Revival...do NOT open unless finished book! *SPOILERS*

  • New to the board or trying to figure out how something works here? Check out the User Guide.
  • New 2019 Hours: The message board is closed between the hours of 4pm ET Thursday and 8:30am ET Tuesday.

    As always, the Board will be open to read and those who have those privileges can still send private messages and post to Profiles.

carrie's younger brother

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2012
5,428
25,645
NJ
Loved the book, it had me thinking for quite awhile once I finished.

Towards the end, Jamie states he thinks Con was the first "revival". After thinking for a bit, does anyone else think that Jacobs may have healed his wife of something prior to the start of the book, then she killed herself and their daughter in the car wreck?
Even though I still abhor the ending, this possibility elevates the rest of the book in my opinion. It makes so much sense! You get an A+ for this totem.
 

Josieg96

New Member
Jan 1, 2015
3
30
23
AUS
Ok someone help me. I really was waiting towards the end for this to happen; somehow fate/destiny would tie the whole thing kinda full circle and Claire's husband who shot her and killed himself was one of the earlier victims of Jacobs' and he himself wouldn't have known who this man was when he healed him or whatever. Then years later Jamie discovers that Claire's death was indirectly the fault of Jacobs....
 

skimom2

Just moseyin' through...
Oct 9, 2013
15,675
92,051
USA
The term comes from a novel by the same name written by Robertson Davies in which he writes: "Those roles which, being neither those of Hero nor Heroine, Confidante nor Villain, but which were nonetheless essential to bring about the Recognition or the dénouement, were called the Fifth Business in drama and opera companies."
I loved that book (Fifth Business) :)
 

skimom2

Just moseyin' through...
Oct 9, 2013
15,675
92,051
USA
I have another question. I didn't pick up on the idea that the story was being told through Jamie's writings in his journal until Jamie mentioned his journal late in the story. Was the entire story told through his journal similar to how Jonathon Harker told his story?
It reminded me much more of the structure of Frankenstein
 

skimom2

Just moseyin' through...
Oct 9, 2013
15,675
92,051
USA
Finally finished. A few thoughts (but just a few, as I'm still digesting):

-First, it's important that Jamie calls Charlie his 'Fifth Business'. A character who is fifth business is neither hero or villain--he's just a mover of the story. If Jamie doesn't consider Charlie a villain, neither should we. So... if there is a bad guy in this story, it's death itself. Very fitting that should come up as the author (and we) age. Death doesn't really scare me (and this story didn't change that any), but DAMN if I'm not resentful of what I'll miss after I'm gone!
-Not convinced that Charlie had anything to do with his wife's death, aside from maybe turning a blind eye to possible drinking. It was the randomness of her death that set him on his path in becoming Victor Frankenstein Jr.
-I thoroughly enjoyed the glimpses of Mr. King's other books. I particularly liked Jamie's description of going home to Harlow--it was so close to Ben's description of going back to Jerusalem's Lot that it made me smile.
-The ant and spider thing (and the hairy leg was definitely a spider leg in my mind) did nothing for me. I'm not a Lovecraft fan, really, so... yeah. Not scary for me, or even particularly troubling.
-I'll probably be lambasted for this, but here goes: I think this story would have worked much better as a short story or novella. This is not because I don't enjoy character development or allowing a story to breathe--I certainly do--but because there were sections and characters that seemed extraneous to me. Not uninteresting, but unnecessary to tell this story.
-Finally: what I did find troubling is how much I found myself worrying about Mr. King over the course of this story. It reads very much as if told by a person who has had a revelation of devastating illness within oneself or a close loved one, something over which the storyteller has no control, and that person is so ANGRY with God (or whatever one chooses to call the Eternal Why). Been there, done that, so no judgment. I usually don't think much about the author at all when reading an absorbing book, but I found myself with a low thrum of worry and sadness virtually from the beginning of this book, worry about Mrs. or Mr. King, or their children or grands. That was weird for me.

Okay. Time to think some more.
 

FlakeNoir

Original Kiwi© SKMB®
Moderator
Apr 11, 2006
42,092
164,789
New Zealand
-Finally: what I did find troubling is how much I found myself worrying about Mr. King over the course of this story. It reads very much as if told by a person who has had a revelation of devastating illness within oneself or a close loved one, something over which the storyteller has no control, and that person is so ANGRY with God (or whatever one chooses to call the Eternal Why). Been there, done that, so no judgment. I usually don't think much about the author at all when reading an absorbing book, but I found myself with a low thrum of worry and sadness virtually from the beginning of this book, worry about Mrs. or Mr. King, or their children or grands. That was weird for me.

Okay. Time to think some more.
My feeling was more, that it was written from a time in life, rather than a worry about a specific health situation... the ageing and moving on to the next life-stage thing was hugely prominent... oh boy, I hope I'm right about that though. :O_O:
 

skimom2

Just moseyin' through...
Oct 9, 2013
15,675
92,051
USA
My feeling was more, that it was written from a time in life, rather than a worry about a specific health situation... the ageing and moving on to the next life-stage thing was hugely prominent... oh boy, I hope I'm right about that though. :O_O:
Me too! He certainly has the talent to put himself in that sort of mind set without a specific catalyst. I keep worrying, though... (I am such a softie for my favorites. I get choked up even thinking about the end of the new Night at the Museum movie, when TR must turn back into wax... I don't think I'll be able to watch the actual movie.)
 

FlakeNoir

Original Kiwi© SKMB®
Moderator
Apr 11, 2006
42,092
164,789
New Zealand
Me too! He certainly has the talent to put himself in that sort of mind set without a specific catalyst. I keep worrying, though... (I am such a softie for my favorites. I get choked up even thinking about the end of the new Night at the Museum movie, when TR must turn back into wax... I don't think I'll be able to watch the actual movie.)
I understand...
 

blunthead

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2006
80,756
195,397
Atlanta GA
The term comes from a novel by the same name written by Robertson Davies in which he writes: "Those roles which, being neither those of Hero nor Heroine, Confidante nor Villain, but which were nonetheless essential to bring about the Recognition or the dénouement, were called the Fifth Business in drama and opera companies."
So, Jacobs is technically not a villain.
 

blunthead

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2006
80,756
195,397
Atlanta GA
His faith must not have been strong to begin with if he was already reading the necronomicon (or the book it was based on) before they passed. And he must have read that before he cured Con.
I think depending on the individual's level of faith a person can read anything at all without necessarily being adversely effected. But, point well-taken, since the fact that Jacobs was questioning his "faith" is presented early in the story.
 
Last edited:
Jan 17, 2015
8
38
40
Finally finished. A few thoughts (but just a few, as I'm still digesting):

-First, it's important that Jamie calls Charlie his 'Fifth Business'. A character who is fifth business is neither hero or villain--he's just a mover of the story. If Jamie doesn't consider Charlie a villain, neither should we. So... if there is a bad guy in this story, it's death itself. Very fitting that should come up as the author (and we) age. Death doesn't really scare me (and this story didn't change that any), but DAMN if I'm not resentful of what I'll miss after I'm gone!
-Not convinced that Charlie had anything to do with his wife's death, aside from maybe turning a blind eye to possible drinking. It was the randomness of her death that set him on his path in becoming Victor Frankenstein Jr.
-I thoroughly enjoyed the glimpses of Mr. King's other books. I particularly liked Jamie's description of going home to Harlow--it was so close to Ben's description of going back to Jerusalem's Lot that it made me smile.
-The ant and spider thing (and the hairy leg was definitely a spider leg in my mind) did nothing for me. I'm not a Lovecraft fan, really, so... yeah. Not scary for me, or even particularly troubling.
-I'll probably be lambasted for this, but here goes: I think this story would have worked much better as a short story or novella. This is not because I don't enjoy character development or allowing a story to breathe--I certainly do--but because there were sections and characters that seemed extraneous to me. Not uninteresting, but unnecessary to tell this story.
-Finally: what I did find troubling is how much I found myself worrying about Mr. King over the course of this story. It reads very much as if told by a person who has had a revelation of devastating illness within oneself or a close loved one, something over which the storyteller has no control, and that person is so ANGRY with God (or whatever one chooses to call the Eternal Why). Been there, done that, so no judgment. I usually don't think much about the author at all when reading an absorbing book, but I found myself with a low thrum of worry and sadness virtually from the beginning of this book, worry about Mrs. or Mr. King, or their children or grands. That was weird for me.

Okay. Time to think some more.
I thought that for a second myself, but this isn't the first time SK has explored what happens after death. I was thinking of Pet Sematary.
 
The Institute - Coming September 10th, 2019