While Stephen King was rising into his legendary fame, he wrote the overwhelmingly complex novel IT. IT is as ominous as it sounds – an evil comes to haunt Derry, Maine, killing random children by feeding on their fear until his prey turns on him. Though mostly known as Pennywise the Clown, IT becomes a flexible unknown, transforming into a werewolf, a bird, and a spider, among other things. Even though IT is doing most of the changing, King’s abilities to shape-shift are impressive. Aligning his nefarious character with the past and present fears of his readers, King is able to keep up with his readers’ tolerances to old scares just in time to provide a new set.
Fear is not the only thing that makes IT worthy of a spot in the horror literature canon. Almost due to its sheer mass, King writes intense characterization into 11-year-old children at the same time as their grown-up selves through a series of flashbacks and flash-forwards. His sweeping descriptions of everything from facial features to the contours of sewer pipes leave nothing to the imagination – which, in some ways, is his main fault. King loves to pour a scene into words and does it quite well in IT. However, if a first-time reader is looking for something a little less demanding and not quite so intense, perhaps Eye of the Dragon or The Dark Tower series would be a better place to start.
Though King was 39 at the time IT was published, he makes spectacular insights into the minds of children through a full range of emotions: love, courage, hatred, and, of course, fear. Though one can imagine which one King leans more fully toward, it is still worthy to note that he does not make the reader imagine that the children are 11; instead, the reader knows that the children are 11.
The latter sixth or so of the book becomes a problem, though. Flashbacks are still happening at this point, descriptions that last 15-20 pages struggle to include people thus far unimportant to the story, and a dense psychedelic 50-page freak-out destroys what seemed to be plausibility up until that point (something about a cosmic turtle?). It seems as though King’s successful slow pacing got the best of him and makes one feel like skipping pages to keep up with one’s own rhythm and not miss anything. Fortunately, if a reader has come this far in the book, more than likely “hardcore” has set in and nothing will deter her from finishing it.
Overall, IT is its own world, alive and breathing. It is so well written that the reader lives and breathes with the book. King is a master, even forcing the reader to hold his breath in all the right places. However, his style will frustrate and confuse at least once. Though for a novel so long, a mistake or two along the way is more than acceptable.
Stumble It!
Voice from the Depths of the Cultural Coil 
8 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 18, 2007 at 4:52 am
binaryprimate
I like that you’re willing to discuss what was wrong with IT in such a flexible way. Your criticism cites specific instances where King goofed up and gave appropriate caution. It wasn’t too overbearing and gave the criticism a nice balance overall.
January 18, 2007 at 5:34 am
thesimmons
I love how you actually point out the weak points of the book. From what I have seen a lot of us sort of left that out since we have such a connection to our favorite books. Also maybe you should explain further how this book will make you wet yourself. I saw the movie at 8 an wet myself and then read it at 13 and repeated.
Overall this was a good review. I cannot think of anything else to say so have a nice day.
January 18, 2007 at 3:02 pm
snookju
Excellent Work. The dark theme of the review matches the dark theme of the blog, no? Anyhoo, you do a great job pointing out how King’s attention to descriptive detail can either go right or wrong. That kind of density, as you point out, can either profoundly make us identify of turn us off.
One thing I would caution you on is your own descriptive tendencies. Avoid trying to cram too much into one sentence, or seek out the clearest ways of doing so. The last sentence of the first paragraph, for example, made me scratch my head the first time and a half I read it. It is hard to condense such thoughts into a space that is practical with such a low WC. Sometimes it is better to to leave out a piece of information than try to condense it so that it risks putting off the reader, though.
I really need to read this sometime. I have seen bits and pieces of the film version, but my opinion is that King’s books aren’t usually made into very good films unless they are relatively normal–like Shawshank and Green Mile. One day…
January 18, 2007 at 4:03 pm
Mark Pfeiffer
Nice job with a concise summary of a long book. I like that you’ve pointed out its (or should that be IT’s) strengths and weaknesses.
Be careful using adverbs–how is “incredibly complex” different from “complex”–and using the same words in close proximity. (You used “incredibly” twice in the first paragraph.)
January 19, 2007 at 12:05 am
ularaannepage
Great job actually critiquing (sorry about the spelling). It is obvious that you like the book, but you still included difficulties that you had with it, thus giving the reader a realistic view of the novel. I stumbled a little over your “It” and its, but the review flowed quite well from about the middle on to the end.
January 19, 2007 at 1:15 am
donnadb
I agree that your clear-eyed view of the book’s shortcomings gives you a lot of credibility. King, as great as he is, does tend to run into trouble in his long works.
A little more plot summary would not be amiss; I don’t think we even get the names of main characters, do we? You know something about King’s other work, and it might be good to set this book in that context. To make room, remove hyperbole (like all instances of the word “incredibly” 🙂 ). “Dense psychedelic 50-page freak-out” is a great phrase — more like that, and less generic praise like “incredibly impressive.”
January 20, 2007 at 11:57 pm
Sarah
I agree with what Donna said (and everyone else). Your criticism is very even; though it was obvious you loved the book, you were not afraid to point out its problems. I would have liked to know a little more about the characters and plot, but your descriptions (especially your more creative ones) were fascinating. It made me want to jump in and read it, even though I’ve never read a King novel.
February 12, 2007 at 11:47 am
W.E.B. Adamant
Note: I reviewed Stephen King’s “IT” because I think it’s an important science fiction horror book that built off of classic frightening icons (i.e. werewolves, spiders) and reinvented them. I also felt that a less “heroworship-py” take on Stephen King was needed, noting his most glaring fault in many of his books. I think it’s important for the reader to understand that, amidst all the praise, there is much room for disappointment.