I’m working on my big American Icons cover story on Stephen King today, and it could almost fill up two full issues. King gave me so much good stuff: He’s a truly fascinating guy, and he had so many great stories and takes on things. When I flew up to Maine to talk to him in December, we got into a discussion of popular authors vs. the academic elite, a subject he has strong opinions about, and I asked him if his mainstream success over the past 35 years paved the way for the massive careers of Harry Potter creator J.K. Rowling and Twilight author Stephenie Meyer. Click read more for King’s feelings about those two as well as some other best-selling authors. And remember to check out my cover story on King in the March 6-8 issue of USA WEEKEND.
Photo courtesy of Simon & Schuster
King, whose Stephen King Goes to the Movies collection came out last week, doesn’t know how much of an influence he had on Meyer, but he does know that Rowling read his stuff when she was younger. "I think that has some kind of formative influence the same way reading Richard Matheson had an influence on me," King explains. "People always say to me, ‘Well, what about H.P. Lovecraft?’ And the thing was, you read Lovecraft when you were a kid but I never felt that he was speaking my language. It was chillier than my heart was, and when Matheson started to write about ordinary people and stuff, that was something that I wanted to do. I said, ‘This is the way to do it. He’s showing the way.’ I think that I serve that purpose for some writers, and that’s a good thing. Both Rowling and Meyer, they’re speaking directly to young people. … The real difference is that Jo Rowling is a terrific writer and Stephenie Meyer can’t write worth a darn. She’s not very good."
But then King recalls that when his mom was alive, she read all the Erle Stanley Gardner books, the Perry Mason mysteries, obsessively when he was growing up. "He was a terrible writer, too, but he was very successful," King says. "Somebody who’s a terrific writer who’s been very, very successful
is Jodi Picoult. You’ve got Dean Koontz, who
can write like hell. And then sometimes he’s just awful. It varies. James Patterson is a terrible writer but he’s very very successful. People are attracted by the stories, by the pace and in the case of Stephenie Meyer, it’s very clear that she’s writing to a whole generation of girls and opening up kind of a safe joining of love and sex in those books. It’s exciting and it’s thrilling and it’s not particularly threatening because they’re not overtly sexual. A lot of the physical side of it is conveyed in things like the vampire will touch her forearm or run a hand over skin, and she just flushes all hot and cold. And for girls, that’s a shorthand for all the feelings that they’re not ready to deal with yet."
[...] priceless example- Stephen King got it thrown at him by fans of Stephenie Meyer for his comments here. The assumption there appears to be that someone who is interested in books shouldn’t throw [...]
[...] “Exclusive: Stephen King on J.K. Rowling, Stephenie Meyer.” USA Weekend: Who’s News. February 2, 2009. Accessed: February 28, [...]
[...] heard, Stephen King openly criticized Stephenie Meyer (and several other popular authors) in an interview by USA Weekend Magazine (2009). “Stephenie Meyer can’t write worth a darn. She’s not very good.” He went on [...]
[...] is a terrific writer and Stephenie Meyer can’t write worth a darn. She’s not very good.” G-d help us if she ever discovers Andy Futral’s coments on the [...]
@Paintedangel
so true.
@dude
That sir or ma’am is a win.
@booksshouldbesmarterthanthat
Same goes for you.
LOL, King is right about everything.
I have read all of the Twilight books and know for a fact that SM is a bad writer. The first book was OK, the second was all angst and boring, the third book had less angst but was still bad and the fourth book was the worst, angst, teen marriage, teen pregnancy, more angst, a whole ton of furry angst, a chapter about pure pain, a good chapter about killing stuff (the only good chapter in the whole series I might add), even more angst, a fairy gathering, mare angst, a whole ton of talking and what’s the ending? Everyone lives happily ever after the end.
It’s not my style of book, I get it, but that’s not what bugs me. What does is that it’s all infatuation and curiosity based romance. If romance was my main category (Witch it’s not) I still wouldn’t like these books.
These books could be about 300 pages longer if SM put some detail into them… but she didn’t
And to the ‘S-M-R-T’ person that said “Steohenie Meyer’s style is a lot different from his. Twilight by Stephen King? HA!
Her books have sold better than any of his.”
You sir or ma’am are stupid. Sure Twilight might of sold more individual but Stephen King does lots of different writing styles to attract more of an audience, therefor making more profit as a whole.
lol at “Your opinion is worth nothing, Stephen King.”
It sure is worth a lot more than SM’s.
There’s my two cents,.
Have a nice day
[...] while I admirably agree with Stephen King’s comparison of J.K. Rowling and Stephanie Meyer (“Harry Potter is about confronting fears, finding inner strength and doing what is right in [...]
It’s hilarious how all the angry teenage girls and lonely housewives came out of the woodwork to stand up for Meyer, whose series promotes pedophilia, abusive relationships, is full of bland Mary Sue characters, and does not have a plot.
[...] King has been openly critical of Meyer’s Twilight series, including an interview published in USA Weekend in February, 2009: “…when (Richard) Matheson started to write about ordinary people and stuff, that was [...]
@Shelby
You were almost right, except that you’re totally wrong. A good book isn’t necessarily determined by the addictive factor in it; I’ve read novels that I couldn’t put down because they were exciting or kept me wondering, but sometimes when you get to the end of those books, you wonder what it was all for. Twilight is one of these books.
Also, getting kids to read is fine and dandy, but books should serve a purpose, whether it’s getting people to THINK- which is ultimately the most important thing about writing and literature- or whether it’s teaching a lesson.
So, let’s consider: does Twilight make us think? Not really; the plot is both cliche and predictable, the characters are bland and flat, and there really is no deeper meaning, except perhaps that if you’re obsessive enough, you’ll get the (perfect) man of your dreams and you’ll spend eternity together.
The next question, then: does Twilight teach us anything important? Well, it does teach us that you can fall in love with someone, so deeply, in fact, that you’re willing to give up your whole life in exchange for eternity with them, in approximately a few months. It also teaches us that it’s okay to have a boyfriend who will creep into our bedrooms and watch us sleep at night, and that that’s not really stalker behavior. It teaches us that while older people (people born in the early twentieth century, no less) may have ideas about sex and marriage, that those ideas are really just old fashioned, and it’s okay to have sex with people you barely know, people who are dangerous predators, before you get married. But best of all, it teaches us that if we’re beautiful on the outside, beautiful the way Edward is- and Meyer does POUND this idea into our heads, over and over and over again- and if we’re pretentious like Bella, and look down on the ‘normal’ and ‘mundane’ activities of mere mortals- things like actually trying to make friends, going to school dances, and enjoying teenage years- then we don’t really need to have anything deeper, intellectually or emotionally, in order to be eternally happy. We all know that what really matters is on the outside, anyway.
But don’t worry, because people like you and me are smarter than all that, right? We know not to take these lessons to heart- it’s just a book, not a guide for life. At least impressionable young girls aren’t reading the books, right? No one who would actually read these books would become obsessed and try to model their lives after the characters. Oh, wait…
I agree with Mr. King. Personally, I love J.K. Rowling, and dislike Ms. Meyer. It’s my opinion that she really cannot write, but hey, at least it got my friends started on reading. And I have gotten to show them better writers, who I personally love, like Stephen King.
Though, being thirteen, not many kids my age actually appreciate it. At least, not yet they don’t.
I can only be thankful that my dad showed me Stephan King’s books once I got into reading. They were, and are, exactly the kind of books that interest me personally. (Great humanized characters with real depth and faults, and somehow combining that real-life essence into a fictional book. Different than Rowling, of course, but also something I like about her writing.)
How people find it boring, I will never know. But I guess that is their opinion, and this is mine.
P.S. My dad and I are in the middle of reading Under the Dome at the moment… Brilliant. Just brilliant book. I definitely recommend it
@Jayde
I’m sorry, but i don’t think you really know what passion is. You claim Meyer has captured this in a novel written for an audience of young girls, most of which have trouble with their own emotions, to which i can only assume that you are in fact one of said target audience.
King has written far more experience and writes for a vast audience of intelligent and mature readers; granted that may not be the case of whose hands his books fall into, but many people can associate with King’s characters, because for the most part, they’re everyday people.
I doubt Meyer will be around nearly as long as Kings has, or be able to grasp the spectrum of emotions that King, and by his own mention, other writers have. King wasn’t bashing Meyer, and she is a terrible writer, but she is starting out in her writing career, so she has room to grow and potentially become a better writer, but you need to grow up and understand that.