Thursday, March 9, 2017

Misery


Misery was the second novel I read from Stephan King, after Carrie (still have a soft spot for that one). As an adolescent, I felt I resonated way more with the plot and characters in Carrie than I did of Misery. That’s not to say Misery didn’t scare the pants off of me, it certainly did, just that I wasn’t at a place in my life to appreciate the book the way I am now. Reading it again, I have a greater appreciate for this work. This is one of those King novels that are classic for a damn good reason.
Plot wise is book is about the author of a popular romance series, Paul Sheldon, finding himself trapped by his mentally ill, sadistic “number one fan”, Anne Wilkes, after a car crash. She gets him addicted to meds while she nurses him and tortures him (yeah, heal and hurt dished out by the same warped character) while demanding he bring her favorite romance character, Misery Chastain, back to life in a new novel written just for her. Seems straightforward enough. A tense situation ripe of all manner of horror to play out.
King is brilliant in the way he presents the story through Paul’s perspective. There was never a point that I felt the tension was dipping by having just the two main characters together in a limited space. I found Paul to be a highly engaging character, though perhaps the fact I’m a writer might make me a bit bias. It’s easy to feel for Paul’s plight, and in turn, feel invested in his wellbeing. The setting added fuel to the fire as the isolated and trapped sensation makes the reader feel desperate for Paul to escape.
Truly impressive is the book’s psycho, Anne Wilkes. She is believable in a way many fictional psychos aren’t, she’s unpredictable. While most fictional psychos are given a tragic backstory to explain their motives for killing, Anne is simply a killer. Her mental instabilities are probably genetic more so that created by a tragic past. Anne Wilkes isn’t becoming a killer, she just is one. In fact, she doesn’t see anything wrong with what she is doing. She sees herself as a good person doing the best she can in the world, which makes her all the more terrifying. King crafts a character that is believably suffering from multiple mental illnesses. At the same time, she is generally unaware she has severe problems. She thinks this is just a part of who she is, a part of her personality.


I also liked how King gave her a common sense sort of intelligence (no fancy psychology Dr. Lecter type here). Anne is smart; she ensures Paul is dependent on her by setting up his drug addiction and his need for food/care from her right at the beginning of the kidnapping. No frills, no toying with her prey. Anne knows what she wants and takes the best direct route to get it, even if that is through a foot or a thumb. She has a hearty sort of intellect that is far too often misunderstood as being simple. As a small side note, Kathy Bates does an amazing job of capturing the character in the film.
There is another dimension of this book that I didn’t grasp in my teenage reading. The whole story can be seen as symbolic of an author’s journey writing a novel, with many parts of the story directly reflecting King’s struggles at the time he wrote it. Anne Wilkes is Paul Sheldon’s biggest fan, but she also represents the harshness of readers in a more general respect. Anne punishes Paul severely for trying to break out of his genre, much like what happens quite often with established writers. Anne demands Paul doesn’t take shortcuts with his writing and insists the story be everything she expects while also being something that isn’t stereotypical. Readers can be unforgiving and demanding. As much as Paul is afraid of displeasing Anne, he is also addicted to not only the drugs but writing the story. I willing to wager that most writers feel at least a smidgen of fear regarding what their audience will think of their work, and yet we are driven to do it anyways. I could go on and on about how much I related to this side of the story as a writer, but I’m sure you get the point.

Overall, like all of King’s classics, this is a great read for any horror fan. As fantastic as the movie is, the book is still superior. Well worth settling in and devouring a page at a time.

2 comments:

  1. I definitely agree that it was easy to identify with Paul. Once you start thinking about how your work will be received by others, it's easy to fall into an endless chasm of 'what-ifs' and 'maybes'. I think it's interesting you found Anne unpredictable. I found her straight forward violence, obsession, and forced drug addiction to be normal psychopath stuff, predictable for someone who believes their psychopathy to simply be a part of their identity.

    ReplyDelete
  2. King did a great job with the locked room scenario. We have a very limited cast and an even more limited environment. In the hands of someone less capable, it could have been a boring story. King is great at this though, as we've seen in some of his other works, including The Shining.
    I also love the symbolism and the story within the story effect. There are so many layers to peel back an examine.

    ReplyDelete