Technical remark
- Thread starter Jan Timmich
- Start date
-
This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.
Neesy
#1 fan (Annie Wilkes cousin) 1st cousin Mom's side
I do not worry at all. I'm just interested in the reasons behind. There is a lot of research about so-called facts in fiction. (Very interesting for example: People were given texts (fiction) to read, the texts included statements which are quite obviously wrong, e.g. chocolate is healthy - that's the only example I remember ;-) . And later, it was found out that the people had taken over these wrong statements as common knowlegde!)
So it's intentional and it is an alternate universe - why does King do it the way he did? And what are the effects? That's what I'm interested in. Some of the discussions in the forum tell you quite a lot about that
It is, as it turns out! Dark chocolate is good for you, just don't pig out on it!
Oh, but I spend so much time thinking about these things that it's at least double the fun that I would have if I had just read and put the book back on the shelf
Ain't seen him in a while.That reminded me - Where is Tiny?
He had all the questions.... probably off looking for Bango Skank
Well, all this discussion has me wondering about that damn monkey in that one SK story called, I think it was something like The Monkey, and they keep getting rid of the monkey, but it keeps coming back, and now that really bothers me, coz how could that darn thing REALLY come back when it was just a stuffed monkey, and all, and thangs like that.
And while Topeka, KS in the Dark Tower series had many similarities to the real city, you cannot, in fact, see I-70 from Gage Park (where the rose garden and train are). Why, Mr. King? Why make up stuff like this???
Seriously, even though I grew up just a few miles from there and spent lots of time in Gage Park, I didn't get my panties in a bunch reading it. I was actually excited about how much he left the same- knowing that with it being fiction and all he could have deviated greatly or made up an entirely new city.
Fiction. Read it. Enjoy it. Quit overanalyzing it.
Seriously, even though I grew up just a few miles from there and spent lots of time in Gage Park, I didn't get my panties in a bunch reading it. I was actually excited about how much he left the same- knowing that with it being fiction and all he could have deviated greatly or made up an entirely new city.
Fiction. Read it. Enjoy it. Quit overanalyzing it.
Hmm, I think you still didn't get the idea that there are multiple ways of approaching a book and multiple ways of enjoying it. I don't blame anybody for their - in my point of view: superficial or halfhearted - way of reading a book. I just enjoy mine and I think I found others who see a point in that. If you don't see any value in questions like these, then why read them and give comments (i.e. not answers)?
Hmm, I think you still didn't get the idea that there are multiple ways of approaching a book and multiple ways of enjoying it. I don't blame anybody for their - in my point of view: superficial or halfhearted - way of reading a book. I just enjoy mine and I think I found others who see a point in that. If you don't see any value in questions like these, then why read them and give comments (i.e. not answers)?
This a a MB- a place were members make comments/ have discussions about books and other related matter.
Answers have been given by MsMod who is in direct contact with the author. On either takes her comments as fact, or one moves on.
I am sorry you feel that my way and the way of many others, regarding how we approach a book and enjoy it, is being superficial or halfhearted. To each his own. I will continue to read and enjoy in a manner that suits me just fine. May you enjoy all future books in the manner you seem to enjoy.
Variety is the spice of life...
Different strokes for different folks...
One man's trash is another man's treasure...
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink...
(ah... yeah, right Flakes, cut back on the coffee)
My (murky) point is... there is no recipe for maximum enjoyment. We all find our own rhythm when we pick up a book.
Oh!.... live and let live.
Different strokes for different folks...
One man's trash is another man's treasure...
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink...
(ah... yeah, right Flakes, cut back on the coffee)My (murky) point is... there is no recipe for maximum enjoyment. We all find our own rhythm when we pick up a book.
Oh!.... live and let live.
Well, the last part you said is just what I said: There are multiple ways of reading and enjoying a book and everybody may choose his favorite way. I read some books superfluously and some more closely - as I did with Mr M., and feel being critised for it in this forum by some of the members. That's the one part I tried to comment on in my previous reply.
The other part of my reply is more on a meta-level to the forum and refers to the comments on the questions Jan Timmich and I posted in the forum. I read Ms Mod's answer and it confirmed to me that it's not a mistake by Stephen King, but done intentionally. This is what I already assumed and this is actually why I posted my question and various comments looking for answers why SK might have done it and what are the effects on the plot and the reader. This has been discussed and I'm happy with the solutions found. What I don't like about some of the comments being made - and that is the part of my commment that I feel you either didn't understand or have a different oppinion about: The questions themselves have been looked upon as being invalid. What do comments such as "just read and enjoy" actually tell you? I read and enjoyed the book, I'm re-reading and still enjoying. These comments tell you to read and not think further and not ask stupid questions, don't they? If I think a question is just stupid and not worth being asked why would I comment on it (comment on the question itself = meta, but not provide any answer = with regard to content). If these members are not happy with the question they could just move on.
More clear now what I meant to say or even more confusing?
The unfortunate part about a forum as opposed to discussing a book with someone in person is that it is sometimes hard to discern tone merely from the words and can easily be misinterpreted as being argumentative or negative when that was not the intent. While it may not have in any way been your intent to come across as that, for at least some members it did. I personally feel that most readers don't feel a need to dissect a book of fiction in order to enjoy it but for you knowing the ins and outs and the whys and wherefores apparently adds to your enjoyment. When people were telling you to just read and enjoy, I believe their intent was to say that it isn't a requirement for fiction to do anything more than that in order to enjoy the story and having to analyze the finer details sounds a lot more like being in a class where you're required to break down a story's components to understand its structure. The suggestion was to just read it for the story's sake, not to make it a lesson because that would detract from the simple pleasure of reading to enjoy it.
Oh, wow!! If i ever read a story in that downbreaking way how boring wouldn't they became, how pointless wouldn't they seem? I would end up with not reading anything but science studies and how to manuals. To fully enjoy a story you immerse yourself in it, live it, feel it and sometimes even fall in love with one of the fictional characters. If you detach yourself from a story so much you also takes away some, possible all, of the magic that a good story has. Then it sometimes dies. Put a story, a song or any other piece of art under microscope and soon the wonder will go. The Mona Lisa is just a collection colour spots and a fantastic song just some common accords. If you get to close to a great painting you don't see its greatness. Its the same with writing and stories in my opinion.