story, who cares how long it is? I'm happy to keep reading. I loved the depth and breadth of it. Wish it had even more breadth, in fact. Glad Kojak lived AND found a girlfriend, even though every other poor dog had to die :(

I'm left wondering what I would do if I had survived. I definitely wouldn't want to stay in the Free Zone with all those people. I want to say I would just roam around, living off of what was leftover of humanity. On the other hand, as was stated a number of times in the book, there are a lot of things that can kill you, or accidents that could befall, and with really no medical assistance, you'd be toast. So, that would make just roaming around difficult. Or even just choosing to live somewhere, alone. You would kind of want to have a couple people within shouting distance if possible. But as Glen kept pointing out, you start grouping humans together, and trouble soon follows.

Plus you'd have to just KNOW to avoid the entire Las Vegas area. I wonder how many people would have wandered into that and died of radiation poisoning. As was also stated a few times in the book, you have to worry about all the weapons of varying levels of destruction just left lying around. Scary...

Anyhow, I will wrap this up, since I am way past the point of rambling now, and everyone else finished talking about this book 40 years ago.
 

doowopgirl

very avid fan
Aug 7, 2009
6,946
25,119
65
dublin ireland
The Stand in it's expanded form is one of my all time favorites. For me, it was a question of how would I react in the same situation. I thin that is what King does best. Takes a situation and has readers asking themselves how they would deal with it. So, obviously eveyone would react i theirown way. I never did like Frannie, before or after. It's the every man that fasci8nate me the most. Becauase thats me. Every man or woman. Most of us aren't heroes. A lot of us do what we are compelled to do even if we know it's wrong. I always felt sorry for Harold because he knew he could have gone in a different direction, but felt he had gone too far to change. Mother Abigail did get on my nerves after a while, but heck, people will do that in any situation. Anyway, I'm done and thanks for your thoughts.
 

staropeace

Richard Bachman's love child
Nov 28, 2006
15,210
48,848
Alberta,Canada
I finished the newer edition of The Stand yesterday, and am sorting through thoughts on it, which is why i was seeking out a forum for discussion. I could leave reviews, but it's not the same thing. I should preface to say I've only read two SK novels so far, so am still feeling out his style and habits as an author. SPOILERS for the entirety of the book interspersed ahead!

I'm sure there's hundreds of books out there (now) about apocalyptic, population-smashing plagues. In fact, I read one maybe a year or so ago called The Passage by Justin Cronin (part of a trilogy, though the 3rd book has not released yet). So while I was reading, I kept comparing it to that story, from the 'what would it be like to live in the world if almost everyone else was dead?' view. Cronin's books are also quite similar to The Walking Dead, except instead of all the infected turning into zombies, they turn into vampires, and so all the survivors have to remain in very strictly regimented enclaves... it's neither here nor there. His book was very well-written, but I didn't know it was about vampires until the end, somehow. So, The Stand ended up being what I had hoped The Passage would have been.

As someone who was born in 1982, it was hard for me to get past the really dated ambience from the 70s. Many of the expressions were completely lost on me, and I had to google a few things. It's always going to be hard when you set a book in the future (1990) and then people from a decade or two past that are reading it in hindsight... it's inevitable, so just let it be dated and readers will have to just deal. I did.

But I think the main appeal for these types of post-apocalyptic books, for me at least, is the thought-provoking nature of "Hey, yeah! What WOULD it really be like if that happened?" It was hard to get past all the unimaginable destruction and grief of everyone seeing all their loved ones dying before they too succumb. Would it be better or worse to survive, when all your loved ones died?

I think it'd be a lot harder nowadays on the survivors, since people in this day and age are so used to relying on technology to tell us how and when to do things that we don't bother to learn for ourselves... we'd be lost without the internet or our phones, or GPS.

The first half of the book, I was in love with it, and liked it just as much as 11/22/63. Unfortunately, when the survivors kind of settled into the Free Zone, I found I had started to dislike almost all the main characters, sadly.

I disliked Frannie intensely, especially her scenes when she was serving on the Committe. I thought she was completely useless and pointless and unprofessional--well... unprofessional is a strange charge to level at someone in those circumstances I guess. I just really hated her character. She was so high-strung, and always getting angry over the wrong thing, or crying, or just being generally obnoxious. Yes, I know she was pregnant and that makes people emotional.

Harold and Nadine were unlikeable from the get-go, but they were sort of meant to be, so that's excusable. At least Harold's character made your emotions run high while reading him. I never pitied him. I just wanted to punch him in the face the whole time. Same with Nadine. She knew what she was getting into was Wrong in every sense, but she was too scared to stop and turn back, plus she kind of wanted to be Wrong. I suppose the same could be same for Harold. I was surprised in the way both of them met their ends. I expected a dramatic, climactic end... it didn't happen for either of them. Which, I kind of like.

I'm learning that SK is not predictable in that respect. Somewhat like George R. R. Martin, he doesn't shy away from killing main characters with no warning, so you can't expect all the main characters to 'make it.' Although it's nice when he gives heads up, like with Kojak, lol. I appreciated knowing from the middle of the book that he would live for another, what was it? 16 years? In general, I like Mr. King's hand with forewarning. It's tricky, so you can't take it at face value. But I think it adds the right touch of gravitas to partings or goodbyes, when he says that two characters never saw each other again, or... whatever the case is. It makes the passages deeper.

Stu and Larry, to me, were just kind of generic Everymen heroes, to me. I had a hard time understanding Larry's deeper motivations. And in the end, I found I didn't care. I was sad he died. I felt sorry for him when he had to leave Stu in the desert after he broke his leg, and finally was impressed with this courage to walk into Las Vegas the way they did (which goes for all of those 3 who did it). Stu was OK, but he never won me over to being a huge fan. Probably because he was in love with Frannie, and I have to judge him for that.

The whole subplot to send spies to Las Vegas seemed so stupid to me. I was already not impressed with the "Free Zone" committee, and this didn't impress me at all. You had to figure none of those people were coming back alive. Your adversary has powers to infiltrate your dreams, and even waking realities. You have to figure maybe he would know they were spies. And whatever info they could bring back is the same info the people in Boulder could (and did) probably have theorized in the first place. Tom Cullen was the only one to survive, and by the time he came back, his info was long irrelevant. (The part at the end, describing Tom and Stu and Kojak's journey back to Boulder after the bomb was a really enjoyable part of the book, imo.)

I was sad (and surprised) by the way Nick died. I thought Mother Abagail had indicated that she knew he would be "the one" from the first time she met him, or something like that. Something that indicated he would be a leader after she was gone. Well, that didn't really happen.

Glen Bateman's character was ok, he didn't bother me as much as someone of the others. My main issue with him was that he initially left Kojak behind. Super lame. I would never, ever have done that. Especially since there's fewer dogs left than people it seemed like, and a lot would probably starve to death with no easy food sources and people to feed them. Don't tell me they don't have motorcycle sidecars back in the 70s? He was a smart dog. Strap him in, he'd have been fine. I would have found a way.

I liked the character of Mother Abagail a lot, and also thought the way that she died was a little strange. She felt she had made some kind of sin of Pride and so exiles herself and that's pretty much that, in essence. That whole subplot was a little murky to me.

Looking back, I do wish that this book didn't contain the Randall Flagg aspect at all. I'd like to read a book that just talks about the survival of mankind after something like this happens. 'This' meaning a supervirus or something similar. No zombie, no vampires, no demons trying to rule humanity. I think it would be interesting to read how they go about surviving, scavenging from what they find lying around. It would probably be a hard book for an author to write though. It would require tons of research and knowledge. There was so much I wondered about while reading this book. You could fill another book the same size just answering those types of questions.

So yeah... I wasn't crazy about most of the characters by the end, but it was a really interesting book, tugged on all the emotions. Thinking back now, there were so many little side parts of the story that didn't affect the major outcome, which I'm sure some critics felt should have been cut or left out of the story, but I'm glad each part was in it. If it's a good story, who cares how long it is? I'm happy to keep reading. I loved the depth and breadth of it. Wish it had even more breadth, in fact. Glad Kojak lived AND found a girlfriend, even though every other poor dog had to die :(

I'm left wondering what I would do if I had survived. I definitely wouldn't want to stay in the Free Zone with all those people. I want to say I would just roam around, living off of what was leftover of humanity. On the other hand, as was stated a number of times in the book, there are a lot of things that can kill you, or accidents that could befall, and with really no medical assistance, you'd be toast. So, that would make just roaming around difficult. Or even just choosing to live somewhere, alone. You would kind of want to have a couple people within shouting distance if possible. But as Glen kept pointing out, you start grouping humans together, and trouble soon follows.

Plus you'd have to just KNOW to avoid the entire Las Vegas area. I wonder how many people would have wandered into that and died of radiation poisoning. As was also stated a few times in the book, you have to worry about all the weapons of varying levels of destruction just left lying around. Scary...

Anyhow, I will wrap this up, since I am way past the point of rambling now, and everyone else finished talking about this book 40 years ago.
I disliked Frannie and the group a bit, too. So damn sure and proud of themselves. I can see why Harold did not like them. I liked Nick and Tom, though.
 

blunthead

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2006
80,755
195,461
Atlanta GA
I'm still trying to figure out whether it's crazy to put a spoiler aler out on a book that was published 37 years ago and reissued 25 years ago.

A Christmas Carol -- SPOILER ALERT: Scrooge gets nice! ;-D
No, I think it's not crazy. There are still plenty of fans or potential fans who have (somehow) not read The Stand. It's my feeling that spoilers should always been used or that a spoiler warning should be included for all posts which reveal crucial aspects of sK stories.
 

bobledrew

Inveterate yammerer
May 13, 2010
2,782
1,924
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
You make a good argument. And I agree. And it still seems weird in my pointy head.


14v37HLLHEXtsY.gif
 

gniknehpets

Backwards Sister Member
Oct 20, 2009
1,917
1,945
northern wisconsin
I liked all the points you made even if I disagree with some of them. Your post was well stated and it's fun to hear others views.

I am probably a dork to admit this but I've read the book 11 times. There are parts that make me hate, love, cry, laugh and get goose bumps even after reading it that many times. In fact, now I start to cry or get goose bumps before anything happens because I know it's coming. But the love and innocence of Tom and Kojak always lift me up and make me feel there's hope for mankind. Because I do wonder.
 

gniknehpets

Backwards Sister Member
Oct 20, 2009
1,917
1,945
northern wisconsin
Sweet Buttery Jesus ! 11 times.. much respect, Man ;)

Thanks! Respect is not what I expected as most people think I'm just nuts for reading anything that many times. I love reading good books more than once. I tend to read way too fast the first time and miss so much.

Have you done the Dark Tower series yet? If not it should be your next mission.
 

Karloff

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2015
152
649
37
Kutno, Poland
A also like reading killer books more than once. I've read "IT" 4 times and often read random chapters-addiction ? ;)
The great thing is that I ALWAYS find something new, a tiny detail, it makes me feel good ;)

To be honest, I haven't :( I'm afraid of sinking into the DT world completely and becoming a SK- no-life :D ;)
In Poland there's a new edition DT series coming out. You can find the covers below:

DT - I http://images.gildia.pl/_n_/sklep/275/275842-450.jpg
DT - II http://stephenking.pl/roznosci/aktualnosci/powolanie2.jpg
DT - III http://stephenking.pl/roznosci/aktualnosci/ziemie2.jpg

Poeple in Poland have gone CRAZY and are very excited about new edition and of course there's more still to come ! ;)
 

gniknehpets

Backwards Sister Member
Oct 20, 2009
1,917
1,945
northern wisconsin
That makes me feel better. ;-D I do that with certain chapters too. Yes, possibly addiction. But do we care? Nope! That's why we're here. Everyone understands.

The DT series does take of a big chunk of time but you can always take a break between books. The first reading took me something like 25 years since I had to wait for each book to be published. Torture waiting for the next one. My personal best with the series was a few years ago when I had back to back ankle surgeries and was pretty much confined to my chair. Read the whole thing in 3 weeks. I would not suggest doing that. :beguiled: