Rose Madder inspired questions
Valérie
First off, I am *thoroughly* enjoying Rose Madder. I didn't
think I would like it nearly as much as I am. As soon as I
started reading it, my mood and general attitude changed (for the
better). Did anyone else feel this way?
I have sort of a psychology question for anyone who cares to
answer. The passage that really prompted me to ask this is on
page 193 of the paperback, which reads:
*I'm losing my mind*, she thought calmly, and that wasn't the
voice of Practical-Sensible; that was her own voice, the one
which spoke for the central, integrated core of her thoughts and
her self."
My question is this: Does everyone think similarly to Rosie? I
mean, do you feel like you have a "central, integrated core", and
*also* have other voices like Rosie's "Practical-Sensible voice".
They needn't necessarily be "Practical-Sensible", they could be
like "Frightened Young Child", or "Rebel Voice", or whatever.
My other question is in regards to "ka". I've only seen that
word used in the DT books. Did King make it up, or is it a real
word? I noticed it's use on page 237, "That is our ka."
I just love this book. I'm on page 250 (I stopped in the middle
of a chapter?? I have *no* idea why I did this...), and already
I'm thinking "Hurry up and finish, so I can reread it!" I
usually won't reread a book unless it's been years since I last
read it. :-)
--
Peace...
Valérie
r...@netrail.net
Carol Clements
On Wed, 07 Aug 1996 18:12:32 GMT, r...@netrail.net (Valérie) wrote:
>I have sort of a psychology question for anyone who cares to
>answer. The passage that really prompted me to ask this is on
>page 193 of the paperback, which reads:
>
<snip>
>My question is this: Does everyone think similarly to Rosie? I
>mean, do you feel like you have a "central, integrated core", and
>*also* have other voices like Rosie's "Practical-Sensible voice".
>They needn't necessarily be "Practical-Sensible", they could be
>like "Frightened Young Child", or "Rebel Voice", or whatever.
This rings true for me Valérie. Especially the frightened young child
voice. Definitely a concept I can relate to. And the rebel? Don't
all women have that voice in them at some time or another? I found my
rebel voice when I hit my early 30's and got sick of being
dominated...yes, I related to Rosie quite well, but not for the same
reasons (I'm pleased to add).
>My other question is in regards to "ka". I've only seen that
>word used in the DT books. Did King make it up, or is it a real
>word? I noticed it's use on page 237, "That is our ka."
The only reference to "ka" I've been able to find so far is this one:
A spirit believed by the ancient Egyptians to dwell in a man or
statue.
I wonder if he uses ka in the same way as karma - or fate - in which
case ka could be a shortened version of karma. I haven't read the DT
books for quite some time, so I'm probably making a plonker out of
myself again...I tend to think of karma as being laid out for you,
like a map, and being related to how you conducted yourself in past
lives. What you did in your previous lives you pay for in future
ones...that sort of thing. Buddhist thinking. I know I'm being very
vague here, but I need to swot up on some of this really, it's dim and
distant past stuff for me, but I *think* it could be related in some
way to this....
>I just love this book. I'm on page 250 (I stopped in the middle
>of a chapter?? I have *no* idea why I did this...), and already
>I'm thinking "Hurry up and finish, so I can reread it!" I
>usually won't reread a book unless it's been years since I last
>read it. :-)
>
Yes. I usually leave them a year or so, but you know the first time I
read the Stand, I went right back to page 1 and started again. That's
the *only* book I've ever done that with. Amazing that as an author
King can get us to do things we wouldn't normally do isn't it?
Good to see you back Valérie.
Carol.
Gord Hutchinson
A long time ago, in a newsgroup far, far away, r...@netrail.net
(Valérie) said:
>
>First off, I am *thoroughly* enjoying Rose Madder. I didn't
>think I would like it nearly as much as I am. As soon as I
>started reading it, my mood and general attitude changed (for the
>better). Did anyone else feel this way?
>
I just finished RM a couple of days ago and I too was pleasantly
surprised. After Geralds Game (which I didn't like) I was really
hesitant to read RM, Dolores Claiborne or Misery. Since RM was such a
powerful novel I'm going to have to give the other two a shot as well.
I really liked the way he was able to write from two different points
of view (Rose's and Norman's) and make you feel what each was feeling.
I don't want to say too much more at the risk of accidentally spoiling
anything for you. I will say though (since you've gotten that far)
that I would have prefferred if he had left out the picture 'stuff'
and left it a 'realistic' novel.
>I have sort of a psychology question for anyone who cares to
>answer. The passage that really prompted me to ask this is on
>page 193 of the paperback, which reads:
>
> *I'm losing my mind*, she thought calmly, and that wasn't the
> voice of Practical-Sensible; that was her own voice, the one
> which spoke for the central, integrated core of her thoughts and
> her self."
>
>My question is this: Does everyone think similarly to Rosie? I
>mean, do you feel like you have a "central, integrated core", and
>*also* have other voices like Rosie's "Practical-Sensible voice".
>They needn't necessarily be "Practical-Sensible", they could be
>like "Frightened Young Child", or "Rebel Voice", or whatever.
>
Not me. The number of times authors use this device, I've sometimes
wondered if I was the oddball with only one voice in my head.
>My other question is in regards to "ka". I've only seen that
>word used in the DT books. Did King make it up, or is it a real
>word? I noticed it's use on page 237, "That is our ka."
>
I don't know for sure, but I don't think this is a King invention.
Isn't there a Middle-Eastern religion or language where ka means
'fate'?
>I just love this book. I'm on page 250 (I stopped in the middle
>of a chapter?? I have *no* idea why I did this...), and already
>I'm thinking "Hurry up and finish, so I can reread it!" I
>usually won't reread a book unless it's been years since I last
>read it. :-)
>
Enjoy the rest. We'll talk more after you're done.
Gord
A bad dream is better than a bad waking.
- Stephen King (Rose Madder)
web-server-account
Carol Clements (ca...@clems.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: On Wed, 07 Aug 1996 18:12:32 GMT, r...@netrail.net (Valérie) wrote:
: >My other question is in regards to "ka". I've only seen that
: >word used in the DT books. Did King make it up, or is it a real
: >word? I noticed it's use on page 237, "That is our ka."
: The only reference to "ka" I've been able to find so far is this one:
: A spirit believed by the ancient Egyptians to dwell in a man or
: statue.
The Egyptian "ka" is a person's spirit or soul. While we are
alive, it dwells in our body. After we die, it lives on in
an image of the person, like a statuette or painting.
--
Bev Vincent
Houston, TX
MURIEL H. WARD
Hi Valirie
Valérie (r...@netrail.net) wrote:
: My other question is in regards to "ka". I've only seen that
: word used in the DT books. Did King make it up, or is it a real
: word? I noticed it's use on page 237, "That is our ka."
I looked "ka" up in the dictionary and it says
in ancient Egytian religion, the soul, regarded as
dwelling in a person's body or image (I always thought
"ka" was your fate).
I couldn't find "ka" on page 237, must have a different book, mine is a
Viking publisher.
: --
: Peace...
: Valérie
: r...@netrail.net
--
Muriel
Come on up and see me sometime
when i have nothing else on but
the radio. - Mae West
Kate Nepveu
Valérie (r...@netrail.net) wrote:
: My question is this: Does everyone think similarly to Rosie? I
: mean, do you feel like you have a "central, integrated core", and
: *also* have other voices like Rosie's "Practical-Sensible voice".
: They needn't necessarily be "Practical-Sensible", they could be
: like "Frightened Young Child", or "Rebel Voice", or whatever.
Well, I argue with myself, but I don't personify the different points of
view.
I also really enjoyed this. I think the painting parts didn't integrate
well with the rest of the story (friends have said the same to me), but
that didn't spoil it for me.
Kate
--
We're cut adrift
But still floating
I'm only hanging on
To watch you go down... my love
--U2, "So Cruel"
Valérie
Gord.Hu...@myna.com (Gord Hutchinson) wrote:
-A long time ago, in a newsgroup far, far away, r...@netrail.net
-(Valérie) said:
->
->First off, I am *thoroughly* enjoying Rose Madder. I didn't
->think I would like it nearly as much as I am. As soon as I
->started reading it, my mood and general attitude changed (for the
->better). Did anyone else feel this way?
->
-Hi Valérie...
-I just finished RM a couple of days ago and I too was pleasantly
-surprised. After Geralds Game (which I didn't like) I was really
-hesitant to read RM, Dolores Claiborne or Misery. Since RM was such a
-powerful novel I'm going to have to give the other two a shot as well.
I hated Gerald's Game, but then it hit a sore spot with me, I
guess. I thought DC was a bit better, but not great. I think I
liked Misery...did it have to do with abuse? I mean of course
poor Paul was abused, I guess, but not in the way I normally
think of abuse... I think RM is *MUCH* better than DC (which in
turn is better than GG). I wouldn't even put Misery in the same
category as GG, DC or RM.
-I really liked the way he was able to write from two different points
-of view (Rose's and Norman's) and make you feel what each was feeling.
I don't know... I hate Norman. I mean I don't even want him in
the book. I sort of try to hurry through his parts as fast as I
can. I don't feel what he's feeling..maybe I won't allow it, i
don't know.. I just know I hate Norman with a different hate than
"oh I just love to hate this character".On the other hand, I
*adore* Rose. More than any character he has ever written, I
think. I just love her. I tear up just thinking about it! :-)
-I don't want to say too much more at the risk of accidentally spoiling
-anything for you. I will say though (since you've gotten that far)
-that I would have prefferred if he had left out the picture 'stuff'
-and left it a 'realistic' novel.
Yeah, I'm kind of wondering about it too... I didn't get a chance
to read it at all yesterday, so I'm still only on page 251 (near
the end of chapter 6, of Part VI - The Temple of the Bull). I
don't like what I know so far about Rose Madder. I thought she
would be beautiful, and perhaps Rose's guardian angel or
something. Why is she trying to hurt Rose? I just don't like
it. I like the mysticism of the painting, and I like that it's
changing, but it's supposed to help her, it's supposed to be
*nice* to her, not scare her and try to give her some horrible
disease or whatever those patches are. I don't like that part.
I'll make sure I'm up to Part VIII - Viva Ze Bool, before I log
on again, so you can comment on anything up to that part, if you
want to. :-) I've never actually talked on here about a book I
was reading before... oh, a little bit with The Stand, but I
gotta tell you, I like this book more than The Stand, at least so
far. If Rose dies or something, I assure you I will *hate* this
book, and will probably come on here cussing up a storm. But I
don't think Kind would do that (would he? no, of course not...
;-) )
->My question is this: Does everyone think similarly to Rosie? I
->mean, do you feel like you have a "central, integrated core", and
->*also* have other voices like Rosie's "Practical-Sensible voice".
->They needn't necessarily be "Practical-Sensible", they could be
->like "Frightened Young Child", or "Rebel Voice", or whatever.
->
-Not me. The number of times authors use this device, I've sometimes
-wondered if I was the oddball with only one voice in my head.
Now I want to clarify that I don't think these types of voices
are of the "I'm hearing voices" variety. I did hear a woman
calling my name once when I was a child, but that's an entirely
different story. This is more along the lines of the "argueing
with yourself" type of voice... a voice that perhaps holds to a
certain way of thinking, which may not be the way that you
normally think. I think King describes it better than I ever
could, with his descriptions of "Practical-Sensible"... I forgot
about something when I originally asked the question though... I
don't just have a "Frightened Young Child" type voice, I actually
feel like a FYC under certain circumstances (sort of a fear
response, I guess you could call it).
->I just love this book. I'm on page 250 (I stopped in the middle
->of a chapter?? I have *no* idea why I did this...), and already
->I'm thinking "Hurry up and finish, so I can reread it!" I
->usually won't reread a book unless it's been years since I last
->read it. :-)
->
-Enjoy the rest. We'll talk more after you're done.
I can hardly wait!! :-)
--
Peace...
Valérie
r...@netrail.net
Jan Junod
On Wed, 7 Aug 1996, Carol Clements wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Aug 1996 18:12:32 GMT, r...@netrail.net (Val=E9rie) wrote:
> >My question is this: Does everyone think similarly to Rosie? I
> >mean, do you feel like you have a "central, integrated core", and
> >*also* have other voices like Rosie's "Practical-Sensible voice".
> >They needn't necessarily be "Practical-Sensible", they could be
> >like "Frightened Young Child", or "Rebel Voice", or whatever.
> This rings true for me Val=E9rie. Especially the frightened young child
> voice. Definitely a concept I can relate to. And the rebel? Don't
> all women have that voice in them at some time or another? I found my
> rebel voice when I hit my early 30's and got sick of being
> dominated...yes, I related to Rosie quite well, but not for the same
> reasons (I'm pleased to add).
I could relate to this also because I have two inner voices: The Wimp
and The Bitch. My Bitch voice didn't emerge until my late 30s when I
got tired of being dominated. The Wimp is the scared child who is
afraid of people, but wants them to like her. The Bitch says, "I am
Woman, Hear me Roar". It has taken a while to temper them into a
"central integrated core", and sometimes when Centrally Integrated
speaks up now the The Wimp is still hiding behind her and The Bitch
still has an (inner) attitude!! ;>
I just (two hours ago) finished re-reading Rose Madder, so this is
fresh in my mind. I enjoyed the book even more this time.
Jan Junod ju...@u.washington.edu
***************************************************************************
"We all float down here......."
***************************************************************************=
*
Valérie
ca...@clems.demon.co.uk (Carol Clements) wrote:
-On Wed, 07 Aug 1996 18:12:32 GMT, r...@netrail.net (Valérie) wrote:
->My question is this: Does everyone think similarly to Rosie? I
->mean, do you feel like you have a "central, integrated core", and
->*also* have other voices like Rosie's "Practical-Sensible voice".
->They needn't necessarily be "Practical-Sensible", they could be
->like "Frightened Young Child", or "Rebel Voice", or whatever.
-This rings true for me Valérie. Especially the frightened young child
-voice. Definitely a concept I can relate to. And the rebel? Don't
-all women have that voice in them at some time or another? I found my
-rebel voice when I hit my early 30's and got sick of being
-dominated...yes, I related to Rosie quite well, but not for the same
-reasons (I'm pleased to add).
I actually don't have a Rebel Voice... maybe I just haven't found
it yet :-) . I'm 32, though, so maybe it's about time? I have a
FYC Voice, but it also goes too far sometimes, and sort of takes
over under extreme fear. I have sort of a Bitch Voice, and a
Maternal Voice. The MV also sort of takes over sometimes, but
that's a good thing. :-) That's when I react perfectly to a
situation with Ryan, and I always end up feeling very proud and
give that part permission to take over whenever it wants to ;-) .
Then there's Insecure Voice, I suppose... Oh geez, y'all are
gonna think I'm a total nutcase or something now. The reason I
brought it up in the first place is because someone said that she
thinks I have MPD (Multiple Personality Disorder), which my
ex-therp says I definitely do *not* have, but it freaked me out
nonetheless. I just sort of wanted to touch base with "the
functional people" (I was going to say "normal people", but that
sounds sort of insulting to those of us working on major
issues....) I've actually gotten a lot of insight from you guys
when I ask these kinds of questions, and I appreciate the
opportunity to grow here, as well as in recovery areas. But if I
get too psychological here or something, you can just tell me to
take it somewhere else, ok? :-)
->My other question is in regards to "ka". I've only seen that
->word used in the DT books. Did King make it up, or is it a real
->word? I noticed it's use on page 237, "That is our ka."
-The only reference to "ka" I've been able to find so far is this one:
-A spirit believed by the ancient Egyptians to dwell in a man or
-statue.
I don't think that's King's definition at all. I'm really liking
his use of ka, and ka-tet. :-)
-I wonder if he uses ka in the same way as karma - or fate - in which
-case ka could be a shortened version of karma. I haven't read the DT
-books for quite some time, so I'm probably making a plonker out of
-myself again...I tend to think of karma as being laid out for you,
-like a map, and being related to how you conducted yourself in past
-lives. What you did in your previous lives you pay for in future
-ones...that sort of thing. Buddhist thinking. I know I'm being very
-vague here, but I need to swot up on some of this really, it's dim and
-distant past stuff for me, but I *think* it could be related in some
-way to this....
I think it's sort of yes, and sort of no. I don't think, in
King's world, that you can change the ka of your next life, if
you even *have* a next life.. Does he refer to multiple lives,
other than with Flagg? I think your ka is just sort of your role
in the grand scheme of things. Like it's part of my ka that I
married who I did, and had my son when I did, and he became who
he is (does that make sense?). I think the three of us are a
ka-tet, of sorts. A few people I've come across in my life have
been "different", and "important", imo.... like members of a
larger ka-tet, maybe. Can a ka-tet change?
->I just love this book. I'm on page 250 (I stopped in the middle
->of a chapter?? I have *no* idea why I did this...), and already
->I'm thinking "Hurry up and finish, so I can reread it!" I
->usually won't reread a book unless it's been years since I last
->read it. :-)
->
-Yes. I usually leave them a year or so, but you know the first time I
-read the Stand, I went right back to page 1 and started again. That's
-the *only* book I've ever done that with. Amazing that as an author
-King can get us to do things we wouldn't normally do isn't it?
-Good to see you back Valérie.
Thank you. :-)
--
Peace...
Valérie
r...@netrail.net
Valérie
mh_...@alcor.concordia.ca ( MURIEL H. WARD ) wrote:
-I looked "ka" up in the dictionary and it says
- in ancient Egytian religion, the soul, regarded as
- dwelling in a person's body or image (I always thought
- "ka" was your fate).
I think it does have more of a "fate" meaning, although I'm
actually viewing it in it's own light, rather than "It means
fate". I like that, too. It means "ka"...he gives so many
different examples, that I'm really starting to grok it, baby can
you dig it? ;-)
-I couldn't find "ka" on page 237, must have a different book, mine is a
-Viking publisher.
Very interesting! (To me, anyway... probably bores the bejeebers
out of the rest of y'all... ;-) ) The phrase is used in Part
VI: The Temple of the Bull, on the last page of chapter 4, the
third paragraph from the end.
I did say mine is paperback, right? I didn't know there are
multiple publishers of the paperback. Here is the information on
my copy:
Paperback; Signet Fiction - AE (which means?) 8636 (which is?)
$7.50 U.S. ; 479 pages
Beautiful cover, in my opinion... It has a cows head (I guess
that's what it is) with a ring in its nose and flowers on its
head. There's a lot of the "rose madder" colour, in the title,
used as shading, etc... (Am I going to find out why there's a
cow's head on the cover? And why it has flowers on it's head?
Ohmygosh! The picture changed! It *used* to just be a head, and
now there's a body attached to it!! ;-) I swear I never noticed
this, though... oooohhh I'm scared now! ;-) ) I just *adore* this
colour, btw. Let's see...what else..
Signet - Published by the Penguin Group
Previously appeared in a Viking edition (should I get one of
those?)
First Signet Printing, June, 1996
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
I think I'm going to want a hardcover edition of this book... How
much are first editions going for, and what information will I
need to make sure I get a First Edition? There's a drawing at
the beginning...is it in colour in the hardback? What's the
cover on the hardback look like?
And one last thing... who is Joan Marks, does anyone know? It's
who King dedicated the book to.
--
Peace...
Valérie
r...@netrail.net
Carol Clements
On Thu, 08 Aug 1996 20:55:50 GMT, r...@netrail.net (Valérie) wrote:
>I actually don't have a Rebel Voice... maybe I just haven't found
>it yet :-) . I'm 32, though, so maybe it's about time? I have a
>FYC Voice, but it also goes too far sometimes, and sort of takes
>over under extreme fear. I have sort of a Bitch Voice, and a
>Maternal Voice. The MV also sort of takes over sometimes, but
>that's a good thing. :-) That's when I react perfectly to a
>situation with Ryan, and I always end up feeling very proud and
>give that part permission to take over whenever it wants to ;-) .
>Then there's Insecure Voice, I suppose... Oh geez, y'all are
>gonna think I'm a total nutcase or something now.
No, I don't think you're a nutcase. These voices, I consider them to
be quite normal - maybe *I'm* a nutcase. But I just think of them as
different parts of the character conversing, and coming to decisions.
The Bitch Voice I can relate to as well. I don't get that voice so
much these days, I'm more serene than I used to be, but I think we
need these voices in order to survive certain situations. As you
said, the FYC voice taking over under extreme fear - nothing nutty
about that. Your MV being the stronger one makes sense too. The
integrated whole is the main thing. Listening to one over another at
certain times is necessary, but when life is on an even keel so to
speak, then all the voices speak as one, so you would only hear one
voice - yourself.
The reason I
>brought it up in the first place is because someone said that she
>thinks I have MPD (Multiple Personality Disorder), which my
>ex-therp says I definitely do *not* have, but it freaked me out
>nonetheless. I just sort of wanted to touch base with "the
>functional people" (I was going to say "normal people", but that
>sounds sort of insulting to those of us working on major
>issues....) I've actually gotten a lot of insight from you guys
>when I ask these kinds of questions, and I appreciate the
>opportunity to grow here, as well as in recovery areas. But if I
>get too psychological here or something, you can just tell me to
>take it somewhere else, ok? :-)
Val, for what it's worth, and I'm no expert, I don't think you have
multiple personality disorder either. Having suffered from depression
also, I may be the wrong person to tell you this, but I think what you
are describing is your way of coping with stressful situations, and
there's nothing odd about it. I think that's why King employs this
device so often. Maybe women do it more than men, but King can get
inside a woman's head better than any other author I've come across
yet, and he uses the voices a *lot*. Jessie and Rosie - they made
perfect sense to me when I read about them, I felt right at home with
those women - which is why I got into those books so well. I won't
tell you to take this somewhere else, maybe others will, but I'd
consider them to be a little uncharitable if they did...it's
King-related, and if it helps *you* then it's a good thing.
>I think it's sort of yes, and sort of no. I don't think, in
>King's world, that you can change the ka of your next life, if
>you even *have* a next life.. Does he refer to multiple lives,
>other than with Flagg? I think your ka is just sort of your role
>in the grand scheme of things. Like it's part of my ka that I
>married who I did, and had my son when I did, and he became who
>he is (does that make sense?). I think the three of us are a
>ka-tet, of sorts. A few people I've come across in my life have
>been "different", and "important", imo.... like members of a
>larger ka-tet, maybe. Can a ka-tet change?
I suppose we often think that we've changed our fate or ka, when in
fact we've probably done what we were supposed to do anyway. I think
you made a good point there.
Carol.
Chad Klausing
Val=E9rie (r...@netrail.net) wrote:
> =
> My question is this: Does everyone think similarly to Rosie? I
> mean, do you feel like you have a "central, integrated core", and
> *also* have other voices like Rosie's "Practical-Sensible voice".
> They needn't necessarily be "Practical-Sensible", they could be
> like "Frightened Young Child", or "Rebel Voice", or whatever.
I think that to some degree, everybody works along these internal
lines. I would go about describing it in that each person has
their "greater whole" which is comprised of all the little =
ideologies and beliefs that contribute to one's self. When =
contemplating any decision, there is the quick response a person
comes up with, sort of a decision based on this "greater whole"
that is at the ready. However, once this quick response is
present, each of the person's separate qualities goes to work =
trying to bend this response to more encompass that aspect of
the person. That is why people tend to have those "inner
struggles" that make some decisions so tough. In some cases,
the "quick response" is such that each of those smaller qualities
match up in how to deal with the situation, so the "quick response"
is also the person's end thought on the matter. In others, the
"quick response" is being pulled in numerous directions by the
different personal components, and thus arrises one of those
tough decisions that weigh heavy on the mind for quite some time.
This is just the way that I view things, but since the little
man in my thumb agrees with me, I think I'm at least on the
right path......
-- =
-Chad Klausing
MURIEL H. WARD
Hi Valirie
This is the third time I have started this to you. Twice last night, each
time something happened and I couldn't post. Once I run out of time and
once It just wouldn't post.
Valérie (r...@netrail.net) wrote:
: mh_...@alcor.concordia.ca ( MURIEL H. WARD ) wrote:
: -I looked "ka" up in the dictionary and it says
: - in ancient Egytian religion, the soul, regarded as
: - dwelling in a person's body or image (I always thought
: - "ka" was your fate).
: I think it does have more of a "fate" meaning, although I'm
: actually viewing it in it's own light, rather than "It means
: fate". I like that, too. It means "ka"...he gives so many
: different examples, that I'm really starting to grok it, baby can
: you dig it? ;-)
: -I couldn't find "ka" on page 237, must have a different book, mine is a
: -Viking publisher.
Well I did find it on page 202. In my hard cover, Rose Madder says, "That
is our ka" (ka is in italics). In other words "our fate."
: Very interesting! (To me, anyway... probably bores the bejeebers
: out of the rest of y'all... ;-) ) The phrase is used in Part
: VI: The Temple of the Bull, on the last page of chapter 4, the
: third paragraph from the end.
: I did say mine is paperback, right? I didn't know there are
: multiple publishers of the paperback. Here is the information on
: my copy:
That is what I thought of later, "she must have a paperback or something."
: Paperback; Signet Fiction - AE (which means?) 8636 (which is?)
: $7.50 U.S. ; 479 pages
(snipped some)
: colour, btw. Let's see...what else..
: Signet - Published by the Penguin Group
: Previously appeared in a Viking edition (should I get one of
: those?)
: First Signet Printing, June, 1996
: 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
My book has:
First published in 1995 by Viking Penguin, a division of Penguin Books
USA Inc.
1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2
The hard cover is a beautiful book. The covers are black on mine and has
red printing on the spine and a red rose with a curved stem and leaves all
red on the front cover. the dust jacket is red and brown colors, it shows
a portrait in the process of being unwrapped, you can see one corner of it
but not what the drawing is. The rough twine is still the wrap. On the
back of the dust jacket is a small photo of Stephen King, the print is in
red and white. I buy most of mine from the Book of the Month Club. I
picked that Club because they sold SK books, the previous one didn't and
they still write to me to buy their books, and that is six years now.
: And one last thing... who is Joan Marks, does anyone know? It's
: who King dedicated the book to.
Just some lucky person he dedicated the book to, I guess.
: --
: Peace...
: Valérie
: r...@netrail.net
--
Muriel
Come on up and see me sometime
when I have nothing else on but
the radio. -Mae West
Antti Matikka
w...@pcjfn.msc.com (web-server-account) wrote:
>The Egyptian "ka" is a person's spirit or soul. While we are
>alive, it dwells in our body. After we die, it lives on in
>an image of the person, like a statuette or painting.
That's a very good explanation, I bow before you...
But...
If there's any Japanese among us, I s'pose there's even better.
Andy
Valérie
w...@pcjfn.msc.com (web-server-account) wrote:
-Carol Clements (ca...@clems.demon.co.uk) wrote:
-: On Wed, 07 Aug 1996 18:12:32 GMT, r...@netrail.net (Valérie) wrote:
-: >My other question is in regards to "ka". I've only seen that
-: >word used in the DT books. Did King make it up, or is it a real
-: >word? I noticed it's use on page 237, "That is our ka."
-: The only reference to "ka" I've been able to find so far is this one:
-: A spirit believed by the ancient Egyptians to dwell in a man or
-: statue.
-The Egyptian "ka" is a person's spirit or soul. While we are
-alive, it dwells in our body. After we die, it lives on in
-an image of the person, like a statuette or painting.
OH!! Ok, that's cool!! (Now that I'm done with RM, I may just
reread it right away!)
--
Peace...
Valérie
r...@netrail.net
Andrej Kluge
Hello Valérie,
r> I *adore* Rose. More than any character he has ever written, I
r> think. I just love her.
At the very point you are currently at I loved her, too. I hope you're
done with the book by now so I won't spoil anything... okay, to go with
the crowd here comes Spoiler Space anyway:
|
/
-
\
|
/
-
\
|
/
-
\
|
/
-
\
|
/
-
\
|
/
-
\
|
I didn't feel quite the same when, at the end, she actually thought of
killing Bill with her kitchen knife (IIRC) for no other reason than her
bad temper at that time which I understand had to do with Rose Madder/the
Vixen/the Tree.
I didn't understand however what caused that change of her that made her
so vicious, even towards Bill whom she allegedly loved. And a person who
is--though subliminally--thinking of murder is very suspect in my eyes. I
couldn't trust her ever again. Good thing Bill never noticed.
Bye
Andrej
Scribbler
Andrej Kluge wrote:
>
>
> r> I *adore* Rose. More than any character he has ever written, I
> r> think. I just love her.
> Whatever the argument, I think it should be pointed out that King proves
writers of one gender can fairly successfully write about the other. How
many battered women must he have read about/interviewed? I was
impressed.
Scribbler
(who writes most of the time in the voice of the opposite gender)
Carol Clements
On Tue, 20 Aug 1996 20:35:49 GMT, r...@netrail.net (Valérie) wrote:
>Does anyone else find some of King's books to be therapeutic? I think it's
>a sign of his genius that the books can be so many things, to so many
>people. That's why he will always be my favorite fiction writer. :-)
>
>--
Hi Valérie
Very much so. Therapeutic I mean. Gerald's Game. Gerald *was* my
ex-husband. Right down to the night-sweats, the snoring, and the
little dick. Not to mention the pretentious crap about cars and status
and promotion and all that shit. When Jessie planted her feet in his
balls and his stomach I did it with her! God did it feel good! If he
ever gets net access and reads this I'll be over the moon! What King
describes in the opening chapters of Gerald's Game, and what goes on
in Jessie's mind - well Jessie is *me*. Scary how accurate he can be.
Yes, I think that's why Gerald's Game got inside me so well and just
stayed there. Plus the fact that I found it one of the scariest books
I've ever read.
TTFN
Carol.
Valérie
Wi...@tmb.in-berlin.de (Andrej Kluge) wrote:
-Hello Valérie,
-r> I *adore* Rose. More than any character he has ever written, I
-r> think. I just love her.
-At the very point you are currently at I loved her, too. I hope you're
-done with the book by now so I won't spoil anything... okay, to go with
-the crowd here comes Spoiler Space anyway:
-|
-/
--
-\
-|
-/
--
-\
-|
-/
--
-\
-|
-/
--
-\
-|
-/
--
-\
-|
-/
--
-\
-|
-I didn't feel quite the same when, at the end, she actually thought of
-killing Bill with her kitchen knife (IIRC) for no other reason than her
-bad temper at that time which I understand had to do with Rose Madder/the
-Vixen/the Tree.
-I didn't understand however what caused that change of her that made her
-so vicious, even towards Bill whom she allegedly loved. And a person who
-is--though subliminally--thinking of murder is very suspect in my eyes. I
-couldn't trust her ever again. Good thing Bill never noticed.
You mean we're allowed to discuss Stephen King here? Oh Goody!!! ;-) ;-)
I understand what you're saying. I had a negative feel towards the end of
the book, and hubby didn't like the ending at all (I'll do his views in a
minute). I talked with Stevie a bit, and he gave me some great insights
into Rose and how things turned out. I think that everyone has a possible
rage inside of them. I'm not sure why Rosie didn't demonstrate any of it
before, other than for fear of her life (but I would think it still might
show up in her thoughts), but I suppose what King was saying at the end was
that we all have the rage, and that you need to acknowledge it, and not try
to forget about it (or forget how it got there, maybe?) in order to control
it. I'm still a bit shaky on that, though... I guess since she planted
the tree, she was putting her rage somewhere else, and she would visit it
yearly to make sure she didn't forget about it. I don't like that Bill
never went with her to their spot anymore, though... I thought that was
sad. It seemed like their relationship suffered a lot from the experience,
and that's not fair. One could reply that "life isn't fair", but I think
that's a cop out. I could just say "life isn't fair" and give up trying to
make my life and my marriage happy, but that doesn't seem right. (My
marriage is pretty happy, though, so that's not a problem. :-) ) I don't
understand what the fox was for, though. Any ideas on that?
Ron's (hubby) view is that since the picture might be a psychological
thing, that that means that Norman is part of Rosie now. He doesn't like
that at all, and I don't either, which is why I'm sticking to the view that
it's her own rage. But that scene in the recording studio was pretty
disturbing... I think Rosie should have seen a therapist! ;-)
I haven't heard much on this (but maybe I missed it when it first came out
or something...), but would like to hear other people's interpretation of
the ending....
Oh, and the other thing Ron commented on was that the beginning was so
incredibly strong and well written and realistic, and the ending scene with
Norman was just not even close to that good. I say that's because truth
can often be scarier than fiction. Rosie's thought processes and the whole
abuse thing was really right on the mark. One of the passages that sticks
with me is when she says she starts to fall asleep, and then a vision of a
fist will fly at her like a comet. That is *very* true! I was so
surprised to read that! I get scary faces flying at me, as well as visions
of other "abuse related body parts" that aren't fists. It's incredibly
disturbing, and can make peaceful sleep difficult. The fact that King
tapped into that particular fear was disturbing, but I found it made the
story very real, and is probably why I fell in love with Rosie like I did.
I could really identify. (Someone emailed me that they thought I was in a
domestic abuse situation because of what I've said, so I want to make it
clear that that isn't the case. All of my abuse is childhood related, and
Ron and I are very safe, and very happy. :-) :-) ) I also had a
miscarriage, so the pain of Rosie's trauma about that was another clincher
for my loving her. :-)
Does anyone else find some of King's books to be therapeutic? I think it's
a sign of his genius that the books can be so many things, to so many
people. That's why he will always be my favorite fiction writer. :-)
--
Peace...
Valérie
r...@netrail.net
Valérie
ca...@clems.demon.co.uk (Carol Clements) wrote:
-On Tue, 20 Aug 1996 20:35:49 GMT, r...@netrail.net (Valérie) wrote:
->Does anyone else find some of King's books to be therapeutic? I think it's
->a sign of his genius that the books can be so many things, to so many
->people. That's why he will always be my favorite fiction writer. :-)
->
->--
-Hi Valérie
-Very much so. Therapeutic I mean. Gerald's Game. Gerald *was* my
-ex-husband.
Oh gawd I'm so sorry!! Yuck!
-Right down to the night-sweats, the snoring, and the
-little dick.
ROFL! Now look what you did! Are you going to come clean off the iced tea
I spit out on my keyboard?? Some people have no regard to the consequences
of their words... ;-) ;-) ;-)
-Not to mention the pretentious crap about cars and status
-and promotion and all that shit. When Jessie planted her feet in his
-balls and his stomach I did it with her! God did it feel good! If he
-ever gets net access and reads this I'll be over the moon! What King
-describes in the opening chapters of Gerald's Game, and what goes on
-in Jessie's mind - well Jessie is *me*. Scary how accurate he can be.
-Yes, I think that's why Gerald's Game got inside me so well and just
-stayed there. Plus the fact that I found it one of the scariest books
-I've ever read.
You really liked it? Hmmmm....
Valérie....who is considering rereading GG, but only if I can e-hold all of
your hands while I do it... ;-)
--
Peace...
Valérie
r...@netrail.net
Shawn Hill
Valérie (r...@netrail.net) wrote:
: Does anyone else find some of King's books to be therapeutic? I think it's
: a sign of his genius that the books can be so many things, to so many
: people. That's why he will always be my favorite fiction writer. :-)
I think they're therapeutic for King himself. I feel like he gets to
explore his own dark side in his stories, and that's why so many of his
characters (as aspects of himself), though the ostensible heroes, like
Rose, entertain evil thoughts or temptations.
Here's a weird idea that struck me when I read the book (which is the
first King book I've even been slightly interested in since the Talisman,
btw):
When Norman masquerades as the war veteran, covered in lefty buttons,
wheeling into the women's festival as a visually disabled and disempowered
(and therefore tolerable) male, he is infiltrating the enclave of his
enemies. Though they at first are oblivious dupes, he is plotting against
them as he makes nice to them. He is completely duplicitous and corrupt,
but did anyone get a weird sense of the whole thing being a metaphor for
what King himself is doing lately as a novelist?
IE, against charges of conservatism and chauvinism (evident, at least to
some people, in the Shining, in Cujo, in Christine, etc.), he's moved
closer and closer to developing a viable heroine who's more than just
wife/mother/girlfriend, finally culminating in Rose, who on the surface
seems to be a completely believable, reasonably complex woman.
But, tellingly, he first had to go through the psychotic nightmare of
woman that was Misery. And now, how convenient that the heroine's husband
is such a complete and utter bastard. How convenient that she fits every
stereotype of the abused woman. And that her journey towards freedom
involves a dispensation of power from a Goddess figure who is amoral,
above evil or good, and consequently deadly and frightening to the
formerly meek Rose, not to mention her enemies. The horror of the Mother
still rears it's head, and Rose herself is kind of scary and separate even
after her maturation and defeat of Norman.
In a cynical way, I saw Norman at the fair as a more accurate, even a
confessional, King self-portrait than Rose will ever be. Which makes the
humiliating (though justified) abuse he suffers when he's found out by
Rose's friends doubly intriguing.
Shawn
*****************************************************
"Look it up in the Book Mobile,
look it up in the gun rack."
**GuidedByVoices
******************sh...@fas.harvard.edu**************
Carol Clements
On Thu, 22 Aug 1996 21:09:37 GMT, r...@netrail.net (Valérie) wrote:
>Oh gawd I'm so sorry!! Yuck!
That's okay, I divorced him!! <G>
>-Right down to the night-sweats, the snoring, and the
>-little dick.
>
>ROFL! Now look what you did! Are you going to come clean off the iced tea
>I spit out on my keyboard?? Some people have no regard to the consequences
>of their words... ;-) ;-) ;-)
Oh, sorry about that Valérie, well I don't mind cleaning it for ya,
but I can't vouch for its effectiveness afterwards.... : )
>You really liked it? Hmmmm....
It's my pet book. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's my favourite.
The Stand probably always will be, and I have a few others which
jockey for position, but it's right up there with the best of 'em in
my little league table. I *love* this book! This probably sounds
crazy and nutso and maybe I'm going to come off sounding like one of
Mr King's worst nightmares as a fan and all that, but I find myself
thinking there are too many coincidences which relate to my former
life in that book. I find myself thinking he got into my brain and
dug around and picked up the bits he needed (which is why there's very
little left!). As an exercise in psychology and wrestling with
personal demons, it did a great job on me!!
>Valérie....who is considering rereading GG, but only if I can e-hold all of
>your hands while I do it... ;-)
>
I'll be there for you every step of the way if that's what you want.
Just holler!!
Carol.
Kate Nepveu
Shawn Hill (sh...@husc7.harvard.edu) wrote:
[snip long, well stated theory of King working through (or not) sexism
in books, culminating in ambigious portrayal of Rosie]
I am philosophically opposed to biographical criticism, so I can't
fairly address your theory on those grounds. However, you do bring up
an interesting topic, about the character of Rose Madder.
First, it's pretty clear that if RM is a Mother figure, then she's a
twisted one. I prefer to see RM as the suppressed creation of
Norman's abuse (ironic, I know.) Symbolically, all her rage and disease
are reactions to the years of torture. And the rages of Rosie at the
end are sort of bubblings over of this. I'm not saying I don't believe
RM was physically real, but it's pretty clear the function she served in
the book. To somewhat get back to the point, I don't think that the
RM/Rosie portrayal is sexist. Rose Madder was insane, but her
counterpart maintained her control and rose past her hatred. To me
that's power and strength.
Kate
--
It's a thin line between pleasing yourself
And pleasing somebody else
--Indigo Girls, "Thin Line"
Valérie
kne...@lynx.dac.neu.edu (Kate Nepveu) wrote:
-Shawn Hill (sh...@husc7.harvard.edu) wrote:
-[snip long, well stated theory of King working through (or not) sexism
-in books, culminating in ambigious portrayal of Rosie]
-I am philosophically opposed to biographical criticism, so I can't
-fairly address your theory on those grounds. However, you do bring up
-an interesting topic, about the character of Rose Madder.
-First, it's pretty clear that if RM is a Mother figure, then she's a
-twisted one. I prefer to see RM as the suppressed creation of
-Norman's abuse (ironic, I know.) Symbolically, all her rage and disease
-are reactions to the years of torture. And the rages of Rosie at the
-end are sort of bubblings over of this. I'm not saying I don't believe
-RM was physically real, but it's pretty clear the function she served in
-the book. To somewhat get back to the point, I don't think that the
-RM/Rosie portrayal is sexist. Rose Madder was insane, but her
-counterpart maintained her control and rose past her hatred. To me
-that's power and strength.
Oh!! Very nice!!! Thanks!
Not too talkative today, sorry.. I'm sick and foggy headed. ;-) (So what's
new? hehe)
--
Peace...
Valérie
r...@netrail.net
Andrej Kluge
Hello Valérie,
r> You mean we're allowed to discuss Stephen King here? Oh Goody!!!
r> ;-) ;-)
Only if you don't smoke too much ;-)
r> I suppose what King was saying at the end was that
r> we all have the rage, and that you need to acknowledge it, and not
r> try to forget about it (or forget how it got there, maybe?) in
r> order to control it.
Hmm, interesting thought, does anyone second that? Perhaps I'm too less of
a psychatrist, but it is not THAT obvious to me. (perhaps I'm just plain
dumb ;)
r> I'm still a bit shaky on that, though...
Oh, you are too? Then I'm relieved ... ;)
r> I guess since she planted the tree, she was putting her rage
r> somewhere else, and she would visit it yearly to make sure she
r> didn't forget about it.
Hmm, she buries her anger there? What if some innocent child happens to
find the tree and eats from its fruits? Wouldn't that me mean? Would she
risk that?
r> I don't understand what the fox was for, though. Any ideas on that?
As far as I understood the vixens stood for Rose Madder, kind of. Is that
right? Since someone pointed out that Rose Madder was just a mirror image
of Rosie herself that would mean the fox stood for herself, too. A bit
blurry, that matter, though.
r> Ron's (hubby) view is that since the picture might be a psychological
r> thing, that that means that Norman is part of Rosie now.
Another matter I find difficult to conceive.
r> But that scene in the recording studio was pretty disturbing...
Yeah, that and the scene with the kitchen knife (the argument over ...what
was it? What house to buy?)
r> The fact that King tapped into that particular fear was
r> disturbing, but I found it made the story very real
Sometimes I wonder how he (King) can place himself in the situation of all
those different people he writes of. And describe them so real, so
credible. That leaves the question, has he been abused himself? Has he
been fat ("Thinner"), or neglected, or assaulted by a dog? Heck, has he
even been a woman, having so many of them as protagonists? ;-)
r> probably why I fell in love with Rosie like I did.
I almost did, too, but then I thought it'd be unfair to snatch her from
Bill, he deserved her better ... ;-)
r> Does anyone else find some of King's books to be therapeutic?
Well, I've never been at a therapeut or psychatrist, so I don't know what
they usually do to you, but I know that his books are certainly moving.
Shalom
Bye
Andrej
Valérie
Wi...@tmb.in-berlin.de (Andrej Kluge) wrote:
-r> I guess since she planted the tree, she was putting her rage
-r> somewhere else, and she would visit it yearly to make sure she
-r> didn't forget about it.
-Hmm, she buries her anger there? What if some innocent child happens to
-find the tree and eats from its fruits? Wouldn't that me mean? Would she
-risk that?
That's right.. I'd forgotten about the fruit... I had misgivings about that
part when I read it.
-r> But that scene in the recording studio was pretty disturbing...
-Yeah, that and the scene with the kitchen knife (the argument over ...what
-was it? What house to buy?)
Wellllll... actually, I've had pretty horrible thoughts too. Maybe it's a
woman thing. hehe Sometimes Ron just gets on my nerves and I'll think of
something really horrible to do..sometimes I even say it "I just want to
smash your face into the cement!" or some such nonsense...sigh... But he
knows I never would, and that I am very non-violent. Maybe it's a PMS
thing.. hehe
-r> The fact that King tapped into that particular fear was
-r> disturbing, but I found it made the story very real
-Sometimes I wonder how he (King) can place himself in the situation of all
-those different people he writes of. And describe them so real, so
-credible. That leaves the question, has he been abused himself? Has he
-been fat ("Thinner"), or neglected, or assaulted by a dog? Heck, has he
-even been a woman, having so many of them as protagonists? ;-)
Maybe he reads the newsgroups.. hehe
Hope to see you back on irc pretty soon... :-)
--
Peace...
Valérie
r...@netrail.net
Andrej Kluge
Hello Valérie,
[Threatening one's husband with kitchen knife ;)]
r> Wellllll... actually, I've had pretty horrible thoughts too.
r> Maybe it's a woman thing.
Oh oh. (I just decided to never get married ;)
r> sometimes I even say it "I just want to smash your face into
r> the cement!" or some such nonsense...sigh... But he knows I never
r> would, and that I am very non-violent.
Do you indeed say things like that? Don't get me wrong--I'd never dare
criticize you in any or other way, but the intenseness of that curse
sounds pretty, um.. appalling to me. Perhaps it sounds not as bad if it it
your mother language? Or perhaps you Americans are a bit more casual with
your words? ;-) But since you said for yourself you're non-violent I'll
trust you :)
r> Maybe it's a PMS thing..hehe
PMS--(don' know that abbr) has that something to to with the periods? I
guess so, huh? Well, I cannot comment on that, of course. (I just know
that my girlfriend gets a bit moody when she's having her's).
r> Maybe he reads the newsgroups.. hehe
You mean he could learn a lot of women's problems in here? ;)
r> Hope to see you back on irc pretty soon... :-)
Hope so, too, but it'll take a while I'm afraid.
Bye..er, Peace... :)
Andrej