Cycle of the Werewolf
by Stephen King
On This Page
Description
Terror began in January, by the light of the full moon. The first scream came from the snowbound railwayman who felt the werewolf's fangs ripping at his throat. The next month there was a scream of agony from the woman attacked in her cozy bedroom. Now scenes of unbelievable horror unfold each time the full moon shines on the isolated Maine town of Tarker's Mills. Only one thing is sure-- when the full moon rises, a paralyzing fear sweeps through Tarker's Mills. For snarls that sound like show more human words can be heard whining through the wind. And all around are the footprints of a monster whose hunger cannot be sated. show lessTags
Recommendations
Member Recommendations
Member Reviews
This was a favorite when I was around 11, and I just revisited it with my 10-year-old son. I still liked it, though perhaps not quite as much. The story was good, imagery was great and dialogue was generally believable and sometimes quite amusing. I'm not sure I get what Stephen King was doing with his tenses during this book, though. Past tense, present tense, past tense, present tense. Make up your mind! :P Other than that though, great. Still love the illustrations (though they're not quite as shocking as they were to 11-year-old me.)
My son gave it seven stars out of five and told me to stop being a grammar cop. So there's that.
My son gave it seven stars out of five and told me to stop being a grammar cop. So there's that.
Whelp, I did it. I read my first Stephen King book in full and it only took me 25+ years to do so. Why so long? Well, I've been a massive horror fan since diaper days, and Stephen King was always one of the giants that I just could never really get into, despite being recommended to me often. I watched more of his movies than read his books (Creepshow being one of my favorites). I tried Salem's Lot (since I'm a massive vampire fan) once but I was in my early teen years and didn't give it a fighting chance and couldn't appreciate a slow burner. That always stuck with me, so I figured I'd at least give his shortest book ever written a shot to see how well his writing held up with me now that I'm much older and a more mature reader. I know show more I was recommended Cycle of the Werewolf at least once when I was in HS, but I never picked it up since I was reading Bram Stoker's Dracula instead. I semi-forgot about it over the years, and since I'm not a fan of King's writing, I felt it was about time I gave him another go.
I digress, so here's a review longer than necessary and all you ever need to know for such a short book.
The Pros
* It's a Straight forward, simple, cut and dry easy to understand monster story. It's a quick and short read that any horror lover or monster fan can squeeze under their belt in no time.Many people who have read Stephen King's books agree he tends to overwrite and tries to overdo his horror scenes- for this one, it had just enough there to keep you invested and not see it as excessive.
* Very fast paced and the gritty action starts as soon as you flip the first page.
* I really like how the chapters are set up in this book- each one is a month of a full year, each one detailing an event that leads up to the big finish. According to my research, this book was originally supposed to be a calendar but ended up becoming a novella because Stephen King felt a calendar wasn't the best fit afterall.
* One of the things I liked the most about this book aside from it being a clear cut monster story, is that putting your faith into religion and prayers can often times be foolish- as there are times where even your own God will not help you. There's not really a good or evil- just survival and that reality is often scarier than make believe.
* Excellent art that would make spectacular mini prints on their own. I've read plenty of people who agree this book was more powerful to them simply because of the artwork featured in the story.
The cons
* I felt to bring this up only because these kinds of things truly bother me and I've heard other horror community members wishing this was addressed more, so I'll be the first to talk about it. There's a racial slur used in one page and this is the only instance it happens in the book-very close to the end. I was taken by surprise when I saw it, as it came out of the blue and was very unexpected. I'm not defending him nor condoning that behavior as I felt to bring it up, but the book is no stranger to other uncomfortable themes, such as physical abuse and more. The word was a quick flash and was not a plot device- used only to illustrate the many varieties of dirtbags that are present in the book, and amongst the wife beaters, drunks, and braggart cops- there's one faceless background racist. You could completely omit the one word and it change literally nothing about the story. I wouldn't be surprised if he used it simply because it's a horror novel and he wanted to use it for shock value to remind folks that the people in this fictional town aren't very likeable. (Apparently, King has been known to use racial slurs in his books plenty. Since this was the first book of his I read in full, I had no idea.) I'm not a sensitive reader at all, but as I said before, I had my own reasons for stating that- so readers beware!
* The Writing is a bit rough and all over the place- we get some setting skips where one paragraph happens in Place A while paragraph 2 is in place B and paragraph C is in another area, and it's all happening at once with no true distinction other than the reliance of the reader's comprehension. Not only that, but I wasn't too big a fan of the prose and style of writing as this is one reason why I'm not a big Stephen King fan, so Salem's Lot memories came flashing back to me here. It somehow felt overwritten and underwritten at the same time? I also noticed the werewolf's eyes kept jumping from yellow to green to something in between without ever having one true color but that was a minor thing that didn't affect the story at all.
* The story is more than a little predictable, but this is the weakest con of them all. The twists and outcome of the story is still good.
The Neutral
* The main protagonist is an unlikely hero, a handicapped 10 year old. I think it's fine to have a brave/mature disabled lead, and I sure do love a character that can handle themselves well and be strong, but it felt a little unrealistic at times given all what the main protagonist does- mainly for the age he is. No spoilers, however this was written during a time where younger characters were written to have more adult-like mindsets rather than match their own age. I put this under neutral only because I don't like talking about realism when it concerns a fictional story about a spooky monster (and plus I like plenty of things where the protagonists are children that do things beyond their age). It's just something to think about that doesn't really impact the story one way or another. I think the tone of the book matched the time it was written fairly well (80s).
* I would say this story is for mature readers- it isn't very graphic nor is it actually truly scary, but with some questionable language present plus the artwork I can see how it might rattle some sensitive readers. Then again, you don't find many children or pre-teens reading Stephen King novels anyway. (I'd say the age bracket is normally 16)
All in all, this book appears to be a 50/50 in the horror community and I can see why. If you can set the cons aside, this book I would say is a decent read and famous for a reason. I've read better books for sure, but I'm glad I read at least one King book entirely now. Read it fully and see what you think. show less
I digress, so here's a review longer than necessary and all you ever need to know for such a short book.
The Pros
* It's a Straight forward, simple, cut and dry easy to understand monster story. It's a quick and short read that any horror lover or monster fan can squeeze under their belt in no time.Many people who have read Stephen King's books agree he tends to overwrite and tries to overdo his horror scenes- for this one, it had just enough there to keep you invested and not see it as excessive.
* Very fast paced and the gritty action starts as soon as you flip the first page.
* I really like how the chapters are set up in this book- each one is a month of a full year, each one detailing an event that leads up to the big finish. According to my research, this book was originally supposed to be a calendar but ended up becoming a novella because Stephen King felt a calendar wasn't the best fit afterall.
* One of the things I liked the most about this book aside from it being a clear cut monster story, is that putting your faith into religion and prayers can often times be foolish- as there are times where even your own God will not help you. There's not really a good or evil- just survival and that reality is often scarier than make believe.
* Excellent art that would make spectacular mini prints on their own. I've read plenty of people who agree this book was more powerful to them simply because of the artwork featured in the story.
The cons
* I felt to bring this up only because these kinds of things truly bother me and I've heard other horror community members wishing this was addressed more, so I'll be the first to talk about it. There's a racial slur used in one page and this is the only instance it happens in the book-very close to the end. I was taken by surprise when I saw it, as it came out of the blue and was very unexpected. I'm not defending him nor condoning that behavior as I felt to bring it up, but the book is no stranger to other uncomfortable themes, such as physical abuse and more. The word was a quick flash and was not a plot device- used only to illustrate the many varieties of dirtbags that are present in the book, and amongst the wife beaters, drunks, and braggart cops- there's one faceless background racist. You could completely omit the one word and it change literally nothing about the story. I wouldn't be surprised if he used it simply because it's a horror novel and he wanted to use it for shock value to remind folks that the people in this fictional town aren't very likeable. (Apparently, King has been known to use racial slurs in his books plenty. Since this was the first book of his I read in full, I had no idea.) I'm not a sensitive reader at all, but as I said before, I had my own reasons for stating that- so readers beware!
* The Writing is a bit rough and all over the place- we get some setting skips where one paragraph happens in Place A while paragraph 2 is in place B and paragraph C is in another area, and it's all happening at once with no true distinction other than the reliance of the reader's comprehension. Not only that, but I wasn't too big a fan of the prose and style of writing as this is one reason why I'm not a big Stephen King fan, so Salem's Lot memories came flashing back to me here. It somehow felt overwritten and underwritten at the same time? I also noticed the werewolf's eyes kept jumping from yellow to green to something in between without ever having one true color but that was a minor thing that didn't affect the story at all.
* The story is more than a little predictable, but this is the weakest con of them all. The twists and outcome of the story is still good.
The Neutral
* The main protagonist is an unlikely hero, a handicapped 10 year old. I think it's fine to have a brave/mature disabled lead, and I sure do love a character that can handle themselves well and be strong, but it felt a little unrealistic at times given all what the main protagonist does- mainly for the age he is. No spoilers, however this was written during a time where younger characters were written to have more adult-like mindsets rather than match their own age. I put this under neutral only because I don't like talking about realism when it concerns a fictional story about a spooky monster (and plus I like plenty of things where the protagonists are children that do things beyond their age). It's just something to think about that doesn't really impact the story one way or another. I think the tone of the book matched the time it was written fairly well (80s).
* I would say this story is for mature readers- it isn't very graphic nor is it actually truly scary, but with some questionable language present plus the artwork I can see how it might rattle some sensitive readers. Then again, you don't find many children or pre-teens reading Stephen King novels anyway. (I'd say the age bracket is normally 16)
All in all, this book appears to be a 50/50 in the horror community and I can see why. If you can set the cons aside, this book I would say is a decent read and famous for a reason. I've read better books for sure, but I'm glad I read at least one King book entirely now. Read it fully and see what you think. show less
This one is actually more of a two-star read. The ONLY reason it pulls a four from me is because of Berni Wrightson's as usual gorgeous artwork.
But the story has so many fatal flaws that it's just not a good read. The hero of the piece--aside from a single mention earlier on--doesn't show up until the seventh of the twelve chapters. The man who is the werewolf is the only other character who is brought onstage and doesn't get killed, so it becomes ridiculously obvious in the early chapters who the werewolf is.
And in between, we're fed a hastily-sketched character who is simply there to get in the path of the titular werewolf, and to die in grisly fashion. King's version of a red shirt.
While there's the odd little King flourish here and show more there, for the most part, he was really slumming here. This is a paint-by-numbers horror tale that was, uncharacteristically for King, mostly about the gore.
I would have loved to have seen what he would have done with this given some more time and more pages. This could have been a new classic werewolf story just as his [b:'Salem's Lot|5413|'Salem's Lot (The Illustrated Edition)|Stephen King|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1320478491s/5413.jpg|40802405] is a modern classic vampire story.
One of King's first major misses, as far as I'm concerned. show less
But the story has so many fatal flaws that it's just not a good read. The hero of the piece--aside from a single mention earlier on--doesn't show up until the seventh of the twelve chapters. The man who is the werewolf is the only other character who is brought onstage and doesn't get killed, so it becomes ridiculously obvious in the early chapters who the werewolf is.
And in between, we're fed a hastily-sketched character who is simply there to get in the path of the titular werewolf, and to die in grisly fashion. King's version of a red shirt.
While there's the odd little King flourish here and show more there, for the most part, he was really slumming here. This is a paint-by-numbers horror tale that was, uncharacteristically for King, mostly about the gore.
I would have loved to have seen what he would have done with this given some more time and more pages. This could have been a new classic werewolf story just as his [b:'Salem's Lot|5413|'Salem's Lot (The Illustrated Edition)|Stephen King|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1320478491s/5413.jpg|40802405] is a modern classic vampire story.
One of King's first major misses, as far as I'm concerned. show less
If you're like me, and you collect the best and worst first sentences of books then rejoice! We have one more for the collection!
To be fair, it's not just the first sentence that's hilariously bad, but the whole first paragraph. Yay for firsts Stephen!
This book also features "pudgy", aka fat & gross people, stereotypes, and a protagonist in a wheelchair whose legs are CONSTANTLY described as "unused", "useless", "crippled", "like sticks", "withered thighs", "wasted", "useless scarecrow legs, so much dead weight", etc. That isn't enough for you? Worry not! Stephen has a whole page dedicated to how his handicapped protagonist manages to... get out of bed! Tadaa! You thought he'd just write "he went to the veranda"? Oh my sweet summer show more child, of course not. He is a "cripple" don't you forget. So let's get some inspiration porn and explain every movement the boy makes to get out of bed. Let's also cut this gripping scene to have a flashback and reminisce about that time he tried to get up in a different way and fell down. Ah, lovely writing.
Of course, if this isn’t your cup of tea, Stephen has more stereotypes and bad writing for you. How about the lonely fat, oh sorry I meant PUDGY woman, who has a VIRGINAL bed and sends herself Valentine’s postcards from famous actors, every year? No, not that either? How about we throw in some domestic violence and violence against women, you know, to spice things up, be a bit realistic, and not be considered a children’s book just because the writing is bad?
Well, if this doesn’t please you either then we’ll have the 10 year old protagonist talk like a 20 year old, successfully aim and shoot the monster, be the hero and be done with it. At least the 10 year old boys will be pleased you virginal, pudgy spinsters. show less
To be fair, it's not just the first sentence that's hilariously bad, but the whole first paragraph. Yay for firsts Stephen!
This book also features "pudgy", aka fat & gross people, stereotypes, and a protagonist in a wheelchair whose legs are CONSTANTLY described as "unused", "useless", "crippled", "like sticks", "withered thighs", "wasted", "useless scarecrow legs, so much dead weight", etc. That isn't enough for you? Worry not! Stephen has a whole page dedicated to how his handicapped protagonist manages to... get out of bed! Tadaa! You thought he'd just write "he went to the veranda"? Oh my sweet summer show more child, of course not. He is a "cripple" don't you forget. So let's get some inspiration porn and explain every movement the boy makes to get out of bed. Let's also cut this gripping scene to have a flashback and reminisce about that time he tried to get up in a different way and fell down. Ah, lovely writing.
Of course, if this isn’t your cup of tea, Stephen has more stereotypes and bad writing for you. How about the lonely fat, oh sorry I meant PUDGY woman, who has a VIRGINAL bed and sends herself Valentine’s postcards from famous actors, every year? No, not that either? How about we throw in some domestic violence and violence against women, you know, to spice things up, be a bit realistic, and not be considered a children’s book just because the writing is bad?
Well, if this doesn’t please you either then we’ll have the 10 year old protagonist talk like a 20 year old, successfully aim and shoot the monster, be the hero and be done with it. At least the 10 year old boys will be pleased you virginal, pudgy spinsters. show less
Let's get a few things out of the way: First, this is a classic. Second, there's only one version of this book that counts, and that's Plume's 1983 trade paperback. Thirdly, the film adaptation, "Silver Bullet" (written for the screen by Stephen King), is a deeper overall experience: better character development, cooler kills, the inclusion of that most-epic motorcycle/wheelchair every 80's kid wanted whether they were handicapped or not, and mo' frakkin' Corey Haim partnering up with crazy-as-balls Gary Busey. Pure epicosity.
Even though the film is an overall better experience, it does not detract from my enjoyment of the novella. To quote King: "Movie and books are like apples and oranges. They both taste delicious in their own show more ways." I will admit, though, my love for this book has a great deal to do with Bernie Wrightson's artwork. Of course, we wouldn't have Wrightson's fantastic drawings without King's story, and the two go together like sex and heroin.
I was three when the original Plume paperback came out, but I remember finding this on my mother's bookshelves some years later (perhaps around the age of five or six). I mistook it for a comic, and decided to flip through to find all the artwork. The most graphic of these pictures for me at the time was the slaughtered pigs. Forget the cop who has his face torn off, or the decapitated body atop the cab of the Peterbilt, the one who's being feasted upon by the titular hulking beast. The pigs' dismembered corpses upset me to the point that I started crying. Needless to say, Mom put the book up a little higher on the shelving after that.
I reread it at least twice a year, and it remains one of my favorite King stories.
In summation: Cycle of the Werewolf is a great place to start if you're new to King. If you're an old fan of his, you've probably already read this and agree with everything I've said in this review. Highly recommended for fans of graphic novels, werewolves, and bloody good times. show less
Even though the film is an overall better experience, it does not detract from my enjoyment of the novella. To quote King: "Movie and books are like apples and oranges. They both taste delicious in their own show more ways." I will admit, though, my love for this book has a great deal to do with Bernie Wrightson's artwork. Of course, we wouldn't have Wrightson's fantastic drawings without King's story, and the two go together like sex and heroin.
I was three when the original Plume paperback came out, but I remember finding this on my mother's bookshelves some years later (perhaps around the age of five or six). I mistook it for a comic, and decided to flip through to find all the artwork. The most graphic of these pictures for me at the time was the slaughtered pigs. Forget the cop who has his face torn off, or the decapitated body atop the cab of the Peterbilt, the one who's being feasted upon by the titular hulking beast. The pigs' dismembered corpses upset me to the point that I started crying. Needless to say, Mom put the book up a little higher on the shelving after that.
I reread it at least twice a year, and it remains one of my favorite King stories.
In summation: Cycle of the Werewolf is a great place to start if you're new to King. If you're an old fan of his, you've probably already read this and agree with everything I've said in this review. Highly recommended for fans of graphic novels, werewolves, and bloody good times. show less
One of King's slighter efforts, but it distills a lot of his recurrent themes in quite a tasty, takeaway-meal fashion: the intrusion of the horrific into recognisable (stereotyped?) small-town America; an omnipotent narrator laying bare the unhappinesses and cruelties of people you'd otherwise have walked past on the street; and a big ol' dog.
Here is yet another book in Uncle Steve's cannon that holds up to a re-read. There is an element of [Needful Things] in the writing, as King structures the narrative by focusing on a different one of the townsfolk for each brief chapter. The conceit helps the suspense to build, as each person knows or experiences something different of the blood-thirsty werewolf as the story unfolds. This is obviously low-hanging fruit for me - lycanthropy and Stephen King, but it is quite a good bite-size tale to enjoy on a dark and stormy night. And the illustrations by Bernie Wrightson are wonderful in this edition. I also am fond of the cheesy 1980s film version, but I came into my own in those halcyon days.
Highly Recommended!!!!!
5 bones!!!!!
Highly Recommended!!!!!
5 bones!!!!!
Members
- Recently Added By
Lists
Read the book and saw the movie
1,170 works; 195 members
Scary Stories for the Season
160 works; 94 members
Best Horror Books
281 works; 85 members
Mythical Monsters of the World
199 works; 79 members
Top 5 Books by Stephen King
27 works; 18 members
Short and Sweet
246 works; 24 members
Favorite Werewolf Novels
62 works; 30 members
Stephen King Bibliography
77 works; 3 members
Small Town Fiction
66 works; 13 members
Animals in the Title
498 works; 11 members
Differently Abled Horror
64 works; 4 members
Books Set in Small Towns and Villages
278 works; 16 members
Books Read in 2016
4,666 works; 197 members
Books Read in 2022
5,166 works; 112 members
Strange Towns
49 works; 7 members
100 Hemskaste
81 works; 1 member
Sinister AudioTales
65 works; 1 member
Eerie eTales
192 works; 3 members
Best Vampire & Werewolf Fiction
221 works; 146 members
Books With Monster Words in the Title
7 works; 3 members
KING of Scare
48 works; 2 members
Creatures of Various Kinds
15 works; 3 members
Books Read in 2011
684 works; 20 members
Stephen King books
81 works; 1 member
New England Books
101 works; 10 members
Talk Discussions
Past Discussions
December's SK Flavor(s) of the Month - Creepshow and Cycle of the Werewolf in King's Dear Constant Readers (April 2020)
Author Information
Stephen King was born in Portland, Maine, on September 21, 1947. After graduating with a Bachelor's degree in English from the University of Maine at Orono in 1970, he became a teacher. His spare time was spent writing short stories and novels. King's first novel would never have been published if not for his wife. She removed the first few show more chapters from the garbage after King had thrown them away in frustration. Three months later, he received a $2,500 advance from Doubleday Publishing for the book that went on to sell a modest 13,000 hardcover copies. That book, Carrie, was about a girl with telekinetic powers who is tormented by bullies at school. She uses her power, in turn, to torment and eventually destroy her mean-spirited classmates. When United Artists released the film version in 1976, it was a critical and commercial success. The paperback version of the book, released after the movie, went on to sell more than two-and-a-half million copies. Many of King's other horror novels have been adapted into movies, including The Shining, Firestarter, Pet Semetary, Cujo, Misery, The Stand, and The Tommyknockers. Under the pseudonym Richard Bachman, King has written the books The Running Man, The Regulators, Thinner, The Long Walk, Roadwork, Rage, and It. He is number 2 on the Hollywood Reporter's '25 Most Powerful Authors' 2016 list. King is one of the world's most successful writers, with more than 100 million copies of his works in print. Many of his books have been translated into foreign languages, and he writes new books at a rate of about one per year. In 2003, he received the National Book Foundation Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters. In 2012 his title, The Wind Through the Keyhole made The New York Times Best Seller List. King's title's Mr. Mercedes and Revival made The New York Times Best Seller List in 2014. He won the Edgar Allan Poe Award in 2015 for Best Novel with Mr. Mercedes. King's title Finders Keepers made the New York Times bestseller list in 2015. Sleeping Beauties is his latest 2017 New York Times bestseller. (Bowker Author Biography) Stephen King is the author of more than thirty books, all of them worldwide bestsellers. Among his most recent are "Hearts in Atlantis", "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon", "Bag of Bones", & "The Green Mile". "On Writing" is his first book of nonfiction since "Danse Macabre", published in 1981. He served as a judge for Prize Stories: The Best of 1999, The O. Henry Awards. He lives in Bangor, Maine with his wife, novelist Tabitha King. King's book, The Bazaar of Bad Dreams: Stories, made the 2015 New York Times bestseller list. (Publisher Provided) show less
All Editions
Series
Belongs to Publisher Series
Work Relationships
Has the adaptation
Common Knowledge
- Canonical title
- Cycle of the Werewolf
- Original title
- Cycle of the Werewolf
- Alternate titles
- Silver Bullet
- Original publication date
- 1983
- People/Characters
- Marty Coslaw (10 years old, uses a wheelchair, loves fireworks); Arnie Westrum (flagman on the GS&WM Railroad); Stella Randolph (runs the Tarker's Mills Set & Sew and dreams of love); Lander Neary (the constable, husband of Joan, is a disrespectful braggart); Brady Kincaid; Reverend Lester Lowe (show all 32); Clyde Corliss; Alfie Knopfler (runs the Chat 'n Chew, the town's only cafe, has previous military experience); Uncle Al (younger brother of Mrs. Coslaw, uncle to Kate and Marty Coslaw, takes Marty seriously ); Elmer Zinneman; Pete Zinneman (Elmer's brother); Milt Sturmfuller (librarian and also a wife beater and adulterer); Donna Lee Sturmfuller; Ollie Parker (the grammar school principal); the werewolf; Grandma Hague (bakes the best pies in town!); Chris Wrightson (Tarker's Mills' biggest drunk); Billy Robertson (owner and bartender of the town's only saloon); Elise Fournier (the barmaid); Herman Coslaw; Kate Coslaw; Grandfather Coslaw; Mrs. Coslaw; Stan Pelky (the barber); Kenny Franklin; Pucky O'Neil; Alice Zinneman (wife of Zeke); Cal Blodwin; Rita Tennison; Willie Harrington; Mrs. Parker; Mac McCutcheon (Uncle Al's friend)
- Important places
- Tarker's Mills, Maine, USA (Fictional); Stowe, Vermont, USA; Portland, Maine, USA; Tarker Brook, Tarker's Mills, Maine, USA (Fictional)
- Related movies
- Silver Bullet (1985 | IMDb)
- Epigraph
- In the stinking darkness under the barn, he raised his shaggy head. His yellow, stupid eyes gleamed. "I hunger," he whispered. -- Henry Ellender, The Wolf
"Thirty days hath September, April, June, and November, all the rest but the Second have thirty-one, Rain and snow and jolly sun, and the moon grows fat in every one." -- Child's rime - Dedication
- In memory of Davis Grubb, and all the voices of Glory.
- First words
- Somewhere, high above, the moon shines down, fat and full--but here, in Tarker's Mills, a January blizzard has choked the sky with snow.
- Last words
- (Click to show. Warning: May contain spoilers.)Outside, the wind howls and screams against the snow-filled sky, and in Tarker's Mills, the first minute of the new year becomes history.
- Original language
- English
- Canonical DDC/MDS
- 813.54
- Canonical LCC
- PS3561.I483
Classifications
- Genres
- Horror, Fiction and Literature, General Fiction, Graphic Novels & Comics
- DDC/MDS
- 813.54 — Literature & rhetoric American literature in English American fiction in English 1900-1999 1945-1999
- LCC
- PS3561 .I483 — Language and Literature American literature American literature Individual authors 1961-
- BISAC
Statistics
- Members
- 3,710
- Popularity
- 4,334
- Reviews
- 90
- Rating
- (3.42)
- Languages
- 13 — Czech, Danish, English, Finnish, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Spanish, Swedish
- Media
- Paper, Ebook
- ISBNs
- 49
- UPCs
- 1
- ASINs
- 21