Ken Baumann
November 20th, 2009 / 10:56 pm
Snippet

King on Sklenicka on Carver & Lish, King on Carver & Lish.

Tags: , , ,

3 Comments

  1. Kyle Minor

      Stephen King is increasingly interesting as a human being. I’m glad he wrote this review, and I’m glad to hear him think aloud about Raymond Carver. I wish the review had been more engaged with Carver’s work on its own terms, absent talk about Carver’s wives or editors or his drinking. I would have enjoyed hearing Stephen King’s close reading of Cathedral or Errand or Are These Actual Miles? I think Carver is King’s opposite in many ways (the minimal v. the maximal, the disparity in attention to the individual sentence, the quiet story v. the rip-roarer, etc.), but I also think that Carver and King are interested in a similar kind of character, often, and have a similar conversation with violence in their work which gets literal play (often metaphorized) in Carver and metaphorical play (often literalized) in King. After reading King’s writing on writing, I thought Carver would be a writer whose work might appeal to King, and I’m pleased to see how the admiration shows through in the Times review.

      reply

  2. Richard

      I just skimmed this article, but will read it later, as a long time King fan. Glad to hear your comments Kyle, as a lot of people bash King, but I think he’s a great storyteller.

      reply

  3. Fajar

      Great post.The best advice I can give to anyone,lucy

      reply

Comment

the internet literature
magazine blog
of the future

Advertisement


Support HTMLGIANT contributors by supporting their literature