22, live in North Wales. I've done quite a few reviews that aren't on Ciao here: http://www.gamesboo...
22, live in North Wales. I've done quite a few reviews that aren't on Ciao here: http://www.gamesbooksfilms.com :)
Member since:19.06.2003
Reviews:221
Members who trust:151
Considering that, in recent years at least, Stephen King has become increasingly hit-and-miss in delivering his horror classics, the late eighties proved to be something of a purple-patch for the veteran American author.
1987’s The Eyes Of The Dragon signalled a fairly radical one-off change for King, both in writing style and in genre, though the end result was a highly atmospheric and innovative fantasy tale. Later that year came Misery; a gut-wrenching lesson in pure horror, featuring one of King’s trademark psychotic villains. And finally, we have Pet Sematary, which was something of a return to common ground for the author – another example of the spooky, supernatural-thriller. But could Stephen King continue his run of good form?
So it was published back in 1988 but is actually set eight years previous to this date. The story focuses on thirty-five year-old Louis Creed, as well as his wife Rachel, five year-old daughter Ellie and baby son Gage. Things start out with the level of equilibrium you would expect – the family have just arrived at their new home, having swapped the busy city life of Chicago for a quieter, somewhat more secluded abode in Ludlow, Maine.
The Creed’s soon meet their new neighbours, the elderly couple of Jud and Norma Crandall, who are eighty and seventy-eight respectively. Despite the considerable age gap and generation divide, Louis can’t help
but take a liking to old Jud, and the pair soon find sharing a few beers on the Crandall porch to be a regular event in the evenings. Louis finds himself in awe of the energy level and knowledge his elderly neighbour possesses, and in time they develop a strong bond.
One thing in particular that Louis uncovers from one of his many talks with Jud is of a path that lies behind his house, which leads up to a graveyard for pets who had died in the area of Ludlow dating from the early 20th Century onwards. Jud tells of how the kids of the town had kept the place in use right down the years – a pet cemetery, or ‘Sematary’ as the children had spelt it. He explains to young Ellie that there is no harm in going up to the graveyard, provided she doesn’t stray off the path and into the woods beyond. But that’s okay; deadfall blocks the route forward anyhow…
And so the scene is set, with the Creed family settling rather nicely into their new Ludlow lifestyle. A few weeks pass and Louis takes up his new role as a medical Doctor at the nearby University, and talk about a baptism of fire – his first day brings a young male jogger, dragged in by his friends after a car had ran into him and jarred him against a tree. Closer inspection reveals some truly horrendous injuries; it’s a minor-miracle that the student, Victor Pascow, is still alive at all. To the Doctor’s astonishment, Pascow begins talking to him in his dying moments, giving him a warning – not to cross the ‘barrier’ of the deadfall, and that the place he had been to was not the real cemetery…
…The real cemetery, he discovers, is an ancient Micmac burial ground, which lies roughly three miles into the woods. Jud shows him this place of awesome, almost mesmerising power one night and explains that animals buried there return from the dead. But the catch is, the animals don’t return quite right – they carry a permanent and overpowering smell with them, waddle about drunkenly, and stare out with their dead eyes, revealing occasional and fleeting looks of evil. All present, but not quite correct.
It’s a horrifying thought, but Louis simply cannot stop himself considering whether any humans had actually been buried in the Micmac grounds that lay hidden deep within the foreboding woods, and how they might act following their resurrections…
Pet Sematary doesn’t manage to conjure up the same level of prolonged tension as the likes of Misery, instead opting to start slowly (as many of King’s novels do) and build up as the story develops. Many would argue that the first half of the book is just another example of Stephen King bombarding the reader with unremarkable and irrelevant details – I felt this approach was particularly detrimental to The Shining as it meant the story took an absolute age to really become interesting, but Pet Sematary succeeds much more in this area due to its excellent characters, clear plotline and the feeling that a specific atmosphere is being created, with the reader being directly involved in its development.
For starters, the characters of Louis and (even more so) Jud, are simply superb. As Louis gets to know his neighbour, so too does the reader – it’s difficult not to become rather fond of the eighty year-old and his mannerisms over time, and consequently, this element of the lead characters’ relationship is convincingly dealt with. Louis’ emotionally-charged relationship with his wife typically has its ups and downs, but his children are also relevant and not overly-twee – not always easy to judge in a story of this nature.
The story as a whole flows noticeably more freely than the majority of Stephen King’s other works – it’s fairly long at 424 pages, but there are few if any sections that I felt dragged on too long or would begin to bore the reader. The text wouldn’t appear to be dumbed-down in comparison to his other books, so possibly the setting and basic ideas are good enough to maintain a certain degree of interest and enthusiasm by themselves.
The storyline makes up for the general lack of scares with a clear and wickedly clever premise, one of the best plots in any King novel to date. Certainly, some sections are quite predictable, but they tend to work in a you-know-something-they-don’t manner, and thus use this method to create some genuine tension. King once again opts to branch the story off into several strands during the latter stages, and it all builds towards a horrifying and absolutely hair-raising finale, that remains totally compelling right up until the final line of the short-but-chilling Epilogue.
Should youngsters read Pet Sematary? Well, no they probably shouldn’t is the simple answer. For starters, anyone who thinks ‘cemetery’ begins with an ‘S’ will probably run into a fair few problems as the general vocabulary is aimed at a more adult-orientated audience, not to mention the language becoming rather colourful at times too. Content-wise, there is for once very little gore or violence to speak of (rather a far cry from the aforementioned Misery I’m sure you’ll agree!) until the very climax of the tale, so in this respect it is very much a psychologically-based thriller, with a fair dollop of the supernatural thrown in for good measure.
It takes a fair while before it really delivers the scares, but all-in-all, Pet Sematary is a top-draw horror title. An eerie ‘n’ excellent storyline and strong characters are its main attributes, and though it seems unlikely to convert those who dislike King’s writing style, it will undoubtedly please his fans. Highly recommended.
How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines
Yet another exceptional review. Pet Sematary is probably one of King's mid-works for me - I think it's fantastic, but it's not one of his best for me.
Tadders 19.07.2005 11:36
Very well written and helpful review, though I'm surprised you find some of the longer sections of prose irrelevant. I think they are vital to character development and achieving a balance between reality and the supernatural world. Without this, it would be difficult to find the supernatural elements remotely credible. Just a thought, though I am a bit biased when it comes to praising Stephen King's work! Think the film was appalling in comparison to the novel!
kylecoare 04.12.2004 05:05
Its a long time since i read this book but your review has started to bring it back to mind, maybe time to read it again!
Another great review mate, and hopefully there will be many more to come.
Kyle
Jul 17th, 2004
exceptional by (22%):
very helpful by (76%):
helpful by (2%):
