I am fairly certain that Stephen King was molested as a child, it's a recurring theme in his work in a way that seems less like an attempt to depict a general/universal fear and way more like he's just working through his own trauma. IT isn't even the best example, he's got a short story called The Library Policeman that is not subtle about it at all. Incedentally, I first read that short story in elementary school, worked better as a stranger danger warning than anything else.
Greentext
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
Hey now, let's be clear. Stephen King did not have the clown defeated by a bunch of outcast youths gangbanging in a sewer. That's just patently incorrect. Every single part. No, he had the ancient terror disguised as a clown temporarily banished by summoning an ancient turtle from the dawn of time and engaging It in a battle of wills. Completely different and, in fact, perfectly reasonable. Anyone that's actually read the book knows the outcast youth sewer gangbang happens after that and actually has no bearing on the plot whatsoever. Stephen King's not some freak writing a book where the entire plot hinges on a bunch of traumatized kids screwing each other to save the world, no; he's a perfectly normal guy writing about a bunch of traumatized kids screwing each other for no reason at all. Bet you feel real silly now, huh?
What the fuck are you on about? Nothing you said is remotely true, this is a gross misinterpretation of the events depicted in the book.
It's not a gangbang, it's a train. They go one after the other.
I thought that in order to be a train they should be connected to each other.
That's a centipede
There is an old painting about this. Tho they are adults.
(Tuhfet Ul-Mulk by Shayk Al-misri, 1773)
(This is illustrated version of the Turkish translation from 1400s and there is an older, Arabic version from 1300s according to carbon-dating)
And this was the stuff he got published. I’d dread to read his drafts and unreleased material from that era.
I remember it being for the need to destroy their innocence or something
It was actually closer to needing to restore the power of friendship
Couldn't they just like... go minigolfing or something?
Was there not some time traveling component? Like their future selves had to find each other again and come back ti their childhoods. I thought that was what made the "children having sex" part not as triggering as it sounds,because they were actually adults. Mind you, it's been years since I read the book. I might be misremembering things.
So ... adult-minds having sex with children's bodies?
That makes it worse!
"They're actually 900 years old" or something
Is this a copypasta
not currently
My ex went on to get a PhD in English with Stephen king as a specific area of interest and I'm glad I don't know exactly the email to send what you said, well it would be super awkward and probably misunderstood
Cocaine is a hell of a drug...
Washed down with some Listerine according to his On Writing autobio
I went into IT with an open mind and was prepared for that scene. Kept thinking that it probably made a lot of sense since many King fans had said it had a very beautiful reason behind it.
Then I get to it. And it's just stupid. Genuinely stupid.
The kids are scared of forgetting each other, because that is the power of IT. It makes people forget as they grow up.
So they want to do something meaningful to remember each other. And Bev is like: y'all can fuck me.
And I am over here like: how are the boys supposed to remember each other if they only fuck you? If that scene was supposed to make a lick of sense, the kids would have an orgy with each other and not just the boys lining up to have sex with one girl.
I can go along with weird and uncomfortable ideas in books if they make sense. In this case, it made no sense. But people either seem to defend it because they just go along with the premise or they defend King because he was high or some shit.
I'm not defending bad storytelling. IT has a lot of cool concepts in it and no one can write about small communities like King can, but I'm not gonna pretend like the kids having sex is some clever narrative device. It's very, very stupid.
I also think the Turtle is goofy af.
Tbh if my first time was a train of my bros all with the same chick, i'd probably remember them for a very long time even without a proper orgy. Though i'd probably remember them all for helping to defeat an eldritch sewer fiend anyways.
Still sounds like a stupid thing to put in a horror story about teenagers though..
What makes it bad is they're not teenagers. They're 11 year olds.
😑 i thought they were like 14 or something....it makes even less sense now
It would have been so easy to just not write that part. Or her character like that at all tbh
It might have been easy for you or I, for King it was an insurmountable struggle