August Group Read: The Stand by Stephen King, Book One

The Stand by Stephen King



Book description from Amazon - "This is the way the world ends: with a nanosecond of computer error in a Defense Department laboratory and a million casual contacts that form the links in a chain letter of death.

And here is the bleak new world of the day after: a world stripped of its institutions and emptied of 99 percent of its people. A world in which a handful of panicky survivors choose sides -- or are chosen. A world in which good rides on the frail shoulders of the 108-year-old Mother Abigail -- and the worst nightmares of evil are embodied in a man with a lethal smile and unspeakable powers: Randall Flagg, the dark man."

From Wikipedia - "The Stand is a post-apocalyptic horror/fantasy novel by American author Stephen King. It expands upon the scenario of his earlier short story, "Night Surf". The novel was originally published in 1978 and was later re-released in 1990 as The Stand: The Complete & Uncut Edition; King restored some text originally cut for brevity, added and revised sections, changed the setting of the story from 1980 (which in turn was changed to 1985 for the original paperback release in 1980) to 1990, and updated a few pop culture references accordingly"

September Book Two link https://www.librarything.com/topic/179007

October Book Three link https://www.librarything.com/topic/179008

I hope you join us for the August-October read of The Stand by Stephen King. For August we will be reading Book One. I have not read this book before. If it is a reread for you let us know if you are reading the original version or the newer expanded version.

Please post spoilers using the spoiler feature like this. Also, post the chapter you are referring to if you are talking about something specific. General comments, thoughts or rants are welcome.

Thanks for setting this up, Roberta! Looking forward to joining you!

I think I'm in...

Tentatively thinking maybe perhaps... :)

Thanks for setting the thread up, Roberta.

I just put a hold on the ebook at the library. There are only two people in front of me so I should have it shortly. The library description doesn't indicate whether it's the original or the uncut version but it was published in 2008 so it's almost surely the latter.

The longer version is available on U.S. Kindle for $5.17 right now.

Thanks for setting up the thread. I think I'm in denial about how close August is. How can the summer be halfway over?

8> That's the edition that I ended up buying.

Last year I read my first Stephen King novel, 11/22/63. I don't like horror, but I have been reading a lot of dystopian fiction in recent years, and I liked the miniseries of The Stand they showed on TV years ago. I hope I'll enjoy reading this book.

>3 Crazymamie: Mamie is here! Whoop!

>4 katiekrug: Katie I know you are going to be reading The Goldfinch so it's okay if you start late. I hope you do join us though.

>5 BekkaJo: Give it a try ;-)

>6 PiyushC: One of the original nominating trio has reported in. Excellent!

>7 rosalita: Julia I can't wait for us to read this.

>9 BookLizard: Now our original nominator is here!

I'm glad you mentioned the Kindle version on your thread. The last time I looked it was a lot more expensive. Now I can just hold my Kindle instead of a huge doorstop and increase the font when my forty-something eyes get tired. Bwahahaha!!!

I don't like a lot of horror but sometimes you have to leave your comfort zone.

Maybe????

>11 Berly: Come on Kim. Ya know you wanna.

I do! And that's the problem. Everyone keep suggesting all these great books! I guess I will just have to give up sleeping.

>4 katiekrug: I would be reading The Goldfinch too in August for my RL Book Club.

>10 luvamystery65: Thanks Roberta :)

>13 Berly: Sleeping is overrated anyway!

Thanks, Ro, for setting up this bad boy! This was always one of my favorite King books. I've read it a couple times. I wasn't as impressed with the LONG UNCUT version. I much prefer the original. I think I will try the audio this time around, narrated by the great Grover Gardner.

I am very happy this is through October, gives me a much better chance to participate. Smiles.

For those of you daunted by the length, try doing it in both print and audio. That approach has worked very well for me, especially with the chunksters.

I've read this book so many times I could probably write down the entire plot by memory so I'll skip the re-read. But I will lurk and chime in on occasion.

I'm with Morphy. I've read it more times than I can count. It was the first King book I ever read, probably the first "adult" book I ever read. I had the paperback version so long, I had to tape the cover back on. Upgraded to the uncut version when it was republished.

I'll definitely follow along with the discussions. Enjoy!

>13 Berly: I hear ya Kim.

>14 PiyushC: What's sleep? :D

>15 msf59: Mark I'm glad you will peep in. I'm considering the audio because Grover Gardner is THE MAN! Plus, like you, I love to Whispersync these big books.

Eva is also wanting to read the original version. If we get some conversation going about the two versions then I may go see if the library has a copy of the original. In fact, I'm going to check now.

>16 Morphidae: & >17 mahsdad: Please do follow along and comment. We need that insight from you both.

I wish I could find the original version but I'm not having much luck around here. It's not a deal-breaker or anything but I have a strong hunch that the original is a tighter, more readable story. I still expect to enjoy the longer version, though.

>19 rosalita: I'm not having much luck either. One of the libraries has one copy posted but zero copies showing anywhere. Someone checked it out and never returned it.

>20 luvamystery65: Oh, people who never return library books should be drawn and quartered! How too bad of them, especially of an edition that the library cannot easily replace. Boo!

It seems like most people that have read the LONG UNCUT version, the first time, did not seem to mind it. I read it after the original and thought it was bloated.
Hopefully, the Grover Gardner version, is the original. Fingers crossed.

I've been wanting to reread this for years. I read the original version when it came out, and now I own the uncut version. It's long but King books read quickly. It may be a few weeks before I start it as I am committed to another long book, The Luminaries. Thanks, Roberta!

>21 rosalita: Agree

>22 msf59: I believe the audio is the uncut version Mark, but hey it is Grover Gardner.

>23 Donna828: No rush Donna. We are doing this August-October.

I read the full uncut edition years ago and found it wonderful. I never bothered with the publisher-chopped version.

>25 .Monkey.: Good to know PMM. I hope you chime in when we start discussing the book.

I'm sure I will, if I feel I have something to say! It's been quite some time so I'm probably no good on specifics, though, but we'll see. :)

I read the uncut version for the Lost (TV show) book challenge (not on LT) and really enjoyed it. This was several years after seeing the awful miniseries. I'm in for commentary but I won't be rereading it.

...Awful...miniseries?! WAT?!

28> Awful??

It was quite good, I own it on DVD. And I don't just mean in my own opinion, either, aside of general positive reviews/praise, it actually received a handful of nominations (including some wins) for a few different awards.

>31 .Monkey.: Yes in fact I remember the narrative at the time being along the lines of it being the first or most successful adaptation of a King story.

Yup, his stories have a lot going on, so the adaptations tend to either just not be able to properly encompass it and wind up feeling shoddy to those who know the actual story, or else the directors/producers just go taking things in their own direction because they feel like it (e.g. Kubrick, heh). The miniseries allowed them to be able to include a lot more, and was done a lot more faithfully than usual.

I never saw the miniseries but King had control over the concept didn't he?

He wrote it and was one of the producers (I imagine "producer" in title as such that, he could say "I don't want this that way" but not really producer), yeah.

Okay, so I'm in the minority. I thought it was awful. Maybe I'll go back and watch it again, because I don't remember why.

>36 AuntieClio: Everyone is allowed to be in the minority. Life would be boring if we all liked the same thing. Sometimes to me it may be one of the actors cast or it wasn't a great time in your life or hey, maybe you just think it sucked. Nothing wrong with that.

>36 AuntieClio: What Roberta said!

36> It's OK not to like it. I was just panicking because I liked the miniseries and was afraid I wouldn't like the book!

If you liked the series you should like the book plenty. :)

40> That's a relief! Thanks.

Came across this group while searching for King related stuff. Coincidentally I'm currently reading The Stand (complete edition) and about at the half way point so I will check in to see what others have to say. BTW read the edited edition some years ago and am enjoying the complete edition even more.

#39 - #41 I do need to check out the miniseries.

>42 FlamingRabbit: Welcome aboard! I look forward to your input.

Did anyone else start reading today? I got about 3 chapters read on my lunch hour today. Nothing much to comment on now, except as I was just saying over on Jeff's thread, reading this now in the midst of the Ebola crisis in Africa is a little disconcerting.

On the subject of the original/restored versions, the ebook I got from the library is the uncut version, and it starts with a little essay from King on why he chose to release the extended version. His comments were ... mildly persuasive. He says the original was cut not for editorial reasons but simply as an accounting measure because the version he submitted was so long and they wanted to save money on paper and such. Which, if that's true, is pretty awful. We'll see, but I'm not as opposed to reading this version as I was before.

>44 rosalita: I haven't started yet Julia. I have two library books/audio that I need to get through first.

I'm thinking of doing the Whispersync on this book but I haven't decided yet.

I haven't started either, and may not get going until the second half of the month.

Fine, I'll just read it by myself then. *pouts*

>47 rosalita:. I'm with you. I'm always amazed at his ability to quickly introduce a lot of characters and make you care about them instantly. A rare gift.

47> I promise to start soon.

OK, my Kindle needed recharging, so I started The Stand on my tablet. Only a few chapters in, but that's a start.

>47 rosalita: I am there with you too!

I am reading the uncut version.

OK, I've read 250 pages. Who's ready to start discussing?

I'm glad I watched the miniseries because having faces to put with some of the names is helping me keep them all straight and know which ones are important. I don't remember most of the bad guys except for the Dark Man, or any of the military people, but I know we still haven't met all of the good guys.

Start discussing away as you please.

Don't pout, Rosalita. I'm on page 622(uncut edition). Of course I started the end of June way before I ran across this group.

OK, I'm done pouting now that I have playmates. :-)

I am through Chapter 28 (for reference, there are 42 chapters in Book One). As Jeff said in >48 mahsdad: King introduces quite a few characters right away, cutting from one point of view to the other in rapid succession but somehow manages not to lose momentum in the narrative. I have found in other books when the POV shifts from character to character that there tends to be one that is more compelling than the others, and it irritates me when the book shifts away to another character. So far I have not found that to be the case here.

As I mentioned earlier, it's hard not to contrast the superflu here with the current Ebola criss in Africa, and how fortunate are we that Ebola is nowhere near as contagious as King's flu?! I wish I could be shocked at the idea that the government would develop a weaponized strain of flu, but I think it's actually pretty likely. The one thing I might question a bit is whether the spread of the flu could have been kept quiet as long as it was, but then we have to remember there was no Internet in the time period of the book.

One last amusing note: Saturday was our small town (pop. ~2,000) summer celebration, and the place was really hopping until after the fireworks. This morning when I ventured out, the downtown was completely deserted and there were little piles of discarded cups and other debris waiting to be picked up. For a second I felt like Nick wandering around Shoyo. It was a relief to get out on the highway and see signs of life. :-)

I finished Book I this afternoon. (Ran down the battery on my tablet. LOL. )

56> There was no Internet and no smart phones, but also it wasn't that long that it was kept hidden. The original accident happened June 16 and the uprising at the Boston TV station happened June 26 - after 7 days of being held hostage by the army.. I think it would be more scary nowadays because of all the misinformation you'd get on the internet.

You're right about comparing it to Ebola, but I also thought about that TB patient that was arrested in California.

>57 BookLizard: Yeah...and then there was the mid July incident where they found six vials of small pox virus is a government lab that no one knew was there. Yikes. I was just really getting into The Stand when I read that article. Freaky!

>57 BookLizard: You make an excellent point about the spread of misinformation on the Internet these days. In fact, that would probably mean that the truth would take even longer to come out and be believed.

>58 FlamingRabbit: Yes, that hits even closer to the book's premise! I'm glad I hadn't started reading it yet when that news came out.

As a sidenote, On the Media on NPR yesterday had a story about just how incorrect the information released by the media immediately after an incident. Almost all of it is incorrect. So, panic in the streets immediately after the announcement in The Stand? Yes, I think so.

I heard that story, Stephanie — very interesting about the consistent errors in breaking news coverage.

Couple things to note as I'm about half way thru. I'm having major "I wish I hadn't seen the filmed version" regrets. Mainly because even tho this is probably the 10th time I've read the Stand, all I can see in my mind's eye are the actors who played the roles. Stupid memory ;)

Second, I liked King's use of Frannie's diary as a different means of making the days traveling go by quicker, switching things up a bit. IMHO

>62 mahsdad: I'm glad I haven't seen the filmed version, for the reasons you mentioned. I can't speak to your second point because I stopped reading at the end of Book One, since that was August's "assignment". I could easily read the whole thing now but then I'm afraid I won't remember enough to be able to participate in the later discussions so I'm holding off.

Just coming in to say that if you have Netflix instant streaming, I think the miniseries is available there. Also I am not reading The Stand now but it is one of my all time favorites and I've read it at least five times. Interesting to find out which characters people like most at this point in the book. While I will always love Stu, I think Larry is the most interesting character.

62> I'm the exact opposite - glad to have faces so I can keep them all straight.

63> I also stopped after Book One, but I'm afraid that I'll forget Book One by the time I'm reading to start reading again.

>64 sturlington: I'm saving the miniseries until after I finish the book, but I'm glad to hear it's on Netflix. I should put it in my queue so I don't forget.

>65 BookLizard: I know that feeling all too well, I'm afraid. I just hope I remember it until the end of August, when some of our groupies are able to get to it.

>63 rosalita: My bad. I missed the part about it being a 3 month read. The way I'm wired, there's no way I'm going to be able to stop (obviously since I'm in Book 2) at the end of each section. Oh well. I'll keep going and lurk around and throw in my 2 cents where appropriate. I'll keep my spoilery (if that's a word) comments to myself, for now.

:-)

Or just mark them with the spoiler tag, and that way everyone can "reveal" it at their own pace. :-)

I don't think I would have been able to stop if I hadn't returned the book to the library to keep myself from reading further!

Idea. What if on August 15 we continue this thread with the September/Book 2 thread? That way early birds will have somewhere to talk and the rest of us can find the thread at our own pace.

>69 BookLizard: Great idea. I am going to create the threads for Book 2 and Book 3 now and everyone can participate at their own pace.

September Book Two link https://www.librarything.com/topic/179007

October Book Three link https://www.librarything.com/topic/179008

Okay folks I'm chiming in with a few thoughts. I'm halfway through Book 1. I won't comment on the actual plot yet. I've skipped the spoilers for now but will go back through when I'm done and comment some more.

One thing that irks me is some of the pop culture references he makes. King should have updated them more. By 1990 there would have been people who knew who Raquel Welch and Sandra Dee were but they would not have been held up as the current idols. Same thing with the Love Story poster. By 1990 it was out of date. Also, by 1990 lots of white guys were singing like black guys so it wasn't a big deal like was mentioned with Larry's single. Heck, Vanilla Ice was a white rapper with a hit in 1990. The story does not flow as smooth for me with the out of date references.

I just started chapter 23 and am meeting Randall Flagg!

I'm going to have to play catch-up with everyone. Probably won't get to start until the very end of the month/early September...

71> I think I was more forgiving of those lapses. By now, it's all dated. Was the white guy/black guy reference made by a certain character? If so, that would date the character. And taking that part out would have meant rewriting the book, not just updating some of the pop culture references. Also, some of the references were probably purposefully chosen for some sort of connection so updating would have changed the meaning.

My copy finally arrived, so I'll be joining in after all. Hopefully starting my read tonight!

Just got my copy so I will try to start shortly.

>71 luvamystery65: Er, no. You don't go rewriting books just because they contain references for the time in which they were written.

76> King did allegedly update some of the pop culture references for the 1990 re-release. I think the point in post #71 was that if he was going to update some of them, he should have done all of them.

>78 BookLizard: Yep, that's right. From the Stephen King Wiki:

A longer edition of the novel was later released in May of 1990; King restored some text originally cut for brevity, added and revised sections, changed the time frame of the very good story from 1980 to 1990, and updated several pop culture references accordingly to the time.

Given that fact, it seems perfectly reasonable to point out references that jar given that the story's time frame is meant to be 1990 and not 1980.

>73 BookLizard: & >76 .Monkey.: >78 BookLizard: >79 rosalita: That is exactly right. It was jarring because he would also mention Tom Cruise and Madonna who were appropriate icons for the time. It made the other references seem odd.

"Er, no. You don't go rewriting books just because they contain references for the time in which they were written" I think you should if you are updating the time frame they are in. He wrote the original for 1980 but some of the references were dated even by then.

It's only my opinion. When I hit one of those references I stop to think about it and it takes me out of the story. I don't like when that happens.

Personally, I think King made a mistake by updating the time frame when he released the uncut version. He should have left it in 1980 and left the pop culture references as they were. Then there wouldn't be those jarring odd references that seem out of place.

>81 rosalita: I think so too. I wonder if he was pressured by his company to update it so they could sell the book again and it would seem "fresher" I promise I won't keep bringing this up. It just bugged me and I had to vent. Now maybe I can move on.

I absolutely loved that Steve Carella of the 87th precinct spread the virus to New York! I wonder what other literary references like that I may have missed out on due to not being aware.

81> Maybe he made a mistake by including so many pop culture references in the first place? I mean, it was early on in his career, so maybe he didn't know it would become a classic, but still . . . who sets a "futuristic" novel 2 years in the future?

82> Now maybe I can move on. Just remind yourself, it's science fiction. It's not real. It takes place in an alternate universe where Sandra Dee is still hot in 1990. ;-)

>84 BookLizard: According to the Dark Tower series, The Stand does actually take place in an alternate universe!

>85 sturlington: Okay, that's what I was thinking because the cultural references didn't seem so out of place to me. I guess I accepted it because they made sense in that world.

I just finished Book One and am liking it, except it's making me pay attention as soon as anyone sneezes IRL. :) I'm reading the original version and haven't had any issue with any cultural references, but then I was alive (albeit very young) in the 1980s - not sure how I would have felt reading a version that mixed references from different time-periods. It took me a while to catch on to the alternate universe-thing mentioned above, but once the red-eyed guy and the magician guy (can't remember his name now ETA: Randall Flagg) - or are they the same person??? - shows up, it's quite clear we're not in the regular world. I'm enjoying the story, but I think I had enjoyed it more if I hadn't recently read Y: The Last Man and a few other post-apocalyptic books recently. I'll continue Book Two immediately, or I'll lose track of all the characters, for sure. :)

Okay I finished Book One and went back and read the spoilers. Very good points about no internet but also how today with every thing reported, including speculation, it would take a very long time for the truth to get out and people believe it.

I am very interested to see where Larry, Frannie and Stu's story takes them next.

I forgot to add my entry for completion of Book One. So far so good.