Tonight the Book Babes got together to talk about 11/22/63. Judi's pick.
My earlier predictions were fallible, only about a 20% accuracy rate. At least as far as this novel is concerned.
The story was entertaining, although most of us agreed it was a bit longer than necessary. But if you were Stephen King's editor, would you have the nerve to argue? And why would you argue with success?
Other interesting points raised
- this might be King's attempt at social commentary, with the 50's/60's being painted as less than idyllic
- King's short stories are technically superior to his longer novels
- the ending was re-written at the suggestion of King's son... how did the first version end, and why and how was the author convinced to change the outcome
- the book is just as much about changing the events and trajectories of lesser-known lives
- more private and personal tragedies might have as strong an influence on major historic events (the "butterfly effect")
- did the author's brush with death influence his choice of topics
- did the book make you wonder about choices you may have made in your own life in the past, and how events might have unfolded differently based on your earlier choices?