Next up on my Stephen King quest is The Dead Zone.

Again, it’s not a review as such but a collection of my thoughts on the book. So there may well be spoilers. I think pretty much everyone has read it a long time ago anyway, all except me.

After reading The Stand and Salem’s Lot in quick succession, you start to appreciate what a spellbinding storyteller The King can be. I can compare these to the other end of the spectrum, his newly released material like Mr Mercedes and Doctor Sleep. The outstanding feature in his new material is the depth he gives to his characters. This depth was touched on but not prevalent at the start of his career. His new stuff neatly wraps the art of storytelling into a bundle, with gripping characterization and plots that leave you hanging on for more.

The Dead Zone sort of explores Stephen King’s development as a skilled author. In this book, he shows that his characters are becoming more deeply fleshed out than in previous works. However, in my opinion, he loses his way with the story a little. He concentrates more on one aspect of the story and drops the ball in others.

I did enjoy the story of Jonny Smith. He is a character that is easy to invest everything in. But my problem lay with the bad guys. They simply weren’t in the story enough to get any feel for. There was a chapter about the killer early on and then nothing more until he was identified, which was a little too easy. There should have been more airtime devoted to the killer to ramp up the tension. No reveal but more focus around his acts themselves.

Then we have Greg Stillson. For me, he just wasn’t a worthy bad guy for the end play. Truthfully, I couldn’t give a flying fuck what happened to him. And Jonny’s mission to kill the guy seemed almost meaningless to me. I appreciate he saw him becoming President and heralding a nuclear war. But I was more taken in by Jonny and his teaching successes with Chuck, the lightning strike and his relationship with Sarah than I was with how the book ended.

I know this book is well thought of by most, even a favourite. But for me, it was a case of the writer honing his considerable talents for future forays. Primarily a character driven story that sacrificed plot devices. When I think back, it could have been made a classic so easily by simply veering slightly off the path he set for himself.

Anyway, that’s just my opinion. I guess most wouldn’t wholeheartedly agree with it. But it’s my Stephen King trip and that’s how I see it.

So that’s 16 completed from my target of 66 books and a nice round 50 to go. A fair undertaking, I think you’ll agree.

http://paulnelson.booklikes.com/post/...

I have read almost all the books of Stephen King and I must say that this one is among those that have impressed me the most.

What I like about this writer is that in many of his stories he explores the "border" that exists between opposites. We find it in every one of his books: good and evil, right and wrong, earthly and supernatural. King asks, and he asks us, if reality can change depending on the way it is observed. And this question is very interesting because it confronts us with the fact that it may not be objective but change based on the point of observation.

In this book, the writer deals with the border between a gift and a burden to bear.

A man comes out of a coma and after four years he finds himself "overwhelmed" by the faculty of being able to take a "peek" into the future of the people he touches. All he has to do is shake a hand or pat someone on the shoulder, and a potential future presents itself to him with great clarity.

What to do? Tell it risking being taken for crazy or for a con artist? Keep it to himself with one, two or many lives on his conscience?

This is the dilemma that the protagonist has to face and that drives the dynamics of this story. Is it a gift from God, as his mother claims? Is it a brain adaptation ability that, to bypass the "dead zone" due to the accident, has activated unused parts that have awakened new abilities in him? Or simply a chance occurrence, a burden too difficult to bear?

At a certain point, the protagonist will have to face a really difficult question: if he had had the opportunity to stop Hitler, seeing in his future what he would have become, how would he have behaved? Would he have believed in his vision and overcome that inviolable border that prevents a human being from taking someone's life or would he have let history simply take its course without intervening?

围绕着这些绝非肤浅的动态，这部小说展开了情节。

我想用一句感人的话来结束我的这一小段思考，这是母亲，一个有坚定信仰的女人，对约翰尼说的：“尊重你的天赋，约翰尼。不要做陶工，而要做陶工手中的泥土。”

这句话，脱离了宗教概念，让我想到，如果能知道如何成为生命智慧手中的泥土，那将是很美好的。这并不意味着成为木偶或放弃自己的选择自由，而是意味着要知道如何像水一样流动，从不产生摩擦，适应任何形状，但却有不可阻挡的力量，或者像树木一样，由于它们的根总是牢牢地扎根在土地里，知道如何随风起舞而不断裂。

Three-fourths into this book, I gradually realized that the slow-burning atmosphere that King had been carefully cultivating was transforming into something far more intense.

After reading the final paragraph, a profound sense of melancholy and loss suddenly struck me. In brief, this is a story about a man who encounters a tragic situation and how he copes with it.

At first, a sketch of the social and political situation in America around the mid-1970s runs parallel to this account. Later, it all intertwines with the kind of neatness and precision that one can find in a great thriller.

Clearly, King had a lot to say about American politics as he perceived them in his present time and in a rather frightening projected future.

The supernatural element in this story is not entirely new. However, King does bring it out into the open, and his description of how it all unfolds is believable and adds a unique touch to the genre of fiction.

There is no skulking around in a literary microcosm where the rules of reality can be bent without considering the wider consequences. Instead, this protagonist makes major news and even becomes a game-piece on the media playing board.

Moreover, the supernatural element here ends up functioning as a deus ex machina. Johnny has an episode, and both he and the reader receive a significant dose of foreshadowing. As a result, all of the character development and drama now have a precise direction.

The narrator seems to be saying, "Look over here, this way, this way, look at this here: aha, the plot thickens."

I wonder: did this device allow King to bypass any need for evidence to support his views on contemporary politics?

Never mind how or why things are headed in a bad direction - they simply are, and this guy sees it, and he feels the need to do something about it. Go Johnny go!

This is all just speculation, and it's all in good fun because, in the end, I truly enjoyed reading this book, and it evoked a wide range of emotions in me.

This is a sad story, and I find myself in agreement with the sentiments of one of the characters: things should have been different.