You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.48 AVERAGE
3.48 AVERAGE
dark
emotional
funny
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
⭐️⭐️ 💫
Critical Score: D+
Personal Score: B
I loved the show Rose Red growing up, and in my journey to read every Stephen King book, I figured I’d throw in this promotional book—NOT written by King—as an excuse to revisit the tv show and get the fuller picture.
So this book is trash, but it’s really fascinating trash. I feel guilty saying I had a lot of fun reading this. It was super cozy, like an 80s pulpy gothic suspense, messy and ridiculous.
This book has quite the dichotomy of errors. On one side, it is cozy, derivative pulp. The haunting itself, the atmosphere, the romance, the glamour. That’s all fun if you turn your brain off.
On the other side, this is basically a self-satirizing book about the elite’s classism and racism. Because this is a diary by the elite herself, all it’s problematic politics could be interpreted as critiques rather than flaws of the book itself. Now, do I think Ridley Pearson was going for a sneaky subversion of the early 20th century oil tycoon and his wife? Not at all.
The book is so uncritical in its approach to its politics that I’d be shocked if this was satire. But if you want to take the book away from disappointing authorial intent, it’s pretty easy to do so. The writing is so melodramatic and idiotic that it’s best read as tongue-in-cheek. The indulgent gothic elements keep things fun.
Plus, there’s no historical richness here; Pearson’s research into the era is shallow. The fear factor is weak because the voice is so unserious and the explanations behind the haunting are noncommittal.
I did appreciate how queer this book is, but that’s nothing to make up for the racism and classism.
The pacing is super wonky but it didn’t bother me, and I flew through the pages from start to end.
The history behind the conception, publication, and promotion of this book is super fun. I wish those websites with bonus material were still up online, lol.
The foreword and afterword contradict each others’ timelines.
And those are my notes on the book. Now I’d like to review Rose Red, having rewatched it this week.
…
I know now that reviews on the show have always been pretty mixed. And while I see the flaws much more clearly now than when I was a tween, I still love this miniseries.
At its worst, Rose Res is simplistic, derivative, full of offensive tropes and damaging representation, and is stretched out over far too long a runtime.
But at its best it’s one of the funnest haunted house stories out there, one that goes all out in supernatural color and creative set pieces, has a charming hokeyness, a vibrant cast, maximum suspense, some decent scares, rich historical background, and an epically dreadful finale.
It would have worked much better as the originally intended feature film retelling of The Haunting (pitched to Spielberg, no less), but the ‘99 Haunting remake destroyed that promising pitch.
And it would have worked *even* better as a novel, where King could have fleshed out the characters and themes to their full potential. King’s writing isn’t sharp and efficient enough for screenplays. We can see that more closely in the screenplay for Storm of the Century. Rose Red is one of those series where the whole time I’m thinking of ways I’d revise it, which doesn’t make me dislike it; it makes me fonder. It makes me feel inspired and giddy. Like a kid again. I am such a nerd for this series.
So I’d give Rose Res personally an A, even if it’s critically…like, a C+.
Critical Score: D+
Personal Score: B
I loved the show Rose Red growing up, and in my journey to read every Stephen King book, I figured I’d throw in this promotional book—NOT written by King—as an excuse to revisit the tv show and get the fuller picture.
So this book is trash, but it’s really fascinating trash. I feel guilty saying I had a lot of fun reading this. It was super cozy, like an 80s pulpy gothic suspense, messy and ridiculous.
This book has quite the dichotomy of errors. On one side, it is cozy, derivative pulp. The haunting itself, the atmosphere, the romance, the glamour. That’s all fun if you turn your brain off.
On the other side, this is basically a self-satirizing book about the elite’s classism and racism. Because this is a diary by the elite herself, all it’s problematic politics could be interpreted as critiques rather than flaws of the book itself. Now, do I think Ridley Pearson was going for a sneaky subversion of the early 20th century oil tycoon and his wife? Not at all.
The book is so uncritical in its approach to its politics that I’d be shocked if this was satire. But if you want to take the book away from disappointing authorial intent, it’s pretty easy to do so. The writing is so melodramatic and idiotic that it’s best read as tongue-in-cheek. The indulgent gothic elements keep things fun.
Plus, there’s no historical richness here; Pearson’s research into the era is shallow. The fear factor is weak because the voice is so unserious and the explanations behind the haunting are noncommittal.
I did appreciate how queer this book is, but that’s nothing to make up for the racism and classism.
The pacing is super wonky but it didn’t bother me, and I flew through the pages from start to end.
The history behind the conception, publication, and promotion of this book is super fun. I wish those websites with bonus material were still up online, lol.
The foreword and afterword contradict each others’ timelines.
And those are my notes on the book. Now I’d like to review Rose Red, having rewatched it this week.
…
I know now that reviews on the show have always been pretty mixed. And while I see the flaws much more clearly now than when I was a tween, I still love this miniseries.
At its worst, Rose Res is simplistic, derivative, full of offensive tropes and damaging representation, and is stretched out over far too long a runtime.
But at its best it’s one of the funnest haunted house stories out there, one that goes all out in supernatural color and creative set pieces, has a charming hokeyness, a vibrant cast, maximum suspense, some decent scares, rich historical background, and an epically dreadful finale.
It would have worked much better as the originally intended feature film retelling of The Haunting (pitched to Spielberg, no less), but the ‘99 Haunting remake destroyed that promising pitch.
And it would have worked *even* better as a novel, where King could have fleshed out the characters and themes to their full potential. King’s writing isn’t sharp and efficient enough for screenplays. We can see that more closely in the screenplay for Storm of the Century. Rose Red is one of those series where the whole time I’m thinking of ways I’d revise it, which doesn’t make me dislike it; it makes me fonder. It makes me feel inspired and giddy. Like a kid again. I am such a nerd for this series.
So I’d give Rose Res personally an A, even if it’s critically…like, a C+.
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Creepy, interesting, enjoyable read. I read this a long time ago and still refer to it as one of my favorites. Very entertaining!
dark
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Boring. This was a reread as I first read this when it came out, and I remember even then not being impressed. The miniseries was a lot better.
First read: 3 stars
Reread: DNF
First read: 3 stars
Reread: DNF
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
I read this book partly because of the Stephen King connection and partly because I just thought it would be interesting. It wasn't very good. I think the specials on Sci-Fi channel and Ghost Hunters are more interesting than this book was.
As a marketing ploy "The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer" is genius. As a novel it is just okay. Did the book scare the pants off of me? Yes, I had to sleep with the bathroom light on (much to the delight of my husband who will mock me for the next two weeks). Was it interesting? Definitely, I finished the book in two days.
However, the character of Ellen Rimbauer is astonishingly uneven. Throughout the entire book she goes back and forth between, "I love my husband" and "I hate my husband," "I hate sex" and "I love sex." She spends (what feels like years) plotting his death and when he actually does die, she then cries. Such histrionics create an unconstant character and as Ellen Rimbauer is our only voice in the book the reading becomes dodgy and lumpy, greatly diminishing my enjoyment in the novel.
However, it is highly probable that I will sleep with my bathroom light on again this evening.
However, the character of Ellen Rimbauer is astonishingly uneven. Throughout the entire book she goes back and forth between, "I love my husband" and "I hate my husband," "I hate sex" and "I love sex." She spends (what feels like years) plotting his death and when he actually does die, she then cries. Such histrionics create an unconstant character and as Ellen Rimbauer is our only voice in the book the reading becomes dodgy and lumpy, greatly diminishing my enjoyment in the novel.
However, it is highly probable that I will sleep with my bathroom light on again this evening.