In 1978, author Stephen King published "The Stand," believed by many to be his seminal work. The Apocalyptic novel was published by Random House, which, according to King, called for editing to bring down the book's total page count. In the latest, expanded version's Preface, King noted the publisher did not want to charge beyond $12.95 back in the '70s to readers who were book shopping.
However, about a decade later, in 1990, King released the current 'Stand,' which is a voluminous 1,647 pages. Consequently, this expanded version of the tale was re-released in 2012 by First Anchor Books, a division of Random House. I purchased this version of the work online at Google Play for $7.99. And, I am fairly certain it is the best money I ever put out for a novel.
For many people, King's work transcends the "Horror" brand because, so often, his characters and settings are incredibly complete and that "horror" aspect of his work intrudes into the believable lives being lived by his characters. For me, this is the highest praise one could offer an author, particularly an author writing within the Horror genre.
As King says in his Preface, the additional pages in 'The Stand' do not offer alternative actions or crucial nuggets to his story. However, these additional pages do offer deeper insight into the characters presented in the book.
For me, the character of "Larry Underwood" benefits most from the expanded vision of 'The Stand.' I saw the 1990's film based on 'The Stand,' read the original release of the book and was always, always left in doubt about why exactly this character was insecure about so much. This version of the book cleared absolutely everything up for me.
In addition, in the film, certain characters within the story were fused together for the sake of brevity. While this did not mar the story for me, when compared with the expanded book, it was clear that much had been amputated not only by the film but also the original book. Though there was an expanded roll call of characters from the film in the original work, their cameos were sometimes not as thoroughly explained as they might have been. Again, this version of the book solves that problem.
Without providing a spoiler, the character of "Rita Blackmoor" plays such a pivotal part in this story that I am surprised she was missing in the film, and I truly did not understand her as well in the first book as I now do. Her contribution to this work is so powerful that I know King must have suffered curtailing her role for the sake of time, insofar as the film, and space, where the original work was concerned.
In addition, I believe this 'Stand' goes far into giving new layers to "Stu Redman" and "Nick Andros." In my estimation, the film shows Redman in a thoroughly heroic light, without providing as much insight to his personality as I would like. Consequently, Redman enters into the range where he borders on being a stereotype in some ways. And, insofar as Andros is concerned, the film paints him as an enigma, a cypher, in many ways, who has a mystical quality without much elaborated upon. Similarly, there is some of this for both character in the original book, though to a lesser extent than in the film.
Yet, after reading this 'Stand,' Redman is flesh-and-blood for me, as is Andros. I might add that this rendition of King's work also cuts deep into the inner-workings of villain "Harold Lauder," and -- dare I say -- I even started having some sympathy for this guy.
So, this was an amazing read for me and I recommend it to anyone who likes the original work or the film. In many ways, 'The Stand' has become a cult phenomenon. As I said in the beginning of this piece, many consider this King's greatest work, though King does not. He has said more than once that, for him, his 'Dark Tower' series occupies that place in his heart. And, after reading that series, I can understand why. Nevertheless, it is clear that the audience for 'The Stand' has a special affinity for this work and I seriously doubt if interest in this book will diminish all that much with the passing of time.
Is 'The Stand' a classic work of American literature? Despite the mewling criticism of coffee house critics and their Goth-inspired legions of supporters, who largely worship obscure works by academic writers...yes. Yes, Stephen King is one of the pre-eminent authors of our age and deserves to be seen in much the same light Edgar Allen Poe or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle garnered during the 19th century.
I think so many of us in the reading public thank our lucky stars that we lived in a time when we had Herman Wouk, John Jakes, Tom Clancy...and yes...Stephen King, among others.
