After a long absence and a series of Doctor Who it’s time to bring back my past recurring blog posts, starting by picking up where we left off with the entire bibliography of Stephen King. Thankfully we don’t have to do The Stand and talk about a global pandemic sweeping the globe but instead we can talk about The Dead Zone, which raises the simple but brilliant question of “If you had the power to change the future, would you?”
The idea of predestination and whether or not such knowledge gives an individual responsibility to potentially change is a fascinating and thought provoking sci fi idea. What will it do to an individual? In the case of The Dead Zone, it makes them a tragic hero, someone who very slowly and hauntingly becomes a shell of their former lives.
Taking place across nearly an entire decade, this massive text depicts the misadventures of Johnny Smith, a teacher (YES STEPHEN WE GET IT YOU USED TO BE A TEACHER) who one day in 1970 gets involved with a car accident and enters into a coma. Nearly five years later, he awakens with the power of foresight- simply by touching someone, Johnny can tell what will happen in their futures and how their lives will play out. Naturally, because this is a Stephen King book, things quickly spiral out of control.
Much like The Stand, The Dead Zone is a sprawling narrative. The book starts in Johnny’s youth, as a seemingly innocent slip on the ice sets the stage for events to come. His story is told vividly, first in 1970 as he begins to realise that maybe he is blessed with amazing luck at a county fair with his girlfriend and then later as he gets into a taxi and sets off on a fateful trip. Only a few chapters in, our protagonist is taken out of the action and the narrative switches to focus on the strong bond his girlfriend Sarah forms with Johnny’s parents, Herb and Vera, form in his absence. Intercut in this is the gradual rise to fame of Greg Stillson, a seemingly ordinary man who, despite his despicable actions, becomes a powerful force in local politics. Meanwhile, in the town of Castle Rock, a string of killings baffle the authorities. All of these plot threads interconnect later in the narrative and it’s wonderfully done.
When Johnny wakes up, his world has changed. Sarah is now married to another man, his mother is near death and he is haunted by visions he cannot explain. This is where the main meat of the story begins, as King depicts Johnny’s slow realisation of the true extent of his powers. His doctors and nurses are baffled by his physic powers (perhaps the “shining” that affects many of King’s early protagonists) and explain it through the idea of “the dead zone” of his brain that was reawoken during his coma. But we don’t need explanations, as what begins is a powerful character study of a man both out of time and perfectly in tune with it. Johnny doesn’t want any powers or to be a hero, he just wants to resume with his life. But he’s missed the past, the past disappeared, and now he’s stuck in a future that he doesn’t even know. All the while, he’s cursed by the ability to see things from other people’s future.
The Dead Zone does not have too much plot. Compared to its mighty predecessor this is a decidedly low key affair, but that’s fine. Johnny Smith is, in my mind, the strongest protagonist of King’s early novels, even stronger than Jack Torrance. His desire for a normal life is endearing and despite this, he chooses to do the right thing when he agrees to help the Castle Rock police department catch the serial killer that’s plaguing the town. This section is good enough for its own novel (and the name Frank Dodds will be important later in another book) but here it’s just another incident in the vast tapestry of Johnny Smith’s life. The idea of Johnny being “chosen” to have this gift is a key theme explored in the novel, as both his religious mother and the media idolise him as a saviour to solve all of humanity’s problems. And it’s this that leads to the ultimate conflict of the book- to quote King himself in On Writing- “Can a political assassin ever be right? And if he is, could you make him the protagonist of a novel?”
So, Greg Stillson, by the late 70’s, is a formidable politician. He’s a representative in Washington and is planning a presidential run. He’s clearly a caricature but isn’t even the villain of the piece, although he does do horrific actions throughout the novel. Stillson meets Johnny, and upon shaking hands Johnny receives a vision of Stillson’s presidency resulting in a catastrophic future for Earth (perhaps in the main King universe, the events of The Dead Zone prevent Earth from succumbing to Captain Trips in The Stand due to Stillson not being president). Johnny, by now unable to control his visions and feeling a duty to do good with them, must now decide if killing Stillson at his next rally is the moral thing to do, and if it isn’t, then why was he given this power? There is nothing left for Johnny in 1979 and his ability has only brought him pain and misery, so why not do something radical? But the novel also makes it clear that Johnny’s actions, from a certain point of view, are just as monstrous as he claims Stillson to be. It’s a brilliant dilemma for the reader, and somehow we sympathise with the would-be assassin, not because of his actions but because we’ve seen and read about his gradual descent from beloved schoolteacher, to a tragic victim, to a miracle, to a reluctant hero, to a pariah from society, to assassin. And because we’ve spent so much time with him, his fall from grace is utterly tragic. No one does a sympathetic protagonist better than Stephen King.
The Dead Zone is a truly unusual and pleasantly surprising read. It’s not a horror story at all, rather an exploration of loss, nostalgia, belonging and morality. Is it always good to do what you see as right, no matter what the consequences? Is the future inevitable? How does someone who’s missed five years recover? Does he adapt to his new world, or does he cling to the past whilst simultaneously trying to preserve the future? It’s a fascinating read and proof that even early on Stephen King was breaking out of the horror mold of his first few books. It lacks the iconic setpieces or characters from his first four novels but is just as good in my opinion. If you like a more character driven, contemplative story, and one that will definitely NOT be connected to any current world events like The Stand, then give it a read.
Drinking game
Get ready… psychic powers (the fourth of five to have it as a central plot point), corrupt politicians, random towns in Maine, religious fundamentalism (although Vera Smith is far more sympathetic than previous religious figures) and stories taking a long time to develop
Adaptations?
A film with Christopher Walken and directed by David Cronenberg and that I (surprise) haven’t seen (I will get better at this, trust me) and a television show that apparently went on for six seasons. Considering the film seemingly condensed things well I’m wondering what was added for the show.
The King Multiverse
Outside of my personal headcanons nothing much connects this to other books other than a random metatextual reference to Carrie. BUT, this is where Castle Rock is introduced and we will return to it very soon.
Next time, we discuss Stranger Things Season On… I mean Firestarter. Totally different narratives, trust me.
Ben Williams' World 