leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (06/12/85)
NIGHT SHIFT by Stephen King
Signet, 1979, $2.95.
BUCKETS OF BLOOD by Clive Barker
Sphere, 1984, L1.50($3.25).
Two book reviews by Mark R. Leeper
On a recommendation for horror stories by a British newcomer, Clive
Barker, I read his third collection, BOOKS OF BLOOD: VOLUME THREE. Then to
put him in a perspective, I read what is probably the best-selling horror
collection of all time, NIGHT SHIFT by Stephen King. That makes sense
because King is to horror writers what McDonald's is to restaurants. His is
a sort of decent, never great, all-pervasive standard.
So what are my conclusions? I'd say the two writers were quite
different but roughly on a par as writers. I read a horror story for three
things: an interesting horror idea, interesting characters, and an engaging
plot.
King's ideas are all right but a little unimaginative and even
timeworn. I often say when I read one of his novels that it would have made
a really good short story. Many of his short stories would have made good
cartoons by a macabre cartoonist like Gahan Wilson. Stories like "The
Boogeyman" and "Gray Matter," in fact, seemed very much like story-length
versions of particular Gahan Wilson cartoons that pre-dated them. At least
two other stories ("The Mangler" and "Trucks") are just variations on
Sturgeon's classic SF-horror story "Killdozer," written in the late Forties.
"Battleground," in which a child's toy soldier set attacks humans is just a
pale shadow of the Richard Matheson story "Prey" in which a really vicious
native doll comes to life and terrorizes the woman who purchased it.
(Actually, a lot of King seems heavily derived from Matheson, who I think
was an even better horror story writer before he was seduced by the
Hollywood side of the Force.) Other so-called stories are really just a
scene each plus a fair amount of set-up time. These stories are "The
Ledge," "The Man Who Loved Flowers," and "One for the Road." The stories
that stand out for original ideas are "I Am the Doorway" and "Quitters,
Inc."
Of the five stories in the Barker anthology, at least three struck me
as really new concepts. When you start out a Barker story, you are never
sure where he is going to take it. When the idea does come along it is
really out of left field and attacks with a real element of surprise. His
best story drones for a little while about a vaguely interesting character
out in his field trying to dig up a large object that he's found. Then the
object comes up by itself and the story shifts gears into a really gruesome
story about, of all things...a giant. I suppose at one time there were
blood-curdling stories about giants, but that was a long time ago. These
days they are confined to mild children's stories, at least in horror. This
is NOT a mild children's story. The idea of doing a gruesome giant story is
more creative than just about anything that King has ever done. I was
certainly more surprised by it than by any of King's stories.
Premise was the first criterion I had for measuring stories. The
second was characters. King goes for interesting people, Barker for real
people. What is the difference? Well, to exaggerate it, would you rather
watch a videotape of an hour out of the life of your next-door neighbor or
Mickey Mouse? One would be very realistic as a slice-of-life, but not as
entertaining as the other. The other would be someone you could feel for,
but it would not be quite as realistic as the first.
Barker writes about male prostitutes, film projectionists,
pornographers. And they are believable portraits. You don't really care
for the characters, but you believe them and you learn something about their
lifestyles. When King writes about a college student, you end up
identifying with the character, but you get no insights into how a college
student sees life differently than, say, how a trucker does. King leaves a
lot of room in his characters for the reader to identify with the
characters, to get into and walk through the horror story with the them.
Barker's characters are too real and specific to have much identification
value. That may be a point against Barker in a horror story, but his
stories are better as literature.
But that is actually getting into the third criterion, plot. Barker's
characters have depth and motivation, where all too often Kings just limns
out an outline for the reader to paint him/herself into. Occasionally King
uses this for an emotional effect. He has real-life things haunting the
character and this is perhaps King's finest hour. His most satisfying
stories are "Sometimes They Come Back" (drawn no doubt on his experiences
teaching in a time when it really is outright dangerous to be a teacher in
some schools) and "Last Rung on the Ladder." which is a non-fantasy story
with some suspense which also has something to say. (While I'm on the
subject of this story, I have some mathematical complaints. The character
first says it happened some time when "Ike" was in office, as if he doesn't
remember exactly when. Yet he knows he was ten years old at the time. Most
people have a pretty precise idea od what summer they were ten years old.
At another point, he jumps from a hayloft 70 feet high. That's like being
on the seventh floor of an office building--assuming six twelve-foot stories
beneath him. If this guy is jumping from that into a haystack, he should be
a stuntman!)
Two different writers, two different styles. The difference is a
matter of taste. Obviously, King is more commercial; Barker is more
original. Either is worth the read.
Mark R. Leeper
...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeperkalash@ucbcad.UUCP (Joe Kalash) (06/19/85)
Also, the final three Books of Blood are due out (in London) June 20th. If you liked the first three, it is hopeful you will like the next three :-). Joe Kalash kalash@berkeley ucbvax!kalash