The Dead Zone

Random thoughts about this book:
• It’s very dated, but in a way that’s amusing and a little thought-provoking. The inner thoughts of a man on hold, at a time when the telephone “hold” function was new and before the now-ubiquitous hold music or recorded messages, when being put on hold was like a little death: “The line was darkly, smoothly, blank. You were nowhere. Why didn’t they just say, ‘Will you hold on while I bury you alive for a little while?’”
• As per King’s usual, the romantic relationship with the main character is awkward and unconvincing, as was their weird little sexual interlude.
• But his portrayal of religious fanaticism *is* convincing, especially in this book, where he treats it with some show more sympathy rather than just as a motivation for evil deeds and rude behavior. He is savage with those who exploit the believers’ needs for relief of pain and grief, all for a price, of course.
• Oh, and Greg Stillson. Chilling description of a power-hungry sociopath who wears the mask of respectability and presents himself as a hard-hatted, patriotically flag-draped champion of the working class, promising jobs and security, while employing thugs as “security” and “campaign managers” to pave the way forward through nefarious means. King seems to have been prescient. For who would have seriously thought that a populist buffoon like that could actually rise to national power in a democratic America?

Overall, it’s not the great book that I remember reading as a young teen, but it’s entertaining and it still has some very relevant things to say about the danger of allowing our pain and fear and need cloud our judgement so much that we make ourselves vulnerable to those who would use us to enrich or empower themselves.

Audiobook, via Audible. James Franco’s performance grew on me a little, but not all talented actors make great audiobook narrators. Few characters had a distinct voice, and his New England Yankee characters had oddly Southern accents. show less

I remember being especially excited about this novel when it was originally published, because it was my first hardcover King novel, purchased through my mother's Book of the Month Club membership.

It was also the first King book I read in a single day.

Better than three decades later, I found that everything I loved back then, I loved more now. The Johnny's run at the wheel, the capture of the killer, the bittersweet reunion with his lost love, and his ultimate fate.

But I also found there was a lot that I forgot. His interaction with the doctors and the press. The entire section where he tutors a boy who can't read well. The fire. And so, I enjoyed that stuff even more.

This is such a tragic novel, and John Smith is such a tragic, yet show more engaging character. The most normal guy, given a gift he doesn't want. He just wants to be a normal, nice guy.

Probably still in my top ten, but not quite top five favourite King novels. I wish he did more like this one. show less

Stephen King is an author I like, but a wildly uneven one – some of his books are awful, while some of his books are among the best I’ve ever read. He’s not really high on my priority list, but I’m not averse to reading his stuff when it comes up, and I picked up an old paperback of The Dead Zone for 50p at a library sale.

One of his earlier books (always a good sign with King), The Dead Zone is enlivened by how much it doesn’t stick to a predictable formula, and it’s really one of those books you want to read knowing nothing about it. Although apparently it was adapted into a Cronenberg film starring Christopher Walken in the 1980s, and a relatively long-running TV series in the 2000s, so maybe it’s more well-known than I show more thought. I’d only heard of it (and knew the ultimate direction it went in) because I’ve been keeping up with James Smythe’s long-running Re-reading Stephen King series at the Guardian, but I think I would have liked it better if I went in blind, knowing nothing about what happened – not even the first act. So if you haven’t heard of The Dead Zone and you’ve enjoyed anything else King has ever written, stop reading this now and keep an eye out for it. It’s one of his better books and well worth your time.

If you still want to know more, suffice to say that it follows the life of Johnny Smith, a young man with a latent psychic sense and an ability to predict what lies in the past, present and future of certain people. A life-altering accident heightens this ability like never before, and Johnny must suddenly decide what to do with it – and how to cope with the way people now treat him. Some of the best parts of The Dead Zone are in the unexpected flashes Johnny gets of other people’s lives when he touches their belongings; as he pushes coats aside on a rack at a restaurant and knows that a man there is slowly going mad, or when he handles a 100-year-old photograph and learns that its subject, a man long dead, poisoned his wife. Johnny’s psychic ability is a curse as much as a gift, but King does a good job of making Johnny an affable character and never letting his misgivings and misery seem too self-pitying.

Stephen King is noted as a horror novelist, but I’ve never personally found that to be a good description of his work, which ranges across the whole gamut of speculative fiction: he has time travel novels, apocalyptic novels, fantasy novels and more. The Dead Zone feels more like a suspense thriller than anything, combining the fantasy aspect of Johnny’s sixth sense with a story of serial killers, FBI agents and something much darker. It’s a little slow to get going, but it ends up being a great read – not as good as something like The Stand, The Mist or The Long Walk, but definitely one of King’s better novels. show less

Não vou mentir, esse é meu primeiro Stephen King e estou bem impressionada. Daí você me pergunta do porquê levei 42 anos da minha vida até lê-lo e respondo: preconceito. Tenho o péssimo preconceito de achar que literatura best seller só pode ser ruim, se todo mundo ama deve ser muito do mastigadinho. Erro meu, não posso falar dos outros livros do autor porque só li esse e é uma obra-prima da literatura política.
Por que escolhi esse para ser apresentado ao King? Porque gosto do filme do Cronenberg e porque em 2015 tive meu próprio momento John Smith quando meu inconsciente leu o zeitgeist e sonhei que eu estava planejando matar o Bolsonaro. Rá!
King trata com maestria as implicações de ver um holocausto fascista com show more antecedência, o horror do livro não está na paranormalidade e sim nas consequências que trará ao mundo ao ser conivente com o fascismo. Absolutamente brilhante. show less

I've noticed a lot of particular trends with the few King books I've read so far, and this one is no different. He has a knack for crafting inventive, complex, and interesting stories, can create incredibly tense and genuinely thrilling sequences, and develops impressively in-depth characters, but he also excels at writing horribly corny dialogue that kills any mood he's going for, creates utterly cartoonish villains that are very difficult to take seriously, and has the prose style of an old man trying way too hard to sound "cool and hip". So my enjoyment of his work seems to depend very much in which of these sides manages to outweigh the other. This one manages to edge out more on the positive side...but it gets dangerously close to show more the opposite.

A great story with mostly compelling characters that deals with a lot more complex and difficult philosophical inquiries than expected, but the rougher parts throughout this one are almost too much to handle. He mostly seems able to wrangle himself back in the right direction before getting too lost in the trash, though. A decent enough read in the end, and if you do like King and haven't read this one yet then you should definitely check this one out as you'd probably love it.

5.75/10 show less

Most people when they think of Stephen King think of evil clowns, killer cars, rabid dogs and manic fans with axes. This one is subtler and less action-packed. Those with the need for blatant explanations and lots of stagey scenes should avoid. The Dead Zone follows a similar theme evident in King’s early works – the power of the mind. Carrie, The Shining and later Firestarter all deal with ESP and telekinesis as does The Dead Zone. That is not the all-consuming point though as it is in the earlier works. The larger theme of The Dead Zone is one’s purpose in life, the random chance of fate and the loss that results.

Johnny Smith does not rail and shake his fist when fate selects him for a path he would never have chosen and feels show more he doesn’t deserve. No pity parties ensue. No sleepless nights with a bottle trying to find answers to the eternal question of ‘why me?’. Very telling on the character of John Smith. He’s a good man. Most people would use the power of foresight for themselves; finding more carnival wheels to bankrupt, playing the stock market or even just scamming the masses out of their hard-earned and foolishly-spent money. Instead, he turns his power to a deed that, with his gift of prophecy, would best serve the greater good.

Of course it is doomed, as is most everything else Johnny turns his hand to during the novel. His life grinds to a halt after the car crash. Miraculously returned to the living, he finds that life has passed him by and his promising relationship with Sarah is nonexistent. Soon his teaching career is in pieces and even his classroom of one ends badly. With his mother (mercifully) dead and his father involved with a new woman, there seems no place for John. Nice guys do finish last I suppose.

King’s ability to make me feel the poignancy of John’s losses is a bit heavy-handed, but adept. The scenes with Sarah after Johnny wakes are the best examples of this. When John’s anger manifests and focuses itself on the tabloid reporter, I cheered for him. His anxiety and true concern when his warnings were doubted and the subsequent fear and distrust when they were proven out are palpable and sad. And the resurgence of self-esteem when Chuck has his breakthrough; that was well executed, too. Overall a terrific characterization and one of King’s best.

So, with nothing else to lose, John pursues the corrupt and sociopathic Stillson. Strangely this is what stuck with me most from my initial readings even though it takes the least amount of time in the novel. With Stillson’s regular visitation of towns in his district, he is remarkably easy to track down. Some cunning goes into John’s recon of the venue and he successfully hides himself from Stillson’s advance team. The final act, however, goes awry and of course, John goes down. Unbeknownst to him, there is a silver lining – a single photo gets out intact. Who would re-elect a politician, who, when threatened, holds a child up as a shield? Success. But at a staggeringly huge price. And one that John seems glad to pay. show less

At its heart, The Dead Zone isn't a horror novel at all. It's a love story, a bitter-sweet tale of a love that might have been. Johnny's relationship with Sarah runs through the middle of the story, the glue that holds Johnny together when everything else seems bleak and hopeless.

I think everybody knows the plot - Johnny wakes from a long coma with the ability to see the future - and what he sees is bleak - unless a single man can be taken out of the equation early. The moral implications, the 'would you go back and kill Hitler if you could' argument drives the story along.

Several themes that would recur in later King novels turn up here - the roads not traveled, a good man trying to do the right thing against seemingly impossible odds, show more and the corruption of the soul that comes with power. But it is Johnny, the broken man, that gets our whole attention. He's a fully realised individual, one of King's great strengths, and we feel his pain and confusion, firstly after the accident, and then, with increasing hopelessness and horror as his 'gift' demands its price.

I first read this on its initial publication, more than 35 years ago now, and I wasn't sure about going back to it. I was worried that my feelings for it might have been colored by repeat viewings of the Cronenberg movie, and also by the somewhat lacklustre TV series from a few years back. I needn't have worried. As ever, King pulled me in, and I got through it in two sittings with just a coffee break in the middle.

I believe I enjoy it more now than I did then - back in '79 I was only a lad of 21 and I didn't really identify with Johnny's lost years, lost love or fear for the future. An older, more cynical me saw much more of myself in Johnny than I did then, and I do believe it's risen up the ranks in my list of favorite King novels to somewhere near the top five.

Stilton is a great, slimy, villain in counterpoint to Johnny's inate goodness, Sarah is as sweet as I remembered her, Johnny's sacrifices tugged at the heartstrings, and the grace note at the end at the graveside did something it hadn't managed before - this old cynical fart had a wee tear in his eye as he put the book down.

Five out of five stars, and I definitely won't wait another 35 years before reading it again.

(This review originally appeared in the KING FOR A YEAR review project hosted by Mark West ( http://kingreviews2015.blogspot.ca/ ) show less