Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by curtiswastaken
It by Stephen King
challenging
dark
mysterious
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
Seems fair that this is King's Opus as it's kind of a pure distillation of King as a writer. All the good and bad are mixed together.
I think IT is maybe one of the worst places to start if you want to get into King, but it's also maybe the ultimate bellwether to know if you're going to love or hate Stephen King books.
If you read all of this book and just love it, 5 stars, no notes, then you probably are going to like anything King has to offer. And I love that for you.
I think this style can be effective sometimes. I think Cujo is a great example where King is able to inject his flavor of world-building that manages to work and elevate the story rather than detract. Christine is the opposite, a mostly fun premise that is routinely soured by obnoxious sidetracking into the past.
What is frustrating about IT is that there is a of stuff that is GREAT. And a lot of what is great about IT is when you're in the dark about what Pennywise is or isn't. The further you go into this book, the more you are told about the history of Derry and 25 different interwoven stories across multiple generations. And the more you learn about Derry and the people within, the less Pennywise feels like a malevolent puppet master and more of a boogeyman.
The inciting event of IT, Georgie encountering Pennywise while chasing his paper boat down the street, is the big motivator for the presumed main character of Bill. But the further you read into IT the impact of that story increasingly dwindles. Bill kind of becomes the least interesting character but as it plays out is ultimately the big hero.
For better or worse, the book should have been about Beverly. And that's probably my biggest gripe with this book, even more so than the fact that about 300-400 pages of this book could disappear and I wouldn't even notice.
Bill, Eddie, Stanley, and Richie just aren't that interesting. I don't care about Eddie and his overbearing mom. I don't care whether Richie is funny or not. Stanley barely feels like he's in this book compared to how much space is devoted to the others, which I'll take as a win.
The ritual scene, the most notorious part of this book aside from Georgie getting ripped apart in the beginning, is the most puzzling aspect. Ultimately, the kids are meant to discover that things that make them weak are the things that make them powerful. Beverly's weakness is tied to her sexuality, at least tied to the perception of her sexuality from the POV of adults in her life. I think there is a version of Beverly's story that ends more solidly with her understanding of what about being a woman makes her powerful.
But why is Beverly's story so strongly tied to sexuality? I understand that the negative perception that's repeatedly drilled into her mind about how sex is bad and if she has sex then she is bad can be thwarted by Beverly having a positive experience with sex and finding power in that. But why does it have to be letting her friends bang her? It subverts the positive outcome for Beverly to realize being a woman is her strength, not her weakness, and instead manifests in a scene where she gratifies her male peers with her body is just very disappointing. It's also not deviating much from the constant tropes King relies on to tell stories about women in his books.
I think IT is maybe one of the worst places to start if you want to get into King, but it's also maybe the ultimate bellwether to know if you're going to love or hate Stephen King books.
If you read all of this book and just love it, 5 stars, no notes, then you probably are going to like anything King has to offer. And I love that for you.
I think this style can be effective sometimes. I think Cujo is a great example where King is able to inject his flavor of world-building that manages to work and elevate the story rather than detract. Christine is the opposite, a mostly fun premise that is routinely soured by obnoxious sidetracking into the past.
What is frustrating about IT is that there is a of stuff that is GREAT. And a lot of what is great about IT is when you're in the dark about what Pennywise is or isn't. The further you go into this book, the more you are told about the history of Derry and 25 different interwoven stories across multiple generations. And the more you learn about Derry and the people within, the less Pennywise feels like a malevolent puppet master and more of a boogeyman.
The inciting event of IT, Georgie encountering Pennywise while chasing his paper boat down the street, is the big motivator for the presumed main character of Bill. But the further you read into IT the impact of that story increasingly dwindles. Bill kind of becomes the least interesting character but as it plays out is ultimately the big hero.
For better or worse, the book should have been about Beverly. And that's probably my biggest gripe with this book, even more so than the fact that about 300-400 pages of this book could disappear and I wouldn't even notice.
Bill, Eddie, Stanley, and Richie just aren't that interesting. I don't care about Eddie and his overbearing mom. I don't care whether Richie is funny or not. Stanley barely feels like he's in this book compared to how much space is devoted to the others, which I'll take as a win.
The ritual scene, the most notorious part of this book aside from Georgie getting ripped apart in the beginning, is the most puzzling aspect. Ultimately, the kids are meant to discover that things that make them weak are the things that make them powerful. Beverly's weakness is tied to her sexuality, at least tied to the perception of her sexuality from the POV of adults in her life. I think there is a version of Beverly's story that ends more solidly with her understanding of what about being a woman makes her powerful.
But why is Beverly's story so strongly tied to sexuality? I understand that the negative perception that's repeatedly drilled into her mind about how sex is bad and if she has sex then she is bad can be thwarted by Beverly having a positive experience with sex and finding power in that. But why does it have to be letting her friends bang her? It subverts the positive outcome for Beverly to realize being a woman is her strength, not her weakness, and instead manifests in a scene where she gratifies her male peers with her body is just very disappointing. It's also not deviating much from the constant tropes King relies on to tell stories about women in his books.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child death, Sexual assault, Violence, and Murder
Moderate: Body shaming, Bullying, Child abuse, Racial slurs, Sexual content, and Blood
Minor: Animal cruelty, Suicide, and Antisemitism