I read it in the 80s. He did not exactly get away with this shit. It was as disturbing and just as disgusting as it is today. I was like "WTH", since it was a bestseller, everyone was like "Why this, Stephen?". Also, it makes no sense, is out of character, out of the story and completely useless for the plot. What was that shit? It would have been my favorite book of him, he writes childhood so good - well - or not. That chapter ruined this book. I don't think he ever talked about his reasons, or the fall-out this scene had, but he still kinda defends it. I hope this still costs him.
Also - cocaine is a hell of a drug, but still... and why did his publishers let that go through?
I read it in the 80s too, but I honestly don’t remember any outcry about it; I do remember being weirded out by the ending but not as weirded out as I would be if I’d read it for the first time now.
Of course, I’m in Australia and this was pre-internet, so I wasn’t reading any literary think pieces at that time.
Where the Redfern Grows was such a betrayal and I was WRECKED as a child by it. Literally just picked it up because it has two cute puppies on the cover!!!
We had to read it as a class in third grade and for some reason my teacher thought it'd be a good idea to followup with the movie (which might've had a different ending or she cut it off before it got that far), it was about as fun as you'd expect.
I have such vivid memories of finishing that book, alone in the den downstairs on the grey chairs my parents used to have. I WAS DESTROYED. I still can't think of the book, some 30 years later, without my eyes welling up. NOT COOL.
What made the trauma of Red Fern Grows *worse* is that it started for me this parade of books where the main protagonist's pet died. I wasn't looking to be sad over the deaths of fictional animals but for some reason, it seemed to be an unavoidable aspect in all the books in my classroom that I happened to pick up. =_=
It really sucked because I couldn't have a pet IRL so I really emotionally invested in these pets in the books I was reading.
I haven't read the book and had never heard of the part in the post and I never needed to and am SO UPSET OP WHY WOULD DID YOU INCLUDE THAT I FEEL SICK
it's the other way around for me, i did think Bale was perfect for the role but i liked the book more because when that rat scene came it just made it feel so... not real. so it was "easier" to handle in a way.
I love the book so much but the details of abuse are so bad, it's hard for me to read without wanting to throw up. The movie is a masterpiece. Bale perfectly captured Patrick Bateman or the absence of.
Comments 228
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
It would have been my favorite book of him, he writes childhood so good - well - or not. That chapter ruined this book. I don't think he ever talked about his reasons, or the fall-out this scene had, but he still kinda defends it. I hope this still costs him.
Also - cocaine is a hell of a drug, but still... and why did his publishers let that go through?
Reply
Of course, I’m in Australia and this was pre-internet, so I wasn’t reading any literary think pieces at that time.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
It really sucked because I couldn't have a pet IRL so I really emotionally invested in these pets in the books I was reading.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
idk if that made sense AT ALL lmao
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment