Scan barcode
A review by geenawrites
Later by Stephen King
dark
emotional
funny
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
Later is one of several books from Stephen King that feel churned out by a ghostwriter. The tone, voice, and pace of the book feels so unlike King, the idea that his name was just slapped onto the cover is one I can't really let go.
Following the story of a young boy (Jamie Conklin) who can see, and sometimes communicate, with the dead (ghosts or demons). Living with his mother, an editor for a George M.M. Martin type super novelist, Jamie finds himself face-to-face with a demonic presence that inhabits other ghosts, specifically, the ghost of a serial killer.
Later is easy to get into. Jamie feels appropriately childish, and matures over the course of the story as he struggles with the positives and negatives of his gift. Each character in the story he interacts with feels unique and distinct from Jamie, even the ghosts.
Later honestly might be one of the first books I've read in a long time that I finished within the same month. It's also one of the few horror/supernatural books that actual made me uneasy with its descriptions of mutilation, gore, and demonic stalkers. King nails atmosphere and dread pretty effortlessly.
But, as I'm coming to understand every time I pick up a Stephen King novel, Later is full of particularly questionable story beats that really have me questioning the motives and intent of King as a novelist. From Doctor Sleep's unprompted tale of sexual abuse (as experienced by a ghost when he was a living, breathing child) at the hands of his relative, to underage 'group sex' scene (or underage rape sequence, depending on who you ask) scene in It, Later dangles the mystery of Jamie's father over the readers as though it will explain why he can see ghosts.
This wasn't something I was particularly interested in finding out. The idea that Jamie inherited his gift from anyone felt a little too much like a superhero origin story in a supernatural tale that never bothered with explaining the mechanics of how its ghosts and demons worked. What would it be the point if you could sell the concept to the reader without it? It wasn't asking, yet King answers this question with an extrapolation tale of incestuous one-night stand between Jamie's mother and her brother (IIRC).
My largely positive feelings about the book were muted considerably with the story ending on this note. It felt like I was thrown back into reading A Game of Thrones in the ASOIAF series (which I never finished reading after the first book). It really had me asking, "What the hell was that about exactly, Stephen?" As much as I enjoyed this book, it definitely has me wanting to avoid any older or newer works from the guy, lest I be walloped with another out-of-nowhere shock value twist in the plot.
Following the story of a young boy (Jamie Conklin) who can see, and sometimes communicate, with the dead (ghosts or demons). Living with his mother, an editor for a George M.M. Martin type super novelist, Jamie finds himself face-to-face with a demonic presence that inhabits other ghosts, specifically, the ghost of a serial killer.
Later is easy to get into. Jamie feels appropriately childish, and matures over the course of the story as he struggles with the positives and negatives of his gift. Each character in the story he interacts with feels unique and distinct from Jamie, even the ghosts.
Later honestly might be one of the first books I've read in a long time that I finished within the same month. It's also one of the few horror/supernatural books that actual made me uneasy with its descriptions of mutilation, gore, and demonic stalkers. King nails atmosphere and dread pretty effortlessly.
But, as I'm coming to understand every time I pick up a Stephen King novel, Later is full of particularly questionable story beats that really have me questioning the motives and intent of King as a novelist. From Doctor Sleep's unprompted tale of sexual abuse (as experienced by a ghost when he was a living, breathing child) at the hands of his relative, to underage 'group sex' scene (or underage rape sequence, depending on who you ask) scene in It, Later dangles the mystery of Jamie's father over the readers as though it will explain why he can see ghosts.
This wasn't something I was particularly interested in finding out. The idea that Jamie inherited his gift from anyone felt a little too much like a superhero origin story in a supernatural tale that never bothered with explaining the mechanics of how its ghosts and demons worked. What would it be the point if you could sell the concept to the reader without it? It wasn't asking, yet King answers this question with an extrapolation tale of incestuous one-night stand between Jamie's mother and her brother (IIRC).
My largely positive feelings about the book were muted considerably with the story ending on this note. It felt like I was thrown back into reading A Game of Thrones in the ASOIAF series (which I never finished reading after the first book). It really had me asking, "What the hell was that about exactly, Stephen?" As much as I enjoyed this book, it definitely has me wanting to avoid any older or newer works from the guy, lest I be walloped with another out-of-nowhere shock value twist in the plot.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Gore and Violence
Moderate: Ableism and Homophobia
Minor: Incest