The
Bazaar of Bad Dreams is my first exposure to Stephen King’s fiction. But not my
first exposure to his writing – I read his ‘Stephen King on Writing’ some years
ago where he advocates a workmanlike attitude to writing instead of an esoteric
approach the other books I had read on writing and related subjects had
advised. Does a writer stands stripped before his reader if he reveals the
tricks and methods he employs to spin his yarns? Well, King, among the most successful
authors in America, doesn’t think so.
The
Bazaar of Bad Dreams, a collection of short stories King has written over a
period of time and some poems, marks a re-manifestation of that belief. Every
short story - some of them are sometimes not exactly short running into enough number
of pages to be a novella - is preceded by an author’s note on the source of
inspiration of the following story and sometimes the author’s reflection on the
subject the stories are based on. I found these notes very interesting and
truth be told sometimes more interesting than the stories. He explains how an
incomplete idea, a rough idea, even a thought string - has the potential to be
developed into a full-fledged story.
Some
of the gems are. An idea can sometimes remain in the depth of an attic (of your
mind) and requires retrieving from there. Another is an idea sometimes come as
a cup without its accompanying handle – and the handle can come to you from the
most unlikeliest of situations without any outward appearance of being the missing
handle to the cup.
Once,
when King was shopping in a departmental store, he was approached by an elderly
woman who asked him why he didn’t write stories like Shawshank Redemption. When
King said Shawshank Redemption was written by him, the woman refused to
believe. Fame can be so limiting!
One
of the stated purposes of the book is to show that King’s quiver of creativity
has more variety to offer his readers than scary stories to which King owes his
fame as a writer. I agree King can offer much more than ghost stories, which is
quite evident from the stories, but almost all the stories show a tendency to
return to King’s familiar turf: horror, some subtle, some a little gross, but
horror. But of course, they have a lot else to them than that.
None of the stories is bald horror. They have properly developed characters with their world explained in detail. And horror is not a persistent theme with most of them. In some of them it’s just a ruse to end a story. In some horror is a plot possibility King slowly builds up towards. And even those with the express intent to scare have an interesting body of narrative which works without the smattering of horror moments.