Is Stephen King a great writer?

Never read any of his stuff and don't plan to, so explain.

Ok so King's work is marginally entertaining and has diction that is a little higher than high school and has basically all basic anatomical parts of a literary work (character development, plot, symbolism,"theme") but they do not function as art on any real level. The work is entirely functional in nature and relies upon the reader not having read the book before and thereby leans on the unfolding of the plot heavily as its chief attraction. So you the pleb reader, notice King because he writes a fuck ton, and you also notice that he's popular and has written a lot of works that have been made into film or have otherwise permeated the cultural dura mater. So you pick him up and read Christine, or Misery, or whatever the fuck. And it appears to stand up as a work because it has literary elements and an interesting plot. Where King fails utterly is on any reread. Unlike Proust or Goethe or Moliere (actual authors), King as a hack is incapable of producing a text that can yield more than the very basics. The symbolism has one interpretation. The theme is manifest, ham-fisted, and quotidian. The dialogue is lackluster at best. Everything that you swept under the rug because you wanted to find out how many people Cujo was going to eat starts to become glaringly pathetic. That's what makes King a hack, his work can not be reread by any thinking person, and as a result it can not be admitted into either the canon or a personal library. He is dangerous because plebs only read works once.

leans on the unfolding of the plot heavily as its chief attraction

Have you actually read any Stephen King?? His novels are purely character-driven. (They're still shit, though, since his characters are so pedestrian.)

Still, if you're gonna shit on King at least don't make a fool of yourself in the process.

He doesn't write anything you'd have to study after high school, but that doesn't mean he's worthless. Sometimes I don't want to read something that requires a character map/serious reflection/essays, sometimes I just want to read a story. King fills that niche perfectly.

Stephen King is shit. There are only two reasons why people are defending him on this board:
1. They're trying to counter a (nonexistent) counter-culture that (in their mind) opposes mainstream lit.
2. They actually enjoy Stephen King, along with other shitty authors, and thus they frequently retaliate with the response "LIT HATES POPULAR AUTHORS."

In reality, most people here who don't like King are simply offering their honest opinions, as they would if someone made a 50 Shades of Gray thread. And sadly, both types of the people mentioned above find it difficult to admit that they might be wrong, because they want to continue consuming their garbage.

People who defend Stephen King are trying to counter the imaginary people who say King is shit, when in fact we all agree King is shit

I agree King is shit but your logic is all kinds of retarded.

What a coherent and fair explanation of your opinion. This is why /book/ is probably one of the best boards on 4ct.

what are personal preferences

ASOIAF is just fine if you like fantasy, and the prose is not nearly as bad as this board makes it out to be.
but go on and post the passage where Dany has diarrhea, i'm sure it will be funny this time.

>>1
He could be an amazing one if he actually focused on doing something new and interesting. Its a blow to the gut that someone as prolific and skilled at stringing together sentences as him wasted their talent on pure genre fiction.

I don't know if I'm an "educated reader" or not and have read very little of Stephen King or Proust but but you sound like a pompous, pedantic, windbag.

Pompus, pedantic, windbag.

Nope, sorry, it should be

Pompous, pendantic windbag.

You're not listing words you're calling him a pedantic windbag who's also pompous. Retard.

>>1
I'd say he is. He has written some brilliant stuff.

He's published around 50 books, apparently he has 50 more just laying around.

Some of his stuff has been terrible, but you can say the same about charles dickens, shakespeare, or william faulkner, they've all written bombs.

Like them, a hundred years after he's dead people will pretend his bad stuff never existed, and focus only on his good stuff and they'll think of him as one of the greats.

actual authors

So are these writers who write for "educated readers"?
You're whole post doen't say anything else than: I don't like his works because they don't meet my standart of art.

There is no such thing as an "actual author". There no such thing as a common definition of art. You're argumentation is all right, but you're conclusion "art/ no art" is just plain wrong and subjective.

>>14
Yes there is. Shit gets forgotten in time, real art doesn't.
Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy are real art. King? Can't comment, never had the interest in reading him. Never actually heard anyone recommend him.

apparently he has 50 more just laying around.

Source anyone?

Shit gets forgotten in time, real art doesn't.
art doesn't

take a walk around your town and ask strangers what they know about tolstoy and dostoyevsky.
tip: no one will know what the fuck you are talking about.
the definition of "real art" depends from person to person.
and if real art never gets forgotten only the people everybody knows were real artists.
does that sound right to you?

I like King because he doesn't pretend to be intelligent, academic or even an "author". He said himself that his work is like a Big Mac of literature; simple, tasty and quite bad for you. For that, I respect him. Also, he has been one of the driving forces in forming American horror.

The key is, he has no illusions of grandeur. He is highly aware that his work isn't "artistic" or "literary". While some of you may think he's rather self-consciously decreasing the intellectual faculties of the plebs, he knows he isn't. On the contrary, he's probably helping some folks to get into books.

In short, he's about as far from a hack as one can be.

What is this hangup some of you people have? I don't go around imagining you taking cocks. Do you? you like them? Fine with me, just keep em to yourself.

>>19 why the fuck would someone post this here?

>>19 still shitting up the internet i see sfbe.

>>22
stop it with the meme!