Scan barcode
A review by dharaiter
It by Stephen King
3.0
This book was my Everest. I have read books this size but the STORY of this book was lengthy as well and that's not a complaint. I don't mind that. I have other problems. I have never been this conflicted before. Never had I thought, 'should I give this book a 1 star or 5 stars?'.
Why 5 stars:
For all the reasons It is still considered a horror classic. For me, it wasn't a scary book at all. In fact, for the first 70% of the book, I found comfort in this story, something I looked forward to reading every night. Stephen King has carved every little nook and crannies of Derry into the pages of this book. The details mesmerized me. I was LIVING Derry. If it wasn't for the bitterness that I now feel towards this book, I would have picked up this book again someday.
Why 1 star:
I am so mad, I can't even write this with straight hands. Yes, I am reading this in a different era and that it was a different time and the sex scene was a gesture of bond/union....yada yada yada. But I will never be okay with the sexualization of children. I was getting mad at the needless mention of Bev's (an 11-year-old girl) breasts and panties or using only her chest as a symbol for her coming of age ("I can't help it that I am started to get big on the top." Seriously? No 11-year-old girl would talk like that). Little did I know that this wasn't even going to be my biggest concern.
I am sure discussions, debates, and conclusions have already been made on the tunnel scene in the 30+ years since this book was published, but I cannot help but call it child porn. I, personally, believe that the scene was not needed at all. People calling it a gesture of union or love or any other sugarcoated crap can argue all they want, but pleasure and genitals were mentioned in the scene. Thus, it's sex. As plain as that.
Besides, the whole thing wasn't just bad, morally. I went down the rabbit hole to find Stephen King's reason behind the scene and he had stated that he had written this book in a different era and that people are more sensitive now to this kind of depiction. That was a pretty lame excuse for an iconic writer who is too particular about how he writes. It's just plain bad writing. There were many other ways to signify what he wanted to signify. A female child asking all her male friends to gang-bang her wouldn't be one of them. The fact that he went with that option is problematic. Plus, any writer who uses "breasts" over 50 times in a single book (for just two females) to depict the sexuality of a woman (or a girl) is not fit to write female characters.
Beverly is probably the most sexualized minor I have ever read in my life. In fact, I don't think I have ever read a book where children are sexualized in this manner. And for that, I will never not loathe this book.
I am combining my love and my distaste for this book and giving it a three-star, for the sole reason that it was written in the 80s.
Why 5 stars:
For all the reasons It is still considered a horror classic. For me, it wasn't a scary book at all. In fact, for the first 70% of the book, I found comfort in this story, something I looked forward to reading every night. Stephen King has carved every little nook and crannies of Derry into the pages of this book. The details mesmerized me. I was LIVING Derry. If it wasn't for the bitterness that I now feel towards this book, I would have picked up this book again someday.
Why 1 star:
I am so mad, I can't even write this with straight hands. Yes, I am reading this in a different era and that it was a different time and the sex scene was a gesture of bond/union....yada yada yada. But I will never be okay with the sexualization of children. I was getting mad at the needless mention of Bev's (an 11-year-old girl) breasts and panties or using only her chest as a symbol for her coming of age ("I can't help it that I am started to get big on the top." Seriously? No 11-year-old girl would talk like that). Little did I know that this wasn't even going to be my biggest concern.
I am sure discussions, debates, and conclusions have already been made on the tunnel scene in the 30+ years since this book was published, but I cannot help but call it child porn. I, personally, believe that the scene was not needed at all. People calling it a gesture of union or love or any other sugarcoated crap can argue all they want, but pleasure and genitals were mentioned in the scene. Thus, it's sex. As plain as that.
Besides, the whole thing wasn't just bad, morally. I went down the rabbit hole to find Stephen King's reason behind the scene and he had stated that he had written this book in a different era and that people are more sensitive now to this kind of depiction. That was a pretty lame excuse for an iconic writer who is too particular about how he writes. It's just plain bad writing. There were many other ways to signify what he wanted to signify. A female child asking all her male friends to gang-bang her wouldn't be one of them. The fact that he went with that option is problematic. Plus, any writer who uses "breasts" over 50 times in a single book (for just two females) to depict the sexuality of a woman (or a girl) is not fit to write female characters.
Beverly is probably the most sexualized minor I have ever read in my life. In fact, I don't think I have ever read a book where children are sexualized in this manner. And for that, I will never not loathe this book.
I am combining my love and my distaste for this book and giving it a three-star, for the sole reason that it was written in the 80s.