Cell *SPOILER*

[Conan]

I have just finished reading cell, a very good read, but again kings ending disapointed me. It was far too open. I knew it would be an open ending but not that open. I knew he would'nt have revealed the beings (if there was any) behind the pulse or infact the fate of the world but I at least thought we would have seen what happened to clays son. Anyway a very good book overall, got a bit like "the living dead" 2/5 through the book though. Your thoughts?

 

[Wiggum]

My thoughts have always been that Cell is the meat in the sandwich of From A Buick 8 and Dreamcatcher of bad.

Cell is the second act in a play, with both the first and third act missing.

I don't mind the open ending, heck, I really liked The Colorado Kid.

Lisey's Story, imho, is the best thing he's written in years, and I have no idea why no one has either read it, or really talks about it.

 

[Barney]

Just read Lisey's Story, personally wasn't too impressed. He has written about flipping between worlds and being stalked by a madman many times before.
Also the private language Lisey and Scott developed during their marriage grated on me a bit. A decent King novel I thought, but definitely not one of his best.

 

[HoopyFrood]

I enjoyed Cell. I'm quite the zombie fan anyway (although they don't seem to like me in return and bother my dreams every month) so the Phone Crazies were like uber-zombies, very cool. It seemed like a return to King's gory, fast-paced horror, which I enjoyed. As to the open ending, well, I've said this many times around here now, but I didn't mind it. It leaves it open for us to decide whether Clay's son was returned to him or not. If we're hopeful, we imagine that he did, but there's always a part of us that thinks perhaps he wasn't, which creates an unsettled feeling that goes beyond the end of the book (which is something that good horror should strive for, I think). Again with not finding out what caused the Pulse - we'll never know, and that's rather an uncomfortable thought. Plus King's books often have a good sense of realism (looking past the ghosts, zombies, vampires, and monsters here; but then, even these are often portrayed in a horrifying believable manner) and just how believable is it for our small group that the book follows to stumble across the source of the Pulse? I'm sure King could have written something plausible if he wanted to, but it would have had to be quite a coincide, I think.

As to Lisey's Story; I enjoyed that book, too. I admit it took longer to get into than other King books, but once I did I thought it a very moving novel. It had a tone that was unlike other King books, but nonetheless was still very good. And the private language; well, it was slightly grating sometimes, but I think it just added to sowing the closeness of Scott and Lisey's marriage. Couples who have been together for some time tend to pick up their own little habits and quirks.

 

[Lioness]

I quite enjoyed Cell. It's been a while since I read it, so I couldn't tell you what I liked/didn't like, but my overall impression of the book was good. It also got one of my crazy teenager friends who just doesn't read, interested.

Lisey's Story I couldn't get into, but I wont corrupt this thread.

 

[Barney]

I liked the fact that Cell was shorter and pacier than the very long books he more often writes. As to endings of horror stories I think they are inherently difficult to pull off.
In the conventional ending the evil that has been menacing the characters is confronted and defeated, maybe in some sort of big battle where the characters are really put through the wringer. Some of the characters might even be killed off. That kind of ending is now so predictable, and no matter how good the writer is it often ends up overblown and sentimental. (The ending of IT I would say is an example of that sort of conventional ending).

But if you try a more unconventional ending it is not what people expect. They want all the loose ends to be tied up neatly. Do you be predictable and safe, or try something different but risk alienating the reader?

 

[KESpires]

His son returns. King said so on his website. He said he thought most people would assume that so there wasn't any need in him spelling it out.

 

[Wiggum]

A) How could he assume that interpretation from what he wrote?

B) Why would that info be posted on his website and not be included in the book?

 

[KESpires]

I came across while perusing his site. The post date wasn't long after the release date of the book.

I think the comment was something along the lines of "judging by what we learned we can safely assume Johnny is ok."

I liked the ending personally. I always felt the kid was ok. But I'm an optimist that way.

It is the only time I've heard of him talking about the book's ending.

 

[Conan]

I liked the ending personally. I always felt the kid was ok. But I'm an optimist that way.

Ah but I am a pessimist in that way and assumed that his boy did not turn out okay, and that clay would have to kill him, then bury and stare off into the distance as the sun sets.

 

[KESpires]

I'm glad you said that Conan.

That is why that ending is better than spelling it out for us.

We can discuss, we can argue, we can write it ourselves.

 

[Wiggum]

Erm, no.

Like I said, I liked the open ending of Colorado Kid, becuase the book and the writing were executed well.

Although I may be the only King fan to read it.

Cell was not executed well, taking the second act out of a piece of fiction and placing it on it own, whether it be a book, a play, a musical, or whatever........doesn't work.

And that's what King did.

 

[KESpires]

I felt that it was one of the few times in his career that he was succinct enough.

First, from Clay's point of view, which is the point of view we stay in, he doesn't know who did it, no one does.

So he stays firmly within the traditional rules of such a limited point of view. Other books, such as The Stand, he takes a distant narrator approach and has scenes where it constantly shifts from one random character to another to show the events he decided he was going to tell the reader before he even started. In The Stand he wanted the readers to know every detail about how the super-flu escaped, spread, and devastated the landscape. In Cell he stuck to the main character's point of view and didn't violate to give us information which ultimately wasn't important.

I didn't read Cell to find out who started the technology and how it was implemented. I continued reading to find out how Clay was going to make it through it all.

It is one of the few times I felt that King left all the unnecessary things out and kept in all the information that I felt I needed to enjoy the story.

 

[Wiggum]

It is one of the few times I felt that King left all the unnecessary things out and kept in all the information that I felt I needed to enjoy the story.

And I respectfully disagree.

One of the things that has always made me love King's writing is his attention to detail, backstory and character development. Which are the three things, for the most part, that Cell lacked (it did give some decent character development).

I know people do like the book, it just doesn't work for me. And not soley from the open ending. For me, it was like being given a bone with no marrow. I could chew on it, but for no satisfactory result. Like I said,the open ending of Colorado Kid worked well. I felt like I had read a complete piece of fiction.

With Cell, not so much.

 

[KESpires]

That's weird to me. It became my favorite book almost instantly after I read it (of King's books).

But then again that's just me.

I'm nearing the middle of The Stand right now. It's good. But I'm nearing the middle and I'm only just beginning to get to the heart of the "plot." However, I am enjoying it. Sometimes I like really long books and sometimes I enjoy books that are very succinct and tightly written. Cell was like that. So was Ender's Game and The Road. All great books, all short and packed with thoughtful prose.

But sometimes I like the long haul. It's why I like GRRM's A Song of Ice and Fire.

 

[Wiggum]

Well, we share common tastes in Ender's, The Road and ASoIaF.

I loved them all.

It also seems that as more time passes that people who read The Stand for the first time seem to like it less and less.

Cell seems to have become one of the most divisive books as far as King fans go.

Half seem to love it with reckless abandon, and some, like me, seem to think it was a paltry effort at best.

We're both right, just amazes me the difference in opinion.

Then again, I LOVED Lisey's Story, .

You know what they say about opinions.

 

[KESpires]

I gave up on Lisey's Story.

I intend to read Duma Key pretty soon, after I finish The Stand. Have you read Duma yet?

 

[Wiggum]

No, not anytime in the near future.

I'll pick up Duma when I hit my local used bookstore and it's there.

Why did you give up on Lisey's Story?

Did you get to the first blood bool, and the question of why "daddy cuts deep"? The can opener?

It may be a question of pace, of what we respectively like, as far as his writing goes.

Especially as his first "act" within a book.

How Gard went on his bender, then ended up in The Tommyknockers I loved.

How the girl Who Loved Tom Gordon, got lost in the forest, didn't interest me.

One was a long prologue, the other concise.

And I prefer the long.