The Dead Zone can be taken exactly as Stephen King presents it: a story about a guy who can see the future and, having seen the future, change it for the better. Or, since it's a horror novel, I think it's more appropriate to view it this way: a story about a guy who can see the future and, having seen the future, have no way at all of changing anything about it. You might be thinking, "Come on, Tess! That's fucking stupid! I read the book and the guy changes the future!" But does he? I said, "Fucking does he, you Goddamned nitwit?!"
Sorry! I get a little bit passionate about how I'm always right about everything. Now some of you might be thinking, "Are you always right about everything?" And, well, fair point, person who doesn't know me and also whom I just made up in my imagination! I guess I'm not always right. But I am about this!
My basic premise begins like this: Stephen King writes horror novels. What's so horrific about a guy who can see the future, notices a man will cause World War III, and then stops that man from gaining the power to do so? That's just a boring Reader's Digest book! Over in like twenty pages! Oh! I just found more proof to my theory: Wikipedia calls The Dead Zone "a science fiction thriller." See?! SEE! If you read it the way everybody fucking reads it, that's all it is! A pulp science fiction thriller where a guy can see the future and read objects to see their history. Oh! But that's a good point, Tess, you should have been thinking. John Smith, the psychic lead in the novel, can see both the past and the future when he touches objects and people. And guess what? When he views the past, he can't change it. Which leads to my hypothesis: when he sees the future, he can't change it either. That's where the horror comes in. The dawning horror of the novel is that John Smith simply sees himself trying to assassinate Greg Stillson while Greg Stillson holds up a child in a blue and yellow coat to block any bullets that might come his way. He tries to assassinate Stillson because he sees himself assassinating Stillson. He fails just like he saw in his vision. His vision about the world looking like it had succumbed to Armageddon? That's not even a real vision in the book! It's what the kids today would call vibes! The horror is that John Smith didn't save the world. He was simply a victim of a brain tumor which gave him psychic flashes of events in the future or past that he had no agency over.
Need more proof? The vision that gets John Smith to believe that Greg Stillson will destroy the world is the one where he sees a building burn down, killing loads of young people in the graduating class of the kid he's tutoring. Guess what happens? The restaurant burns down, killing loads of kids from the graduating class of the kid he's tutoring. He never saw a vision of all the kids he saved by warning them but that doesn't mean that he always saved that many kids by warning them. Yes, he touched a person who didn't die in the fire when he saw the fire and all the people dying. But that doesn't mean he saved that person. That just means maybe the kid he touched was wearing a friend's piece of clothing that he gave back to that friend who subsequently died in the fire.
John Smith doesn't see any future when figuring out who The Strangler is so that doesn't matter. He doesn't see a future where he wins or loses while placing bets on the wheel at the carnival; he just sees what number the wheel will land on and, you know, it does. He sees his physical therapist's house catching fire because she left a stove on and, guess what? The house catches fire but is saved. Was John Smith the direct reason the house was saved? That one could be the best argument that he could change the future but we don't know that the future changed because John Smith saw what would happen and it happened and he's a person with agency who, not having any psychic vision, creates consequences in the world via his actions anyway. So if he didn't see it, would her house have burned? Well, no, because he saw it and they called her neighbor and the fire department was notified. He didn't have a vision of the house burned to the ground. He had a vision of the curtains catching fire which is what happened.
This story is about a man who was driven crazy by his ability to see the past and future, neither of which he could change, and then opted to try to assassinate a man instead of getting lifesaving surgery because he shook the guy's hand and got some bad vibes from him. That's where the horror comes in. It's a story about the lack of free will and our inability to manage and control our lives; it's about depression and heartbreak and choosing a hell of a way to commit suicide. Why else would Stephen King call it The Dead Zone? Oh, sure, something John called the areas he couldn't read psychically. But in reality, it's just depression and giving up and, through no fault of your own, be it fate or accident or psychic payback, having your life taken away from you without any chance of actually changing it.
Sorry! I get a little bit passionate about how I'm always right about everything. Now some of you might be thinking, "Are you always right about everything?" And, well, fair point, person who doesn't know me and also whom I just made up in my imagination! I guess I'm not always right. But I am about this!
My basic premise begins like this: Stephen King writes horror novels. What's so horrific about a guy who can see the future, notices a man will cause World War III, and then stops that man from gaining the power to do so? That's just a boring Reader's Digest book! Over in like twenty pages! Oh! I just found more proof to my theory: Wikipedia calls The Dead Zone "a science fiction thriller." See?! SEE! If you read it the way everybody fucking reads it, that's all it is! A pulp science fiction thriller where a guy can see the future and read objects to see their history. Oh! But that's a good point, Tess, you should have been thinking. John Smith, the psychic lead in the novel, can see both the past and the future when he touches objects and people. And guess what? When he views the past, he can't change it. Which leads to my hypothesis: when he sees the future, he can't change it either. That's where the horror comes in. The dawning horror of the novel is that John Smith simply sees himself trying to assassinate Greg Stillson while Greg Stillson holds up a child in a blue and yellow coat to block any bullets that might come his way. He tries to assassinate Stillson because he sees himself assassinating Stillson. He fails just like he saw in his vision. His vision about the world looking like it had succumbed to Armageddon? That's not even a real vision in the book! It's what the kids today would call vibes! The horror is that John Smith didn't save the world. He was simply a victim of a brain tumor which gave him psychic flashes of events in the future or past that he had no agency over.
Need more proof? The vision that gets John Smith to believe that Greg Stillson will destroy the world is the one where he sees a building burn down, killing loads of young people in the graduating class of the kid he's tutoring. Guess what happens? The restaurant burns down, killing loads of kids from the graduating class of the kid he's tutoring. He never saw a vision of all the kids he saved by warning them but that doesn't mean that he always saved that many kids by warning them. Yes, he touched a person who didn't die in the fire when he saw the fire and all the people dying. But that doesn't mean he saved that person. That just means maybe the kid he touched was wearing a friend's piece of clothing that he gave back to that friend who subsequently died in the fire.
John Smith doesn't see any future when figuring out who The Strangler is so that doesn't matter. He doesn't see a future where he wins or loses while placing bets on the wheel at the carnival; he just sees what number the wheel will land on and, you know, it does. He sees his physical therapist's house catching fire because she left a stove on and, guess what? The house catches fire but is saved. Was John Smith the direct reason the house was saved? That one could be the best argument that he could change the future but we don't know that the future changed because John Smith saw what would happen and it happened and he's a person with agency who, not having any psychic vision, creates consequences in the world via his actions anyway. So if he didn't see it, would her house have burned? Well, no, because he saw it and they called her neighbor and the fire department was notified. He didn't have a vision of the house burned to the ground. He had a vision of the curtains catching fire which is what happened.
This story is about a man who was driven crazy by his ability to see the past and future, neither of which he could change, and then opted to try to assassinate a man instead of getting lifesaving surgery because he shook the guy's hand and got some bad vibes from him. That's where the horror comes in. It's a story about the lack of free will and our inability to manage and control our lives; it's about depression and heartbreak and choosing a hell of a way to commit suicide. Why else would Stephen King call it The Dead Zone? Oh, sure, something John called the areas he couldn't read psychically. But in reality, it's just depression and giving up and, through no fault of your own, be it fate or accident or psychic payback, having your life taken away from you without any chance of actually changing it.
maybe king's best book? like, i legitimately enjoy his writing in this one. it's certainly the last time he wrote a full outline and followed it. he's said he hates writing outlines & plotting because he wants to be surprised. i say it's because cocaine does not a patient craftsman make
ReplyDeleteon the one hand, no structure? i'm not sure that's the best way to approach being a published author of popular fiction... yet it seems to have worked for him, so wtf do i know?
besides the fact that king voted nixon. a bug that clearly got up his ass