1. New to the board or trying to figure out how something works here? Check out the User Guide.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Hot Topics is closed from 4 PM - 8:30 AM ET.
    Dismiss Notice

Steve's Explanation For Loser's Sex Scene

Discussion in 'IT' started by Dana Jean, Nov 17, 2013.

  1. Dana Jean

    Dana Jean Dirty Pirate Hooker Moderator

    Again, JMO, but I wouldn't like the scene either way. Ben or Bev or anyone. I was totally pulled out of that time and place when that situation was introduced into the story.
     
  2. recitador

    recitador Speed Reader

    if it was described with exactly the same emotions and reasoning behind it, no.
     
    kingricefan and GNTLGNT like this.
  3. Dana Jean

    Dana Jean Dirty Pirate Hooker Moderator

    I'd like to hear your thoughts on the movie.
     
    kingricefan and GNTLGNT like this.
  4. Dana Jean

    Dana Jean Dirty Pirate Hooker Moderator

    Well, I definitely appreciate your opinion, but I'm not misguided nor am I a conservative. Far from it. Again, this is fiction and it's Stephen's vision. I loved the book, and respect his vision. I was totally immersed in the story, until this scene. He just pulled me out of the story. It didn't seem to flow and fit with the narrative -- to me. I respect everyone's right to love or hate this scene. But I don't appreciate name calling.
     
    Sundrop, kingricefan and GNTLGNT like this.
  5. williamc

    williamc Member

    That brings to me another what if question. What if Bev had been 18? Same scene, same reasons. Darthclide's question makes me wonder. When is it too far? When is it luscivious?
     
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  6. Dana Jean

    Dana Jean Dirty Pirate Hooker Moderator

    No. I did not like the scene. It would not matter that the ages were different to me. The scene is what took me out of the story.
     
  7. not_nadine

    not_nadine Comfortably Roont

    I honestly forgot about that scene until this thread and re-read. Early Stephen King was a bit different. That scene was not necessary all. But it is what it is.

    He would do that in early years with other books as well. Remember 'The Raft?' Suddenly wild passion while all that going on. I just shook my head. There goes SK again. 'Autopsy Room?' And many more.

    It was what it was.
     
  8. recitador

    recitador Speed Reader

    that probably has a lot to do with the author and how they describe it, as well as personal readers sensibilities. you can throw all the what ifs you want to at it (even if it's a bit of tilting at windmills, because the scene is what it is, and there's no changing it), and those two will always be the main factors. some writers have more tact than others, even when their subject matter explores fringe ideas. others could probably write the same scene and have it come off much worse.
     
  9. Piersyl

    Piersyl New Member

    Hello Forum,

    I originally didn't want to comment in this thread- I was just reading your opinions and found some of them very interesting and sensible. I agree with most people who argue that the aspect of their age isn't the damning part in itself but rather how unnessesairy if feels. I have no problem with the simple truth of life that kids entering puperty start to experiment and as I live in europe I feel like people are way more relaxed about it here anyways (child nudity is normal here on beachers, television etc- age of consent is 14- sex ed is widely available). But I do have to say out of fairness that I am quite socially conservative (in contrast to other posters anyway) just due to the fact that I work with with abused children that the goverment had to take out of their enviroment at home for 5 years now. And I feel that there are quite some misconceptions and dangerous opinions out there.. althought I respect that everyone can have their opinion. When I read the contribution/rant about sexual "repressive" society and victim shaming/ mental bagacke for something "normal" like a Bev having sex with six boys from deathclide i felt lime I had to comment.

    Aside from the 'very' subtle implication that age doesn't matter when it comes to having group sex in this specific post ("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?") and some other gripes i have with this post that could be summed up with the words 'ideologic differences', I felt like there is a very important element to alot of arguments made in this and similair posts in defense of the scene:

    When working with sexually abused children we often have to look out for certain behavioral problems. Self mutulation (cutting/burning skin) and other destructive behvaiors are often the easiest to spot anf combat. They are quite 'surface level' due to the fact that the children know it's a bad or anormal thing they do. But one of the more deep running problems of which I had no clue of when I started working with kids and families, was the degree of sexual activity in contrast to non-abused children. When children enter puperty they begin to experiment with things and might "put it in" out of curiosity but real sexual contact almost always develops in the later stages of puperty. Sure a 14 year old girl might have sex already but a 11-12 year old girl is most usually not on that level. At that age mutual touching is considered quite mature yet clumsy but still in the field of "normal" compaired to the average. They are NOT "sexually mature teens" as deathclide put it. The complete lack of understanding or nuance that different ages during puperty have in that posts is what made me write this. Kids entering puperty are not already in ful swing hormonal sex drive mode yet. They are on their way but not "gang-bang" level as someone else phrased it.
    But children who were subject of sexual abuse by someone else in their life are often already way ahead of the curve. I don't want to get into details but I've seen young kids succeeding in encouranging other more innocent children to do things that I personally didnt know of untill my college years. Children are incredibly good at adapting to circumstances and a child that way abused might end up seeing these things as 'normal'. Infact once in a while we only suspect that there were elements of sexual abuse (additionally to for example physical abuse/beating from drunk parents) after we hear from other children about/or walk in on these troubled kids trying to do fishy things with other kids in the childrens shelter. Often after carefull probing we do find out that these kids "learned it from unclen jim" or wanted to try it out on others because it was done to them and most of the time the parents end up confirming our fears. Just because a 10 year old girl thinks this is how you make someone you like happy doesn't mean it's right- and even if they already begun to enjoy some of these things. They are children and not "small adults". There is a very important difference between the natural clumsy experimenting (which also goes on Im very aware of) and full mature sexual "skills"

    Lots of words. But here is my point: I read the book before I started working with children and after (last year) and the first thing I had to think of last time was these most abused kids I work with. To me, especially after realizng that Bev's father probably directly or indirectly sexually abused her, it looks like Bev is acting out things she had been introduced to way earlier than she should have. Im not implying she was raped before but certainly her father was being fishy or maybe touchy about it. When I look at that scene I see all the elements as they happen in real life. Bev the only ne who was worried about rape/ sex that much the whole time coaxing the boys into something they didn't conciously want. She had to talk them into it as King puts it.
    Most of them were not even that developed (compairison of size) or didnt even ejaculate. None of the boys even thought of this as an option (group sex) nor did most know were to put it and most were unconfortable with this.
    Infact King even states so himself:

    'She senses his eagerness, but it is tempered and held back by his anxiety for her, perhaps because only Bill and she herself realize what an enormous act this is, and how it must never be spoken of, not to anyone else, not even to each other.'

    Maybe i'm biased because I walked in on a similair scene before during my work back in 2013 but it looks to as if Bev was somewhere subconciously affected by previous experiences in her life that made her initiate a situation that any normal child of her age wouldn't have thought of. For me this was very obvious anf I thought King a genius for carefully planting all the elements of this very subtle and quite dark turn in her character development during the entire book. I actualy thought King had quite some knowledge of troubled children and was trying to sneak in some more social commentairy (especially since I think this isnt the only time he touches on the topic of how children cope with sexual abuse). To me this scene was totally shocking ag first and I realy don't like it but I didn't think it was that 'unnatural' in terms of how real abuse victims behave. She is even mortified when the supresed memories of that incident pop up later during the 80s part. This element of supressed memories of traumatic things is another thing troubled people with a traumatic childhoods have to deal with.This of course stands in stark contrast to the above mentioned post which looks at 12 year olds engaging in group sex and sexual cohersion in a more relaxed light (again, i dont want to get into viewpoint/ideological arguments about whether or not children are being sexualy 'repressed' or indoctrinated into being less sexually aware etc-). To me all signs point to the fact that this was quite sly and educated attempt to add another layer of symbolism to this book; not mythical but alegorical.

    Only after reading other comments on this scene I realized that I might be in the minority with this view. I understand the other interpretations on this too but in that case i'm puzzled as to why King had to describe the scene the way he did
    or why he used and described group-sex between kids (half of which cant or wont even ejaculate yet according to the text)
    in the first place. Certainly King was aware of how shocking and disturbing this scene was when he even the adult versions of the kids invovled were shocked when remembering it. I kinda hope I wasn't totally deluding myself with seeing patterns in the sand that aren't there because of my job. Maybe i'm the one coping here and fiction isn't as dark as reality even when it involves child-murdering giant spiders.

    Pls tell me if you think my totally wrong and full of garbage - I can take it :kiwi-fruit:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 11, 2017
  10. williamc

    williamc Member

    I meant lascivious, right?
    You bring up some good points. What I am curious about is the personal reader sensibilities. My tilting is not what the scene is, you are correct, but the scene itself is fiction. It was intentionally created. And, to put a bit of my opinion into it, it was a grown man romanticizing 12 year old sex. With detail. Mr. King defended it as symbolism.
    I have sympathy toward those that would be sensitive to that scene. And I don't understand those that would angrily defend it. I would like to understand.
    To understate, I will say that Mr. King is my favorite author, and I have read a lot of authors.
     
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  11. FlakeNoir

    FlakeNoir Beta Tester Moderator

    Welcome to the site, Piersyl.
     
  12. GNTLGNT

    GNTLGNT The idiot is IN

    ....yesh, what she shaid.....
     
  13. Out of Order

    Out of Order PS I Love You

    Well, got my Book of the Month Club reading in......:D
     
  14. John13

    John13 Active Member

    It wouldnt work because the point of King is that kids act in ways that shock adults
     
    williamc and GNTLGNT like this.
  15. Tiny

    Tiny RECEIVED:Annoying Questions award

    good grief...they should have left in the scene/idea... but its not a big deal to me.
    they may have changed some other stuff....and some of THAT might make me NOT
    like this movie, but the sewer-train isnt one such scene.

    it is VERY strange to me that PRIME TIME TV in 1990 left the 'reference' of the scene
    in their silly TV-PG mini series, and the whole world was pretty much OK with it.

    now, in 2017... we are having a much harder time even talking about it.

    now let me make sure every one understands. Bev had sex with the boys
    because they were GONNA DIE. they were lost and were NOT gonna find their way out
    of the sewers because the BOND was broken. The 7 of them had a magic BOND that kindda
    gave them Mild-supers powers [sortta kindda]. She had sex with each of them and brought
    back their bond so that one of them could find the way our [Richie I think] she brought back their friendship.

    FRIENDSHIP IS MAGIC [kek]
     
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  16. Tiny

    Tiny RECEIVED:Annoying Questions award

    PLEASE please please.
    did bev have any kind of weapon , a sling shot or something else
    please post in spoiler text
     
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  17. wem3

    wem3 Member

    Please let me express my apologies for the rudeness and my thanks for the classy reply.

    For what it's worth, I wouldn't let a little coprophagia turn you off to Pynchon. After all, Bevvie takes a sip of **** in Mrs. Kersh's house...
     
    GNTLGNT and kingricefan like this.
  18. wem3

    wem3 Member

    Nope
     
    GNTLGNT and kingricefan like this.
  19. kingricefan

    kingricefan All-being, keeper of Space, Time & Dimension.

    It's all good! We're all friends here.
     
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  20. César Hernández-Meraz

    César Hernández-Meraz Wants to be Nick, ends up as Larry

    Well done. Spelling rules should be learned in elementary school, so ever-present errors (and any attitude the students may have not to fix them) should not exist on middle-school. I am ashamed to see many people who graduate from University but still make no effort to write well (in English or Spanish). Typos (specially when typing in a hurry) are one thing, but when the best case scenario is to use a spelling (or grammar) software and rely on it then I fear for where language is headed.

    I think Ben's would hurt B-B-Bill more than it did Beverly. :cold:
     
    GNTLGNT and danie like this.

Share This Page