ENTERPRISE INCIDENTS: THE SHINING

VAN HISE REVIEW OF: THE SHINING

(The Shining Journal, #3)

Mr. Van Hise likes The Shining, but complains that it has "too much characterization." While Salem’s Lot was a big novel with lots of characters, The Shining is a big novel with just a few characters.

In van Hise’s words:

"The complaint I’m making is that when writer has a finely conceived story, there is no reason to detour from it into subplots and extraneous discourses which have nothing to do with that plot. Characterization is fine, but let’s not overdo it, and this book certainly does overdo it, mostly with Jack Torrance. The book is about the Overlook Hotel and what it does to these people one winter. When the story stays here it’s great. What happened to Jack Torrance when he lsot his job is just a big rap which he wasn’t able to roll with. Drumming that fact into our heads time after time isn’t necessary. Certainly it was important to describe Jack Torrance ine nough back ground detail so that we can understand why his mental collapse is believable, but too much of this reached the point hwere it came across to me as just padding. I’m well aware that this is a terrible thing to say about a writer, and I’m not saying that this is what King did, but rather that this is the effect it achieved. Fortunately, the book’s strong points far overshadow its weak ones."

The reason Jack’s firing was so important to the book is that it was one of the catalyst for his drinking. Or return to drinking. I find all the background information does slow the story – but I can press on because I actually enjoy all these asides. If this was my first time reading The Shining, I think I too would be annoyed! "Where’s this going?" I would ask. But I already know where this is going, so I can take time to enjoy the greater depth King gives these characters.

Now, for an early commentary on the Kubrick film! Remember, please, Van Hise hasn’t had years of King and others griping about the film. It was met with generally good reviews, so it takes some perception. 

"The film is also an abortion from the standpoint of the fact that the movie ends before it even reaches the point in the book where the climax really gets rolling. Yes, the movie cuts out the climax of the book, which is the very facet of the story which insured its popularity, because unlike the film, the book is not anti-climactic. The book builds to such a wild, ever pritch that it remains a classic of the genre no matter how many other horror stories you’ve ever rad. Whereas Salem’s Lot is a better book on the whole, The Shining contains his finest climax from every standpoint, and especially for sheer power and imagination.   

Whatever else may be disappointing in the book, the climax is not! It delivers a one-two punch which carries the reader straight through to the conclusion with pile-driver intensity and in an extremely satisfying manner. This book cried out fo a powerful screen translation, rather than the commonplace treatment it received at the hands of Stanley Kubrick. Because of this, there are a lot of people out there who don’t understand why The Shining was a bestseller, or why it was even made into a film at all, and that’s criminal. Kubric has made King seem like an ordinary writer, and all because Kubric took excellent material and made an ordinary film. If there is anything The Shining is not, it’s ordinary."

I can hear the "experts" on Room 237 shouting, screaming, crying at this! "The Shining" a "ordinary" film? I love the way van Hise gives such credit to the book.

The introduction to this set of reviews is at talkstephenking.blogspot.com

THE SHINING: I remember that world

the LA freeway in 1977

Stephen King books are written for the NOW -- meaning, whatever the now is when they are written.  The present is always before you in a Stephen King book.  That means that if you read a new King novel, it will be full of fresh, delightful cultural references.  If you read an oldie, it will be full of bits of history you might have forgotten.

I find myself identifying deeply with The Shining, because I feel like I've been to that world.  In so many ways reading The Shining is like a personal trip down memory lane.  I don't know these people, but I am familiar with their alien environment.

It's all in the little  things. Jack drives a yellow VW.  My aunt and uncle had a yellow VW, and my family had a blue one.  The year, late 1970's -- same time frame the Shining was written in.  So, the scene where Jack pulls up in his VW is especially powerful to me, since I remember playing in my families driveway, and looking up to see my father coming in his VW Bug.  My mother hurried me to get out of the way -- I think I was playing with toy cars.

A big deal is made in the book of Jack having a phone installed -- and again, I feel like I vaguely remember that world..  A world that used microphones to record things;a world where boilers  still had to be checked 3 times a day.  A world where someone can't just cell phone or text to announce the outcome of a job interview. A world where Richard Nixon was long gone -- but his memory still stung.

Who can really say they remember the 70's with  any kind of fondness?  Well, I can.  I don't remember it well, mostly just feelings -- but mostly all good.  In 1977 the Apple II went on sale, the average income was $15,000 and the average home cost under $50,000.  Get this, the average monthly rent  was $240.  In theaters Star Wars was released.   Meaning that in 1976, people didn't know what Star Wars was!

Also released was a movie named Roller coaster  Not great on plot, but it was  filmed at Magic Mountain (partly) and I like it because I can spot old rides.  Notice in the movie The American Revolution, the first roller coaster to make a full loops, does not have shoulder straps.  Magic Mountain was also Wally World  in National Lampoons Vacation.  And, again, notice that back then Revolution required no shoulder straps!  They only added the harness because people thought they would fall out, even though that's impossible.

By the way, goodreads lists The Shining as #1 on their list of "Most Popular Books Published In 1977." (www.goodreads.com)

Do you remember this world. . .

A Note About Jack:

King objected to the portrayal Jack Nicholson gave Jack Torrance. Reading the novel again, I can really see what was missed.  Kubrick's Jack is crazy; King's Jack is broken.  The difference is that crazy Jack is always seething just under the surface.  He is not tender toward his wife or son, just completely self  absorbed.

The Jack of the novel is more complex.  He deeply loves his wife and son and sacrifices for them.  He plays with Danny, changes diapers when Danny was a baby and fights to keep his marriage together.

When Kubrick's Jack goes nuts and kills everyone, there  is absolutely no surprise.  It's crazy to watch it unfold, but you could tell he was nutso from the get-go.  King's Jack  displays moments of rage, but in the early novel King is careful not to show us that Jack in action -- instead we see the Jack who has to live with the consequences of his bad  behavior.  It's like seeing the aftermath of a nuke and having to imagine what exactly the force was that  brought on the devastation   Only later  will King show us the nuke in action.

The Shining, Journal #2

Do You Plan To Read THE SHINING Before Doctor Sleep's Release ?

Doctor Sleep is a stand alone book.  It is not a sequel to The Shining.  However, it contains characters from The Shining -- namely Danny Torrance.  Should readers reread The Shining before Doctor Sleep?   Stephen King has made it clear that he knows some people will, but that it is not necessary for understanding the new novel.

Huck Finn followed Tom Sawyer,  had the same characters, but you don't have to read Tom Sawyer to understand Huck Finn.  However, why wouldn't you want to read Tom Sawyer?  And likewise, why wouldn't you want to read The Shining?

I started rereading The Shining the other night.  I'm listening to it as I run, which makes  the running no less painful, but at least gives me some motivation to get out and moving.  I run late at night, so that makes reading Stephen King all the better!

Why reread The Shining?
Because the movies have tainted my memory.  Did Jack freeze to death?  No. . . that was the Kubrick version.  Did the Overlook remain,  or do I remember is blowing up?  I think it blew up.  I think that boiler went from the basement to through the attic. . . but I'm not sure!

I've seen Kubrick's version of The Shining many many more  times than I've read the book.  Add to that the fact that I've also watched the ABC mini-series.  It seems appropriate to return to the original text and refresh myself.

Because the story is pretty simple, we can assume we know it well.  But there are many things I've already encountered that I'd forgotten.  The reason Jack was sent packing from his teaching job, for instance.

Some Quick Notes:
A few things stand out to me right away as I start back through this book.
1. Ullman is absolutely right to be uneasy about hiring Jack.  The reader experiences the scene through Jack's eyes, so on first read Ullman comes off as a jerk.  Or, in Jack's eyes, he's a officious little prick.  But this is not my first journey through The Shining, so I know that though Ullman may seem like a jerk, he's actually spot on about more than a few things.

Ullman raises several valid concerns about Jack's employment.  He's worried that the family will be so isolated that they cannot get help if they need it.  And how true that is!  Danny will have to use his Shining to call for help when trouble comes.  He points out that the previous caretaker had two little girls, and the Hotel turned out to be a less than welcoming place for a family.  He wishes the owner would hire a single man to do the work.

Ullman is also concerned that Jack's creative mind will go stir crazy in a big empty hotel.  He might start imagining things.  Could this be his way of warning Jack that all is not as it appears?

The biggest concern  on Ullman's mind is Jack's drinking.

2. King gives us quite a bit of the hotel's history.  I know, and have read, the extended prologue King originally wrote for the novel.  It's great!  However, King does a nice job in chapter 1 of telling the reader that the hotel has a very dark history.

3. Chapters 2 and 3  introduce us to Jack's drinking and his temper through two different sources.   First Danny and Wendy are given a scene in which Danny recalls abuse at the hands of his father when he messed up the play his dad was writing.  Second, Jack is being given a tour of the hotel boiler room when he has a flashback of hurting Danny.  All this is nice foreshadowing.  The reader wonders: Will he do it again?

4. Chapter 3 also introduces us to a major character -- the boiler.

First Edition:

The oldest "first" edition Stephen King book I have is The Shining.  I bought it about a year ago, anticipating Doctor Sleep.  I knew they would print The Shining and Doctor Sleep together at some point, but it seemed like a good idea to have an actual first edition of both books.

The cover of the book itself tells you right away that the family dynamic is quite different from that of the movie.