You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.89 AVERAGE
3.89 AVERAGE
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I didn't have high expectations going into this book. It was my least-favorite of the entire series the last time I read it (2004), and I went into this re-read expecting to be disappointed. True to form, I liked the book a bit better than I did the last time, namely because I lowered my expectations, which of course sends me down this rabbit-hole of thinking where I question whether I know a good book or not, since how I feel about it depends on where I am in my life, what I think about it before starting the book, and what I bring into it when I start reading it. I feel like I shouldn't have an existential crisis over how I feel about reading a book.
The book is still an interstitial volume, one that progresses the plot of the larger story, but doesn't do much else. And it does go on: half of the book is Mia/Susannah giving birth to the Chap, and lord, does it take a while to get there. We have to get Mia's background and story, and we have to take them to New York in 1999, and we have to show how much Mia is a fish out of water, etc., etc., etc. It feels long-winded and tedious, even though King's telling of events moves along at its usual breakneck pace.
The other half of the book introduces Stephen King himself as a character, which is a contentious part of the story for a lot of people. I've said for years that this device is either stupid or brilliant, and I'm never sure which it is. I've always leaned just a skosh more to the "brilliant" side of the scale, because it makes sense for a writer to be tied in to the survival of the tower, and when you look at how much the tower permeates his other work (and the fact that King created the tower), it makes sense for that writer to be King. On the other hand, I recognize the amount of ego that goes into him using himself as a character, so the balance is still pretty close.
Anyway, both stories are important to the events that will happen in The Dark Tower, but I question whether we needed this much space to develop them. Wolves of the Calla was also long-winded, and the central plot of that book only tangentially related to the larger story, enough so that I wondered why the ka-tet didn't just get what they needed to know while passing through the town. I think the reasons are: (a) we wouldn't have Father Callahan as a new character in the story (no big loss); (b) we wouldn't have any foreshadowing of Mia and the Chap; and (c) we wouldn't have Black Thirteen and the door. I still can't help that we could have had all that without a 900+-page Old West story.
The whole bit with Mia and Susannah was tedious, but I found myself liking the part of the story about Stephen King and the other characters in Maine. Of course, Roland and Eddie stumble across another no-nonsense gunslinger character in their adventures (two, if you count Deepneau), and the scenes between them and Calvin Tower were amusing. It still feels like these events could have been told more quickly, but at least I found myself entertained enough with half of the story.
Heading into the final volume in the series, I find myself more worried than anything else. The story has taken a turn from how he told the first four books, and I'm worried that I'll be ultimately disappointed with its conclusion. I know what's going to happen, but I don't remember all of the details leading up to it, and with Wolves and Song feeling less like Dark Tower books than the first four books, I dread to see how it will play out. I remain committed, though, Constant Reader that I am, so I guess I'll report back once I reach the clearing at the end of the trail.
The book is still an interstitial volume, one that progresses the plot of the larger story, but doesn't do much else. And it does go on: half of the book is Mia/Susannah giving birth to the Chap, and lord, does it take a while to get there. We have to get Mia's background and story, and we have to take them to New York in 1999, and we have to show how much Mia is a fish out of water, etc., etc., etc. It feels long-winded and tedious, even though King's telling of events moves along at its usual breakneck pace.
The other half of the book introduces Stephen King himself as a character, which is a contentious part of the story for a lot of people. I've said for years that this device is either stupid or brilliant, and I'm never sure which it is. I've always leaned just a skosh more to the "brilliant" side of the scale, because it makes sense for a writer to be tied in to the survival of the tower, and when you look at how much the tower permeates his other work (and the fact that King created the tower), it makes sense for that writer to be King. On the other hand, I recognize the amount of ego that goes into him using himself as a character, so the balance is still pretty close.
Anyway, both stories are important to the events that will happen in The Dark Tower, but I question whether we needed this much space to develop them. Wolves of the Calla was also long-winded, and the central plot of that book only tangentially related to the larger story, enough so that I wondered why the ka-tet didn't just get what they needed to know while passing through the town. I think the reasons are: (a) we wouldn't have Father Callahan as a new character in the story (no big loss); (b) we wouldn't have any foreshadowing of Mia and the Chap; and (c) we wouldn't have Black Thirteen and the door. I still can't help that we could have had all that without a 900+-page Old West story.
The whole bit with Mia and Susannah was tedious, but I found myself liking the part of the story about Stephen King and the other characters in Maine. Of course, Roland and Eddie stumble across another no-nonsense gunslinger character in their adventures (two, if you count Deepneau), and the scenes between them and Calvin Tower were amusing. It still feels like these events could have been told more quickly, but at least I found myself entertained enough with half of the story.
Heading into the final volume in the series, I find myself more worried than anything else. The story has taken a turn from how he told the first four books, and I'm worried that I'll be ultimately disappointed with its conclusion. I know what's going to happen, but I don't remember all of the details leading up to it, and with Wolves and Song feeling less like Dark Tower books than the first four books, I dread to see how it will play out. I remain committed, though, Constant Reader that I am, so I guess I'll report back once I reach the clearing at the end of the trail.
Giving this book a rating as low as 3 stars was a wrench, but I had to differentiate this book from the others. No, the plot, the writing, they were every bit as good as the previous books. However, I just can't understand the need to keep the story centered on a certain Stephen King!!!
I liked the twist at the end of the Wolves of Calla, that maybe all was fiction, and reality was put into doubt. It is a very unconventional take, normally, novelists wish to give an illusion of reality, not put the stories penned under doubt. It was a bold move if nothing else.
However, giving such a heavy role to Stephen King in Stephen King's book is beyond my toleration and contemplation. Was there any real need to use the writer's own name? This is maybe a contrary viewpoint on my account, but using the writer's own name made the writer seem rather obnoxious. If the writer is indeed so important, wouldn't making up a new character be better? (Since the Stephen was name-dropped like a bomb suddenly into a perfectly good story.) I kept trying to keep the two Stephen King's apart, but it was impossible! Stephen King gives more and more proof to the reader that the Stephen King in the story is Stephen King the writer! This does not give entertainment or dilemma to fictionality. It simply takes away from the wonder of a fantasy and plunges the whole haunting story back into... Well, it just turned the whole story into one about a writer who wrote characters who came to life and saved the world. Hurray!
It's downright comical! I thought the tone of The Dark Tower series was supposed to be dark and brooding.
This should be a 4-star book, but Stephen King pivoting so much of the plot on Stephen King ruined the fantasy in the book, so I deducted one star.
I liked the twist at the end of the Wolves of Calla, that maybe all was fiction, and reality was put into doubt. It is a very unconventional take, normally, novelists wish to give an illusion of reality, not put the stories penned under doubt. It was a bold move if nothing else.
However, giving such a heavy role to Stephen King in Stephen King's book is beyond my toleration and contemplation. Was there any real need to use the writer's own name? This is maybe a contrary viewpoint on my account, but using the writer's own name made the writer seem rather obnoxious. If the writer is indeed so important, wouldn't making up a new character be better? (Since the Stephen was name-dropped like a bomb suddenly into a perfectly good story.) I kept trying to keep the two Stephen King's apart, but it was impossible! Stephen King gives more and more proof to the reader that the Stephen King in the story is Stephen King the writer! This does not give entertainment or dilemma to fictionality. It simply takes away from the wonder of a fantasy and plunges the whole haunting story back into... Well, it just turned the whole story into one about a writer who wrote characters who came to life and saved the world. Hurray!
It's downright comical! I thought the tone of The Dark Tower series was supposed to be dark and brooding.
This should be a 4-star book, but Stephen King pivoting so much of the plot on Stephen King ruined the fantasy in the book, so I deducted one star.
The pace quickens in this volume of the tale, but the metafictional elements, especially the inclusion of King as a character, are beyond just irksome and actually deflate the momentum of the whole story. When you learn that Roland only exists because King created him, the stakes are lessened, the tension nearly gone.
Liked this one even less upon the reread.
Liked this one even less upon the reread.
Did Stephen King just kill himself off?
.....
Okay I really need to read the last book.
Also while I know it's not to everyone's tastes. The Stephen King parts of this were some of my favourites. And I legit got chills when he was hypnotized and was like,"when I write It sees me" .....oh god It is It isn't it. DX
.....
Okay I really need to read the last book.
Also while I know it's not to everyone's tastes. The Stephen King parts of this were some of my favourites. And I legit got chills when he was hypnotized and was like,"when I write It sees me" .....oh god It is It isn't it. DX
In a pretty intense and A+ series, this book is the weakest link. That is, of course, assuming that The Dark Tower itself isn't somehow weaker (which I doubt). It focuses on too much and explains very little in a way that is satisfying. Hopefully this is just a bridge building up to the epic ending of this massive work. I did like the King cameo though, which I know some people didn't like. It was humorous and interesting and I appreciated the way he wove it into the story.
I was a bit on the fence about the entrance of Mr. King into the story. You can see it coming from a mile away and it bordered (briefly) on self-indulgence, but he rescued it before it was too late. Another good installment!
adventurous
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
Well, I shall be terse. It just didn't grab me at any point. Felt quit different from first five books, although I've yet to find the words to describe it adequately. But I must say that Susannah is not my favourite character, so perhaps I need say no more.
This book would have gotten a 5/5 if King had only given ''the writer'' another name!