I have often joked to my friends and husband that Stephen King is a talentless hack. This is because 1) his writing isn’t exactly highbrow, and 2) I’m a literary snob. But honestly, I would consider most authors “talentless hacks”, even some that I enjoy. I think it’s part of what makes the writing profession so appealing - you don’t need talent so much as perseverance (of which sadly I don’t have quite enough), some rudimentary ability, and a willingness to sell people something you that know is utter crap. Stephen King gets the honor of being the only author I actually call a talentless hack because he’s from my home state, and that gives me special license to abuse him. But actually, I think that some of Steve’s books are very good and I have a great deal of respect for him. The Shining is still one of my favorite movies. That opening shot of them driving up the mountain gives me the shivers every time.
I thought about this because surfing my Gmail web clips this morning, I came across the “Funny Quote of the Day”:
I am the literary equivalent of a Big Mac and Fries.
I’m fairly certain that’s an even less flattering statement than “talentless hack”, but I’m not entirely sure what it means - does Steve think of his writing as fattening, greasy, and lacking worthwhile substance? Or maybe he just means that it’s easily come by, and results in indigestion and obesity? Maybe it’s a comment that his books are mostly filler and sit for too long under heat lamps before being served? I did fairly well with analogies on the SATs, but this one is completely beyond me.
Based on interviews with him that I’ve read, I think he’s aware of his limitations as a writer. He knows that he’s not F. Scott Fitzgerald, and doesn’t aspire to be. He understands that his destiny is to be a skilled contributor to and commentator on (do you read his pieces in “Entertainment Weekly”?) pop culture.