Take a photo of a barcode or cover
spiderj95 's review for:
Danse Macabre
by Stephen King
slow-paced
Published right on the cusp of the 80s and its strides in horror as well as the beginnings of King’s career, in a modern context this book isn’t essential to fans of the genre.
The few mentions of King’s childhood and one mention of his writing process are somewhat interesting but the book’s commentary on the horror genre is pretty surface level (on King’s insistence to not examine works of horror too closely). King spends a lot of time going through other mediums before getting to horror books and his ability to comment on these other industries (movies, for example) is from looking at the audience (literally, he gets some of his analysis from both comments from moviegoers and the demographic of the audience he saw the movie with). Even with books, King leaves the authors of those works to comment on them while he’s much more satisfied with looking at overall themes and excerpting examples of the prose with no deeper analysis.
As for the writing itself, it feels as if King was given carte blanche with this book as it frequently goes into other topics outside of the current chapter as well as repeats lines/situations told in previous chapters without connecting them. Don’t know if this is because parts of the book are reprints of articles that were published previously in other places or if more editing needed to be done. The book as a result is a chore to get through if you’re looking for thoughts from “The Master of Horror” since it frequently gets off-track and ultimately doesn’t offer much when you do get there.
There is at least a little enjoyment from takes that haven’t aged well, from a couple of rants on TV being a bad place for horror (King would go on to make made for TV versions of his books as well as original movies) to King taking jabs at The Rocky Horror Picture Show. At least his rant about radio disappearing has a modern answer in podcasts.
The few mentions of King’s childhood and one mention of his writing process are somewhat interesting but the book’s commentary on the horror genre is pretty surface level (on King’s insistence to not examine works of horror too closely). King spends a lot of time going through other mediums before getting to horror books and his ability to comment on these other industries (movies, for example) is from looking at the audience (literally, he gets some of his analysis from both comments from moviegoers and the demographic of the audience he saw the movie with). Even with books, King leaves the authors of those works to comment on them while he’s much more satisfied with looking at overall themes and excerpting examples of the prose with no deeper analysis.
As for the writing itself, it feels as if King was given carte blanche with this book as it frequently goes into other topics outside of the current chapter as well as repeats lines/situations told in previous chapters without connecting them. Don’t know if this is because parts of the book are reprints of articles that were published previously in other places or if more editing needed to be done. The book as a result is a chore to get through if you’re looking for thoughts from “The Master of Horror” since it frequently gets off-track and ultimately doesn’t offer much when you do get there.
There is at least a little enjoyment from takes that haven’t aged well, from a couple of rants on TV being a bad place for horror (King would go on to make made for TV versions of his books as well as original movies) to King taking jabs at The Rocky Horror Picture Show. At least his rant about radio disappearing has a modern answer in podcasts.