Archive for the ‘rage’ Category

Someone gave this book to me, so despite the sluggish pace and boomeriffic orgasming over The Good Old Days, I wanted to finish it. But I cannot. I cannot, because I did the smart thing and read the Wikipedia entry. My rationale was that, if I knew the ending wasn’t completely idiotic, I would be able to continue reading in good faith. In fairness, the post-time-travel post-apocalyptic ruin part of it did sound pretty good.

Unfortunately, this book is fucking stupid. Not just predictable and hackneyed, but just plain stupid. This is the sort of book that would have made a much better Hollywood film. The embarrassing nostalgia, the passing shallow acknowledgment that actually the 50s weren’t so great for a lot of people, and the painstaking attention to How Much Research I Did would have suited it. At least if I had watched a film like this, I would only have two hours of my life that I’d never get back instead of about 12.

It’s bad enough that King treats us to repeated scenes of the hero and his old-timey girlfriend in bed, complete with coy nudge-wink euphemisms for sex. It’s bad enough that the paint-by-numbers Crazy Ex-Husband subplot could have come straight from a Lifetime TV movie. It’s bad enough that the book manages to perform the impressive liberal contortion of decrying racism while at the same time failing to actually include any minorities as even ancillary characters. I’m not even going to get into the issue that not one but TWO female characters are disfigured and the point is made that it would be really great if they could get their faces fixed (because that’s what’s important: making them pretty again).

But what really fucks me off, what has actually enraged me to the point of writing about it, is the fact that the stupid bastard broke one of the most important rules of writing, which is this:


We know the time travel tropes. Killing Hitler, stopping the Kennedy assassination, we know all the cliched events that people would go back in time to stop. And we know also the cliche that, as sure as you go back to the past to change something or help someone, you will find that somehow something equally bad has happened. Despite this, despite actually seeing the process in action the first time he went back in time via the magical diner, King’s intrepid protagonist gamely ventures back to 1958 so that five years later he can save JFK’s life. Because that will fix everything. No, really.

And it feels like five fucking years. We watch the protagonist create a new life for himself thanks to convenient fake IDs. We watch him move to Smalltown USA, become attached and start a relationship, all the while keeping a beady eye on Mr Oswald. Did he act alone? Was it a conspiracy? At this point, I don’t even fucking care, which is why I went to Wikipedia to find out if our hero succeeds. SPOILER: he does.


If you said ‘nuclear war,’ congratulations, you too could write a Stephen King book. And congratulations to Mr King, since this is the only part of the plot summary that didn’t sound like shitty Mad Men self-insert fanfiction. Turns out, if JFK had lived, George Wallace would have become president and incited nuclear war. Or something.

Once again the profoundly stupid hero learns that you should not fuck with the past, and apparently at the end there is a sappy reunion between him and his would-have-been girlfriend and oh my god are you fucking kidding me. Did someone kill Stephen King and replace him with Mitch Albom?

I can count on one hand all the books I’ve never finished. Well, now it’s probably two hands. I am not going to finish this book. And not because I find the baby boomer wish fulfillment sad and empty. Not because the gender and race politics are dodgy (I have read pretty much all his other books, so that is not unexpected). Not because it’s a lame idea that’s badly executed, and not because the book is one lengthy cliche. Because more so than any of these things or all of them put together, this book is just fucking dull. It is the literary equivalent of that guy at the party who’s not especially offensive, just a self-indulgent knob, so when he sidles over to tell you about his family history project (or his novel), you pretend you have to use the toilet and then go talk to someone outside.


Read Full Post »

I see this comment a lot, and I’m tired of it:

“People don’t care about [public sector/higher education/benefits cuts/strikes/protests] because [group implicated] have it so easy. They should stop complaining!”

This is the biggest single obstacle to genuine change. It isn’t Labour MPs scabbing, it isn’t the Tories gleefully slashing at the bellies of the vulnerable, and it isn’t the tax avoidance of the very rich. It isn’t even the specious reasoning that ‘cuts have to happen.’ The biggest problem of all is the self-absorbed and cruel attitude of a significant part of society. “Sod these people trying to change things, I’ve got it hard and so should you!”

Who are these people? They seem to be omnipresent on the internet, filling up Guardian comment pages with the spleen of tiny-hearted misers. Everyone’s a scrounger, everyone wants something for nothing, everyone’s a thief and a liar and a violent thug– everyone else, that is. One can only assume that the commenters in question are hard-working, upstanding members of society.

This is what decades of capitalism and consumerism have wrought: a culture obsessed with a perpetually out of reach image of success, which we are told is attainable if we just work a little harder and behave ourselves a little better. And because we don’t live the life of ease that capitalism and advertising have promised us, the taste left in our mouths is the bitter ash of being hard done by.

Now, we could take this sense of injustice and turn it against the people responsible: MPs who have no qualms about campaigning on an issue and then backtracking once they’re safely elected (that is to say, pretty much all of them); employers who violate labour laws and get away with it because taking action against them is risky; the very rich, who profit from a system designed to exponentially expand their wealth; the police, who murder and assault with near impunity; the middle classes, who don’t gain as much from these institutions as the rich but still manage to hold onto their comfortable standard of living by stepping on everyone beneath them.

Instead, what appears to be the case is that society wants those who are already suffering to suffer a little bit more. They want the poor to starve, because obviously if they’re poor it’s their own fault for being lazy and on drugs. They want the working classes bound and gagged to prevent them from striking, because how dare they inconvenience more important people! No word on why disabled people are also expected to starve– their fault for not having magical healing powers, I guess.

This is the problem with our society. It isn’t teen mums or drug use or benefit fraud or divorce; it’s a culture of sadism. It’s not ‘reason’ or ‘sense’ or ‘sustainability’ or ‘value.’ It is, quite simply, the urge on the part of the privileged to make other people suffer as much as they can. It is sadism.

The urge to punish someone for things being fucked up is understandable. What isn’t understandable is the cultural equivalent of someone kicking the dog when they get home because they’ve had a hard day at work. I’m sick of it being rationalised and justified. Stop it.

Read Full Post »