Yet another Stephen King book about a writer/teacher from Maine? But this time it’s non-fiction.
A one-line review on the release of Danse Macabre, King’s analysis of horror, back in 1981 sniffed: “Stephen King with his
critic’s hat on”.
But, like the homogenous writing and/or teaching heroes of
most of his early novels, King is actually well-placed to examine and critique
other works, particularly in the horror genre. Obviously there’s a strong
leaning towards American films , TV and fiction, but that goes hand in hand
with the often interesting autobiographical tone of this book.
I first read this book almost 25 years ago, and at that time
still enjoyed King’s novels. I had just
finished The Talisman, his brilliant
and inexplicably still-unfilmed novel co-written with Peter Straub, and was
willing to accept everything he said as gospel. Stephen King’s Danse Macabre was my unerring compass pointing to
recommended destinations, and away from dead-ends, pitfalls and washouts. His swooning adoration of Straub’s Ghost Story, a book which I read while staying
in a Highland Castle and rattled me like no other
novel ever has, further convinced me of King’s worth as a guide through the
genre.
Since then of course, I’ve been let down to the point of
no-return by both King and Straub, and done enough reading and viewing to form
my own opinions about much of the material covered in Danse Macabre.
Although returning to this book in a slightly belligerent frame
of mind and far less inclined to be lectured to, I still found it difficult to
disagree outright with most of King’s views. When this hopefully-ashamed author
of the interminable and unfocused Tommyknockers
accuses Ray Bradbury of over-writing I couldn’t decide whether to laugh or
choke, but King also nails what is so magical about Bradbury’s work:
“…he lives and works alone in his own country, and his
remarkable, iconoclastic style has never been successfully imitated. Vulgarly put, when God made Ray Bradbury, he
broke the mold”.
“Amen to that!”: to borrow King’s sometimes annoying habit
of falling into overly-chummy “gonna, gotta, aintcha” slang when he feels
confident he’s made a point which we’re all going to hoot and murmur “right
on!” to.
That quote was from the final and densest part of the book,
where King is obviously most comfortable – analyzing American horror
literature. As well as Bradbury’s Something Wicked this Way Comes and
other writers, he looks at The
Bodynatchers, Rosemary’s Baby, The Haunting of Hill House, The Shrinking Man and, to his credit, a
couple of British authors. What unites
this list is that they have all been filmed, mostly well, and so if I hadn’t
read the novels discussed I have at least ‘seen’ them King appears to have corresponded with the
authors, and so the views presented aren’t just his but are also straight from
the horse’s mouths, which is insightful and fascinating. Jack Finney, for example, had no thoughts at
all of a ‘reds under the bed’ subtext when he wrote the Bodysnatchers – so
there!
The Film and TV sections are where the book shows it’s age
the most, with discussions of long-forgotten features as ‘current cinema’
(mutant grizzly bear epic Prophecy,
anyone?) and an unsurprisingly American-centric and ultimately dismissive view
of horror on television. There was much
more happening on the box than Kolchak
and Twilight Zone re-runs across the
pond, Mr King…
Elsewhere, his insistence on distilling characters and
themes into Apollonian and Diosynian (good and bad to you and me) are useful
categories when King is in full lecturing mode, but feel a little like being
constantly tugged on a lead back to his own totemic dog park rather than really
being allowed to explore. (Not sure why
I fell into a dog metaphor there, maybe it’s the ghost of Cujo…)
On the plus (apollonian?) side, King’s love for the material
shines through and his own skills come to life when recounting one of his own
viewing or reading touchstones. He quite rightly prophesises the then-recent Alien to be a modern horror classic and
recalls 50s and 60s B movies with real affection. Here he recounts an image
from such a film which was obviously hugely influential:
“But the feeling that stuck longest was that swooning
sensation when good old Richard Carlson and good old Julia Adams were surely
going down for the third time, and the image that remains forever after is the
creature slowly and patiently walling it’s victims into the Black Lagoon; even
now I can see it peering over the growing wall of mud and sticks.
Its eyes. Its ancient eyes.”
Its eyes. Its ancient eyes.”
Perhaps more fond
recollections and less lecture note would have gone down better with me, even
if I can’t dispute his conclusions. But
given all that has happened in the horror genre since 1981, I wouldn’t say no
to a follow-up, either.
No comments:
Post a Comment