People reading horror for some reason:
“What the fuck is this horrific shit what was the author thinking”
😂😂
Horror that heavily involves sexual themes is definitely difficult. Unless you make it immediately disgusting, a la Meatcanyon, it’s nearly impossible to make it seem like anything other than a thinly veiled fetish.
This scene is such a stain on his legacy I wish he’d put out a version without it.
I think that we all have really fucked up thoughts every now and again, and behaving like we never have is a great way to delude ourselves into believing a false reality.
Better to own them and grow than bury them and act like you’re some golden god on high.
People really need to stop spreading this misinformation.
It was a TRAIN.
Gangbangs are simultaneous, trains are sequential.
So if you were to compare it to a vehicle a gangbang would be like a plane that goes to Epstein Island, just like Steven King did multiple times.
up for interpretation
Not defending King, as I always found the gangbang suspicious after I learned about it (haven’t, and won’t read it anyway), but there are people who fully believe Trump is a pedo etc but don’t think there’s any actual files the way people want. They argue there’s evidence, sure, but not the exact client list full of incriminating details on everyone involved that people are expecting to see.
Personally, if I remember the timeline right I can see that point, and it could be true, or there could be files, but I think the lions share that associated with him should be under suspicion, no matter the political alignment, and we should still keep pushing for them anyway, even if there is a chance they aren’t the format lots of people think they are.
The gangbang makes sense but it is still fucked. Penny wise goes after kids so fuck and you’re no longer a kid. Still a plot point that should have stayed unexplored
The gangbang makes sense but it is still fucked. Penny wise goes after kids so fuck and you’re no longer a kid.
Maybe they could pay some bills, fill some spreadsheets in a cubicle, get a doctor’s appointment complaining about lower back pain, instead of a gang bang?
It isn’t all too uncommon of a story what with the supposed potency of virgin sacrifice, virgin foreseers whose powers are literally tied to their maidenhood, shit like that.
I’m not saying it was a good choice, I’m just pointing out that King is not the only weirdo to have ever existed.
To be fair, he was drowning in cocaine when writing that book, so he managed to keep the lid on it to the best of his abilities.
Ah. This is why everyone posting cocaine.
I was trying to figure out how a bunch of tweens stuck in the sewer got a hold of enough cocaine to think an orgy would help their cause.
According to King, at the height of his cocaine use he wrote the entire novel Cujo and doesn’t remember writing it at all.
You could also make a strong case that the director credit for the movie Maximum Overdrive should go to cocaine rather than King lol.
Yeah, King went through a rough patch that only got worse before it got better.
I always thought the part with Patrick and the refrigerator was far, far worse than the adolescent sex scene.
Also, Beverly having her period is a pretty big plot point. Not exactly prepubescent. The boys maybe.
This scene haunts me to this day. The barrens is for me the most unholy place in fictional existence. Shouldn’t have read it as a teenager. Nobody stopped me cause “look she is reading such a huge book.” …
When I was 12, my mum told my teacher that I found the books we were reading for class childish. Teacher then gave me IT to read instead. No idea what he was thinking. Being the same age as the characters, the sex scene was the most traumatizing by far.
“so you little shit think you can handle what adults read, huh?”
Reading the story, the “gangbang” part wasn’t like a huge orchestrated planned event. The kids were lost in the dark, loosing hope, and knew that IT wanted them to feel down and weak as alone they could be defeated by IT.
In an effort to make them feel close, Beverly took it up her self to make them all Eskimo Brothers. This brought the Losers Club back into solidarity.
Wasn’t it because the clown only went after innocent children?
So in order to lose their innocence they had a gang bang.
Thank God for the Beverly’s of the world, keeping it all together
I’m a big fan of Stephen Kings work. He’s deserving of respect as a writer and story teller. Your explanation is reasonable and true in the context of the story.
There is just no way to talk about, write about, discuss, etc, stuff like that, without the air in the room not going still as fuck. All of what you say is true, it’s still… off.
And that book was just a bit too long, but again, great book, great writer, questionable AS FUCK portion.
cocaine
Ya know, people keep saying this, but I’ve tried coke before, and preteen sex didn’t cross my mind once during it.
The people saying it have probably never seen an illegal drug before much less party time Adderall
I agree, coke makes you an annoying motormouth with no filter. If kiddie shit is what comes out then that’s just what was inside to begin with.
We’re you writing a book about pre-teens being lured by a murderous clown when you did cocaine? No, I didn’t think so!
There is just no way to talk about, write about, discuss, etc, stuff like that, without the air in the room not going still as fuck.
I don’t think that’s true at all. I think there are a lot of people out there who could discuss it, but that requires a significant degree of emotional maturity and there are too many people who can’t step back and be open to discussing topics which make them uncomfortable.
Sure. People can have a mature discussion about real life events. But when you make fantasy stories about children having sex that’s a fantasy.
You’re making a fantasy. You’re writing characters In a fantasy world and having them do this very inappropriate thing. And what makes it weirder is that the writer isn’t a child, he’s an old man. It’s creepy.
And isn’t that supposed to be the not creepy part of the book?
Mate, where are you going with this? Aldous Huxely erotic play for children? I think you’re missing the point. It’s not a discussion because the fallacy purported by the writer was to give 12 year olds emotions, desires, and mental processes that they simply have not yet developed. Beverly, the twelve year old girl, wouldn’t think to have sex with her friends to comfort them. Full stop. That’s the writer putting these emotions where they simply wouldn’t exist. And. Creepy.
It’s not maturity. Maturity is knowing that twelve year olds don’t reason that way.
Ummm was your childhood stunted or something? 12yos absolutely can be capable of complex emotional intelligence and reasoning. Hell, for most of humanity “childhood” wasn’t even a concept and an adult was anyone over 13.
And don’t get me wrong, that we can gift our young the idea of “childhood” is simply one of the greatest achievements of the modern world, so I’m not out here trying to say kids should be considered adults again, but I think you are vastly underestimating the capability of children. Especially children who are trauma survivors and haven’t had the benefit of the slow progress of childhood gifted to them.
Well, she would, because she’s a child sexual abuse survivor and it’s a hypersexualization thing and a result of how she’s been told things work by the adults taking advantage of her.
Still fucked up to type that out and not have some editor say “Are you doing okay, Stevie?”
And don’t pretend this is only fucked up sexual thing he’s written about children.
This is a very well-made point which does make a very good case for her actions fitting with her backstory.
However, a) it really only works as a post-hoc rationalisation for the scene, rather than an explantation for why the book is better with it, and b) speaking about consistency and foreplanning is somewhat undermined by the climax of the book being “…actually, it’s a…giant alien spider!”
As a writer, I disagree. Writers often write thinking from the perspective of their characters. If something makes sense from the character’s perspective, they’ll write it. It’s not an endorsement by the writer, it just makes for a natural and believable progression and that’s why the book is better for it.
I can bet you King never decided that he should include such a scene because it would make the book better. He did it because he was writing from her perspective, and it popped into his mind as something that made sense for her to do.
It’s not a fantasy, not an endorsement, and not a post-rationalisation either. And knowing his writing style, upon reflection he probably felt it belonged for shock value alone. Writers do have a knack for pushing boundaries, and he’s certainly got a taste of it.
Oh, trust me, I’ve had the “right, I need you to do x for the plot”, “well, I wouldn’t do that so I’m not going to” conversation with characters I’m writing.
But, let’s give King the benefit of the doubt and say that that’s how and why he came up with the idea…that’s a reason to have Beverly suggest it. Not a reason to have it actually happen.
Also, if “relating to people sexually” was a consistent character trait of hers, I don’t remember it actually coming up in the novel before that point. It’s been a long time since I read it and maybe she does proposition people often and inappropriately, but I remember thinking that the orgy came somewhat out of the blue, and I’d have thought that if it was the natural conclusion of a theme woven carefully through the narrative more people would bring that up as a defence whenever this topic comes up.
You know the story isn’t real, and any “explanation” that makes it seem logical is purely designed by the author, right? She didn’t survive anything. King made up a story about a sexual assault survivor and wrote this into it. He could have chosen literally anything else.
Sure, he was being a weird freak of an author and not for the last time.
Doesn’t mean it’s not outright silly to complain that a child SA survivor has a broken view of sexual norms and what adulthood is.
That’s not what people are complaining about. They’re complaining about the author wanting to write about that.
There are plenty of people who are abused at a young age that come to associate sex with giving comfort or thinking its the only way they can help others.
Sure.
There’s also choosing to put that into a book. Choosing to put that in a story. Thinking about the psychology of a sexually abused child and thinking “this would go well into my book.”
i definitely knew about sex by 12
Same? Like does no one remember being 12, or did they just block it out?
That sounds very much like a pedophile fantasy.
That’s like saying that a lot of people get murdered in Stephen King’s stories, so he must have homicidal fantasies.
Horror writers look for ways to shock and shake up their readers, and judging from the comments here, he succeeded.
Jonathan Swift must have really wanted to cannibalize poor children!
I’ll never forget bringing that up in a classroom and realizing adults had no idea it was satire.
… This isn’t satire and King is in the Epstein files.
This isn’t the only pedophile adjacent thing he’s written by the way, not even close.
Did I say King’s writing was satire? I said Jonathan Swift’s short story was satire.
As for King being in the Epstein files, do you have a source for this? I can’t seem to find it.
I believe it’s heavily implied due to his defense of Epstein.
When did he defend Epstein?
Yep when your job is to shock, gross out and give people very specifically a moral and ethical panic attack
You tend to do some fucked up stuff.
I assumed that there was a reason that he agrees with trump on not releasing the Epstein files.
No, King does not agree with Trump not releasing the Epstein files.
King doesn’t believe there is a document that clearly lists who is guilty of being a pedophile because that isn’t how long running and successful criminal activity works. They have lists of contacts and hints, which have already been released, but not something so cut and dry as a client list.
Yeah but it’s exactly how long running CIA/Mossad blackmail operation works
Even if there is an explicated log book. It’s likely filled with worthless pseudonyms, chicken scrawl or some other worthless data.
Making it worthless and basically what we already got
but not something so cut and dry as a client list.
Right. I know that. I assumed the ‘list’ people were talking about was able to be made with the actual information. Especially with the financial information on where the money was flowing.
The idea that there was 1 specific list that was found isn’t the idea being pushed when people say ‘Release the Epstein file.’ King said he doesn’t think a definitive list is real, but we sure do have a lot of information that can be used to create a list. That list can lead to questions that might have valid answers. It will also lead to a lot of pedos…so I’m assuming protecting them is the point of Trump’s delay.
King might have his own reason for not wanting a list of people not having to explain their connections with Epstein in the past, but I don’t care. Explain it and then move on, if you are innocent. It just feels King is arguing a red herring (about an actual list) instead of the meat and potatoes of going after pedos. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
“Buy why”
Drugs.
Don’t blame the drugs, man. Drugs only enhance what’s already there. Just like Ambian didn’t make Roseanne racist.
“no it’s about growing up and it’s like the pig thing in Lord of the Flies not my latent (hopefully) pedophilia”
Stephen King is not a good writer. He has great story ideas; but, his actual writing is poor and he does weird things that are unsupported by the narrative - like writing sewer gangbang scenes with children so that they can defeat the bad guy with the power of underage eskimo brotherhood.
You can explain that in a less derisive way that sounds a bit more reasonable, but it doesn’t make it a good narrative choice.
Another example is 11/22/63. People on reddit cream their pants over the book, but it’s literally just King self-inserting as the main character so he can (totally uncritically) reminisce over how great small town America was in the 50s/60s and have a fantasy relationship with this incredibly weak/badly-written female character and repeatedly “make poundcake” with her and drink rootbeer floats in diners or whatever. It’s an 800+ page book (paperback is 1049 pages) supposedly about time traveling to stop the Kennedy assassination (which is a cool story idea), but like 700+ pages are filled with asinine garbage and the actual plot is thin and pretty bad.
I completely agree. A couple of his books are okay, but most are long-winded, self-indulgent tosh that would have been far better if written by practically anyone else. Half the time, you can skip entire chapters and miss nothing, because he seems to think describing every minute aspect of every minor character’s life equals character development. Five pages cataloguing all the canned goods in Jimmy’s grandmother’s pantry, all the steps of her apple pie recipe, where she learnt it, how she decides which milk to buy, why the grocer moved the milk from aisle 5 to aisle 2, etc, etc, etc – none of it matters and it’s a slog to read.
It’s like he thinks more words equals a better novel. He is a better writer than a director, though.
Disclaimer: I enjoyed the Tower books and many of his other books.
Often his man characters are reparative, always writers. I had many hits with him but also misses. Like maybe because I was too young and have no children of my own I found Pet sematary not very good. But what he does he gets me into a flow of reading. He makes it easy for me to enjoy the book no matter how thin the plot is.
But there a couple of plot points I admit I find now weird and not well played out. Like in The Stand why is everybody understanding English? There is no real communication barrier apart from not being able to talk at all. So I miss language barriers. So his books have a place in my heart but I also grew up with Goosebumps so it was a natural progression to King.
I read so many of his book thinking “at some point I’ll land on one that’ll make me understand what all the fuss is about”. Never happened. As you said, the guy has great concept ideas, but he doesn’t know how to build on them. So many endings are so stupid and far fetched it would be comical if it were a Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure episode…
I can’t agree more. I enjoyed his earliest works some, but he quickly hits his “stride” and falls into his characteristic writing pattern, making every book more or less the same novel with interchangeable variations on the same plot points.
This is pretty much my experience with King. I highly appreciate his ability to consistently create great story ideas, but his actual writing is just kind of bad. Since he has so many books, there might be some good ones in there, but from what I’ve read I’m not impressed. Not that he needs to impress me, he’s done fine for himself.
King isn’t a “writer” as much as he’s “some rando that took up horror lit as a paid hobby in college in order to fund the completion of his ‘opus’ The Dark Tower series …some numerous decades later” 🤢 Prolific =/= professional, etc.
At least people will admit that the horror books often are terrible. The dark tower books suffer from so much of the same, but are lauded and people will flip out if you say they’re not good. The entire first book was like reading a history timeline rather than a story, and was boring history to boot. The second book was better, but still just felt like a really dull friend relaying a story.
Wasn’t IT about the loss of innocence? Also drugs were a factor
I’ve been told that cocaine is a helluva drug
If you are writing a horror book, you gotta find a variety of ways to scare people. Sex often triggers a select group of readers.
What icks me out is when they make an evil character LGBTQ or kinky.
I recently heard about how the Hellraiser movies helped represent the kinky community
So many of us loved that film without quite being able to say why.
Misrepresent, you mean? Yeah, the Cenobites are dressed up as kinksters, and that’s done to play upon the ick reaction that the mainstream has towards kink. That’s exactly the kind of thing I’m talking about, and it’s probably the reason why their outfits are much less BDSM in the reboot.
I will admit I’ve had my suspicions about him for a long time. He’s also written a short story of a child being raped outside a library and in another he went into great descriptive detail about the genitalia of a young girl who is lost in the woods. This is after she drank water from a stream resulting in exposure to Cholera.
What was acceptable in the past is no longer acceptable. There are people that can’t accept that.
In 1986 though? Pretty sure we had our cultural view on child gangbangs locked in by then.
Let’s check out the lyrics of some popular rock songs from that time period…
Or what the age of consent was…
By all means, check out the lyrics of some popular rock songs from the late 80s. I think you’ll find the pedophila vastly underrepresented.
Now, that’s not to say songwriters like Steven Tyler didn’t exist, but a large part of the lyricism you’re talking about is from around a decade or more earlier.
On the age of consent, I’ll give you this: they’re definitely weird in Georgia. Georgia’s age of consent was 14 until 1995.
However, the kids in the Losers Club were 11 in the first part of IT, which is still below even that threshold. With the exception of Georgia, the age of consent in America has been at least 16 since 1920. Plus, 23 states actually set their age of consent at 18 back then as well.
Maybe it was a little less weird in 1986 than it is now, but it was still far from the cultural norm. That’s all.
Motörhead – Jailbait (1980): Lemmy’s vocals directly reference wanting an underage fan, with explicit references to ignoring her age
Aerosmith – Jailbait (1982): Aerosmith released their own song titled “Jailbait” exploring a similar theme
KISS – Christine Sixteen (1977, still popular into the 1980s): Focuses on a fascination with a sixteen-year-old girl, and gets repeated mention for its controversial spoken section
Winger – Seventeen (1988): Describes a romantic obsession with a seventeen-year-old girl
The Police – Don’t Stand So Close to Me (1980): Explores forbidden attraction between a teacher and his student
Benny Mardones – Into the Night (1980): The lyrics reference a young girl separated from the singer by age
Unfortunately it isn’t even to this day. Just look at who is in the white house.
Most voters who support Trump are in genuine denial that he’s a pedophile. It’s ridiculous, but it doesn’t change the fact that they also hate pedophilia - they’re just being conned into thinking queer people are the pedos (also very likely some of them are pedos/complicit, but I will risk the assumption that that is the minority and the conservatives I’ve met in real life actually aren’t pedophiles).
Also, have the standards of what’s acceptable changed or not? You said they have, then you implied they haven’t. Either way, I highly doubt everyone was just fine with that scene in 1986, especially given it was not recreated in any adaptation.
Snortin’ Whiskey, Drinkin’ Cocaine.
Well, Coca Cola…
