natsilene's review against another edition
4.0
L'intento dell'autore riesce in pieno. Le Notti di Salem, infatti, è, come Stephen King scrive nella prefazione del 2005, un anti-Dracula. Dracula è una delle storie dell'orrore più ottimiste mai raccontate. Dracula è il romanzo positivista per eccellenza, dove la razionalità splende come la luce elettrica che aveva fatto il suo ingresso nell'Inghilterra vittoriana e mette in fuga un orrore arcano. Il conte del romanzo di Stoker è un semidio nella sua Transilvania rurale ma non ha le armi per affrontare un gruppo di uomini illuminati dalla scienza moderna.
In Le Notti di Salem la situazione è capovolta, i mostri sono persino avvantaggiati dalla modernità poiché credere alla loro esistenza è difficile, e se la fine del mostro è la stessa del Conte, qui le sue vittime non saranno solo due ma un'intera cittadina. I personaggi di King infatti muoiono come mosche e successivamente si rianimano come vampiri. Il vampirismo qua si diffonde come una malattia virulenta, quasi simbolo della frantumazione dei sogni utilitaristici. Infatti a fine 800' pochi pensavano alle nefaste conseguenze dell'industrializzazione ma poi si è scoperto come l'anidride carbonica, emessa come prodotto della combustione dei carburanti fossili, sia causa del riscaldamento dell'atmosfera, acidificazione degli oceani e in generale possa portare a cambiamenti climatici a cui la maggioranza delle forme di vita animale (uomo compreso)non riuscirà ad adattarsi. L'urgenza di cambiare modello industriale e passare ad uno sviluppo eco-sostenibile si avvertiva già mezzo secolo fa, oggi, nel 2017, questo quasi non sta avvenendo e lo scenario e nerissimo.
Ed è quasi troppo palese la chiave di lettura nel ventunesimo secolo del secondo romanzo di King, i vampiri non sono altro che i nuovi cavalieri dell'Apocalisse: inquinamento, sovrappopolazione, carestia e guerra (2 su 4 non vanno in pensione). Salem's Lot è l'intero ecosistema terrestre e i vampiri stanno venendo a prenderselo.
In Le Notti di Salem la situazione è capovolta, i mostri sono persino avvantaggiati dalla modernità poiché credere alla loro esistenza è difficile, e se la fine del mostro è la stessa del Conte, qui le sue vittime non saranno solo due ma un'intera cittadina. I personaggi di King infatti muoiono come mosche e successivamente si rianimano come vampiri. Il vampirismo qua si diffonde come una malattia virulenta, quasi simbolo della frantumazione dei sogni utilitaristici. Infatti a fine 800' pochi pensavano alle nefaste conseguenze dell'industrializzazione ma poi si è scoperto come l'anidride carbonica, emessa come prodotto della combustione dei carburanti fossili, sia causa del riscaldamento dell'atmosfera, acidificazione degli oceani e in generale possa portare a cambiamenti climatici a cui la maggioranza delle forme di vita animale (uomo compreso)non riuscirà ad adattarsi. L'urgenza di cambiare modello industriale e passare ad uno sviluppo eco-sostenibile si avvertiva già mezzo secolo fa, oggi, nel 2017, questo quasi non sta avvenendo e lo scenario e nerissimo.
Ed è quasi troppo palese la chiave di lettura nel ventunesimo secolo del secondo romanzo di King, i vampiri non sono altro che i nuovi cavalieri dell'Apocalisse: inquinamento, sovrappopolazione, carestia e guerra (2 su 4 non vanno in pensione). Salem's Lot è l'intero ecosistema terrestre e i vampiri stanno venendo a prenderselo.
friedeggyolive's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
icarrington's review against another edition
dark
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.25
realhumanbean4u's review against another edition
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
beth_pattison's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
kandicez's review against another edition
5.0
This has always been my favorite King. Always. I read it for the first time when I was about 12. We were driving cross country, from West Virginia to California and I was absolutely certain that I saw a vampire at a truck stop. I mean really, really saw one. This book is intense and is no less so each time I re-read it, and there have been many re-reads. There is nothing lost just because you know how it all turns out.
This is the first book where King shows us his world-building skills. This isn’t Ben’s story. Or Barlow’s. Or Matt’s. This is the story of Jerusalem’s Lot. The town itself seems to be the main character. This is also our first look at King’s idea that places can be intrinsically evil. Short of that, places can attract evil. This idea is something I can believe in. There really are bad, bad places. Jerusalem’s Lot may not appear on any map, but I believe in my bones it’s one of those places.
King is such a master at painting a very, very detailed painting of lives. He doesn’t just show us what’s happening right now. He shows us how our characters go where they are. Why they are reacting this way. Why they are NOT acting the way we think we would in a similar situation. My husband calls this diarrhea of the pen. I just want more.
King’s vamps are scary because they seem so infinitely possible. Barlow is a bit lofty, but all the rest are simply us. Us, but bitten. They roam the night preying on their friends and loved ones. King shows us that not only can this happen to the baby beating young mother, but just as easily to the loving Susy-Homemaker middle-aged wife. Everyone is in danger. No one is safe.
I feel King’s using Ben as a visitor of sorts to the Lot is the perfect way to introduce us. Ben has a history here, which helps with the large details, but Ben experiences the fine details as we, the reader, do. I never get enough of King’s old guys on the porch, village gossip, or nosy old bats. He writes them so well you feel you know them. I’ve said this in reviews about other books by him, but I feel I would recognize them if I passed them on the street. In fact, I HAVE met people that reminded me of King’s characters. I re-read him compulsively, so often they will BECOME that character for me the next time I read.
I am a voracious reader and King is my all-time favorite. I am always surprised when someone says they don’t like him. My first thought is that they must not have read this one.
This is the first book where King shows us his world-building skills. This isn’t Ben’s story. Or Barlow’s. Or Matt’s. This is the story of Jerusalem’s Lot. The town itself seems to be the main character. This is also our first look at King’s idea that places can be intrinsically evil. Short of that, places can attract evil. This idea is something I can believe in. There really are bad, bad places. Jerusalem’s Lot may not appear on any map, but I believe in my bones it’s one of those places.
King is such a master at painting a very, very detailed painting of lives. He doesn’t just show us what’s happening right now. He shows us how our characters go where they are. Why they are reacting this way. Why they are NOT acting the way we think we would in a similar situation. My husband calls this diarrhea of the pen. I just want more.
King’s vamps are scary because they seem so infinitely possible. Barlow is a bit lofty, but all the rest are simply us. Us, but bitten. They roam the night preying on their friends and loved ones. King shows us that not only can this happen to the baby beating young mother, but just as easily to the loving Susy-Homemaker middle-aged wife. Everyone is in danger. No one is safe.
I feel King’s using Ben as a visitor of sorts to the Lot is the perfect way to introduce us. Ben has a history here, which helps with the large details, but Ben experiences the fine details as we, the reader, do. I never get enough of King’s old guys on the porch, village gossip, or nosy old bats. He writes them so well you feel you know them. I’ve said this in reviews about other books by him, but I feel I would recognize them if I passed them on the street. In fact, I HAVE met people that reminded me of King’s characters. I re-read him compulsively, so often they will BECOME that character for me the next time I read.
I am a voracious reader and King is my all-time favorite. I am always surprised when someone says they don’t like him. My first thought is that they must not have read this one.
kandicez's review against another edition
5.0
I’ve said this in numerous places, but “Salem’s Lot is my favorite book by Stephen King. It’s a close margin, and there are numerous ties for second place, but I always fall back on this one as my favorite. Imagine my surprise when a couple of years ago I saw that this book was published and I missed it! Perish the thought! So I finally tracked down a first edition (used, but almost perfect) to add to my collection and decided I would NOT allow myself to read the “deleted scenes” until I had finished the original.
Let me say that I never feel that there are enough words in a Stephen King book. People complain about his lack of editing, but I am NOT one of those people! I would read the guy’s grocery list. Having said that, I will admit that most of these edits were sound. I would never have complained had they been inserted into the tale where they belonged, especially if the names had been appropriately changed to fit, but reading them at the end, as I did, I can see why they were cut.
I don’t feel I am spoiling anything by talking about the contents of these deleted scenes, because they are just that...deleted, but for those of you that hate spoilers
I really dislike the original name King had for Barlow. Barlow has a nice ring to it and flows off the tongue of the mind. Sarlinov just does not. I also don’t like the idea of actually “seeing” Barlow, as soon as we do, with one of the deleted scenes. King has always been a master at keeping the real menace in the shadows until the last minute. With the inclusion of this particular scene, there is no mystery left. I prefer the “Bruce the Shark” approach.
The only other scene I feel would have changed the tone of the book is the conversation between Ben and Matt regarding Ben’s finances. Because Ilove adore worship like King as much as I do I tend to see little glimpses of him in his characters. I would not have liked reading about Ben Mears’ squandering of a small fortune, or even about how little he was actually paid for what other characters' describe as an excellent novel.
I’m very happy I bought and read this. The few illustrations/photos are just enough to lend another level of creepiness to an already terrifying book. They don’t overwhelm the story, and including One for the Road and Jerusalem’s Lot was a stroke of genius. Tacking the deleted scenes on at the end was also the right choice with these. Unlike the deletions that were later added to The Uncut Stand these didn’t improve or add to the story.
Let me say that I never feel that there are enough words in a Stephen King book. People complain about his lack of editing, but I am NOT one of those people! I would read the guy’s grocery list. Having said that, I will admit that most of these edits were sound. I would never have complained had they been inserted into the tale where they belonged, especially if the names had been appropriately changed to fit, but reading them at the end, as I did, I can see why they were cut.
I don’t feel I am spoiling anything by talking about the contents of these deleted scenes, because they are just that...deleted, but for those of you that hate spoilers
Spoiler
I did not need to see Susan screaming obscenities and offering to ball Ben in front of everyone. That entire exchange felt out of place for me.I really dislike the original name King had for Barlow. Barlow has a nice ring to it and flows off the tongue of the mind. Sarlinov just does not. I also don’t like the idea of actually “seeing” Barlow, as soon as we do, with one of the deleted scenes. King has always been a master at keeping the real menace in the shadows until the last minute. With the inclusion of this particular scene, there is no mystery left. I prefer the “Bruce the Shark” approach.
The only other scene I feel would have changed the tone of the book is the conversation between Ben and Matt regarding Ben’s finances. Because I
I’m very happy I bought and read this. The few illustrations/photos are just enough to lend another level of creepiness to an already terrifying book. They don’t overwhelm the story, and including One for the Road and Jerusalem’s Lot was a stroke of genius. Tacking the deleted scenes on at the end was also the right choice with these. Unlike the deletions that were later added to The Uncut Stand these didn’t improve or add to the story.
straycatt's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.5
tifftastic87's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
There are some really strong Dracula vibes. A lot of getting to know the characters and the town. It felt really gothic with small town twist.