The Stand question

I really don't understand the negative comments on here! In my opinion The Stand is a masterpiece & one of my favourite books ever. Of course that is MY opinion & everyone has different tastes. But to the reviewer who said Stephen King 'can't write', that is YOUR opinion my friend & I think his books sales say differently!

The Stand is one of my three favorite books of all time; I can open it to any random page and get lost in it all over again. That said, I have to admit to preferring the tighter original edit to the longer author's cut because it spends less time with the "evil" characters (though I wouldn't call either Lloyd or Trashcan Man entirely unsympathetic). Thinking back to the first time I read it, I remember getting so sad (and sniffly--the power of suggestion works too well on me) reading the story of Captain Trips, I almost gave up. But once the characters started coming together, I was completely engrossed.
All that being said, if you love Needful Things, you might not be satisfied even if you make it to the end. I like Needful Things, too, but for me it's the first of King's "life is shit and people are all assholes" books, whereas for me, The Stand is the peak of his "life can have light in the dark and people can surprise you" period.

My opinion is that if you have given it several hundred pages and don't like it, then give it up. No reason to make yourself finish a book you don't enjoy. Plenty of books out there to read.

The Stand is epic, and is meant to be savored rather than raced through. However, I do know what you mean about it becoming depressing in places. I recommend you finish the book; as you said, you paid for it, and you deserve to see how it comes out. But I always kept at least one other book going for balance (when I was working; now that I am retired I read several at a time) so that if things got too grim, I could grab something else...memoirs by comics and comedians are wonderful, because not only are they funny, but those people wrote all their own stand up material and therefore already know how to write well. It's a good alternative when the world starts to close in around you. Then when you're ready, you can pick up King again.

The Stand is an epic... it haunts me every moment of the day, why? Because of the detail.

I read it when it first came out eons ago and I loved every minute of it. I'll have to look for the longer one and re-read it.

I love SK's going into the personalities of his characters, and I'm always sorry when his books end. I'd love to see them go on forever. I was caught up from the beginning of The Stand and never felt that it was slow or dragged.

I thought his writing started going downhill at times starting with Eyes of the Dragon (terrible book, the only one I didn't want to even finish) and Black House. Now he's no longer as consistent. I suspect The Stand just isn't for you.

I love The Stand. I love it for all its faults and flat spots. I have found over many readings though that I've found a few favourite characters whom I love to spend time with (and others like Larry and the Trashcanman whom I just can't connect with) who make it easier to stick with the flat spots.

The Stand has always been my favorite of King's works. I read the original release first...but when they published the extended version I snapped up the hardback right away. I think it's a much richer, fuller story now. But as someone said, not every book is for every reader. I know some think that Carrie is good, but I didn't care for it. Couldn't even get through Salem's Lot.

I loved the premise; the beginning. Halfway through it, I was worn out with the evil. It was kind of like watching a tv show with a villain that they won't kill off because he's a main character. So there is nothing else for him to do but keep doing evil unspeakable things that are supposed to be worse than the last...but it just never ends and it becomes ridiculous. I finished it. Can't say I enjoyed it.

Agree with many on here, "The Stand" in my view has a great beginning, but somewhere at the halfway point just loses all direction, and the ending is as lame as any ending he has ever written. King can be very, very hit-or-miss, sometimes within the same book. I personally haven't really enjoyed any King after he got hit by that van in Maine, and even before that he undeniably put out a lot of pap. However, the gems pre-car accident were usually worth digging around for. But which ones you might consider gems and which coal is in the eye of the beholder...

The trouble with Stephen King is the longer the book, the more plodding it becomes. His shorter books are far superior to THE STAND. Some masterpieces: "Salem's Lot, Thinner, Pet Sematary. Carrie and my favorite, Misery. Bigger is not better as far as King is concerned, IMHO.

Not every book is for every reader, and this may be the book that is not for you. I found the book gripping from the start, and it remains my favorite among all the King books. I'm not sure the book will ever improve for you if you're not caught up in it by now. Since you paid so much for it, you may wish to not give up on it quite yet. Good luck. :)

I do tend to like his longer books better and The Stand is one of my favorites. But for faster-paced page turners try: Cell, Cujo (one of my favorites), The Dark Half, Dreamcatcher, Eyes of the Dragon, Misery, and Pet Sematary. By all means, stay away from the Dark Tower series; my favorite of his, but can be pretty slow at times. The first book in particular.

It just seems to me like SK can come up with great ideas and plots and characters but he just can't write... I just keep thinking "give me a break... REALLY?" while I'm reading him, and with "The Stand" it was like, "is this EVER going to END..."

I enjoyed it, personally, as a bit of fun writing with some over-the-top bits. The theological aspect of it was entertaining but a bit on the nose/obvious.

If you enjoy fast-paced thrillers, and don't want to read slower books, this is not the book for you. Maybe try Salem's Lot, which starts a little slow, but builds up to a fast pace. This book definitely moves slower, and does not have as much suspense as you may want.

The pacing is appropriate to what the story is really about. It isn't a penny dreadful or thriller. "The Stand" is a story of providence.

Every thread has been woven into the plot by Mother Abigail's God, and his will be done. Because of this, the book takes it's time, focusing on things that seem pointless when you read it the first time. It is only at the end that the weave is visible.

I thought the book made a turn for the worse as soon as they settle in Colorado. For me, it does not get better. Are you reading the expanded version? Because that version has waaay more stuff/backstory/etc on Trash Can man and Lloyd.

The Stand started slow for me, but grabbed my interest from the start. I agree with Will's assessment.

Which version are you reading? The original version was pretty long but then they brought out an even longer one.

I love The Stand to bits, but it is a long slow book. The Da Vinci Code or 24 it certainly is not. If you are enjoying it, that means a long, slow luxurious pleasure. If you aren't enjoying it, it could well be a long slow torture.

This is not a fast paced book, by any stretch of the imagination.

Will it get better for you? It gets a little bit faster later on, but it never gets to wham bang Jason Bourne intensity. It's just not that sort of a book. A marathon rather than a sprint.

EDIT:

I liked the fact that it was a slow start and a long haul. It's a novel to savour not gulp down, like Tennessee sippin' whisky.

Ol' Stevie boy does like to write long. That's just the way he is. So pull up a chair, crack open a cold one and we'll jus' talk the sun down. There's no rush.

The 1990s extended version is not for everyone. I started with the vanilla edition when it first came out. To my mind, that's a better book. It's more tightly edited. But there are some folk who like to take their time and who think the extended version is the only way to go.

Or put it this way. My wife won't sit through the normal length movie of Lord of the Rings. There's certainly no way she'd stay awake for the Director's Cut, extended version. But my boy and me would happily watch all three extended versions back to back.

Different folks, different strokes

I loved it. The total expanded, un-cut "newer" one. It is a little slow in spots and you wonder why you're getting all the minute details - but then later on it makes sense. It definitely is not for everyone.