Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vendetagainst]

I was just wondering what other people thought of him. My uncle got me into him a few years back with Velocity and I've since read maybe ten to twelve of his books. I know there are a lot of mixed feelings about him, or at least that's what I hear so it follows that such is true, but personally I think he's a really awesome writer and I highly reccomend him. The biggest problem with Koontz is that some of his books are fairly generic or flat, which is because he's written a shitload of books and some of them just aren't going to be that good. When he's good he's ridiculously good though; some books I recommend:
Velocity, The Mask, By the Light of the Moon (Shep's awesome), The Watchers, Cold Fire, and most definitely the Odd Thomas series. Other good books by him are Dragon Tears, Darkfall, and The Husband but I don't think these are of the same caliber. The only book I have not enjoyed of his was Icebound.

[tomselleck69]

The Watchers was pretty good, but everything else of his I've tried has left me pretty cold.

[Vendetagainst]

you might be having some bad luck with what you pick up too. What've you read?

[Surgoshan]

Of his stuff, I've only read From the Corner of His Eye.  It wasn't very good and definitely failed to inspire me to seek out more of his work.

[Ikrik]

Tick Tock
Whispers
False Memory
From the Corner of his Eye
Phantoms

I didn't like any of them.  I think he's a great writer and he definitely knows how to set a mood but after I've never really enjoyed any of them.  A couple of my friends convinced me to reading some of his stuff hence the reason I've read a couple...but honestly I'm not a huge fan of his stuff.

[CamusCanDo]

Hasn't there been a Odd Thomas manga released recently?

[Dimmukane]

I read...I think it was Cold Fire.  It came out how I imagine it would if Michael Bay had written it.

[Vendetagainst]

@ Camus
I had to look that one up, that's pretty strange to me. Was it supposed to be any good?

@Dimmukane
That sounds like a bad thing from the very scarce knowledge I have on Michael Bay.

[Scandanavian War Machine]

read The Dark Place because it is really sweet.

also, Midnight is worth a mention too, i guess.

[karl gambolputty...]

I think I'm too much of a Stephen King fan to be able to read Koontz without thinking he's completely derivative.  Although I did read By The Light of the Moon recently, and it was pretty decent.  It starts out as a rather blatant rip-off of Firestarter, but goes off in a completely different direction. It was a good time.

[Ikrik]

There are Stephen King fans?  Wow......I would rather read 5-7 of Dean Koontz's books before I would even start reading one of Stephen Kings....Cujo? It? Eugh.

[Vendetagainst]

I've never read any of Stephen King, but I suppose he's popular for a reason (though than again so is Paris Hilton, so that point might be moot). I looked up Cujo and I think it's kinda funny that the premise is a killer dog, Koontz is madly in love with dogs and when they're used in his novels (which is frequently) they're usually the most heroic protagonists in the book 

[karl gambolputty...]

See, that's kind of the thing.  Dean Koontz loves dogs, so there's a heroic dog in most of his books.  He's a religious man, so every book of his I've read has this heavy-handed religious theme to it.  You can read 5-7 of his books pretty easily, because, well, you're basically reading the same book 5-7 times.

[Vendetagainst]

that's not a bad point, a lot of his books are basically CC'd, and he can get pretty preachy sometimes, but this isn't always true. When he gets creative what you get is a really awesome book, it's just a matter of knowing what to look for.

[Ikrik]

See, that's kind of the thing.  Dean Koontz loves dogs, so there's a heroic dog in most of his books.  He's a religious man, so every book of his I've read has this heavy-handed religious theme to it.  You can read 5-7 of his books pretty easily, because, well, you're basically reading the same book 5-7 times.

Yeah but a bunch of Stephen Kings books are like....a million pages long.  I tried reading IT like.....five times and honestly it was one of the hardest things I've ever tried to read.  For Dean Koontz there tends to usually be an annoying womanizing piece of sludge character who dies.  That or a ridiculously frightening rapist/murderer.

[Vendetagainst]

You should try Watchers, if memory serves me it has neither of those elements, and it's all-around a great book.

[Postino]

Dean Koontz isn't an author folks, and the same goes for Steven King. I will tell you exactly what they are, they and all the grisly stereotypical goons like them that publish fiction as quickly as they can spew it out onto paper. They are creative typist and nothing more. They know how to write quickly, they don't have ideas they cobble stories together in some odd Frankensteinesque fashion. (Not to impugn Frankenstein by Mary Shelley which is a delightful book.)

Listen up folks because I am gonna talk about something very near and dear to my heart. Real Authors don't just give us stories for entertainment sake, in their stories they include ideas, they take romps in our mind scape. If all you accomplish in a story is to entertain your audience then you have failed, if at no point during your tale does someone wonder about something, if their view are not challenged, if they are not startled or shocked then you have failed. I'm not saying stories need to be preachy and that authors are akin to televangelists trying to convert us to their ideology, but here is the skinny, the main point, the thing most of the idiots out there seem to forget about, words and the written language were developed with one very specific purpose in mind. Words were developed to convey ideas. If all your conveying is that someone got an icepick in the eye, or a lamp came alive and ate someone, or hundred of other wastes of paper then you are doing just that, wasting paper and wasting our time.

Now I know I come off as preachy and I apologize for that, but dammit this is important to me. I am not a writer myself, as you have probably noticed. My above statements are not eloquent and probably not entirely grammatically correct. I am well aware I have not the skills for writing I use other mediums, but since writing is the only way I can communicate this to you I am forced to use it. When Steven King, Dean Koontz and nameless others give us this drivel and present it as bestsellers and amazing works of fiction. When they try to put it upon the same level as authors who write not to edify their pockets but rather to edify us and people buy it, well that just makes me sad. So please instead of reading that drivel, that will I guarantee you atrophy your brain, read something edifying, something that will rekindle your sense of wonder. Its well worth it, and if it makes you a little uncomfortable and you find yourself getting angry, well then good its done its job.

[Ikrik]

Postino

I think I read six lines of what you said and I agree with everything you say.  Well....maybe not everything, but the center nugget of what you're saying I'm agreeing with....which is why I don't read either of them.

[tomselleck69]

Sometimes one just wants a hamburger instead of a steak. Yes this hamburger fails when you attempt to pass it off as steak, but otherwise it serves its purpose very well.

Also Stephen King has written some lousy books, but I think it could be argued that he is often a user of "ideas."

[karl gambolputty...]

Stephen King and Dean Koontz  are not real authors because they write too many books and all they do is entertain.
I like books a whole lot.  But only good books.  Books that don't just entertain, but challenge, and engage me.
I get sad because people read Stephen King.  He is so bad you guys.

Is it irony that you used about 300 words too many to denounce a man for writing too much?

I will absolutely concede that King is no Pynchon.   He's written some awful books, but to say he's not a 'Real Author' at all is patent nonsense.  So what if he entertains?  So what if he writes a book every 6 months? Hell, if you're to tie the rate at which an author writes to his validity as an author, then would you call Wodehouse a hack? 

I get the point you're trying to make, I make it all the time when I'm yelling about music.  But at the end of the day, you don't get to call King a non-author any more than I get to call Motley Crue non-musicians.  And you sure as hell don't get to say he writes only for the money.

Besides, if Stephen King were a band he'd clearly be the Stones.

[Postino]

Is it irony that you used about 300 words too many to denounce a man for writing too much?

I will absolutely concede that King is no Pynchon.   He's written some awful books, but to say he's not a 'Real Author' at all is patent nonsense.  So what if he entertains?  So what if he writes a book every 6 months? Hell, if you're to tie the rate at which an author writes to his validity as an author, then would you call Wodehouse a hack? 

I get the point you're trying to make, I make it all the time when I'm yelling about music.  But at the end of the day, you don't get to call King a non-author any more than I get to call Motley Crue non-musicians.  And you sure as hell don't get to say he writes only for the money.

Besides, if Stephen King were a band he'd clearly be the Stones.

Couple of points to make here. First thank you for misquoting me, nothing makes a man feel better than when he is misquoted. Now a couple of points to clear up. First of all, I'm not criticizing King, Koontz and etc for writing to much, I am criticizing them for writing badly. I merely point out the writing too much as a symptom that most of these people seem to share.
Secondly you can spout silly nonsense about what I can or can't do all day until you turn blue in the face and pass out, and its still not gonna change how I conduct myself or what I say.
Thirdly since you seem to have trouble reading I should perhaps clarify, I at no time stipulated that the only reason that King and Co. wrote was for money, I don't presume to know what motive fuels them to write the dross that they do, I simply can identify the finished product for what it is.

Now I do have to agree with one point you and Tom have made and that is that reading Steven King is certainly no crime, sometime one does just want a "hamburger". The crime in my eyes are the people who come to believe hamburgers are steak, instead of a cheap substitute. (That really is a terrible metaphor Tom.)

[Vendetagainst]

so um, what do you consider steak?

[tomselleck69]

Now I do have to agree with one point you and Tom have made and that is that reading Steven King is certainly no crime, sometime one does just want a "hamburger". The crime in my eyes are the people who come to believe hamburgers are steak, instead of a cheap substitute. (That really is a terrible metaphor Tom.)

Agreed. Nothing worse than someone who accepts Oprah's book club as the canon of western literature.

I was in the mood for non-metaphorical beef when I wrote that, but it is at least as apt as it is horrible/clunky/obvious/etc.

[wesleyv]

I only read "tick tock" (if you read what it's about it should already become appararent that's it's prety bad)
and "door to december" which is totally cool and definitely recommended to koontz fans.

I also bought odd thomas a year ago but I never read books in the order I buy them so who knows when I'll end up picking it up.

[idiosyncratic]

While though there has been some level of animosity toward Koontz (and apparently King as well) I would like to agree with the majority of this thread and state that sometimes a Koontz novel can be nice.  I don't particularly enjoy the majority of the works that are produced by those two authors, but I don't think that they can be considered anything other than authors.  Their target audience and creative process are just different than others.  It irks me when people make large, elaborate claims based solely on a matter of taste.

My personal experience with novels by these two authors is rather limited.  As I said before they are not my favorite.  I really enjoyed Lightning by Koontz and Salem's Lot by King though. 

Postscript.
Tomselleck, even though your metaphor was slightly bad, I certainly enjoyed it.  It made me smile, and sometimes I do want a hamburger instead of steak.    I also agree with the comments on things like Oprah's book club.  *wrinkles nose*  I don't think I need to say anymore on that subject.

[idiosyncratic]

My problem with it is that people are actually reading solely because someone told me to.  Yes, it is better that people are reading, but it disturbs me that people actively choose not to think for themselves or to self-educate. 

[Postino]

Postscript.
Tomselleck, even though your metaphor was slightly bad, I certainly enjoyed it.  It made me smile, and sometimes I do want a hamburger instead of steak.    I also agree with the comments on things like Oprah's book club.  *wrinkles nose*  I don't think I need to say anymore on that subject.

My problem with it is that people are actually reading solely because someone told me to.  Yes, it is better that people are reading, but it disturbs me that people actively choose not to think for themselves or to self-educate.

Hey look kids more on the subject!

[tomselleck69]

I went and checked, and it seems that Oprah's Book Club has actually featured a bunch of good books over the years. The ratio of brainless life-affirming platitude-based novels to real solid literature is still fairly skewed, but I honestly did not expect to see Tolstoy or Marquez on there.

So I guess you won't do too badly by following that path. And yeah, I am of the opinion that reading light stuff is better than reading nothing, and that hopefully following a book club will get you interested in reading enough so that you begin to seek out new books yourself.

[Postino]

I went and checked, and it seems that Oprah's Book Club has actually featured a bunch of good books over the years. The ratio of brainless life-affirming platitude-based novels to real solid literature is still fairly skewed, but I honestly did not expect to see Tolstoy or Marquez on there.

So I guess you won't do too badly by following that path. And yeah, I am of the opinion that reading light stuff is better than reading nothing, and that hopefully following a book club will get you interested in reading enough so that you begin to seek out new books yourself.

Better than reading nothing... but not by much. I am of the opinion that just like the Glass Teat, continuous reading of trash will rot your brain. Its like a muscle folks, you don't exercise it and it atrophies.

Man I wanna start singing Imagination land or something.

[Ikrik]

Dude, Dean Koontz and Stephen King will not rot your brain.  If we want to use the hamburger analogy Koontz and King are like...homemade burgers, not necessarily good for you but they're not going to kill you.  However, Shopaholic is like...McDonalds.  Every time I hear someone talk about "reading" and they say they read and enjoy Shopaholic I lose respect for them.  Shopaholic ruins your brain.