Welcome to Gaia! ::

Though I enjoy all the works of Stephen King, it bothers me that he always has the same base plot, the same events when he writes his books... It's overly structured to the point of boredom. What are your thoughts?

I've never actually read any of his books (shame shame!). If the movies are any indication, his early stuff was better. I loved It, but couldn't stand Rose Red. The Shining, I had high expectations for but was disappointed by it. They put too much supernatural stuff in it. When it comes to supernatural, less is more.

Although I've only read It, and I'm currently making my way through The Talisman; I find him an interesting author. None of the movies quite capture the horror in his stories in my opinion. But I think that instead of giving people a large dicription of the horror that they should capture in their mind, that the reader must make up the horror in their own mind so that the story is somehow more 'personal'? Sort of like the works of Edgar Allan Poe in The Cask of Amontillado. Edgar doesn't give you all of the gore and blood, but instead makes the reader imagine the scene in their own mind. I find this to be a better way to write a horror novel. It's better to scare people from the inside out rather than giving them the author's personal image in which to base an opinion on. Stephen King is probably a very well known author and although his stories do have the same basic plot I do find that he gives them all their own little twist. Maybe that's just me. Stephen King is a great writer nonetheless but he'll live up to the glory of Edgar Allan Poe.

Right now I'm reading Cell, his newest novel, if I'm not mistaken, and it does seem amazingly similar as his other books. Personally I've read Christine, my favorite, It, and I am also reading From a Buick 8 They have slight differences, and as Green With Envy said, their own little twist. The characters are essentially the same people, just in different sitiuations.

I guess what I'm trying to ask is, has the plot differed enough so that you can't guess the ending? Or differed enough to be a new book? Or should they all be considered too simalar...

I'll admit, there is a definite feeling of Deus Ex Machina in most, if not all, of his work. Especially in the 'Dark Tower' series. That series has a very heavy sublot that puts Stephen King himself into the story and gives you this huge sense of surreallity, but all the while you know that the good guys (or at least one of them) will get what he came after. And you only get that feeling after king introduces himself into the story. It's bizarre and hard to describe...perhaps you should read the series if you haven't already.

Anyway, I also know what you mean about the same subplots and the same characters in all his stories. There's always something to do with 4 kids having something amazing happen to them when they're young (dreamcatcher, IT) or a guy getting hit with a van and dying (Song of Susannah, dreamcatcher). Those were all real experiences in King's life, I'm sure (I know for a fact that he was hit by a van) and that's the most likely reason why he continues to use the same general events and settings. But, as your poll suggests, that doesn't mean he doesn't write entertainging books.

King is my mom's favorite author, and yet she has so many gripes about his work. And that doesn't make sense to me. But it does prove that your work doesn't have to be perfect to be awesome.

I've read Bag of Banes and Desperation.

Bag of Bones was weird.

Desperation was really good.