I was re-reading the opening scene from Stephen King's Carrie for academic curiousity. It struck me that King was deliberately trying to portray Carrie as pathetic, not pitiful. The omniscient narrator repeatedly refers to her physique, complexion, and wits in highly uncomplimentary terms: frog bovine ox ape For you, is Carrie pitiful or Pathetic?
It's been a long time since I read it. In fact, I'm not sure if I ever did or I just remember the movie. But I do know that King himself never liked her character. It was an ongoing problem for him as he wrote it. He talks about it in his book On Writing. I have a hard time remembering which means what, especially since the root word pathos means 'evoking empathy'. But yeah, pathetic means you feel disgust for them, and pity means you feel sorry for them. I'd say she was intended to be pathetic (which ironically means to not evoke a sense of pathos... ). I do remember that I read it now. But it's been so long I couldn't say.
Pathetic. I never liked the book Carrie everyone was a jerk, everything made to look like rubbish. I had the same reaction over Judy Blume's Blubber. I know there are some losers that are more groanworthy than pitying but what's the point in making them your instrument in storytelling? I suppose in King's case because it allows him the guilt-free carnage at the end. If Carrie has some moral common sense and an ounce of unloserly gumption she might've had a more complex reaction. In Blubber's case Blume allows the character she most identifies with to 'experience' bullying and 'see the light' but the moral of the story is less don't bully but rather - don't be a loser. Which I kinda agree with but sheesh ... the mc in Blubber, Jill, is as insufferable as Blubber but every detail is tipped in her favor. Both loser characters are never given an ounce of dignity.
I never read the book, but obviously know the movie, and honestly can't answer, but your poll got me to think what the power ballad 'Carrie' by the rock group 'Europe' was about. Seems no connection, but now everytime I hear it I'm gonna be reminded of the movie.
I probably haven't read Carrie since the early 80s but I remember her as being pretty pathetic. She was never intended to be a hero to be rooted for. She got crapped on and she crapped back.
I don't think he's that good anymore. I used to really enjoy his stuff in his early days. I stopped caring once he got too big for his britches and his publishers started getting afraid of offending him. It's the same thing that happened with J.K. Rowling and the Harry Potter books. They kept growing out of control with elements that had nothing at all to do with the story and they couldn't get an editor to tell her to knock it off. I think the last books of King's I ever tried to read were the early Gunslinger novels and it took me 2-3 tries to get through the first one and I couldn't manage it with the second. I'd never buy one of his modern novels. They're just not my thing.
I don’t remember that. I remember him talking about how important it was to be authentic, and not pull any punches. I don’t remember that King didn’t like her (but not surprised) I thought there were a couple decent characters, like Desjardin. And of course she survived. I was thinking how different the book would have been if the opening scene was in third-person deep from Carrie or one of the girls. I think the omniscient narrator trashing her made it much easier to despise her as a reader. Wonder if that was intentional on King’s part - I suspect it was
