...
Show More
I've Just revisited this book and I'm still at 4 stars with it, for the same reasons I stated in my original review. It was never going to jump to five, but I'd been deliberating whether to shuffle it back to a three.
This Depression era tale of life on death row, somewhere in the Deep South, started slowly. It took me quite a long time to grow familiar with the characters on the Green Mile, as it was known. It’s a long book, so that’s not so much of an issue (unless I’d given up on it, of course). Once I was comfortable with the cast, I was quickly sucked in to the atmosphere of it all. It’s a good story, a very good story. And it’s well told. But I have some misgivings.
What I Liked: At this point I'd read only a few of King’s books (11/22/63, Joyland and Mr Mercedes) but enough to know that ensnaring the reader by drawing believable, empathetic characters is a cornerstone of his longevity as a successful writer. This was certainly in evidence here. I was introduced to, and grew to love, Paul Edgecombe (who narrated the story first person, for the most part) and his colleagues on the Green Mile. Throw in a mixed bag of interesting inmates awaiting their fate and the interactions reached the extremes of tear inducing pathos all the way to hilarious belly laughing humour. The latter particularly emanated from my favourite character, William "Wild Bill" Wharton. But, above all, the dialogue always felt right, it fitted the mood of the place and the time and clearly delineated each character.
What I didn’t… I may be alone in this but I found the introduction of Mr Jingles, the performing mouse, to be a distraction – one that added nothing to the story. In fact I’d go further: to me the least attractive element of the book was the use of ‘magical realism’ and Mr J was the element that most jarred, was the least believable. If the mouse’s role had been imperative to the story I’d have lived with it but I truly believe it to have been a superfluous inclusion. I know it would have been hard to tell this tale without asking the reader to suspend disbelief for its duration, but I’d have preferred for this element to have been minimised. As I say, this is just a personal view.
An interesting aside is the parallels of the story to Of Mice and Men. Both depict big, innocent men who are completely lacking in guile. In each, this character meets his end at the hand of a companion who shows love for them. If the reader was in any doubt about the author’s intended linkage then the inclusion of the mouse allows King to introduce a phrase to the text that is a close approximation of the title of the Steinbeck book.
Overall, it’s an enjoyable read and one that would and did draw me back to more of the author’s work – though I continue avoid the horror books.
This Depression era tale of life on death row, somewhere in the Deep South, started slowly. It took me quite a long time to grow familiar with the characters on the Green Mile, as it was known. It’s a long book, so that’s not so much of an issue (unless I’d given up on it, of course). Once I was comfortable with the cast, I was quickly sucked in to the atmosphere of it all. It’s a good story, a very good story. And it’s well told. But I have some misgivings.
What I Liked: At this point I'd read only a few of King’s books (11/22/63, Joyland and Mr Mercedes) but enough to know that ensnaring the reader by drawing believable, empathetic characters is a cornerstone of his longevity as a successful writer. This was certainly in evidence here. I was introduced to, and grew to love, Paul Edgecombe (who narrated the story first person, for the most part) and his colleagues on the Green Mile. Throw in a mixed bag of interesting inmates awaiting their fate and the interactions reached the extremes of tear inducing pathos all the way to hilarious belly laughing humour. The latter particularly emanated from my favourite character, William "Wild Bill" Wharton. But, above all, the dialogue always felt right, it fitted the mood of the place and the time and clearly delineated each character.
What I didn’t… I may be alone in this but I found the introduction of Mr Jingles, the performing mouse, to be a distraction – one that added nothing to the story. In fact I’d go further: to me the least attractive element of the book was the use of ‘magical realism’ and Mr J was the element that most jarred, was the least believable. If the mouse’s role had been imperative to the story I’d have lived with it but I truly believe it to have been a superfluous inclusion. I know it would have been hard to tell this tale without asking the reader to suspend disbelief for its duration, but I’d have preferred for this element to have been minimised. As I say, this is just a personal view.
An interesting aside is the parallels of the story to Of Mice and Men. Both depict big, innocent men who are completely lacking in guile. In each, this character meets his end at the hand of a companion who shows love for them. If the reader was in any doubt about the author’s intended linkage then the inclusion of the mouse allows King to introduce a phrase to the text that is a close approximation of the title of the Steinbeck book.
Overall, it’s an enjoyable read and one that would and did draw me back to more of the author’s work – though I continue avoid the horror books.
![\"The](\"https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1477999967s/32848933.jpg\")