/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21594692]

>Has never planned a word of any of his novels, yet they still are (mostly) devoid of plot holes and tie up all plot points, while offering complex characters.
>Only writes 6 pages a day, and only works for about 4 hours a day
>Has published over 50 books
>Most of his novels run over 400 pages
>Among his bibliography is a finished fantasy series (seven installments, the last one 800 pages long)
>Kubrick, Darabont, De Palma, William Goldman, Mike Flanagan, and John Carpenter saw something in his works that made them want to adapt his stories
How in the absolute fuck does he do it?
>Inb4 worst writer ever
Yeah okay, but at least he’s professionally published.
How has he done so much? GRRM can’t finish a series and most writers are lucky if they publish 10 novels. But big dick King comes around and establishes himself as one of the greatest living horror writers, sometimes switching between genres, and has published multiple books per year.

[Anonymous No.21594696]

>>21594692
Some people are just skilled enough to shit out genre fiction like machines. Sanderson is the same.

[Anonymous No.21595490]

>>21594696
I would argue genre fiction is more difficult to write, especially stories about time travel, aliens, other worlds, etc.
So it's even more impressive he has been able to crank out so much. King's writing style is superior to Sanderson and Neil Gaiman by miles.

[Anonymous No.21595505]

Under the Dome is basically an underrated classic. People sleep on King because he's so popular and a bit of a midwit Maine-oid but he's obviously the type of dude who just has a burning motivation to observe the world around him in a way that translates very well to writing fiction and people are attracted to that. If you want to be a prolificacy chad like King then you should 1) try to see the good in everything until you eventually gaslight yourself into liking pain itself so that you can write about anything forever because you love everything and 2) become addicted to coke and booze in the 80s kek.

t. can shit out 10 pages on a dime but who knows if it's just manic nonsense. i guess i'll find out once i self-publish it.

[Anonymous No.21595587]

>>21595505
>midwit Maine-oid
I think every writer comes across as a midwit when they verbally express their views. This is why I love Pynchon for staying away from the public and letting his work speak for itself.
> he's obviously the type of dude who just has a burning motivation to observe the world around him in a way that translates very well to writing fiction and people are attracted to that.
I agree.
>1) try to see the good in everything until you eventually gaslight yourself into liking pain itself so that you can write about anything forever because you love everything
This sentence confused me

[Anonymous No.21595596]

>>21595490
>genre fiction is more difficult to write
It's the opposite. Most genre fiction lack soul, akin to video games that only want you to play more regardless of the content of the game.

[Anonymous No.21595618]

>How in the absolute fuck does he do it?
Uses his sons, among others, as ghostwriters.
The quality of his work took a dive after the accident.

[Anonymous No.21595619]

>>21595596
...you don't read genre fiction, do you?

[Anonymous No.21595632]

>>21595596
What I mean is this:
"Realistic fiction" (if such a thing exists, as true reality can never be fully captured in all it's mundanity) takes place on Earth, which has a history, geography, set of laws (physical laws as well as judicial) outside of the writer's control. The writer is responsible for characters and plot, but the world building is done, unless the story takes place in a fictional city -- but then, it isn't considered "realistic", and trends the realm of speculative fiction as it requires the audience to believe an obvious fake town is real.
Genre fiction has no limits. Restrictions of what is possible and impossible must be set. Entire histories, languages, geography, political systems, etc. must be created, or at least hinted at.
>Most genre fiction lack soul
Can you give me examples of genre fiction that doesn't "lack soul"?

[Anonymous No.21595639]

>>21595632
So in genre fiction there are no rules and you can just make shit up and give it silly names and it flies? And if you write yourself into a corner you can just make more shit up? Wow, somebody tell the legions of retard fantasy fanfic writers what they are doing is literally rocket science.

[Anonymous No.21595645]

>>21595632
Aerth was walking through the plains of Moungherth, a rich fertile area on the planet of Schlap which was kind of like Earth but a little bigger and the buildings were more renaissance looking, but in a futuristic way. Anyway, the main empire was like the Roman Empire but more Arabian and less sexist.


Wow, world building is so hard!

[Anonymous No.21595661]

>>21595639
>>21595645
i bet these cliché jokes give the bpd women and closet cocksuckers you know a delightful little chortle as you all stand around your meagre mezze platter turtle-necked and moscato drunk

[Anonymous No.21595664]

>>21595661
kek

[Anonymous No.21595674]

>>21595639
>So in genre fiction there are no rules and you can just make shit up and give it silly names and it flies?
Any writer can do that. Some of the silliest names I've ever found in fiction come from Pynchon.
>And if you write yourself into a corner you can just make more shit up?
Not sure why you think this only applies to genre fiction.
>>21595645
Not that world building is hard, though it can be, but it's required for a believable world. Yes I get your point, it can be shitty, as seen by your example. But great genre fiction has established rules and describes worlds people feel like they could live in. I don't know why you're pretending anyone can start writing random nonsense and become successful, or that genre fiction is somehow inferior to X,Y, and Z.
You do know that A Midsummer's Night Dream and The Tempest are fantasy stories, right? There is a ghost in Hamlet, a statue comes to life in A Winter's Tale, Macbeth has witches, etc. the Bible features angels and names of places that archeologists have never discovered. That's not even touching on The Iliad, Mahabharata, Paradise Lost, the poems of William Blake, etc.
It's not that genre fiction is garbage. It depends on how it is written. I don't think King is bad, but I guess you might disagree.

[Anonymous No.21595678]

>>21595661
>not liking moscato

filtered

[Anonymous No.21595680]

>>21594692
>How in the absolute fuck does he do it?
Ghostwriting

[Anonymous No.21595686]

>>21595674
My unstated point is that any story taking place on a similar scale in the real universe can be conceived as just as hard to write (not that we could ever "know" such a thing).

Try writing a historical nautical adventure and then wait for the boat autists to come out and pick apart your rigging, without being able to use the excuse of "ummm that's just how boats work on different planets'.

[Anonymous No.21595744]

>>21594692
cocaine

[Anonymous No.21595759]

>>21595680
Kind of like how David Bowie or Ozzy just nabbed themselves different bands for each album.

[Anonymous No.21595767]

>>21594692
Just because he does not plan ahead does not mean he does not rewrite, revise and edit. Reasonably common way of writing,

[Anonymous No.21595803]

>>21595587
Take the Baconpill.

[Anonymous No.21595808]

>>21594696
Kings writing style is mediocre but it is also not bad and easy to read, but he is still miles above Sanderson.

[Anonymous No.21595811]

>>21595505
>midwit Maine-oid
Kys

[Anonymous No.21595820]

>>21595490
Maybe when he was starting out. Now genre fiction is the majority of fiction you've consumed by the time you are 20, so its the main mod of though that you accept media(this includes movies and video games).

[Anonymous No.21595829]

>>21595632
>Entire histories, languages, geography, political systems, etc. must be created, or at least hinted at.
You are a fucking idiot and the reason lore fandom shit has plagued fandoms in the last decades. Sci-fi and fantasy writers are just midwit "ideas" guys who think basic description of things is somehow literature.

I hope people like you are banned from speaking when the chad Bloomian revolution happens and we kill off these kiddie genres.

[Anonymous No.21595834]

>>21595829
What are you talking about

[Anonymous No.21595835]

>>21595811
seethe and checked

[Anonymous No.21595841]

>>21595674
>ou do know that A Midsummer's Night Dream and The Tempest are fantasy stories, right? There is a ghost in Hamlet, a statue comes to life in A Winter's Tale, Macbeth has witches, etc. the Bible features angels and names of places that archeologists have never discovered. That's not even touching on The Iliad, Mahabharata, Paradise Lost, the poems of William Blake, etc
These stories are literal part of actual existing Being, you dimwit retard. Also people then were religious, so it wasn't fantasy to them.

God you need lurk more before you post, You are a historical iliterate and I think that is the reason you think much can come from worldbuilding in modern fantasy and sci-fi. I feel ashamed for knowing the full GoT/Song of Fire and Ice lore when seeing your dumb posts.

[Anonymous No.21595853]

>>21595834
If you don't know, then get the fuck out of here you midwit redditor.

[Anonymous No.21595866]

>>21595803
What do you mean?

[Anonymous No.21595871]

>>21595841
>historical iliterate
Kek. Please jump off a bridge.

[Anonymous No.21595873]

>>21595619
Not him. I do and whenever I dabble in some newer author who doesn't have significant status I feel like I'm reading a video game. I recently gave a shot at Adrian Tchaikovsky and one of his fantasy series and it was quite litearally like reading a garbage version of Arcanum.
>>21595632
>Entire histories, languages, geography, political systems, etc. must be created, or at least hinted at.
Usually this is where they fail as that is also where they end, but also what they produce is video game sort of world building. At this point it's just mix matching various already existing ideas without the author having the knowledge or dedication or authenticity to write in a single character that acts like a part of the setting.

[Anonymous No.21595882]

>People in this thread shitting on genre fiction for being poorly written
>They have no understanding of basic grammar and can't spell

[Anonymous No.21595921]

>>21595866
Become a masochist like the painter Francis Bacon. I'm not on his level and don't want to be, but I do engage in a bunch of medieval christcuck shit like wearing a cilice and beating myself with a pair of cat o' nine tails I bought from some BDSM coomers lol. Why? Because to be any kind of great artist one must experience extremes and enjoy the process. Then you can truly *know* the various extremes of humankind and produce art about them. You can force yourself to do this by just going into it with the intention of enjoying it, or at least that's what I did.

Of course there is also the inverse of this: sadism. There are healthy ways to engage in sadism too (mostly sexual bullshit in a responsible manner) but anybody who starts hurting unwilling people should have their brains blown out imo.

[Anonymous No.21595931]

>>21595921
I see.

[Anonymous No.21596025]

>>21595853
What?

[Anonymous No.21596035]

>>21595661
Are you implying its not the most idiotic of STEM nerds and losers that read male-oriented genre fiction?

[Anonymous No.21596071]

>>21594692
He doesn't spend all day on 4chan, arguing with nobodies on /lit/

[Anonymous No.21596095]

>>21595490
>I would argue genre fiction is more difficult to write, especially stories about time travel, aliens, other worlds, etc.
lol, this is just genre fandom cope. what you're gauging the difficulty of is the theoretical, idealized vision of genre writing where you pull elaborate and startlingly new "worlds" out of your ass every time, which never actually happens. each new piece of genre fiction is just yesterday's genre fiction but the elves are, like, purple now. the basic quality of fantasy etc writing is actually familiarity. you want a shelf that you can go to that when you pick something up it will be a mild variation on what you got there last week, that's the attraction, that's the business model. these titanic acts of world creation never actually happen and if they did their own audience would reject them as too hard to follow. all this shit reads the same, by design.

the difficult, time-consuming part of writing is not coming up with what color the elves will be, it's the actual craft of constructing sentences, paragraphs, chapters. a serious literary writer knows he will be judged harshly on this and rewrites the same sentence fifty times, gets stuck on a single word choice for an hour etc. a genre writer knows perfectly well his audience doesn't care, if he tried hard they wouldn't be capable of noticing the difference anyway, he just has to find his rhythm and then he can shit out another 500 pages of gmork hitting zlork with a fireball. it's just a question of training yourself to be a pabulum production machine, like that sanderson guy.

[Anonymous No.21596136]

>>21596071
source?

[Anonymous No.21596165]

King is a retard. Literally. Genre fiction is formulaic and the themes are built into the work before you even start. Horror fiction has overarching themes: good conquers evil for a price, evil conquers good to teach us a lesson, or the future's uncertain and the boundary between good and evil is unclear. That's it. Yet King, retard that he is, searches for themes and meaning in his work, as though it's not baked right in. He writes hamfisted allusions to other works that his readers either haven't read or don't care about or both. He thinks it makes him look sophisticated, but it's embarrassing. He can't write an elegant sentence to save his life. His diction is that of a high schoolers, like he has no vocabulary, yet claims he reads all the time. I mean, this dude got filtered by Cormac McCarthy of all people. His imagery is like one or two lame snapshots throughout a whole book. And circling back to formula, he says he doesn't plot (though he has) and yet his books follow the brain-dead pattern of all shitty Hollywood movies. You can find this plot pattern anywhere on the internet for free. The only thing he has going for him is that he knows Maine, which few are from, since no one important would ever want to live there. And that his competition in the horror genre is non-existent, because anyone with a lick of talent stays miles away from that retarded drivel and also because he cornered the market and has a throttle hold over it. He's a moron. And the worst part is, he thinks he isn't one, that because he's sold books he's somehow wise and special. He's not. And neither are retarded as his readers, mouth breathers that they are. Enjoy another five hundred un-edited pages of doggerel you flamers.

[Anonymous No.21596174]

>>21596165
King also did the midwit thing and popularize the whole "children with superpowers and le ebil gov organization exploits them" trope in adult books. Like this is some manga-tier shit and now is overused in adult media too. His shit is barely above comic books.

[Anonymous No.21596179]

>>21596095
>>21596165
>>21596174
And what, prey tell, have you gentleman done with your lives?

[Anonymous No.21596194]

>>21596165
>being familiar is... le bad!

also guess which state has a bunch of rich people snapping up real estate since the coof started dumbass. hint: it's essentially an ethnostate that has the lowest crime in the country while also consisting of a bunch of beautiful wilderness and being nicknamed "vacationland".

[Anonymous No.21596196]

>>21596179
What does that have to do with, don't change the subject you genrefiction-reading piece of shit? I can do point to authors that have done more than King and will be remembered and have driven literature further.

Can't we critique what we consume? Or do we have to let lesser taste enjoy itself. It can sell itself quite well, but that doesn't mean we should just let it go around uncritiqued.

[Anonymous No.21596252]

>>21596196
> don't change the subject you genrefiction-reading piece of shit?
It helps your case if you know when to not use a question mark. >>21595882 is right. None of you can write half as well as King.
>Can't we critique what we consume?
Instead of making general statements, take a passage from a King novel and break it down, then compare it to "real literature". Tell us why your example works, and why King fails as a writer.
Did you learn to critique from the Roger Ebert, or worse, one of those YouTubers?

[Anonymous No.21596258]

>>21596252
>the Roger Ebert,
Alright. I fucked up there.

[Anonymous No.21596284]

>>21596252
not him but
>muh grammar

doesn't matter as much as the cut of your jib. i'd rather read henry darger's insane fever dreams than a page of harold bloom's precise faggotry. and no i'm not just coping because my own grammar and spelling are atrocious kek although perhaps that does say more negative things about me than i realize. i do normally try to write correctly but in my defense i'm on 4chan + currently hour ??? of sleep deprivation and hangover fugue.

anyway people tend to overvalue writing correctly when some of the top dogs don't know shit about being proper. for example, francis bacon as i already mentioned is known as a mid draftsman but that doesn't matter because the vibes of his paintings are S tier and his shit currently sells for millions. true, there is money laundering and corruption in art but if you think bacon is a hack and i'm overvaluing his work then plz extrapolate on that.

[Anonymous No.21596287]

>>21594692
writing sex stories is not an art, dwt it roastie

[Anonymous No.21596801]

Kings books are good, I like them. If you don’t then fuck you.

[Anonymous No.21596835]

>>21595921
should i psychologically torture multiple boyfriends until they finally commit suicide, too? Is that part of the bacon pill?

[Anonymous No.21596888]

>>21596835
no that's bad.

[Anonymous No.21596922]

>>21596888
checked.

that's why Bacon's painting are so good. He was a genuinely deranged, sadistic /and/ masochistic, basket-case.

Artists like Giger or Beksinski produced arguably similar work. Theirs however never conveys malicious intent; it can be said to be horrific, but the subtext is never "and that's a good thing!" With their work the modus operandi is always a coming-to-terms with gruesome existential notions, I've always felt.

Bacon's work is just evil. I think he was an evil person. I mean, I like it. It's interesting—but morbidly so in the same way gory traffic accidents are. Francis Bacon had a mind a serial killer would have, I've always thought.

[Anonymous No.21596945]

>>21596922
interesting. i knew about the suicides but the ancient documentary i watched on the subject presented him as more ambiguous regarding all of that but i guess i shouldn't be surprised. it makes sense that certain people have an interest in presenting him that way.

>69
>22

very nice

[Anonymous No.21596955]

>>21595490
No, it's easier to write because the main attraction is the plot. Prose-centered fiction is harder because it requires great writing skills. A divorce story written in the style of a genre fiction writer would not be as good as if it was written by a literary fiction writer.

[Anonymous No.21596962]

>>21596252
>None of you can write half as well as King.
He's not saying he's better than King. He's saying other writers are better. You know they really don't have any arguments when you are personally being compared with then target of your critique.

[Anonymous No.21596968]

>>21595490
I find this very difficult to believe.

[Anonymous No.21596991]

>>21596945
you might like this channel, it has a lot of footage of beksinski.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkzcGK4mDOc

I think a certain tenderness comes across in these videos and interviews which is noticeably absent in ones of Bacon. but oh, what do I know? maybe that's just because he reminds me of my grandfather. It's just my opinion.

[Anonymous No.21597006]

>>21596991
yep ty0ywrj

[Anonymous No.21597014]

>>21597006
>somehow accidentally typed captcha in the post itself too

i guess this level of sleep deprivation should be incorporated into the baconpill.

[Anonymous No.21597070]

>>21594692
> are (mostly) devoid of plot holes and tie up all plot points, while offering complex characters
Not really. King is a great writer in the sense that he can produce volumes of material. It IS filled with plot holes and hackneyed bits as well as masses of plot that goes nowhere. You can see this especially when you read the unabridged version of The Stand. The man needs an editor.
His realistic characters also all draw on the 5x5 stomping ground he’s created as a reflection of himself and his surroundings. How many stories of his contains an author character? How often does he leave his northeastern setting?

“Write what you know” is fine, but it just becomes a collection of stock characteristics in aggregate. You also get repeats of audience friendly asshole characters and his personal animus against religion recurs with similar underwritten “crazy religious” characters.

I don’t say this to make some point about him being all trash. It’s just that your defense of him as some kind of master is stupid. He spins a good yarn and that’s clearly good enough to be a publishing powerhouse. I think the archetype for a successful writer of this type is Charles Dickens. He is seen as an elevated author these days but really published stories toward the mainstream and about topics he knew (grew up alone and poor for some time) or felt strongly about (social issues, hypocrisy, charity).

There are also more authors in this vein. Elmore Leonard had the nickname “the Dickens of Detroit” for instance. Personally I prefer his writing style and humor. Where King writes volumes he writes a taut yarn. Instead of schmaltzy nostalgia you get acerbic wit. The best King’s written imo are the short stories and novellas where his worst excesses are reined in.
Thank you for reading my blog.

[Anonymous No.21597446]

>>21597070
well, i read it at least.

[Anonymous No.21597847]

>>21596179
>
literally 6th grade tier fallacy. kys

[Anonymous No.21597962]

>>21595490
Noir is the most difficult genre, Objectively speaking

[Anonymous No.21598030]

>>21595632
Holy midwit. Worldbuilding is not something to be praised. I love him, but Tolkien and his consequences have been a disaster for popular literature.

Anyway, though I have no hope of you ever appreciating these, since they're not examples of pointless worldbuilding where the funny names are the most interesting part of the story, I will give give some examples of good genre fiction. Peake is the peak (heh) of fantasy, followed by the Lovecraft circle, Howard, Ashton Smith, etc. And you have good non-fantasy/Sci fi writers in people like Le Carre and Chandler. Try reading some real fucking literature sometime, instead of childish adventure stories for teenagers.

[Anonymous No.21598064]

>>21598030
Lol

Never stop reading pulp crap is the only source of truth

[Anonymous No.21598065]

>>21597962
>objectively speaking

orly, so who are you then? god? an AI?

[Anonymous No.21598085]

some of the things I like about King characters

>they always have weird but believable inner monologues, the characters think like normal people do, they imagine themselves as sharper cooler versions of themselves, they have little catchphrases or quirks that belong solely to them, straddling the line between cartoonish and realistic.
>The wives and mothers in King can be bad, but when they're good they're so good, they're ethereal, they speak beautifully and with a distinct post ww2 American femininity.
>I like how he makes all of his maine-oid characters go "A-yuh"

[Anonymous No.21598156]

>>21598085
>there's always somebody who quotes random dadrock/boomer lyrics and thinks it's the most clever shit

[Anonymous No.21598390]

>>21598085
I get that it's what made him famous, but he's old now and I wish he'd write more stories without any supernatural shit going on. It's not one of his more popular books, but I really liked the parts in From A Buick 8 that focused on the day to day goings on in the State Patrol barracks and the way the cops just interacted and bullshitted with each other. He could have easily cut the stuff about the spooky car and reworked it into a great little story about a kid dealing with the loss of his dad.

[Anonymous No.21598699]

>>21598390
but why? he's been into edgelord stuff his whole life. why should he stop now?

[Anonymous No.21599259]

>>21596252
Why would anyone want to write "as well as King" when that would equate to absolute drivel? It wouldn't be worth doing. And in the sense that you'd want to write like King to make money, then look at Patterson, and why not write like him? He makes way more than King. No matter which way you look at it, writing like him is NOT an admirable goal.
>Tell us why...
I'm not here to write you critical essays, retard. If you've read King and you've read literature extensively, you know he sucks and is not worth the trees cut down to print his words upon. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.21599300]

I've downloaded a torrent of all King adaptations and majority are very watchable at minimum. But for an author to have such an easy time writing for adaptation(even for TV low-budget ones), means there is almost no reason to read his book if you have access to the visual media adaptations(many who are very soulful). The plots are the strong point as someone already said that lends itself more to the visual medium. Sometime around the 90s for some reason King stopped being considered pulp, which is a loss.

[Anonymous No.21599411]

>>21595808
Sanderson is better.

[Anonymous No.21599719]

>>21594692
He managed to wrangle pantser writing.

Normally novels written by the seat of the authors pants have a tendency to be contrived meandering doorstops.

He puts a lot of emphasis on editing when talking about writing. I think that he basically writes first and then runs around his story with insulation sealing the plotholes shut.

He has multiple editors to help him no doubt.