>
> P.s. I thought it was common knowledge that the majority of Stephen Kings work was contrived pap, and pretty much on a par with Dean Kootnz in that respect
>


I just can't get a grasp on why it becomes avant garde to bash popular anything. It seems like if a lot of people like something, there must be a contingent who disparages and disdains it, usually simply for the idea that if it is well liked by so many, it must be too mundane for the educated, the mature, the somehow superior. I have a friend (he directs and produces animated films) who HATES anything remotely having to do with Steven Spielberg, one of the most popular and successful directors in film.

I love Stephen King. I always have. I don't consider him in the same contingent with Dean Koontz or James Patterson. Few other authors have left me afraid to sleep in my own bed, not due to gory pictures, or suspense building music, or the sudden and startling appearance of the bad guy, but just from *words* on a *page* that put those thoughts in my head so clearly I saw and heard and was startled by them.

So a lot of his works have been made into movies which didn't convey the same anything as the books. So he's possibly one of the best selling authors of our time, obviously relegating him to "popular" status, and goodness knows, all "pop" culture is somehow subpar for its popularity. Give me a break. Is there nothing to be said for the idea that if a lot of people like something, there's probably something good about it?

Mousie