'Salem's Lot
Thousands of miles away from the small township of 'Salem's Lot, two terrified people, a man and a boy, still share the secrets of those clapboard houses and tree-lined streets. They must return to 'Salem's Lot for a final confrontation with the unspeakable evil that lives on in the town.

'Salem's Lot Details

Title'Salem's Lot
Author
LanguageEnglish
ReleaseMay 10th, 1991
PublisherNew English Library
ISBN-139780450031069
Rating
GenreHorror, Fiction, Paranormal, Vampires, Fantasy

'Salem's Lot Review

  • Nataliya
    January 1, 1970
    There was a time once when vampires were ruthless predators and not the misunderstood brooding and essentially harmless creatures. Ahhhh, good old scary times... Vampire stories have been around for a long time - after all, people love a good scare, and what is more terrifying than a monster showing up at night and sucking the life essence out of you? But leave it to Stephen King to turn the terror up a notch, add a whole new layer to it. How? Simply - using the winning formula that he continues There was a time once when vampires were ruthless predators and not the misunderstood brooding and essentially harmless creatures. Ahhhh, good old scary times... Vampire stories have been around for a long time - after all, people love a good scare, and what is more terrifying than a monster showing up at night and sucking the life essence out of you? But leave it to Stephen King to turn the terror up a notch, add a whole new layer to it. How? Simply - using the winning formula that he continues to employ in the vast majority of his work. In addition to showing us the monsters of the night, he also brings into the picture the monsters and the darkness that are already with us, that live in the deep dark recesses of everyone's soul. ""The town knew about darkness.""The town has its secrets, and keeps them well.""The town cares for devil's work no more than it cares for God's or man's. It knew darkness. And darkness was enough."The eponymous 'Salem's Lot is a small town in Maine, and it is not a stranger to secrets and darkness. It's quaint and pastoral on the surface, but once you look deeper you are bound to discover what lurks behind its respectable surface. And trust me, that's the discoveries that you can easily go without for the darkness of the human soul as presented by Stephen King beats everything that any monster or boogeyman can ever send your way. The small town of 'Salem's Lot can boast your usual lies, bullying, corruption, and prejudice - and spices it up with well-hidden child abuse, violence, and murders. Not so quaint, is it? It is this portrayal of everyday people's secrets, of the towns being almost like living breathing organisms that is one of the big reasons why I am a huge fan of Stephen King's works.From the very first pages of the novel we know that some terrible fate made 'Salem's Lot a ghost town with apparently only a couple of survivors. It doesn't take the reader long to realize, as we go back in time to see how the events unfolded, that the mysterious menacing Marsten House welcomed new evil that tends to lurk at night, floating past your (hopefully, tightly shut) windows. The story itself is rather straightforward, steadily moving along to its almost-conclusion that we have glimpsed in the first few pages, and we watch with bated breath as our bunch of good guys - Ben, Mark, Susan, Matt - are trying to take on the supernatural horror. Oh, and did I forget Father Callahan? (view spoiler)[A high-five from the Dark Tower universe, Father! (hide spoiler)]King is excellent with the plotting and the pacing (since this was only his second novel, he was still a stranger to writing larger-than-life brick-sized tomes). The story never lags, the suspense and sense of foreboding are rampant, and there are quite a few truly nailbiting situations. Nothing distracts the reader from the vampire story unfolding on the background of small-town horrors. There are no heavy-handed lessons to be learned, no deep morals to take out of the story - all we get is a thrilling and quite scary ride that may make you (a) sleep with a light on, and (b) be very careful about who you invite into your home. 5 stars.
    more
  • Bradley
    January 1, 1970
    Well this is annoying times two. I just wrote a review and lost it, and then there's the *other* issue.What other issue?Oh, the one where my 14 year old self of infinite wisdom and experience remembered a boring tale lacking truly epic blood and guts from what should be a vampire tale in a small town. If that 14 year old could have had his way, then 80% of the novel would have been excised for being too-character driven, too-focused on hundreds of characters only set up to be knocked down in gru Well this is annoying times two. I just wrote a review and lost it, and then there's the *other* issue.What other issue?Oh, the one where my 14 year old self of infinite wisdom and experience remembered a boring tale lacking truly epic blood and guts from what should be a vampire tale in a small town. If that 14 year old could have had his way, then 80% of the novel would have been excised for being too-character driven, too-focused on hundreds of characters only set up to be knocked down in gruesome death (or undeath), and too detail-driven and poorly-paced for a thriller. Damn, I was a dipshit. I'm not saying that I'm no longer a dipshit, mind you, just that I think that kid was a real idiot. I mean, I'd only been reading anything at all for less than a year and 8 months of that was focused on learning *how* to read. Of course I was going to be influenced more by the all the slasher movies rather than novel construction. I even watched the crapfest that I considered the made for tv movie based on this book, and I think I might have been a *little* too harsh on it, too.So flash-forward to now, when I jump up the rating from a scathing 3 stars to a full-blown 5, an adult reading an adult novel of suspense, emotionally invested characters, subtle humor, more high-brow words than I remember Stephen King usually using in his novels, and beautifully crafted passages of hometown life falling into what might as well have been a modern retelling of a medieval town falling under the spell of the Black Plague, with all the horror and sadness and superstition that entails.This novel was gripping and intense to my adult sensibilities. Do I feel like a fool for my old memories? Yes. Am I embarrassed? Yes. Am I absolutely impressed and amazed that the very first "trash" novelist I got into as a kid actually turned out to be a consummate master of the writing craft? Yes.All the things I hated as a kid happen to be the things I love the most, here. The characters were absolutely gorgeous. I fell into them, and later, I fell into love with the whole town. The fact that it had a cancer that was eating away at it from the inside, slowly, was only a tension-driver. This may be a vampire novel, but it is really a tragedy, through and through. We expect to love and lose our loved ones, and this is the true horror. Not just the eyes like stars or the breath that smells of pure putrescence or the image of a supernatural horror that no longer needs keys because, now, the dead can squeeze between door jams. Of course, Part 3 was all action all the time, with the stakes as high as it can be. It was all for the sake of pure survival. But Part 1 (the get to know you) and Part 2 (something isn't right) were some of the best readings of Stephen King, like, ever. :) Believe me, he has a personal formula when it comes to his writing, but I know of no one who's able to pull off exactly what he pulls off. He makes everyone so damn real to me. :)Fun fact! There's a dead John Snow who knows nothing in this novel! Isn't that fun?So, I've eaten crow and said that I'm sorry for being an childhood idiot, but what I really mean is that There Are No Sparkles. This is a novel of horrible anticipation and and deep sadness, of exciting vampire hunting with truly intelligent foes. There are no levelled-up vamps or long antihero arcs or Master Vampire Hunters. And best of all, there are no werewolves.There is, however, a sense of reality and loss and fear, and if you are missing a huge dose of that in your life, if only to hold up as a mirror to your own life to say that things aren't so bad with you, then you really ought to jump out there and pick up a copy. I can't believe this is only SK's second novel! Wow!
    more
  • Matthew
    January 1, 1970
    4.5 starsI feel like there has been a lot of debate over Stephen King's last few books about what genre he might be considered anymore. Mystery, sci-fi, fantasy, general fiction, etc. etc. etc. - you just don't hear Stephen King = horror all that much anymore. Well, if you want to get back to the roots, Salem's Lot is pure, raw, old school Stephen King horror at its finest!I am doing a re-read of most of Stephen King's books chronologically and Salem's Lot was the next after Carrie. I read it or 4.5 starsI feel like there has been a lot of debate over Stephen King's last few books about what genre he might be considered anymore. Mystery, sci-fi, fantasy, general fiction, etc. etc. etc. - you just don't hear Stephen King = horror all that much anymore. Well, if you want to get back to the roots, Salem's Lot is pure, raw, old school Stephen King horror at its finest!I am doing a re-read of most of Stephen King's books chronologically and Salem's Lot was the next after Carrie. I read it originally sometime back in the 90s. I am so glad I did because, honestly, I don't remember any of it! Salem's Lot is a vampire story influenced by vampire fiction, like Stoker's Dracula, as well as vampire horror flicks. The influence of both these mediums is very evident, while at the same time King crafts a new, unique, and terrifying vampire story of his own. If you are a fan of the original, raw, pure evil vampire (not ones that sparkle), you need to make sure and read this book!Those of you out there who have heard about King, haven't read him before, and are wondering where to start, this would be a great place to do so! I think many would agree that this is up there with King's horror fiction at its best.
    more
  • Lyn
    January 1, 1970
    Vampires.Years after I first read it, I can truthfully say that this is still on a short list of scariest books I have ever read. King at his best. An American re-telling of Dracula, King stays close to the vampire myth but with some of his own storytelling thrown in and some subtle changes that make for an original novel. I cannot help but think that Barlow helped to usher in a new generation of vampire literature, of which we have now been inundated for the past few years.
    more
  • Mohammed Arabey
    January 1, 1970
    لوهلة ظننت أن الرواية عن مصاصي الدماء، رعب تقليدي فحسب، لكم كنت مخطئاالرواية عن الشر نفسه والظلام الذي لا نراه إلا بعد فوات الأوان "لقد تغير مفهوم الكنيسة الكاثوليكية للشر عموما بشكل جذري في القرن العشرين بسبب فرويد..فلم يعد الشر هو ذاك الشيطان الأحمر بقرون وذيل وحوافر، أو ثعبانا يزحف في حديقة، الشيطان طبقا لإنجيل فرويد، له هوية مركبة عملاقة، هو اللاوعي أو العقل الباطن الخاص بنا جميعا" قصة مدينة صغيرة يرسم لك ستيفين كينج بشكل بانورامي اخر ايامها قبل اختفاءها الغامضممتزج بها فلسفة عميقة مقدمة بشك لوهلة ظننت أن الرواية عن مصاصي الدماء، رعب تقليدي فحسب، لكم كنت مخطئاالرواية عن الشر نفسه والظلام الذي لا نراه إلا بعد فوات الأوان "لقد تغير مفهوم الكنيسة الكاثوليكية للشر عموما بشكل جذري في القرن العشرين بسبب فرويد..فلم يعد الشر هو ذاك الشيطان الأحمر بقرون وذيل وحوافر، أو ثعبانا يزحف في حديقة، الشيطان طبقا لإنجيل فرويد، له هوية مركبة عملاقة، هو اللاوعي أو العقل الباطن الخاص بنا جميعا" قصة مدينة صغيرة يرسم لك ستيفين كينج بشكل بانورامي اخر ايامها قبل اختفاءها الغامضممتزج بها فلسفة عميقة مقدمة بشكل مبسط عن مخاوف الطفولة وتغير البشر والبيوت المهجورة والكهرباء والمدن الصغيرة التي يهجرها سكانها والكتب والتأليف والأساطير وفرويد وحتي الحروبتروي من وجهة نظر مؤلف وقع في حب فتاة حسناء، وولد صغير يتغلب علي مخاوفه بشجاعة، وكاهن يختبر ايمانه، ومدرس كبير في السن لم يتصور ان يؤمن بمصاصي الدماء يوماوالأكبر هو وجهة نظر كل سكان مدينة صغيرة بأكملها...تتعرض لقصة مصاصي الدماء بشكل بانورامي متقنماذا تقول؟ قلت لك انني ظننت انها رواية عن مصاصي الدماءأعذرني انها الذاكرة ، نعم يا صديقي هي عن مصاصي الدماء "هو مفهوم مذهل وهائل بالطبع أكثر من العفريت الأحمر ذو القرون والذيل، ذو الأنف الحساسة الذي يتم طرده ونفيه تماما بـ'ريح' من رجل دين مصاب بالإمساكمفهوم الشر بالنسبة لفرويد ضخم بالطبع ولكنه مبني للمجهول، غير شخصي قاس بلا رحمة، نفيه وإستئصاله مستحيل إستحالة طلب تاجر البندقية إستئصال رطل من اللحم دون أسالة الدماء" الرواية عن مصاصي الدماء فعلا ...وفي 3 أجزاء في 650 صفحةكدت اتراجع عن قراءتها، فكل ما اردته تلك الفترة هو فكرة المدينة التي تختفي والبيت المهجور الغامض، الرواية لن تقدم لي جديدا، الأفلام هرست فكرة مصاصي الدماء وعصرتها حتي فضلاتها وبذورها أنتجت توايلايتويكفي قرائتي لبرام ستوكر اصل كل هذا والتي حتي لم تثيرني كروايات أحدث مثلاريفيو دراكولا لبرام ستوكرما يزيد الأمر سوءا أن كينج كتبها من 1972 الي 1975...وهي ثاني رواياته ، يعني رواية سبعيناتي وكمان تاني رواية للمؤلفولكن لا شئ ينتهي كما يبدو ظاهرياً ، هناك سبب ان يكون ستيفين كينج هو كينج ادب الغموض والرعب...الرواية متقنة والأسلوب جذاب ومثير وقوي بعكس عادة الأعمال الأوليبالأخص في اغلب ما يقدم علي الساحة الأن من هراء يلقب بأدب الرعب لبعض المؤلفين الجدد كالمنحوس والمرسوس واستخربوص وغيره، هذا الهراء الذي ملأ معرض كتاب 2016 وبعضه العمل الثالث لمؤلفيه العظماءالأسلوب وسلاسة اللغة يجعل قراءة 100 صفحة في اقل من 4 ساعات امرا ليس مرهقا بحق وكان رقما قياسيا بالنسبة لي في رواية ليست شبابيةاما المفاجأة فأثناء كتابتي للريفيو اكتشفت ان الرواية هي الرواية المفضلة لستيفين كينج نفسه والأقرب لقلبهبل واستخدم نفس المدينة "ساليم لوت" وتيمتها في بضعة القصص القصيرة لاحقا، واحدي الشخصيات الهامة بها في سلسلة برج الظلام The Dark Towerولكن فعلا الأمر لا يقتصر علي الرعب والأسلوب المميز الرواية بل فلسفتها هي أكثر ما جعلني اشيد بها بهذه القوة.. ولا عجب ان تكون رواية المؤلف الاقرب لقلبه….لماذا؟ فلنبدأ بــالأحداث------ "الكنيسة أجبرت لإعادة تفسير نهجها تجاه الشر ,قصف كامبوديا بالقنابل ,الحرب في أيرلندا والشرق الأوسط ,قتل رجال الشرطة , أعمال شغب الأحياء اليهودية, مليارات من الشرور الصغيرة منطلقة في العالم كل يوم كوباء الناموسلتتخلص الكنيسة من جلدها القديم و لتظهر بشكل اجتماعي معاصر, لتثبت قدميها في هذا العالم , حيث لا وجود للساحرات ,لا ارواح شريرة ولا مصاصي دماء .فقط مؤذوا الأطفال , زنا المحارم , وهتك وتشويه البيئة" تبدأ الرواية برجل ما وشاب صغير يسافران سويا من بلدة لآخري، يحاولون الإبتعاد عن الولايات المتحدة قدر الإمكان ،حتي يقرأ الرجل خبر حول مدينة ساليم لوت، واختفاء اغلب سكانها تماما وانتقال القليل منهم لمدن اخري بعيدة، والشائعات التي تنسج حولها من اصوات غريبة وانوار واختفاءات لبعض السكان بالمدن المجاورة لهاليضطر الرجل والفتي الرجوع…..ونرجع نحن ايضا معهم بالذكريات ليبدأ الجزء الأول تبدأ قصة اخر اسبوعين تقريبا للمدينة..من أواخر سبتمبر حتي 6 اكتوبر، حيث في يوم باواخر الصيف وبداية الخريف حضر بين ميرز، مؤلف متوسط النجاح، للمدينة الصغيرة التي عاش بها طفولته، ليتعافي من حادث فقد بسببه زوجته، وليكتب رواية جديدة ترتبط بمواجهته مخاوف طفولة قديمة تخص بيت مارستن، بيت مهجور علي تلة في اقصي شمال غرب المدينة كئيب الشكل وصار مهجورا،فقد كان مشيده رجلا مجنونا عذب زوجته حتي الموت وانتحر مشنوقا...وظل البيت بلا سكان، وعندما دخله بين كتحدي طفولي منذ اكثر من 20 عاما شعر انه رأي جثة الرجل مازلت مشنوقة في غرفة نومه، انها خيالات الطفولةيتعرف علي سوزان بالصدفة في الحديقة وهي تقرأ احد رواياته، ويحدث بينهما إعجاب وحب، تعرفه علي امها المتشككة وابيها الذي يعجب بشخصية بين القوية العملية، ويسكن بين في نزل ايفا ،ارملة فقدت زوجها في حريق شهير كاد يقضي علي البلدة في الخمسيناتيحاول بين الذهاب للبيت مرة اخري تأجيره من محامي البلدة ليكتب به ولكن المحامي يخبره بأن البيت تم بيعه منذ أيام قليلة لرجل نمساوي ،بارلو، متوقع ان ياتي خلال ايام.. والذي اشتري ايضا محلا ضخما مع شريكا له انجليزيا يدعي ستاركر ليبيع به انتيكات اجنبية واثريةتأتي الصناديق من الجمارك ، من بينهم صندوق كبير ثقيل جدا يجد عمال الشحن صعوبة في حمله، لكن ستاركر يحمله بكل سهولة...ستاركر هو الواجهة بينما بارلو لم يقابله احد بعد في المدينة حيث انه في سفريات عملربما الجزء الماضي الخاص بالصناديق من دولة اجنبية سيذكرك برائعة برام ستوكر...وأعتقد ان سيكون لديك فكرة عاما ما سيأتي بهاولكن لا تقلق ، فالمؤلف أشار لرواية برام ستوكر بنفسه اكثر من مرة خلال الأحداث ، فلا احد في الحقيقة اشياء سخيفة كمصاصي الدماء....هذا شغل روايات كما قيل في تلك الرواية نفسها أعتقد أنه من الأسهل للناس التصديق علي أشياء كالتخاطر عن بعد أو الاستبصار او التجسد. طالما إيمانهم هذا لن يكلفهم أي شئ. لن يصيبهم بالأرق طوال الليل. لكن فكرة ان الشرور الذي قد يفعله أحدهم قد يعيش حتي بعد وفاته فإن تلك الامور غير مريحة ثم تبدأ الأحداث في السخونة بنهاية الجزء الأول وبداية الجزء الثاني لتبدأ الأحداث في منعطفات خطيرة، قتل وتشويه كلب، اختفاء ولد صغير بينما اخيه الاكبر وجد مغشيا عليه ليموت بعدها بأيام قليلة من انيميا حادة وفقر دم مفاجئ، مدرس أعزب تخطي الستين يعيش وحيدا يقضي ليلة من الجحيم مع حفار قبور القرية تجعله يشك في وجود فعلي لمصاصي دماء ككتب الروايات الخياليةليستعين ببين لخبرته كمؤلف ليتأكد من شكوكه الجامحة...ولكن الامر لن يصدقه الكثيرينلا احد يري الظلام الا بعد فوات الأوان ولاكتفي بثلث احداث الرواية -الجزء الأول فقط -لاتحدث عنه ولنتحدث لم هذه الرواية ربما من اجمل ما قرأت في هذه التيمة، تيمة مصاصي الدماء ولأستعرض -باختصار!!- بعض النقاط الفلسفية التي لاحظتها بوضوح كقارئ عادي في تلك الملحمة الضخمة عن البلدة الصغيرةSalem's Lot..**********************************الظلام ووهج نور الكهرباء ووهج نور الإيمان ** "ربما سبب التغير في مفهوم الشر ليس كله بسبب فرويد فحسب , ربما جانب كبير منه سببه يرجع لإختراع الأضاءة الكهربائية, والتي قتلت الظلال في عقل الانسان الشر والظلال مازال موجودا ولكنه الأن تحت الوهج القوي القاسي للمبات الفلوريسينت والنيون الذي بلا روح ولمبات الإضاءة مائة وات الموجودة بالملايينالجنرالات يخططون استراتيجيات تحت وهج الكهرباء اللامعقول وكل شئ خارج عن السيطرة كعربة اطفال تنزل منحدر بأقصي سرعة وبلا فرامل"لقد كنت أنفذ الأوامر"حقا هذا صحيح لقد كنا جميعا جنودا, فقط ننفذ الأوامر المكتوبة لنا , لكن من اين تأتي الأوامر عاما؟ "خذني إلي قائدك" ولكن أين مكتبه؟ انا فقط كنت أتبع الأوامر, لقد أنتخبني الشعب ولكن من أنتخب الشعب؟ اعتقد هي اكثر ما أثار انتباهي بتلك الرواية الرائعة المثيرةالظلام الذي من حولنا ولكننا لا نراه بسبب نور التقدم الذي صرنا بهالكهرباء, النيون , التليفزيون , والأن الفيس والتويترلسبب ما هناك امرا ما لاحظته مع ستيفين كينج في رواية كتبها بعد تلك بثلاثين عاما عن الكهرباء ريفيو إعادة إحياء لستيفين كيجيحاول ستيفين كينج هنا محاولة التأكيد أن الظلام مازال موجودا برغم كل التطور والوهج الكهربائي الذي وصلنا له والذي قد يعمينا من رؤية هذا الظلام..قد يطفئ الإيمان ووهجه ونوره الحقيقي مازال هناك شيطان..ولكننا لا ندركه..هو من يأمر بتلك الفوضىبالحروب التي من اجل العرق والدين والبترول والأرضبقتل المتظاهرينبقتل الجنود والضباطبقتل الشبابمازال هناك من يحرض ويخطط ويشيع الظلاملا أدري لم شعرت بهذا طيلة الأحداث أن تلك التيمة الأساسية..بل وصدقني حتي كتابة هذه السطور لم أحاول البحث في تفسيرات لأنك إن ما قرات الرواية ستشعر بهذا ,فهذا واضحا في الاجزاء التي ترجمتها السابقة من الرواية تشعر انها مباشرة جداهل معني هذا أن الرواية عن الأيمان في الديانة المسيحية فحسب؟ بالعكس ، الرواية تشعر فعلا انها عن المعني المطلق للإيمان بالخالق نفسه وليس الرموزفي مشهد ممتاز قرب ذروة الأحداث هناك شخصية ما -كي لا احرق لك الأحداث- يحمل الصليب ليشع بوهج إيمانه وليحاول صد ونفي مصاص الدماء، وما أن يتردد تلك الشخصية ويبدأ في التشكك ويحاول أن يحل الأمر بنفسه دون ايمانه يزول الوهج عن الصليب بل و ينجح مصاص الدماء في انتزاعه من يد الشخصية وكسره بسهولة بالرغم من انه في البداية كان يخشي منه وقت توهجهلا يا صديقي ليس مجرد ان تلوح بصليبك والماء المقدس سيبعد عنك الشر، كما أنه ليس بترديد المعوذتين وحمل مصحف سيمنع عنك الشر، ليس معني ركوعك وقيامك وسجودك بشكل روتيني يجعل منك مؤمنا بحق ما يمنحك القوة الداخلية هو إيمانك نفسه بالرب، ايمانك بالله هو ما سيصد عنك الشر ،ايمانك بدينك الحقيقيتؤدي مشاعرك الدينية لخالقك بإيمان وتستعن به لمنحك قوتك الداخلية ليخرجك من مواجهاتك مع الشرور الذي نقابله في حياتنا يومياهل انا وحدي من شعر بهذا المعني عندما قرأت ذلك المشهد الغريب الي يضيء فيه يد الشخص بعد غمسها في الماء المقدس بوهج،وكذلك الصليب… دعك من ان المشهد هوليوودي ومبالغ فيه ولكن اعتقد ان الرسالة واضحة في الأحداث بعكس كثير من الروايات العميقة او بالأصح تتصنع العمقوهج الإيمان الحقيقي هو ما يقويكحتى لو تم تصويره بوهج مشع حقا ... فلا لا تنس انك تقرأ قصة أساسا عن مصاصي الدماء**********************************الرجولة ومصاصي الدماء **ربما شعرت ايضا انه يرمز لنقص عنصر الرجولة الحقيقية في بعض الشباب وقتها - تذكر إنها تدور في السبعينات ، ولكن...هل تظن أن الوضع تغير الأن تماما؟ بكل هذه الذقون والشعر المشعث؟فمثلا وصف صديق سوزان السابق والذي وقع في حبها البطل ، ستجد ان امها مقتنعة بذلك ذو الشعر المموج الطويل والعيون الحالمة , الشاب الرقيق الحساس، بينما أبيها قد ارتاح لبين الرجل بحق والذي لا يمانع استكمال عمله بعد العشاءربما رمز مصاصي الدماء يعبر عن التغيرات العجيبة التي صارت تتفشي اكثر بكثير من الماضي، كالتحرر المبالغ فيه، او بالاخص التحولات الجنسية، هذا لم يتم ذكره بالطبع مباشرة ولكني استشعرته عندما قام المؤلف بتشبيه في النهاية الشوارع الخالية جعلته يشعر بالبرودة في عظامه، وبدر لذهنه صورة غلاف البوم روك اند رول قديم عليه صورة متحول جنسيا في غلافه الأمامي، صورة بروفايل بخلفية سوداء ، الوجه الرجولي يدمي باحمر الشفاه وبودرة التجميل ، عنوان الالبوم : إنهم فقط يخرجون ليلا وعند ربط ذلك المشهد بالمقارنة بين الشاب والمؤلف ستجد ان ستيفين كينج يحاول ان يصرخ صرخة ما هناقيم مفقودة ربما, انهيار ليس فقط في حروب العالم -تذكر انها السبعينات , فيتنام , الشرق الاوسط...وغيرها , بل في نمط حياتنامن خلال تصوير نمط الحياة في تلك البلدة الصغيرة في بداية السبعيناتربما عن تحول البشر عاما للسهر عاما لأوقات تصل الفجر بينما الحياة الصباحية تنقض والتي أيضا صورها ببراعة بالمقارنة بين الفصل الأول كيف تستيقظ المدينة منذ الصباح الباكر بشكل بانورامي خلاب وبينها وبين فصل المدينة الأخير وهي خاوية تقريباً إلا من قليلأليست أعراض التحول التي سببها مصاص الدماء هذا تشبه اعراض الإنترنت والتليفزيون في وقتنا الحالي اذا مأتم إساءة استخدامهما...حولت البعض لكائنات ليلية؟ربما كان يقصد الكثير وربما لم يقصد شيئاً. ..من يدري؟كان هذا في الجزء الاخير من الرواية .."المدينة الخاوية" ،والذي به ذروة الأحداث والاكثر رعبا واثارة وفلسفة بنفس الوقت كفاني فلسفة لهذا الحد … ولكن في النهاية هناك ايضا مقارنة ممتازة بين المخاوف بين الاطفال والكبار اعجبتني جدا***************************مخاوف الطفولة**قلت لك لن اتفلسف هنا… ساكتفي بترجمة هذا النص وايضا بلا حرق احداث حقيقي وجد نفسه يفكر وليس لاول مرة عن غرابة البالغين. يأخذون المسهلات والمشروبات الروحية أو الاقراص المنومة لتمحي مخاوفهم ويستطعون النوم, ومخاوفهم سهل ترويضها جدا وأليفة : العمل , المال , ماذا سيظن المدرس اذا لم استطع شراء ملابس افضل لجيني , هل زوجتي مازالت تحبني , من اصدقاءي الحقيقيون. هي مخاوف شاحبة مقارنة بالمخاوف التي يستلقي الطفل علي مخدته في غرفة نومه المظلمة ولا أحد ليعترف له أملا في أن يتفهم أحد بشكل جيد تلك المخاوف سوي طفلا أخر مثله. لا يوجد جماعات علاج نفسي ولا دكتور نفسي ولا جمعيات خدمات اجتماعية للأطفال التي يجب ان تتأقلم مع الشئ القابع اسفل سريره او في الدولاب كل ليلة. الشئ الذي يزحف ويهدد وهو خارج نطاق البصر. نفس المعركة يجب ان يحارب بها الطفل وحده ليلة وراء ليلة والعلاج الوحيد في النهاية هو تعرية وتحليل عوامل الخيال والتخيل...وهذا ما يسمي بالبلوغبأختصار ,هذه الأفكار مرت بعقله. في الليلة الماضية "مات بيرك" واجه شيئا مظلما وبعده اصيب بأزمة قلبية من الخوف.. وهذه الليلة "مارك بيتري" واجه نفس الشئ , وبعد عشر دقائق استلقي علي فراش النوم وهو مازال متمسكا بالصليب البلاستيكي في يده اليمني كلعبة اطفال. هذا هو الفرق بين الرجال والأطفال. هذا هو الشئ الذي واجهة الطفل مارك..أعز اصدقاءه يناديه من خارج شباك الدور الثاني ويطلب منه ان يدعوه للدخول للعب سويا نعم هو احد المشاهد المقبضة بهاماذا تقول ياصديقي ؟ قلت لك انها رواية عميقة تحوي بعض الفلسفة؟بل أنها رواية عن مرعبة عن بيت مهجور مسكون بظلال من الماضيوعن مدينة يختفي سكانها كالكثير من المدن الأمريكيةوعن مصاصي الدماءنعم , انها عن مصاصي الدماء ياصديقيمحمد العربيمن 2 فبراير 2016الي 7 فبراير 2016ملحوظات----بعد تلك الرواية بدأ كينج في كتابة تحت القبة بمنتصف السبعينات عن مدينة صغيرة ايضا ولكنه توقف لان الفكرة لم تختمر جيدا وقتها ليعود لها بعد 25 عاماريفيو تحت القبة لستيفين كيجفي قصة ممتازة اخري عن المدن الصغيرةالمقال ببداية الرواية يروي بعض القصص الحقيقية عن مدن امريكة اختفت وسبب الظاهرة وتفسيرها الطبيعي وتلميح للتفسيرات الماورائية لتلائم الروايةوقد استخدمه بشكل كبير احمد خالد توفيق في عدد جديد من سلسلة ماوراء الطبيعة في 2016ريفيو تلك المدينة لاحمد خالد توفيقعندما بدأت البحث عن صور لاضيفها في الريفيو فوجئت للمستوي الهوليوودي الرخيص في تصميم شكل مصاصي الدماء للافلام المبنية علي الرواية , مبالغ فيه جدا .. الرواية صورت الموضوع بصورة اكثر واقعية تجعل تخيلها اكثر قبولا مما يجعله ايضا اكثر رعبا, وسهولة في استخراج الرمز بهفأنس الفيلم وابدأ بالروايةوعذرا لسوء ترجمة المقاطع من الرواية
    more
  • Char
    January 1, 1970
    1.24.19-I just finished my third read of SALEM'S LOT, this time via audiobook. The narrator, Ron McClarty worked well for me and I found this tale as satisfying as it ever was. 11.1.2014-Original review. I just finished a re-read of this book with the Horror Aficionados group here at Goodreads. I'm so glad that I participated!Remember little Danny Gluck? I first read this book in junior high or high school. It's been about 30 years since then, unfortunately. I've read The Stand and IT a couple o 1.24.19-I just finished my third read of SALEM'S LOT, this time via audiobook. The narrator, Ron McClarty worked well for me and I found this tale as satisfying as it ever was. 11.1.2014-Original review. I just finished a re-read of this book with the Horror Aficionados group here at Goodreads. I'm so glad that I participated!Remember little Danny Gluck? I first read this book in junior high or high school. It's been about 30 years since then, unfortunately. I've read The Stand and IT a couple of times each, but I never did pick this one up again. Finally, that has been rectified and what a payoff!I forgot how well this story wrapped its arms around the reader and refused to let them go. We meander through the town, meeting its residents and learning about their daily lives. (I think Stephen King excels at this, mostly because you can tell he knows what he's talking about.) We focus our attentions on a few different characters-some strong, some weak-but they're all human with characteristics, (both good and bad, )that we recognize. Quote: "The town cares for devil's work no more than it cares for God's or man's. It knew darkness. And darkness was enough."I feel that's all I need to say. I have nothing new to bring to a review of a book that has thousands of reviews already. If you haven't read this tale, you should.
    more
  • Delee
    January 1, 1970
    I was a bit of a wimp before I entered my teen years...so I stayed away from anything vampire. My first vampire experience was Love at First Bite, and not knowing it was a comedy (yes, it was before you could Google) I put on a brave face for the friend that invited me- and entered the movie theater terrified by what I would see. Luckily the evenly tanned George Hamilton awaited me...along with some mighty impressive disco dancing. The scary blood suckers would have to wait to frighten me. Next I was a bit of a wimp before I entered my teen years...so I stayed away from anything vampire. My first vampire experience was Love at First Bite, and not knowing it was a comedy (yes, it was before you could Google) I put on a brave face for the friend that invited me- and entered the movie theater terrified by what I would see. Luckily the evenly tanned George Hamilton awaited me...along with some mighty impressive disco dancing. The scary blood suckers would have to wait to frighten me. Next was Fright Night...again not so scary- I would have welcomed Christopher Sarandon nibbling at my neck for all eternity. A year later I was hooked on Interview with a Vampire's beautiful and tragic characters....but nothing to panic about yet...Enter into my life- the book SALEM'S LOT!!! Now these were vampires that kept me awake at night- pulling my covers up just under my nose. Not that flimsy cotton sheets would be enough to protect me from impending doooooooooooom...but so far no blood has been spilled. Knock on wooden cross.Writer Ben Mears has come back home to Jerusalem's Lot after twenty-five years, to write a book and face his fears...The Marsten House, an abandoned house- that has haunted Ben since he was a child has recently been purchased by a Kurt Barlow- and Ben is curious about both house and owner....but as he settles into town- one boy goes missing and another turns up dead...or undead should I say....Hands down my favorite Stephen King- and no matter how many newer, shinier, sparkly vampires- come along to try to tempt me- none can compare to SALEM'S LOT.
    more
  • Jeffrey Keeten
    January 1, 1970
    From the 1979 movie version of Salem’s Lot”It would be years before I would hear Alfred Bester’s axiom ‘the book is the boss,’ but I didn’t need to; I learned it for myself writing the novel that eventually became Salem’s Lot. Of course, the writer can impose control; it’s just a really shitty idea. Writing controlled fiction is called ‘plotting.’ Buckling your seatbelt and letting the story take over, however...that is called ‘storytelling.’ Storytelling is as natural as breathing; plotting is From the 1979 movie version of Salem’s Lot”It would be years before I would hear Alfred Bester’s axiom ‘the book is the boss,’ but I didn’t need to; I learned it for myself writing the novel that eventually became Salem’s Lot. Of course, the writer can impose control; it’s just a really shitty idea. Writing controlled fiction is called ‘plotting.’ Buckling your seatbelt and letting the story take over, however...that is called ‘storytelling.’ Storytelling is as natural as breathing; plotting is the literary version of artificial respiration.”This nugget of wisdom is shared by Stephen King in the introduction to the 2005 illustrated edition of Salem’s Lot. I have to say that I completely agree with this philosophy. I have talked to many would-be writers who are so bogged down in getting the outline of their story completely figured out that they never actually get to the writing part of the process. I like having a few concepts in my head before I start whacking away at that mesmerizing whiteness of the blank page, but if I have it all figured out,...then why write it? The fun part is discovering the nuances of the maze before I find the exit. Stephen King grew up in a small town in New England, and it seems like he has been waging war on small towns every since. ”There’s little good in sedentary small towns. Mostly indifference spiced with an occasional vapid evil--or worse, a conscious one. I believe Thomas Wolfe wrote about seven pounds of literature about that.” I, too, grew up in a small town and fully intend, in the scope of my writing, to eviscerate some of the more heinous aspects of small town “values.” I love Paul Bettany’s line from the movie Knight’s Tale. Chaucer: “I will eviscerate you in fiction. Every pimple, every character flaw. I was naked for a day; you will be naked for eternity.” I always like to say that my career is littered with the corpses of my enemies.(Hyperbole) Just a word of warning for those still breathing: I will reveal you for the bloody bastards/bitches you are in my fiction. If you think it isn’t you...it probably is. #evillaughwahahaJerusalem’s Lot is that typical small town that King loves to destroy on a regular basis, and this time his weapon is...vampires. The Marsten House, the scene of unspeakable tragedies, has been left empty for many years. It is a grand mansion falling into ruin by the very evilness that seems to fester in the walls and the rafters clear down to the bedrock. Ben Mears has come back to town to write about the place and intends to actually stay on the premises, but learns on his arrival that the house has been sold. Who would really want to stay there anyway? ”The house smelled. You wouldn’t believe how it smelled. Mildew and upholstery rot and a kind of rancid smell like butter that had gone over. And living things--rats or woodchucks or whatever else that had been nesting in the walls or hibernating in the cellar. A yellow, wet smell.” The Marsten House is the perfect place for a vampire named Barlow and his assistant R. T. Straker to take up residence. The first clue should have been the initials; remember Dracula’s assistant...R. M. Renfield. The one word name as well...Barlow…. What does he think—he is Prince? Yes, he does, and much, much more. He is, ultimately, a God fashioning people in his own image. As Barlow picks off the residents of Jerusalem's Lot one by one and turns them into an army of hungry vampires, a small band of misfits start to fight back. After all, who else, but the freaks and oddballs would believe that there really are vampires? ”An old teacher half-cracked with books, a writer obsessed with his childhood nightmares, a little boy who has taken a postgraduate course in vampire lore from the films and the modern penny-dreadfuls.” Barlow has certainly had better men and women than these who have tried to destroy him. He has become overconfident and underestimates the courage and resolve of this disenfranchised band of eccentrics he is dealing with. Check out this condescending speech he lays on Ben Mears: ”Look and see me, puny man. Look upon Barlow, who has passed the centuries as you have passed hours before a fireplace with a book. Look and see the great creature of the night whom you would slay with your miserable little stick. Look upon me, scribbler. I have written in human lives, and blood has been my ink. Look upon me and despair!” No one is more shocked than Stephen King that his idea for a vampire hoard destroying one of his loathed small towns turns into an inspiring, uplifting novel of the weak fighting back against the most powerful. It is a slow burn of a plot. King uses the early pages of the novel to let us get to know these people before we see them tested beyond normal human endurance. Fortunately, his working title of Second Coming was vetoed for the published title by his wife Tabitha who, rightly so, decided it would be a better title for a sex manual. It is a nice ode to the classic vampire myth and manages to add some original stake splattering moments to the genre. Salem’s Lot has become a classic of fanged literature. King proves his storytelling chops. If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit http://www.jeffreykeeten.comI also have a Facebook blogger page at: https://www.facebook.com/JeffreyKeeten
    more
  • Mary
    January 1, 1970
    I hate vampires. I hate them and I hate books about them. I hate the way they're romanticized and sexualized and just generally presented in modern fiction. That's why I loved this book. King doesn't shy away from the fact that vampires are creatures of horror and he presents them as such. They are vile, violent, and everywhere, and that's the way I like them.The characters pitted against them, particularly the priest, are compelling and almost too human to face the vampires. And, in the end, th I hate vampires. I hate them and I hate books about them. I hate the way they're romanticized and sexualized and just generally presented in modern fiction. That's why I loved this book. King doesn't shy away from the fact that vampires are creatures of horror and he presents them as such. They are vile, violent, and everywhere, and that's the way I like them.The characters pitted against them, particularly the priest, are compelling and almost too human to face the vampires. And, in the end, they don't actually triumph. They escape but that's about it. It's tragic and horrible and the perfect vampire book.
    more
  • Dan Schwent
    January 1, 1970
    When writer Ben Mears moves back to 'Salem's Lot, a sleepy Maine town he spent a few years living in as a child, he has bitten off more than he can chew. 'Salem's lot is home to an ancient evil. Can Ben Mears and his friends stop the vampire in their midst before falling victim to his lust for blood?One of the great things about getting older is that old books magically become new books after ten years. I forgot most of the wrinkles of this one so I figured it was a good time to give it another When writer Ben Mears moves back to 'Salem's Lot, a sleepy Maine town he spent a few years living in as a child, he has bitten off more than he can chew. 'Salem's lot is home to an ancient evil. Can Ben Mears and his friends stop the vampire in their midst before falling victim to his lust for blood?One of the great things about getting older is that old books magically become new books after ten years. I forgot most of the wrinkles of this one so I figured it was a good time to give it another read.'Salem's Lot owes a lot to Jack Finney's Invasion Of The Bodysnatchers. In this case, the pod people are replaced by vampires! Stephen King does a great job portraying small town life and then destroying it. While I remembered the bare bones of the plot, most of it had been lost in the sands of time so it was a pretty suspenseful read the second time through.Ben Mears is the first instance of what has become a Stephen King staple over the years: the writer as the main character. In some ways, Mears is a prototype for the protagonists of Bag of Bones and The Dark Half. Mears, damaged by the death of his life, moves back to 'Salem's Lot to try to resume writing. Good luck with that.The characters other than Ben Mears were an interesting crew. Too bad most of them are dead or worse by the end. I'd read a second book featuring the two survivors dealing with the fallout from this one.If I had to pick one thing to gripe about, it would be that the ending itself seemed a little easy. After everything that came before, it was kind of a whimper rather than a bang. Also, I had to wonder why they didn't just burn Barlow's hiding place down and be done with it.40 years later, Stephen King's sophomore effort is still a fine read. His Dracula meets Invasion of the Body Snatchers tale is just as suspenseful as the first time I read it. Four out of five stars.
    more
  • Justin
    January 1, 1970
    Hey. I’m not a vampire fan, okay?I mean, I am cool with scary books, and I read scary books, but vampires...They’re just not really my thing. If I had to power rank my favorite types of horror novels, and I can’t imagine a time where I would have to do that, except now, obviously...Vampires would be near the bottom of the list. Vampires would be one or two spots above werewolves. Werewolves are stupid, and so are books about them. Werewolves, give me a break. Now, I am a Stephen King fan. Not al Hey. I’m not a vampire fan, okay?I mean, I am cool with scary books, and I read scary books, but vampires...They’re just not really my thing. If I had to power rank my favorite types of horror novels, and I can’t imagine a time where I would have to do that, except now, obviously...Vampires would be near the bottom of the list. Vampires would be one or two spots above werewolves. Werewolves are stupid, and so are books about them. Werewolves, give me a break. Now, I am a Stephen King fan. Not all the time, but his early stuff especially. This is his second book. And in his second book Stephen King wrote a story about vampires. Thank God he didn’t write a story about werewolves for his second book. If he did that, he would probably not even be a thing today. He would have probably had to stop being a writer and get a job doing something else. Selling insurance or Lyft or something. Anyway, I’m not giving this story four stars because of the vampires. I’m giving this book four stars because he managed to take something I’m not really crazy about, namely vampires, and built a pretty fantastic story. He best parts of Salem’s Lot have very little to do with vampires anyway. After writing Carrie, King added a lot more pages to his next book, and he really takes his time with this one. There are whole chapters called The Lot, and they are about the town and the people in it, and those are some of the best chapters in the book. King creates this amazing world set into a small town with characters who inhabit it and have meaning and importance. Even the minor characters get their moments to shine and breathe a little bit. King spends pages just talking about the Lot and how it came to be, how it’s changed, what kind of people live there and why...... and vampires. The terror builds slowly. You know what’s happening. You know where the story is going. But in the end it goes there and then way, way past what you think, and...... oh man. I think in every King review I write I say this. I say something along the lines of King being a better writer than a horror writer. He’s at his best when he isn’t trying to scare you. I always say that, and I still agree with myself. However...In this book he excels at both. He takes the time to build up the horror and suspense in the first half, and the second half really pays off. Even with vampires. Hopefully, you’ve read this before. If not, read it in October. Or now. Or whenever. Don’t read it even. You should read it, but not reading it is your choice. It’s not the right choice, but it’s yours. You get to make it. However, and this is my last “however” and the last thing I’m going to write...However... oops...If you don’t read this, and you read a book about werewolves, and I can make an exception for Book 5 of the Dark Tower series. It has wolves in the title, so it’s fine. That’s the only exception. If you do that, we can’t be friends. I’m sorry. We can be friends. It’s fine. We shouldn’t be, but let’s be friends anyway. Choices are great, aren’t they? Good night guys.
    more
  • Samadrita
    January 1, 1970
    The last time I picked up a King novel, my inclination towards critical analysis of a text was still just a budding obsession. Now it is an enduring preoccupation. Try as I may, I cannot overlook the subtle slips in King's plot arrangement and characterization any more - the inevitability of women being cast in the molds of the lover or the victim of abuse or the tactless ingenue is a veritable threat to my fangirlism. (This is not to mention the tropes of the 'magical negro' and other assorted The last time I picked up a King novel, my inclination towards critical analysis of a text was still just a budding obsession. Now it is an enduring preoccupation. Try as I may, I cannot overlook the subtle slips in King's plot arrangement and characterization any more - the inevitability of women being cast in the molds of the lover or the victim of abuse or the tactless ingenue is a veritable threat to my fangirlism. (This is not to mention the tropes of the 'magical negro' and other assorted cliched representations of people of color.)And yet I cannot challenge the legitimacy of his repute as a master story-teller. Even though it has been many years since I picked up my first King title from the bookshelves of a friend, his words still make me break out in goose flesh in the middle of the night, his narrative voice exerts a hypnotic pull rendering me incapable of detaching myself from the world wrecked by paranormal phenomenon that he carefully builds from scratch. The horror that King conjures up here is not just a direct consequence of the emergence of an unknown, malevolent force which destabilizes the functioning of a secluded small town but the sinister darkness of the human soul which needs just the right trigger to be unleashed, to soundlessly absorb all capacity for reason and leave a bestial urge for carnage in its place. The supernatural forces that threaten to disrupt the lives of King's characters are symbolic of the evils existing in the realm of reality - the ominous shadows of war, hunger, poverty, totalitarianism. All accusations of profit-making and sacrificing good writing on the altar of plot can be damned to hell. King can write a wordy passage fraught with grim philosophical reflections when he wishes to. He can still rescue me from a miserable reading rut and remind me of the hollowness of ritualism - that faith is not prayer offered without feeling or the routine thumbing of rosary beads but simply the mind channeling an inner strength to purge the darkness within, professing unwavering devotion to a worthy cause. ...the good was more elemental, less refined. It was ore, like something coughed up out of the ground in naked chunks. There was nothing finished about it. It was Force; it was Power, it was whatever moved the greatest wheels of the universe. Before the abomination called 'Twilight' inspired the publishing industry to mass market vampires as lustful, gorgeous, innocuous hunks ready to pleasure women at their behest, there were fictional bloodsucking fiends like the ones in 'Salem's Lot. And no that is not a spoiler, given most community reviews here contain more generous spoiler-y synopses in this regard. In terms of thematic resonance and characterization this is far from King's best work, but if you haven't yet made yourself familiar with Bram Stoker's masterpiece and wish to make the acquaintance of vampires who give rise to pure spine-tingling, bone-chilling terror, this is the book for you. Fans of The Haunting of Hill House will also find something of value here.I am just glad that there are a great many number of King titles out there left for me to devour.
    more
  • Will M.
    January 1, 1970
    A novel about a creepy town and deadly vampires. This should've received 5 stars from me, but I was a bit disappointed with this novel.I swear I wanted to love this novel, but it was an okay read for me. An okay read from the King. I'm 100% sure that something is wrong with me, and not the novel.My main problem with the novel would be the fact that it took almost 350 pages for it to become really interesting. The character and plot introduction felt 150 pages longer than it should've been. Aside A novel about a creepy town and deadly vampires. This should've received 5 stars from me, but I was a bit disappointed with this novel.I swear I wanted to love this novel, but it was an okay read for me. An okay read from the King. I'm 100% sure that something is wrong with me, and not the novel.My main problem with the novel would be the fact that it took almost 350 pages for it to become really interesting. The character and plot introduction felt 150 pages longer than it should've been. Aside from that, the only character that I really liked would be Ben Mears. I guess it's also a good thing that I really liked the main character, but it's also a bad thing that everyone else were a bit flat and lifeless.The plot was not bad, and the execution was also quite good. This novel dealt with the mystery of the town more than the creepiness of the vampires. I like a good town mystery story, but the whole mystery of the town was not that interesting for me. I heard that this novel is quite similar to Dracula, so maybe I should've read Dracula first? Similar in a way that the novel doesn't revolve around the vampires, but of the setting. King is good with setting centered novels (Pet Sematary), so I'll be redundant and repeat that I'm probably the problem here, and not the novel.3.5/5 stars. I made the review short because I know that I'll have a better opinion of this novel after my reread in the future. Looking back, I'm reminiscing violent scenes and picturing the ending vividly. As of now I can't bump it up to 4 stars because it didn't blow me away. I'd be lying if I say that I enjoyed this a lot. I enjoyed some parts, but the most were a bit boring for me. Hoping for a good reread in the future. Go ahead and read this novel, and don't trust my 3 star rating.
    more
  • Ginger
    January 1, 1970
    FULL REVIEW UP4 bloody and bite worthy stars! ⭐⭐⭐⭐'Salem's Lot was a nice venture into the mind of Stephen King in regard to vampires! I’ve read so many vampire stories over the years that I went into this one hopeful and looking for something different.Did I get a different type of vampire tale? Not really but I got something similar to the classic Dracula and I was all about that!Stephen King really got the culture and characteristics of vampires down.You can tell he liked Dracula because 'Sal FULL REVIEW UP4 bloody and bite worthy stars! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️'Salem's Lot was a nice venture into the mind of Stephen King in regard to vampires! I’ve read so many vampire stories over the years that I went into this one hopeful and looking for something different.Did I get a different type of vampire tale? Not really but I got something similar to the classic Dracula and I was all about that!Stephen King really got the culture and characteristics of vampires down.You can tell he liked Dracula because 'Salem's Lot has the feel of that classic.✔️ The blood thirsty and vicious monster causing death and destruction wherever he goes.✔️ The band of fighters coming together to try and destroy the monster.✔️ The undead slowly taking over the whole town.✔️ The feeling of dread for the last remaining characters who have not been changed.It's all there and it worked well in this vampire vision by Stephen King. I loved the main characters of Ben Mears, Matt Burke and my personal favorite, Mark Petrie. I loved this kid!! What a little badass.Side note: Read more books regarding Harry Houdini. hahaha!Why didn’t this get a higher rating for me?Well, I didn’t need ALL the information of the whole town and every living person living there. It was too much detail for me. If this had been cleaned up a bit, I feel the story would have been seamless from the introduction of Ben Mears, Richard Straker and Kurt Barlow to the tense ending with the undead.Recommended to all Stephen King fans, vampire lovers and fans of horror!
    more
  •  Danielle The Book Huntress (Back to the Books)
    January 1, 1970
    City folk have a distinct misconception about small towns. We tend to believe that they are tranquil and innocent. That the denizens are wholesome and full of family values. But, we don't see the hidden rot that lurks beneath the sleepy facade.Stephen King does a lot to shatter that myth with 'Salem's Lot. This a horror novel about a vampire who destroys a town from the inside out. This is a horror story about the darkness that we don't see clearly (or maybe we ignore) about our friends, familie City folk have a distinct misconception about small towns. We tend to believe that they are tranquil and innocent. That the denizens are wholesome and full of family values. But, we don't see the hidden rot that lurks beneath the sleepy facade.Stephen King does a lot to shatter that myth with 'Salem's Lot. This a horror novel about a vampire who destroys a town from the inside out. This is a horror story about the darkness that we don't see clearly (or maybe we ignore) about our friends, families, and neighbors.What was the most horrific part of this book for me? You're going to guess wrong. It wasn't the horror of the vampires. It was seeing a woman punch her ten month old baby in the face because he was crying. Yes, that bothered me more than any of the actual supernatural horror. I say to Mr. King that you know what fears lurk in our hearts. The dark is full of potential evil that can possess us, take over our bodies, and turn us into monsters. But, the truest monsters are the human ones. With this novel, Mr. King showed me both kinds of monsters.Do you believe that there are no true secrets in a small town? You'd be right if you said yes. You'd be equally right if you said no. The townspeople of 'Salem's Lot know a lot more than they want to know about their neighbors, but they overlook it, ignore it, sweep the sins under the rug until the rug starts to bulge in the middle, and it won't hold those secrets back. For example, 'Salem's Lot harbored an ex-mobster who had a penchant for devil worship. He lived in a scary house on the top of a hill, the Marsten House. It was a house that haunted Ben Mears after he went there as a nine year old on a dare. He went there, and saw something that was from his worst nightmares, but he believed even in his adulthood to be true. The evil that Hubie Marsten brought into existence never died. The house held it as a battery holds a charge. It was the perfect place for a vampire and his evil minion to set up shop in this little town.I read the introduction to this story with interest. I love knowing how an author came to craft his or her story. Mr. King was a fan of Bram Stoker's Dracula, and he wrote 'Salem's Lot as an unofficial homage to that classic vampire novel. In my inexpert opinion, I think he did a great job. I feel that Mr. Stoker would probably nod in approval, even if he didn't get all the modern references. Mr. King wrote his idea of a vampire story, and it holds his individual stamp on it. Yet, the aspects that make Dracula such an excellent vampire novel, at least to this vampire aficionado, are clearly represented. Mr. Barlow could give Count Dracula a real run for his money as far as being a completely evil, despicable, and formidable being. His minion, Straker, could give Renfield some lessons in evil. And Matt, Ben, Jimmy, Susan, Father Callahan, and Mark could compare notes with Van Helsing, Harker, Mina, Holmwood, and Quincy. But, if Mr. Stoker would forgive me, I think that Mr. King ramped up the fear level significantly, because his world is not sentimental and endowed with as many basically 'good' people. His world is full of flawed humanity who have really nasty proclivities, although I still feared for their safety and didn't want them to succumb to the evil of the vampire that infected this town.In this story, we learn about the heights and depths of the human condition. How a person can bounce back from despair, face his/her worst fears, and quite possibly wrap his mind around events that cannot be real to an empirical mind. We learn about what a person's limits are. Can you go into that house and do what needs to be done? Do you have the nerve? Or will you turn away and pretend it's not happening, as some members of this town do, for their own sanity? Can a thirteen- year-old boy show the bravery that a seventy-year-old man in the twilight of his life lacks? Can a non-believer trust in the symbols of a faith that held no relevance to him, in the face of an evil that defies scientific explanation? All these questions are explored in this story, with answers that might surprise you.I deliberately read 'Salem's Lot during the day, because it is quite, quite scary. Even still, I thought about a pair of red eyes haunting me in the night. Feared for the scratching of a lost loved one against my window pane as I tried to sleep at night. Some part of me hoped that I had not inadvertently invited the wrong person into my home. If that is what makes a successful vampire novel, I'd say Stephen King has succeeded in a big way.
    more
  • Edward Lorn
    January 1, 1970
    This is the greatest vampire novel ever written. Forget Stoker, ignore Rice, this is it. Why? Because the vampires herein are not your friends. They are not your lovers. There is nothing remotely lovable about Barlow's children of the night. They simply want to fucking drain you.(view spoiler)[Like many people, my first experience with 'Salem's Lot had to do with Tobe Hooper's amazing made-for-television adaptation. The mute Nosferatu-like Barlow of Hooper's version is nothing like the mustachio This is the greatest vampire novel ever written. Forget Stoker, ignore Rice, this is it. Why? Because the vampires herein are not your friends. They are not your lovers. There is nothing remotely lovable about Barlow's children of the night. They simply want to fucking drain you.(view spoiler)[Like many people, my first experience with 'Salem's Lot had to do with Tobe Hooper's amazing made-for-television adaptation. The mute Nosferatu-like Barlow of Hooper's version is nothing like the mustachioed Dracula-esque Barlow of King's book. Some even find Hooper's version of Barlow to be scarier for that reason. No words. No nonsense. Just one scary motherfucker. I remain on the fence. The Barlow of the book is cold and cunning and terrifying, but Hooper's vision can freeze the blood on site. Which is scarier? I don't know, but why can't they both be equally horrifying?My only complaint about this book is the beginning. Even after two reads, I still cannot find a purpose for the prologue. It's one major fucking spoiler and I don't like it. But that's it. Ignore the prologue and this book is perfect.Notable character:Chopper (It's not the same dog, but another canine with the name Chopper pops up in The Body)Gendron (various King books. Thanks to RedTHaws for doing the research on this one.)Father Donald Callahan (the final three books of the Dark Tower series) (hide spoiler)]In summation: A lot of people will disagree with my opening statement, but I don't care. I have not found a more frightening vampire tale, but I must admit, I stopped looking. If you would like to suggest vampire novels that you think are scarier, go ahead, but know that I have read all about Rice's slumberfests, Stoker's diaries, and McCammon's bloodsuckers. The only tale that even comes close to this is the 30 Day's of Night graphic novels. King's vamps have the bite I require, what more can I say?
    more
  • Celeste
    January 1, 1970
    Full review now posted!If you’re looking for vampires with some bite, look no further.There are few monsters as enduring as the vampire. For well over a thousand years, mankind has told itself stories of preternatural beings who look like us, and perhaps even used to be us, but who now live by draining the life from us. Sometimes, these are just campfire stories, meant to give us a chill and a thrill before we drown them out with reality. But other times, we can’t help but believe our own storie Full review now posted!If you’re looking for vampires with some bite, look no further.There are few monsters as enduring as the vampire. For well over a thousand years, mankind has told itself stories of preternatural beings who look like us, and perhaps even used to be us, but who now live by draining the life from us. Sometimes, these are just campfire stories, meant to give us a chill and a thrill before we drown them out with reality. But other times, we can’t help but believe our own stories. In the past few decades, vampires have taken a big hit in pop culture. Yes, they’re still popular, perhaps even more popular than they’ve ever been before, but they’ve lost some of their power. Vampires were once terrifying entities, wielding their seductive beauty as a cobra does, to hypnotize and ensnare their victims. But in recent years, we as a society have defanged vampires, so to speak. We have rendered them harmless by giving them consciences and glittery skin, and making them into a metaphor for fighting the temptations of the flesh. That is not at all what you get when you visit ‘salem’s Lot.This sleepy little community in Maine is Everytown, USA. There’s nothing really to do, and kids tend to leave as soon as humanly possible in search of a bigger life. This leaves the elderly, children, and people who weren’t able to escape and had to settle for keeping the town running. It’s a town that could fall off of the map with very few people ever noticing, and that’s exactly what happens. The building horror of what decimated the town, and how quickly and easily most of the townspeople gave into that destruction, is where King really shines. In one corner, we have a terrifyingly magnetic mastermind of a vampire, his disturbing and well-spoken henchman, and the townspeople that quickly succumb to their new master’s advances. Some of these newly turned are children, which made them all the more disturbing. No one can write children quite like King, be they brave and compelling or terrifying enough to make a person decide against reproduction. Child and adult alike march to the beat set out for them by their new master, who is everything a vampire should be. He, and his newly turned children, are everything vampires should be; they’re beautiful, but their beauty is a disturbing and deadly. They are mankind’s reproduction of a Venus Fly Trap, using their unearthly beauty to entice their prey into their hungry, tooth-lined maws. In the other corner, we have a motley crew of renegade townsfolk, rebelling against the force attacking their town and doing their best to save ‘salem’s Lot from utter annihilation. An author from out of town, the girl he hits it off with, an English teacher from a local high school, a doctor, a priest, and a child stand alone against an incomprehensible evil. Where the story goes from there is something you’ll have to read to find out.There is one other central player in the story: the Marsten House. This house, the site of the town’s most disturbing history and allegedly haunted to boot, is what drew Ben, our writer, back to ‘salem’s Lot. It is a menacing presence hovering over the town, seemingly evil in spite of its inanimate state, which makes it the perfect abode for a monster. King did a great job of making the house itself super disturbing.In recent years, I’ve grown to love reading horror novels during the month of October; they just get me excited for the changing seasons and cooler weather and Halloween. This book was just exactly what I was hoping it would be, atmospheric and scary in a purely intellectual way that didn’t hinder my sleep. King did a great job reclaiming vampires for the horror genre. Keep in mind that this book was originally published in 1975, long before we as a modern society decided that vampires should be lusted after instead of feared, but it was still refreshing to read a novel that gave the bloodsuckers back their throne of fear. If you’re in the mood for a good Halloween read, I heartily recommend this book. And if you’re just looking for a way to see vampires in all of their terrifying glory, I think you just found it. This was a buddy read with my wonderful friend Caleb!Original review can be found at Booknest.
    more
  • Matt
    January 1, 1970
    I don’t read a lot of horror, so it’s taken me a bit longer than most to recognize the genius of Stephen King. Belated as it might be, I am finally making my way through his surprisingly versatile oeuvre. At this point, I think I’ve skimmed off much of the cream, having read several of his undisputed classics (The Stand, It, Pet Sematery, etc). Now I’m ready to bore down into the second level. Salem’s Lot is definitely a step down from King’s best, most enduring novels. That being said, horror d I don’t read a lot of horror, so it’s taken me a bit longer than most to recognize the genius of Stephen King. Belated as it might be, I am finally making my way through his surprisingly versatile oeuvre. At this point, I think I’ve skimmed off much of the cream, having read several of his undisputed classics (The Stand, It, Pet Sematery, etc). Now I’m ready to bore down into the second level. Salem’s Lot is definitely a step down from King’s best, most enduring novels. That being said, horror done by King can really only be compared to horror done by King. King is so ubiquitous (he’s written over 50 books) and so much a part of popular culture that it’s become hard to read one of his books without knowing everything about it before the first sentence. Take The Shining, for instance. You might not have tried the novel, but you’ve probably run across Kubrick’s classic film (which King hates), The Simpsons’ spot-on parody (“No beer and no T.V. make Homer go something, something”), or had the ending spoiled as the punch-line to a joke on Friends (Joey does not do well with spoilers). Salem’s Lot has not had that same widespread cultural impact. It’s been adapted twice for television, as a movie and a miniseries. Despite this, I didn’t know anything about it when I started. This ignorance made for a better reading experience, so I’ll try to tread lightly, just in case you’re as late as I am to the Stephen King show. Salem’s Lot is set in the small Maine town of Jerusalem’s Lot. A writer named Ben Mears, who grew up there, comes into town to write a novel and exorcise his demons. He starts canoodling with a young artist named Susan, and befriends an aging schoolteacher named Matt. Strange things start happening, emanating from the haunted Marsten House that overlooks the community. Those strange things, you will not be surprised, take a turn for the violent. I think that’s about all I can safely say, plot-wise. I could probably stop writing right now, review complete. But then what excuse would I have for ignoring my family, specifically the child knocking on my office door right now? Published in 1975, Salem’s Lot was King’s second novel, after Carrie. You can see early on many of the hallmarks he would work into his later efforts. There is the struggling writer as the lead character. There are children, both in danger and as heroes. There is care and detail taken into constructing Jerusalem’s Lot, which is given both geography and history. As he did later with Derry and Chester’s Mill, King gives you such a comprehensive rendering of Jerusalem’s Lot that you feel you can navigate its streets in your mind. Salem’s Lot is written in the aggressively third-person omniscient style that he utilizes so well. King leaps from person to person, from consciousness to consciousness, giving you a story from an eclectic collection of viewpoints. Ben might be the moral and plot-necessitated hub, but there are many spokes. Among the dozens of characters, King gives us a small-town constable struggling with his courage; a young mother who abuses her newborn child; a couple engaging in a discrete affair; and a Catholic priest whose struggle is more with the bottle than his faith. Are all these characters necessary to the storyline? No, absolutely not. Many, if not most, could have been shorn. The 653 pages in my trade-paperback edition could easily have been halved, without losing any of the essence. But the excess is what sets King apart. It is what makes him great. This is not, however, a great Stephen King novel. He is still experimenting with the themes that he’d nail later on. He does not have the complete and utter grasp of his material yet. There are lurches and sudden, jarring stops in the pacing. Here, more than in his other novels, I strongly felt the outside literary influences guiding King’s hand. (It’s impossible not to, since King name-checks many of them within the story). Salem’s Lot feels like an amalgam of Stoker, Shirley Jackson, and Richard Matheson. Elements from those authors’ works are thrown into a pot and set to boil. King then adds his own secret sauce, that sauce being blood, and lots of it. It’s entertaining, but not seamless. There were times I was more interested in literary comparisons of early verses later King than I was in the tale unfolding on the pages before me. The characterizations are just not there. King has the ability – think Jack Torrance, in The Shining – to create characters of incredible depth and complexity. Characters that are unforgettable. That’s not present in Salem’s Lot. More importantly, the connections between the characters is lacking. Ben saunters into town and quickly falls in love with a woman and becomes BFFs with a guy. This happens overnight, with no real explanation except expediency. As the plot reaches its endgame, and people find themselves in mortal danger, King desperately needs us to believe in the bonds – love, affection, loyalty – between his characters. But it’s just not there. I didn't believe in Ben’s humanity beyond his role as a pawn in King’s chess match. Thus, I didn't feel any stakes when Ben, and the people around him, found themselves struggling with their very lives. Perhaps it’s not necessary to think so deeply about Salem’s Lot. It’s just a genre throwaway, right? A guilty pleasure worth a cheap thrill? Something to be read at the turning of the season, when leaves change and fall, when the air sharpens like knives, when the long dark of winter begins whistling in the wind? I don’t think so. King is an American treasure. He is a master. He has a gift for baking complex and knotty themes into deceptively simple spook stories. His unmatched skill has probably made it easier for us to take him for granted. The guy churns out 800-page blockbusters by the gross, books that’ll be read by millions for years to come. Yet he’ll never get the same fawning attention that some Iowa Writers Workshop alum receives for delivering a slim, affected deconstruction of suburban ennui, or the laurels heaped upon some Harvard-grad twenty-something for capturing the acute travails of being young, sardonic, and overeducated in New York City.In that spirit, I can say that Salem’s Lot is not King at his best. It is, however, better and more effective than most books you’ll read. And I don’t mean just horror novels. I mean novels in general.
    more
  • Christy
    January 1, 1970
    ****WARNING: The following lyrics, and police account are sickening and grotesque---not for children!!!! (Though no spoilers...the man is mentioned in the book briefly ...during a discussion between Father Callahan and Matt Burke in his hospital room, filled with books on vampires...heres's more about the real one behind the myth. If you are easily made sick to you stomach, just don't go there,really...just move down to the regular review....I need a victim to do things sickeningI just want to m ****WARNING: The following lyrics, and police account are sickening and grotesque---not for children!!!! (Though no spoilers...the man is mentioned in the book briefly ...during a discussion between Father Callahan and Matt Burke in his hospital room, filled with books on vampires...heres's more about the real one behind the myth. If you are easily made sick to you stomach, just don't go there,really...just move down to the regular review....I need a victim to do things sickeningI just want to make you bleedMy knife is gashing your blood is splashingTo see your blood is what I needI'm gonna strangle you and I'll slit your throat tooI love to see your blood run, that's the thing that makes me cumI'm gonna kill you just because I want toI'm the Vampire of Dusseldorf and I will cut your life shortMy hands are choking my knife is brokenAn orgasm is what I needYour blood is spilling the sight is thrillingTo cum I need to see you bleedI'm gonna strangle you and I'll slit your throat tooI love to see your blood run, that's the thing that makes me cumI'm gonna kill you just because I want toI'm the Vampire of Dusseldorf and I will cut your life short.Peter Kurtin, The Vampire of Dusseldorf As the real Peter Kurtin was mentioned in 'Salem's Lot (the book was in Matt's hospital room with all the others, and discussed with Father Callahan--so naturally, I had to look it up, and got this little treat), I thought I'd share this fun little ditty to start things off on the right...ummm...note ;)Of course this is based on the real Peter Kurten, who murdered up to 68 women, motivated by sexual sadism; and became:A.K.A.: "The Vampire of Düsseldorf"--known for his atrocities, including drinking blood from the women's...ummm.....(_____) after the attack, assuming he got them during that....period. (I think I prefer the type of blood Barlow get's off on...... ;) )Just for fun (real life so-called "vampires" can be so much grosser and many times more twisted), I borrowed a bit from http://murderpedia.org/male.K/k/kurte...(then I promise to get on with the...ummm...much more tasteful :) book at hand)Classification: Serial killerCharacteristics: Sadist - RapePeter KurtenBBC – Crime Case ClosedShortly before he was executed by guillotine, Peter Kurten, the so-called Vampire of Dusseldorf, asked the prison psychiatrist: "Tell me, after my head has been chopped off will I still be able to hear; at least for a moment, the sound of my own blood gushing from the stump of my neck?"When the doctor replied that his ears and brain probably would function for several seconds after the blade struck, Kurten replied: "That would be the pleasure to end all pleasures".That's enough of him, I think.... By the way...if you haven't seen Salem's Lot already, save the movie until you've finished the book, you'll thank yourself for it, trust me. It really has ruined some of the best scenes in the book for me. I've learned my lesson, time and time again--unfortunately, I watched many of these movies years ago, before I was into Stephen King's books....introduced only 5 or 6 years ago to those (a gift from an english major started me off with Lisey's Story, which started with his later works--and he kept giving me more of those as he finished them another lesson learned!) I have made my way through a ton of novels, and finally realized two things: it is best to read his works in order (they build on each other in so many ways--many, like the one just mentioned above, deserve a re-reading after a few Dark Tower reads), and (thinking I didn't like short story collections, I was forced to try some that he wrote), I found out his short stories are as good as the novels, sometimes I want more, but often they are just right--or better, and more would ruin them. So, here I am...making my way through a few of his early works--in order--soon the first DT novel comes up (dreading that one, because I fear it will be a loooong introduction into the series as a whole).I am finding that King's earliest works are definitely some of his best! Loved this modern take on the whole Dracula mythos. After reading his reasons why, the small town is the best setting possible for this story. In general I love his use of small towns, where people know each other, and when someone goes missing it is easily noticed. (I also like the way he took his wife's ideas...they all seemed to make the story better!) Especially the small towns in Maine--my favorite state by the way--people ARE different there, everything is different, the way they talk...the scenery (breathtaking!)....the architecture...the blue-collared, hard working folk. Finally, he shares the darkest secrets of the people in the town; often the ordinary people you meet on his streets are already monsters in their hearts.This book also uses more of what, I feel, are King's strengths. The protagonists in this book (super faves in bold) include a writer (he admitted being a mirror of himself--perhaps supposed to be the main protagonist?), struggling to make it--Ben Mears; the very intelligent English teacher (King was one of those, too) Matt Burke; the fiercely smart and courageous child with some supernatural abilities, Mark Petrie (he outsmarts a stronger schoolyard bully when he comes at him--until said bully cries with pain and is humiliated in front of everyone, can escape situations just like Houdini...); the independent (for her times, at least regarding her mother) girl and love interest (Ugh--I really can skip the romance!) of Mears, Susan Norton; the heavy-drinking (gotta have at least one good-hearted person with this condition!) priest, who believes them, ready for the old-time church to be a Force once again, and assists in the final showdown--not just a dogma robot of the church, Father Callahan (view spoiler)[who turns up later in the dark tower series (hide spoiler)]...(the use of the Catholic Church to fight vampires is a MUST, as King stuck to the mythos, adding the modern day setting...leaving out all the church's own seemingly endless crimes against innocent children, yet including near the end the castrated choir boys--so they could sound as if actual females were allowed to sing in such a pious place!), and a reluctant at-first small town doc, Jimmy Cody.And his building of characters!!! Probably what he does best, and one of the reasons I enjoy almost all of his books regardless of a poor storyline (another is that his writing is just plain great...no matter what he has to say)--though this book has it all, including a terrific story. Some younger readers may be reading for the first part wondering when it's going to get into the action. By spending so much time getting there, expanding on the characters (often dislikable--come on--I roll my eyes at all the reviews that say they couldn't find anyone to like--when was that a prerequisite to liking a book? Anyway, there are several to love in this book), he slowly builds the tension and draws us in, making us care when the action starts. He knows very well, that the fear of what is to come is often the best part! Finally, King is also not one of those writers to shy away from topics others often do: killing children--or making them evil (evil kids are the best!!!), child abuse,killing off main characters, making heros out of drunks (who always kick the bottle aside when they are finally really needed for something important), etc....This book has it all. Highly recommended!!!!...Now off to read One for the Road and Jerusalem's Lot (again). Both short stories...one a sequel and the other a prequel are found in Night Shift(GREAT short story collection, with many of the stories pre-dating the novel Carrie-- therefore including a lot of his earliest work)......One For the Road being the sequel.
    more
  • Carmen
    January 1, 1970
    Stephen King's take on vampires. I didn't enjoy this book as much as CARRIE.THE HEROES: - An author. Of course. Self-insertion much? Notably the only character who has good sex in the novel. (I'm not complaining about the self-insertion... but I want you to know I notice what you're doing, Mr. King.) Ben Mears - A priest. Irish-American. A drunk. Fed up with the suffering, abuse, rape, and hate he sees every day. When can he fight the Big Evil? Human evil is boring, apparently. This character e Stephen King's take on vampires. I didn't enjoy this book as much as CARRIE.THE HEROES: - An author. Of course. Self-insertion much? Notably the only character who has good sex in the novel. (I'm not complaining about the self-insertion... but I want you to know I notice what you're doing, Mr. King.) Ben Mears - A priest. Irish-American. A drunk. Fed up with the suffering, abuse, rape, and hate he sees every day. When can he fight the Big Evil? Human evil is boring, apparently. This character elicited no small amount of anger from me. (See THE CHURCH) Father Callahan. - A doctor. Jimmy Cody. - A little boy, blessed by God with special powers to stand strong and face off against evil. Classic Stephen King. He's also surprisingly smart, confident, able to kick ass, unflinching, pragmatic, practical and quick-thinking. Mark Petrie. - A mild-mannered bachelor English teacher. Smart and well-read, the Van Helsing of the group. Matt Burke.THE HEROINE(?): Perhaps, reader, you're asking, "Well, Carmen, where are the females?" There's only one female who could be put into the "heroine" group... or even the "main character" group, and that's Susan Norton. I have conflicted feelings about Susan and her actions.Things I liked about Susan: - She's a reader. - She tells Ben what she needs and wants sexually. - She stands up for Ben. Her mother hates Ben and wants her to date and marry some local boy. Susan, who still lives at home, really puts her foot down and tells her mother where to get off. She also makes plans to move out - even though she'll be struggling financially. A strong, powerful, human scene in which both Susan and Mrs. Norton act and are portrayed as human characters with both good and bad in them. Excellent writing on King's part. I think he does some amazing work on challenging mother-daughter relationships (e.g. Carrie).Things I didn't like about Susan (and other people in relation to Susan...Ben, I'm looking at you....) - Ben tells her at one point, "Eat your ice cream." AND SHE JUST DOES IT. Can't stand this sort of "submission to a guy I like" thing, especially and over all with food and drink. I know this fits in with the times (early 1970s) but if a man gave me orders ever in regards to what or when or where I was choosing to eat or NOT to eat, he would find himself in some very hot water. I know this statement by him was innocuous - with no malice on his part - kind of like when men tell me to "Smile, you'll look prettier!" But that also fills me with rage. Again, 1975, so I'm going to try and overlook this...just this once. (If it came from a villain or someone with any kind of evil characteristics, I wouldn't even mention this. It's only because Ben is the White Knight of the book that I feel it needs to be addressed.) - Susan does something very stupid and (I feel) very out of character when she (view spoiler)[ decides to go hunt down the big, evil, ancient powerful vampire all by herself armed only with a broken fence slat. (hide spoiler)] Dumb, really dumb and out of character. But she's not the only one...CHARACTERS DO STUPID THINGS FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN TO GIVE KING A WAY TO KILL THEM OFF: - (view spoiler)[ Susan decides to go face Straker and Barlow by herself, armed with a flimsy piece of wood. People die as a result. (hide spoiler)] - (view spoiler)[ Father Callahan and Mark go to speak to Mark's parents without the others. People die as a result. (hide spoiler)] - (view spoiler)[ Ben stays and makes stakes while Jimmy and Mark check out the neighborhood. Right after Matt warned them not to split up. People die as a result. (hide spoiler)] - (view spoiler)[ When Jimmy figures out where Barlow is staying, instead of going back to tell the others and get them to go en masse, he decides to take Mark, age 12, and go take care of it himself with no other support or backup and WITHOUT telling anyone this crucial information. People die as a result. (hide spoiler)]I want to stress that these are rational, thinking, practical characters at all other times throughout the book. They just are overcome with a 'case of the dumb' every time King decides someone needs to die. It's very frustrating and very out-of-character. It goes like this: The group of heroes meets and discusses the situation intelligently, looking at it from all angles. Matt tells them not to split up. AS SOON AS they drive away from where Matt is staying, they decide to split up. Someone dies. They go to Matt's and tell him someone's dead. They discuss the situation intelligently and make smart plans. Matt warns them not to split up. They leave. They decide to split up. Someone dies... Wash rinse repeat. It's annoying. (This only happens in the last third of the book...the first 66% is more build-up and less fighting.)THE CHURCH: - This book is heavily Catholic. By the end, everyone who's still alive is wearing crucifixes and carrying holy water, whether they are Catholic or not. Even praying the Hail Mary or the Our Father appears to be an effective way to hurt vampires. - The scenes where the heroes fight vampires using crosses, holy water, and prayer are AWESOME. Very well-written, very exciting. This is great writing by King. You can vividly see everything in your mind while reading. I especially enjoyed the glowing touch King gives holy objects. When calling on the power of the Lord, the cross you're holding or the holy water you've washed in starts to glow so brightly that you have to squint. This is a great visual touch that I think added a LOT to the book and to the final fight scenes. Wonderful idea by King and a powerful one. - There is the pervasive idea that somehow the Church has become weaker because it now addresses issues that its parishioners deal with. I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH THIS. The book is a callback to the ancient role of the Church as protector against things like vampires, witches, and demons. Modern problems (what King calls "evil with a lower case e") such as rape, child abuse, incest, suicide, and murder are seen as mundane. Father Callahan, the local priest is "bored" with the idea of facing and fighting this kind of evil. He longs for the day he can showdown "real" evil - and his wish is granted in the form of bloodsucking fiends who are working for Satan. This evil which garners so much scorn in this book IS real evil. And it's human evil. Since the Church is supposed to help humanity, I hardly think that it is "weakening" the Church to address these problems, or somehow getting off track with it's "real" purpose of fighting Satan, or something. BULLSHIT. I can see why King chose to include this tiny thread, after all, the Big Evil is what is the enemy in this particular time and place. But I don't appreciate the trivialization of human evil, and especially have rage towards any priest who thinks it's boring or a waste of his time.VIEW OF SMALL TOWNS AS WRETCHED HIVES OF SCUM AND VILLAINY: - Multiple times King describes small towns as festering cesspools with no redeeming values, which everyone should move away from at the earliest opportunity. I take umbrage at this idea. Good people live in small towns. Good people live in cities. Crimes happen in small towns. Crime happens in cities. Both small towns AND cities have their benefits and disadvantages, and I have NO idea what is going on with all the small-town hate King slathers on this novel like orange marmalade. I found it irrational and a bit disturbing. - There's a whole chapter about how living in a small town, marrying your high school sweetheart, farming, and having kids is akin to death or slavery. This is very bleak and not at all true. I can see that this is not the path for EVERYBODY, but it's a perfectly valid way to live your life and certainly not the soul-destroying agony King thinks it is.COWARD:A certain character, who is smart and practical (view spoiler)[ Parkins, the Sheriff, (hide spoiler)] leaves town because he knows it's dead and he doesn't want to die. Ben promptly rips him a new one, calling him a coward and a gutless piece of shit. I completely disagreed with King here. Obviously the heroes are brave and stalwart by staying and vowing to fight the vampires and rid the town of evil, but I completely respect and sympathize for anyone smart enough to hightail it out of there. I felt like this was really judgmental and harsh. I admired the character AND his decision at the end to flee - it made a lot of sense to me and didn't make him any "less of a man" in my eyes.GOOD AND EVIL:Again, for people who haven't read King or think King writes about grimy cesspools without hope - that's not true (in this book). There are good men and women in this story. There is a powerful Evil and a lot of despair, death, blood, abuse etc. etc. but there is also good to combat it. I really like that King provides us with hope and also characters who are not disgusting (because, let's face it, the majority of the plethora of people in this book are awful people). Even though King writes here that Satan is a very real and powerful enemy, there's also the unwavering and unshakeable truth that God exists and that God is helping humans to fight Satan. Take that as you will. VAMPIRE BITING AS SEX: - Again, even in this "super-realistic, ugly, real" representation of vampires, I am still confronted with "and when he bit me it felt so good" and "when she bit me I had an erection" etc. etc. etc. That's okay - King does a good job with the rest of it, and I can see he was going more ancient legends meet Dracula with it, so I can forgive his (all in all, very slight) fetishizing of sucking blood. But I'd prefer for it to be absent, and for an author to do away with it for once.SIDE CHARACTERS: - There are so many side characters and tiny, tiny subplots or threads that occasionally I would have to flip backward in the book to figure out who the heck King was referencing. And then there were side characters and side plots that I really wanted more of, but King never ended up fleshing them out, and I was disappointed. It's a VERY busy book.SLUT:I am slightly concerned and bothered with the glimmer of "that-16-year-old-girl-is-a-slut-because-she-has-big-boobs-and-I-want-to-fuck-her" that runs through this novel. Ruthie (as far as I can see) never does anything to indicate she's sexually promiscuous, but men call her "slut" and hate her simply because she's gorgeous and they want to fuck her. Women hate her and call her "slut" because she's gorgeous and they know men want to fuck her. Unfair to Ruthie, who is a small, small, part of this book - we never see her thoughts or see any part of her world, we only look at her through other's eyes. I would throw a fit if I thought King was slut-shaming (or, more accurately , labeling-a-woman-who's-most-likely-a-virgin-as-a-slut) if I thought he, Stephen King, really believed that - but I don't. Instead, I think he's showing us how people judge others on appearances, and that's okay. So, it's fine - he gets a pass from me on this one. Although I think he could have addressed it and/or handled it better.SPOILER:(view spoiler)[ The Staking of Susan. I found this a bit weird. Matt asks Ben if he's had sex with Susan. When Ben admits he has, Matt tells him that HE'S the one who has to stake Susan - no one else apparently - because he's taking the place of her husband. This didn't make ANY sense within the lore of the book - the rest of heroes stake vampires regardless of if they're related or not. I'm 99% sure anyone can stake any vampire for any reason with the same result. There was just this kind of creepy patriarchy vibe regarding Susan's corpse, though. And I have no idea why - the 'male relative must stake the vampire' thread is never mentioned again. Also, it really, really upset Ben to have to stake the woman he loved. Why couldn't one of the other men do it? WHY? Unnecessary. It felt like King was just trying to create drama without having any consistent lore to back it up. (hide spoiler)]...Tl;dr - Even though King didn't write a perfect book here, he wrote a dang good one. He's an excellent author - there are chapters in here (maybe 6 or 7 out of more than 100) that I know I could read over and over again just to admire how they sparkle in the light.Of the two King books I've read on GR so far, Carrie is better than 'Salem's Lot, in my opinion. I plan to rank all of them as I read them, so stay tuned!
    more
  • Robert Vanneste
    January 1, 1970
    'Salem's Lot is my favorite Stephen King novel . Granted I haven't read every book he's put out . I read it the first time in the late 70's or early 80's . Ouch that was a long time ago . Overall I've reread it 4 or 5 times so it's a guilty pleasure of mine . I feel another reread coming on .
    more
  • Ashley Daviau
    January 1, 1970
    I fall more in love with this book and its characters every single time I read it. It's both heartbreaking and terrifying and that's a huge part of why I love it so much. I always have a hard time enjoying vampire novels and I definitely think that stems from my love of this book. King does vampires in such a horrifying way that nothing quite lives up to Barlow after reading this book. Despite finding him utterly terrifying, I absolutely adore Barlow as a character. In fact, I think he may just I fall more in love with this book and its characters every single time I read it. It's both heartbreaking and terrifying and that's a huge part of why I love it so much. I always have a hard time enjoying vampire novels and I definitely think that stems from my love of this book. King does vampires in such a horrifying way that nothing quite lives up to Barlow after reading this book. Despite finding him utterly terrifying, I absolutely adore Barlow as a character. In fact, I think he may just be one of my favourite King villains! Another huge part of my love for this book is the amazing cast of characters. They're really such a bunch of unlikely heroes that you can't help but root for them and shed a tear or two at some of the deaths. I really enjoy the whole cast of characters as a whole but my favourite by far is definitely Mark, that kid is one hell of a warrior and steals my heart every damn time I read this book! No matter how many times I read Salem's Lot, I am on the edge of my seat from the very first page until the very last. I get so caught up in the story and I still get shivers when I get to the final show down! It is such an epic and perfect ending to this book, it just plays like a movie in my head. I could really go on and on about how much I love this book, it's most definitely one of my favourite King books!
    more
  • J.K. Grice
    January 1, 1970
    Maybe the greatest vampire novel of all time. Certainly one of the scariest stories I've ever read. I loved everything about this book. The audio version is also excellent, narrated by Ron McClarty. The best vampire book since SALEM'S LOT would have to be by Michael Rowe.
    more
  • Erin
    January 1, 1970
    I love reading books multiple times because each time I read it I feel completely different about it. I find new things I missed, I view things from a different perspective. Each time its like reading a new book. I first read Salem's Lot when I was a teenager, I liked it but I didn't fully appreciate it. Salem's Lot is a vampire novel but its so much more than that. Salem's Lot is about small town America and the disintegrating social fabric. One of the things I've come to appreciate most about I love reading books multiple times because each time I read it I feel completely different about it. I find new things I missed, I view things from a different perspective. Each time its like reading a new book. I first read Salem's Lot when I was a teenager, I liked it but I didn't fully appreciate it. Salem's Lot is a vampire novel but its so much more than that. Salem's Lot is about small town America and the disintegrating social fabric. One of the things I've come to appreciate most about Stephen King is his ability to bring out the horror of everyday life. Salem's Lot is how I imagine a real life vampire attack would happen. The vampire would move to a small insular town and slowly rip it apart. I recommend Salem's Lot to all horror lovers and to readers who love intricately plotted well written stories.
    more
  • Evgnossia O'Hara
    January 1, 1970
    «Ο Μαρκ Τουέιν είπε ότι ένα μυθιστόρημα είναι μια ομολογία των πάντων από έναν άνθρωπο που δεν διέπραξε ποτέ τίποτα»Αυτό ακριβώς είναι και το κάθε βιβλίο του Stephen King. Μια ομολογία…Μπορείτε να διαβάσετε την ολοκληρωμένη άποψή μου στο blog μου, Through the Chapters, εδώ.
    more
  • Helga
    January 1, 1970
    Brilliant! Just Brilliant!I wasn't even born in 1975 when the book was published, yet i connected with the story and the characters. They didn't seem old fashioned and out-dated. Stephen King sure knows how to captivate the reader and scare the shit out of them in his typical way. Aptly, we had a couple of nights of thunderstorms here and suffice it to say i had to check the windows to make sure they were closed properly.
    more
  • Suzanne
    January 1, 1970
    I stayed up till nearly 4 am on a weekday to finish this book. I would have to admit that Stephen King and his weird ass books hold the record of keeping me up late into the night, regardless of the day of week. I want to read all his books but I have to spread them out because I just do not think my psyche can take a marathon of his books, though it would love to! In Salem’s Lot, King writes about a town fallen victim to vampires. I will admit, I am one of those overly excited fans of vampire l I stayed up till nearly 4 am on a weekday to finish this book. I would have to admit that Stephen King and his weird ass books hold the record of keeping me up late into the night, regardless of the day of week. I want to read all his books but I have to spread them out because I just do not think my psyche can take a marathon of his books, though it would love to! In Salem’s Lot, King writes about a town fallen victim to vampires. I will admit, I am one of those overly excited fans of vampire literature so this was so down my alley. There was no way this was not going to be a book that would fall into my favorite’s category. There is romance, there is weirdness, there is epic storytelling, and there is creepiness because it is a King book and that is what you expect and want!My quick and simple overall: I loved this creepy book and even this freaky little town.
    more
  • Councillor
    January 1, 1970
    In „Salem’s Lot“, one of his most well-known novels, Stephen King masterfully explores the effects of evilness on unsuspecting and (more or less) innocent people through the introduction of vampires. He presents a vivid cast of characters to his readers, including the main protagonist, Ben Mears, an author who is haunted by his own past and discovers several obstacles on his quest to find peace; Matt Burke, an aging teacher confronted with the largest challenge of his life; Jimmy Cody, a doctor; In „Salem’s Lot“, one of his most well-known novels, Stephen King masterfully explores the effects of evilness on unsuspecting and (more or less) innocent people through the introduction of vampires. He presents a vivid cast of characters to his readers, including the main protagonist, Ben Mears, an author who is haunted by his own past and discovers several obstacles on his quest to find peace; Matt Burke, an aging teacher confronted with the largest challenge of his life; Jimmy Cody, a doctor; Father Callahan, a priest who struggles with being addicted to alcohol; Mark Petrie, a brave young boy trying to find his place in life; and – the single female main character of the entire novel – Susan Norton, a young woman with huge hopes and longings. While their characters are developed during the beginning of the novel, Stephen King temporarily throws irritating events into the game, e.g. a boy disappearing without any traces to be found, or the mysterious background history of Marsten House, a dark mansion located close to Jerusalem’s Lot’s smalltown-life. Slowly, but unavoidably, the true horror of vampire invasions begins to cloud the life in ‘salem’s Lot.One of the most remarkable things about this novel is the way it is driven by its characters rather than its plot during the most parts of the story. It is their decisions which lead to certain events, and those events which lead to certain decisions again. Occasionally, Stephen King lets his heroes (and his heroine) make dumb decisions leading to death and devastation, and some of those decisions even seem to be out of character in comparison to other scenes where the protagonists appear very rational and reasonable. But everyone commits mistakes, no one is perfect. Not even the villains are.Speaking of the villains, Stephen King used a lot of space to create his evil characters, to give them motivations, a background, a purpose. In his novel, vampires are no sexy, charming, dangerous, appealing men. They are dangerous, yes, but they are also repulsive, murderous, merciless and very, very unsexy (even though King also addresses the sexual aspects). A lot of references to Bram Stoker’s Dracula can be discovered during the course of the novel, and King took great care to create his vampire character with Dracula as inspiring example. Maybe I should have read Bram Stoker’s novel before reading this, but it’s a reference shining clearly through the lines, and that’s what makes me anticipate Stoker’s novel even more.King seems to love not only exploring the deepest fears of human nature, but also setting up a smalltown-feeling and then causing havoc over this town. The fight scenes were especially well-written, especially at those times when the Church was involved (either through crucifixes, references to the Bible or the appearances of Father Callahan himself), but he focussed even more on developing his characters and making the story feel real to the reader. For more than half of the story, nothing outstanding happened at all except for two or three stunning scenes. This is already the problem: The way King introduced his main characters (Ben, Susan, Mark, Jimmy, Matt and Father Callahan) was fantastically implemented, but he also created dozens of side plots, which may have been necessary to successfully create the smalltown-feeling, but which kept being irritating and unevenly integrated. In the third chapter of the story, each of the twenty scenes introduced a new character, only for this character's existence to be ignored during the next two hundred pages. I have lost count of the amount of times I had to flip through the pages again to learn who the heck this character was who was just referenced with such a naturalness that you were left thinking you had not been reading close enough.However, „Salem’s Lot“ is fast-paced; well-written; full of depthful annotations; complex, breathing (or rather not breathing, in the subsequent course of the novel) characters and an enthralling conclusion. For me, the most incisive twist occured during the Epilogue, which left the story with an open ending, yet left me satisfied and with a feeling of hope. King allowed his reader to develop the story further, to think of what might have happened to Jerusalem’s Lot afterwards and to create one’s own thoughts and ideas on the story’s message. And that is essentially what I will keep this novel in my memory for.
    more
  • Paul O'Neill
    January 1, 1970
    Loved it more the second time around. This book is soooo tense! It's everything you need in a horror book. This book remains the only book that I've had a physical reaction to. I was that spooked that I jumped a little and dropped my book (kindle). Too bad everyone on the train seen me do it... King at his best.
    more
  • Melki
    January 1, 1970
    There are thousands of reviews of this book. My review is for the AUDIO CD version, which I thought was pretty darned well done.This was read by actor Ron McClarty yet another one of those guys I've undoubtedly seen in dozens of things but can't quite place. He did a great job with character voices, imbuing some with heavy Maine accents, and even using a womanly warble to choke out hokey lines like, "Make love to me, Ben." (Somewhere I imagine there must be an "outtake disc" where he burst out l There are thousands of reviews of this book. My review is for the AUDIO CD version, which I thought was pretty darned well done.This was read by actor Ron McClarty yet another one of those guys I've undoubtedly seen in dozens of things but can't quite place. He did a great job with character voices, imbuing some with heavy Maine accents, and even using a womanly warble to choke out hokey lines like, "Make love to me, Ben." (Somewhere I imagine there must be an "outtake disc" where he burst out laughing the first ninety-four times he tried saying that.)I really enjoyed listening to this on the way to and from work, even though I got pretty creeped-out when I had to drive home after dark. I highly recommend hearing this one. I'm looking forward to more Stephen King on audio in the months to come.And, okay - one thing about the book . . . (view spoiler)[When they discovered the blue chalk, and every character immediately thinks school? Seriously? Seriously? NOBODY but me thought POOL HALL? (hide spoiler)]
    more
Write a review