Stephen King the Doubleday Years

[Brian James Freeman]

If you've ever wondered what THE STAND printed out single-sided on copy paper might look like, here you go...

[slayn666]

Hey, despite CD's problems thus far with the DD Years- and, sincerely hoping that those problems are in the past- I am ALL for the Viking Years. The books are great, and I'm glad to have them. Just would like one every six months. Surely we can manage that now that the printer is sorted, no?

Their shortest gap between Doubleday titles was twelve or so months between 'Salem's Lot and The Shining, which predated both their initial printer issues and the supply chain issues caused by the pandemic. King titles are also incredibly large undertakings for CD and their subs, even in the absolute best circumstances. For them to do two King books a year would likely mean they'd have to give up publishing anything else until a hypothetical Viking Years set was completed.

I'd absolutely sign up for a Viking Years set, but I would also expect the timeline involved to be measured in decades rather than years.

[swintek]

They've barely managed three in a decade, let's not get ahead of ourselves here

Hey, despite CD's problems thus far with the DD Years- and, sincerely hoping that those problems are in the past- I am ALL for the Viking Years. The books are great, and I'm glad to have them. Just would like one every six months. Surely we can manage that now that the printer is sorted, no?

[slayn666]

So now that CD is closing in on the 2/3 point of The Doubleday Years set this would be a good time to announce The Viking Years. Of course this a much larger effort so you should probably plan for 3 releases a year.

They've barely managed three in a decade, let's not get ahead of ourselves here

[bsaenz24]

Yep, I think it was 100% the need to cut so many pages simply because of pricing/printing concerns. Bev Vincent has written a great (unannounced) essay all about this, which will appear at the end of our special edition of THE STAND.

Brian

Gotta LOVE bonus materials!!!!

[Brian861]

The only thing I found a little jarring in the original Stand was how Trashcan Man suddenly ended up in Las Vegas after not being heard from in a while. I thought the expanded text helped to shed some light on his trip across country and on his importance.

This is probably why I prefer the uncut.

[Brian James Freeman]

I have heard several authors, Mr. King included, praise their editors. I really believe, with no basis in fact, that being edited because the printer can't handle the length is an issue.

Yep, I think it was 100% the need to cut so many pages simply because of pricing/printing concerns. Bev Vincent has written a great (unannounced) essay all about this, which will appear at the end of our special edition of THE STAND.

Brian

[Martin]

The only thing I found a little jarring in the original Stand was how Trashcan Man suddenly ended up in Las Vegas after not being heard from in a while. I thought the expanded text helped to shed some light on his trip across country and on his importance.

I agree that not all in the uncut version is needed to advance the story. I do feel that the flow of the uncut story is better which is why I prefer it.,

[Martin]

I guess artistically, no writer wants to be edited at all lol!

I have heard several authors, Mr. King included, praise their editors. I really believe, with no basis in fact, that being edited because the printer can't handle the length is an issue.

[taost33]

The only thing I found a little jarring in the original Stand was how Trashcan Man suddenly ended up in Las Vegas after not being heard from in a while. I thought the expanded text helped to shed some light on his trip across country and on his importance.

[mhatchett]

I guess artistically, no writer wants to be edited at all lol!

[Martin]

So now that CD is closing in on the 2/3 point of The Doubleday Years set this would be a good time to announce The Viking Years. Of course this a much larger effort so you should probably plan for 3 releases a year.

[Martin]

In my opinion, the edited version was better, it was edited for a reason. He might not like it, but there it is. The little vignettes with stupid/mean people succumbing to their own cruelty/ignorance, while entertaining, does not add much to the story arc.

Many share your view, King does not. I believe the cuts were done for multiple reasons. I assume all King books are subject to editing cuts. No inside knowledge but I would not be surprised if King was upset with being told to edit out a certain number of pages because they did not have the ability to print a book that large. That feels very different than cutting useless story lines.

[mhatchett]

In my opinion, the edited version was better, it was edited for a reason. He might not like it, but there it is. The little vignettes with stupid/mean people succumbing to their own cruelty/ignorance, while entertaining, does not add much to the story arc.

[Brian861]

I believe King has been clear that he will not ok the reprinting of the truncated version.

From my understanding, he wasn't happy with all the cuts from the original. Hence the uncut edition that came to be.