Book Review. The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger

In the film industry, this year can be boldly called the year of Stephen King, so many of his books got film adaptations in such a short period. One of them was "The Dark Tower", a series about a lonely gunslinger.

Of course, it was clear that the film would be bad. But for Christ's sake, there were Idris Elba and Matthew McConaughey ... Especially, McConaughey. After finding out that he was there I bought a movie ticket. I became his devoted fan after his role in Interstellar. Throughout the movie "The Dark Tower", my face was like:

Although I'm not a fan of criticizing the screen adaptations too much. I always try to watch "with a clear head".

After watching the movie, I came out with a clear thought that it was time to reread "The Dark Tower". Today I'm going to write a review on the first book of the series "The Gunslinger", the first edition of which was published in 1982. The book was revised in 2003. King added about 35 pages to a new edition.

In the preface to "The Gunslinger", King wrote one thing that completely took my breath away. It turns out that "The Dark Tower" is not popular among his fans and half of them did not read it either. I must say that I read very few stories and novels written by King (only about twenty) and I can not be 100% sure about his oeuvre. But to figure out that someone loves King and did not read "The Dark Tower" was definitely a punch to the gut. Although many people now say that they love King, just because it's fashionable.

So, The Gunslinger.

King wrote that "The Gunslinger " is hard to read but we must endure this book, get acquainted with the hero and move on.

The story seemed very interesting to me. I can't say it's boring because we find out the structure of the world in which Roland lives, about his childhood, parents and about The Man In Black. Their former life, when they were still normal people, gives us the opportunity to foresee their actions.

His world is a perverted version of ours. Something happened, Roland calls it "the world moved on". The passage of time can not be counted. In the course of action, we encounter artifacts left behind by the Ancients. They are still working, so the apocalypse has come recently? The age of the protagonist is also impossible to calculate. King practically does not describe him, only bright-burning blue eyes are mentioned a large number of times.

The narrative is not dynamic at all. The Gunslinger walks through the desert, reflects. An action is waiting for us in the middle and the end of the book but the plot unwinds very slowly. The lack of dynamics also does not bother me, because King has the gift to write so that I completely immerse myself in the book as if I look at what is happening from behind the Gunslinger.

In the book, there is no epic, fairy tales, and almost no fantasy, although there are a whole magician and a couple of miracles that he will create. But while the fantasy is not felt, there is a feeling of a western because of the boundless dry desert and two revolvers on the hips. The memories of his childhood are responsible for the colorful part of the story. Roland recalls his friends, delicious food, a mother singing a lullaby. And then he returns to the world full of suffering, where living people go crazy and where the Gunslinger has to survive every day.

The main idea of the first book, in my opinion, is the question "What will a person go to achieve the goal?". Roland has to make a difficult choice, he knows what he is waiting for. Well, the end justifies the means and we understand his actions, let them terrify us.

In fact, the book is an introduction, a kind of a trailer to the whole series. It is a small book in size, it took me about 3-4 hours to read.

A few pictures to the book and go to the spoiler part. The author of illustrations is Michael Whelan.

Since in the description of the book The Man in Black is declared, it becomes clear to us that the Gunslinger is his opposite, i.e. The Man in White). Roland goes to the Tower because he thinks that when he gets to it, his familiar world will return (at least it's my guess). He is a guy with insane perseverance. Tear his feet off, he will crawl, he is confident in his goal for sure. The reader is positive in relation to The Gunslinger. "Well done, man," he thinks. "You are fallen, so let's get up and go."

The Gunslinger enters the village, he will kill 70 people in a couple of days, among them there will be children and old people. But I do not doubt him, after all, they wanted to kill him. I think his decision is right. But then he finds a boy - Jake Chambers. In the film, he is alive and falls into the world of the Gunslinger due to dreams. Here the boy gets hit by a car and soon Roland will allow him to die again, sacrificing the boy for the sake of talking with The Man in Black. Despite the fact that Roland thinks that this moment was predetermined, I believe that such a fate could be avoided if he leaves Jake somewhere along the way. Taking him to the mountains, he did not leave him the slightest chance. At the same time, Jake realized that the death is approaching, the end is inevitable.

Despite the fact that Roland and Jake became practically a father and son, at the time of Jake's death it becomes clear that no matter how many people Roland met on the way, he would all sacrifice just to reach the Tower.

Stephen King once again proved himself as a master of psychological tricks. After all, the world is turned inside out and the writer turned The Gunslinger inside out so that we can examine all aspects of his personality.

The key points of the book: