Spyke
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Hey now, let's be clear. Stephen King did not have the clown defeated by a bunch of outcast youths gangbanging in a sewer. That's just patently incorrect. Every single part. No, he had the ancient terror disguised as a clown temporarily banished by summoning an ancient turtle from the dawn of time and engaging It in a battle of wills. Completely different and, in fact, perfectly reasonable. Anyone that's actually read the book knows the outcast youth sewer gangbang happens after that and actually has no bearing on the plot whatsoever. Stephen King's not some freak writing a book where the entire plot hinges on a bunch of traumatized kids screwing each other to save the world, no; he's a perfectly normal guy writing about a bunch of traumatized kids screwing each other for no reason at all. Bet you feel real silly now, huh?

235
jlai.lu

What the fuck are you on about? Nothing you said is remotely true, this is a gross misinterpretation of the events depicted in the book.

It's not a gangbang, it's a train. They go one after the other.

174
sh.itjust.works

Add a one-line explanation of what this file represents.

Surprised nobody's volunteered to write the English caption yet.

8
snoonsreply
lemmy.ca

How the hell is that related? Those lads were merely showing a circle can be made with numerous stiff rods, a precursor to calculus. It has nothing to do with ancient terrors, god-like turtles or traumatized children having a gangbang in a sewer after killing what they thought was a supernatural clown. For shame!

5
Jankatarchreply
lemmy.world

What's a clown master time-pilgrim? Is it in likeness of a jester?

Edit: Wait nvm just read wikipedia page on clowns they go WAY back. And used to be religious?

2
sh.itjust.works

That's the "train position" you're referring to. It's different from "running a train".

Why? I don't know.

11

And this was the stuff he got published. I’d dread to read his drafts and unreleased material from that era.

49
abbadon420reply
sh.itjust.works

Was there not some time traveling component? Like their future selves had to find each other again and come back ti their childhoods. I thought that was what made the "children having sex" part not as triggering as it sounds,because they were actually adults. Mind you, it's been years since I read the book. I might be misremembering things.

21
ඞmirreply
lemmy.ml

"They're actually 900 years old" or something

33

Ah, the classic anime workaround.

"Nigomichisichason is technically 1000 years old so when I jerk it to Rule 34 fan art, I'm not actually jerking it to anime of a kid even though she looks and acts exactly like one"

6

No, it is even more bizarre. They have sex because the group is lost in the sewer and apparently this makes them know where they are, somehow, so they can leave, which they then do. It adds literally nothing to the plot, apart from really shoddy symbolism of growing up.

15

Sounds like sense8 but your kid self hitches a ride or something. What the what Stephen

5

My ex went on to get a PhD in English with Stephen king as a specific area of interest and I'm glad I don't know exactly the email to send what you said, well it would be super awkward and probably misunderstood

10

I am fairly certain that Stephen King was molested as a child, it's a recurring theme in his work in a way that seems less like an attempt to depict a general/universal fear and way more like he's just working through his own trauma. IT isn't even the best example, he's got a short story called The Library Policeman that is not subtle about it at all. Incedentally, I first read that short story in elementary school, worked better as a stranger danger warning than anything else.

42
steeznsonreply
lemmy.world

Washed down with some Listerine according to his On Writing autobio

10

Fuck, that's nasty.

Which flavor? Napalm Mint™? Yellow Horse Breath? Amethyst Apocalypse?

edit: Now I've got a 3pc band in my head of straightedge Mr. Cleans w/ scrubby-bubble brushstaches in Ned Flanders fit, called The Listerines.

4
feddit.dk

I went in knowing nothing about the book other than there was a supernatural clown in it. When I read that scene I had to stop, then go online to find an explanation of what the fuck I just read (to be fair, I was also pretty confused by the denouement in general) and how it is related to the plot. I was absolutely baffled by the amount of people saying they thought it was fine to have, some people even said it was a good allegory for leaving childhood.

13

some people even said it was a good allegory for leaving childhood.

It is an allegory. But that is a certainly not a good one and should be not a choice to be used as one.

8
feddit.org

There is a scene in the book "It" where the only girl in the friend group decides to have sex with all the others to bring them back together. Down in the sewers.

75

Also, this friend group is all children. Not teenages of age, or even teenagers of questionable age, children.

8
kibblebitsreply
quokk.au

The book has child porn in it. A group fuck where they all fuck the girl.

Not joking.

28

Describing it as porn is wildly inaccurate, it's not particularly detailed or explicit and it's not written in a way that even comes close to being erotic

25
Zettareply
mander.xyz

Today I learned everyone with a copy of the book 'It' is in possession of CSAM, and amazon and Barnes and noble are actively and criminally distributing the same material.

Words have meaning.

8
arrow74reply
lemmy.zip

At least in the US, I'm not sure if purely textual would ever be illegal. You could likely get away with a visual depiction of the scence with current law.

-4
lemmy.world

The Pedophile-in-Chief is ok with it, even though he personally prefers them to be teenaged, he'll gladly start a war and crash the global economy to defend him and his pedo pals from too much scrutiny in the Epstein files.

0

Pretty sure this is case law from like 70 years ago, but okay rant on

2
kibblebitsreply
quokk.au

I think a lot of people never saw it coming. He was on a lot of drugs at the time.

That said, in every single book he wrote, he has very elaborate scenes where a person urinates themselves. Every. Single. Book.

51

I’m certain someone did. At least he came on himself and not in a middle school child.

11
kibblebitsreply
quokk.au

You get the logic… of… peeing or the middle school gang bang to defeat a monster?

11
sh.itjust.works

The second one. It preys on innocent childish fears, so kill that part of you. Haha, so clever, makes sense in universe I guess. But like, why would you make your universe that way?

5

Cause when you use drugs, you are in the deepest, darkest corners of your psyche. You usually start taking drugs because you either want to silence that part of yourself, or because you feel like a piece of shit because of the thoughts you have in your head. Ultimately, healing comes from realising that everyone experiences thoughts like that, they just decide to not live out the thoughts.

10

Because Stephen King has sexual trauma from his childhood and has been working through it with his writing the entire time

2

I guess. I mean, he’s a pervert who wants to watch kids fuck. You know he jerked off after writing it.

-4
slickgoatreply
lemmy.world

His early work was exceptionally good. Tommy knockers, Needful Things, Salem's Lot, Misery, Stand By Me, were all pretty good. Not a fan of some of his latest stuff.

10

I think his latest stuff is pretty good. The Mr. Mercedes and Holly series are an interesting take on a detective series, IMO.

10
kibblebitsreply
quokk.au

I don’t know. His books aren’t that great. His movie adaptations are just okay.

He has some early work that was good and got a lot of attention. It was back in the prime days of horror novels. Right place right time. That’s all.

With the right amount of cocaine I think you or I could probably give him a run for his money

4
moopetreply
sh.itjust.works

His books are variable, but they usually have like 300 pages of genuinely good character development and scene setting, an inciting horrible incident and then another 100 pages of suspension-of-disbelief. All of the film adaptations I've seen are pretty bad though.

8

Shawshank? Shining? Mist? Green Mile? Misery? Maybe not everything is a winner, but these are pretty classic movies and some like Pet Sematary, Thinner, Carrie, Dream Catcher and many others are not bad movies. The Running Man wasn't super well made (old one) but a decent movie for it's time. I haven't even seen half of his adapted works and I just rattled off 10 movies that pretty universally are not seen as "pretty bad":

2

I think, in his case, the more he did the more he produced.

However, he’s very public about having no recollection or writing many of his books.

I wish I could say “damn, I don’t ever remember making that app. It made a million you say? Wow”

8

I latent agree with that for all of his books, except for the Dark Tower series. I actually think the Dark Tower series is pretty good. It's very different from his other books though.

3
iktreply
aussie.zone

read the book and tell us if it's any good? if you're morally opposed to reading some book because of a fictional scene that disgusts you then stick to childrens books

-1

It's a weird and completely unnecessary scene narratively speaking but it's not even close to porn. It's one of many similar examples in King's writing, seems like the guy was molested as a kid and tried working through it with his writing

12
slickgoatreply
lemmy.world

He was extremely coked out of his mind during those years.

9

Let’s put it this way, enough people read IT that IT got three movies and a TV series.

8
sh.itjust.works

"And you thought I was fucked up? I didn't have anything to do with that! I just eat children!"

12

Oh come on use the original.

(also maybe don't do child gang bangs in your books, its a bit weird)

10