ES una buena reseña de todo lo que ha escrito stephen, pero ha quedado un poco desactualizada. Deberían sacar un nuevo libro incorporando todas las novelas y cuentos que se han publicado. Igualmente me gusto.

Both a biography and a critical appraisal of Stephen King's first decade of writing, focusing on the novels: Carrie, 'Salem's Lot, The Shining, The Stand, The Dead Zone,The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger, Cujo, Christine, Pet Semetary, & The Talisman; as well as the novellas The Mist and Cycle of the Werewolf, and his short fiction.

"Winter has taught me things about the novels of Stephen King, just when I was no longer sure that was possible." -Peter Straub on the back cover.I bought this book soon after it was published in the late 1980s. Even though it is 30 years old, it's an excellent survey of the first part of King's writing career. Winter writes very well, and brings a scholarly analysis to his essays. He discusses the influences on King's books and short stories - literary and popular culture alike - and the politi...

DNF - If I were a huge King fan and read all the books discussed by Winter, I would have finished. But because I haven't read many of the books on the list, it didn't hold my interest. I may return to it if I read more King.

Stephen King said he didn’t know about The Simpsons Movie while writing and finishing Under the Dome, and also claimed he originally started the idea/project back in the 70s and 80s . . . But in The Art of Darkness, published in 1984, clearly highlights King’s attempt to write “Under the Dome”—long before The Simpsons first episode or the coincidental the movie. There is no ambiguity

Originally published in 1984 (the foreword mentions a revised edition in 1985, my version is © 1989 but doesn’t have details of “Stand By Me” which came out in 1986), this exhaustive book looks at King’s output (to date) and also includes elements of biography (with a lot of quotes from “Danse Macabre”). The sheer wealth of information is incredible (I wish I could have found this back in the 80s!) and, due to their friendship, Winter has better access to King than most people writing about him

I don't get celebrity-stalker types, except for maybe in the case of Stephen King--the dude's just so friggin' awesome. This book is good for people who want to learn everything they can about King, without going quite so far as to root around in his garbage. It also might be worth a look for people who have dismissed King as simply an auteur of "cheap thrills"--as my former writing teacher put it. The book feels a bit like a master's degree thesis, but a VERY good one. At first, it was disappoi...

Despite the author's admiration of Stephen King (this book goes up to the Tommyknockers), the prose is dry. Yes, there are some good tidbits about some of the maestro of horror's iconic novels, but not enough to overcome the lifeless writing. For hardcore King fans only!

I am a "Constant Reader", and anyone who loves King knows exactly what I mean. I've read quite a bit about him. He is one of the few authors I love enough to care about the person behind the craft.This contained nothing I hadn't read before, except for a few lines Winter's (looooooong)analysis of King's work. I have been reading this off and on for months because I hate to put a book in the DNF pile, but just couldn't stomach his posturing for long stretches. I'll admit there were a few kernels

I was a little disappointed with this book though I was forewarned by a snippet from an anthology of essays on pulp fiction I read some years back which I cannot recall the name of at the moment. This book follows a format of synopsis of parts of the discussed work with plot points paired with biographical anecdotes from Stephen King's life along with some uncritical commentary and the direct interpretation of symbols in the said work. Between the biography and analyzed bits of King's work you

This was written in the early 80's when King's popularity was just taking off. It's a good critical analysis of his early, most popular work. Integrating King's comments with Winter's academic-type discourse, I think this makes an excellent background book for a discussion club or writing class.

Published in 1984, this book covers Stephen King's early work, including an index of 20 years of short fiction alphabetically arranged with a brief synopsis of each or reference to the page it is discussed in the book. Also included are the movie adaptations, few of which were written by Stephen King. I enjoyed this book immensely, especially savoring the nostalgia it invoked. However, now I am compelled to reread some of them. Not a bad thing, however it adds to an always somewhat overwhelming

I found this book at a yard sale. It was given to me. I can see why now. I usually try to finish any book I start, even if I don't like it a lot. Not this one. I thought it would be interesting. Not so much. It is such a slow read. Some sections were better. But, as a whole it was just BLAH. I would not recommend this book to anyone.

This gets points for being an early (perhaps the earliest, I don't know) book on King that tries to analyze his work and take him seriously--though for a general audience, not a scholarly one. It doesn't hurt that Winter and King were friends, so he had access to unpublished MSS of forthcoming books and was able to interview King for the project. There's lots of interesting information here, especially about potential projects at the time that never saw the light of day (e.g. Spielberg's propose...

Had to read something new during the snow storm.

i've read lots of books about stephen king. i've also read and have been stunned by the author, Douglas Winter's, debut novel Run. That said, i wasn't all that pleased with this book. it is considered one of the more important books on Stephen King but i found it rather dry and uninteresting. i would suggest checking out the latest editions of The Complete Stephen King Universe, or The Stephen King Companion before this book. do yourself a favor though, and get your hands on Douglas Winter's Run...