Showing posts sorted by relevance for query STEPHEN KING. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query STEPHEN KING. Sort by date Show all posts

Sunday, August 27, 2023

Stephen King won't forbid AI from training on his writing, and he's not afraid of AI ... yet

Jordan Hart
Sat, August 26, 2023 


Stephen King weighs in on AI in an essay published by The Atlantic.

King said that he's not opposed to programmers using his works to teach AI about creativity.

Thousands of other authors have objected to their work being used in AI without permission.


Artificial intelligence may be getting more capable, but Stephen King believes it still has some learning to do before it can successfully mimic human creativity.

In an essay for The Atlantic, the author said he wouldn't object to his work being used to teach AI programs, and he's "not yet" nervous about technology's potential.

"Would I forbid the teaching (if that is the word) of my stories to computers? Not even if I could," King stated.

Even human writers need to be readers if they hope to write well, according to King. Uploading the works of others to computers, or "state-of-the-art digital blenders" as he put it, can teach AI how to produce better art.

As of now, the 75-year-old wrote, AI's creativity isn't on par with the mental capabilities of a person. He compared AI-generated poems to "movie money: good at first glance, not so good upon close inspection."

Fellow authors Margaret Atwood and James Patterson joined over 8,000 other writers in signing an open letter demanding compensation for their work being used by AI companies without consent. The letter was sent to tech CEOs Sam Altman of OpenAI, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Sundar Pichai of Alphabet, and more in July.

"Millions of copyrighted books, articles, essays, and poetry provide the "food" for AI systems, endless meals for which there has been no bill," the authors wrote in a letter published by the Authors Guild.

Elsewhere in the literary community, audiobook narrators have also raised concerns of their voices being cloned by AI. Audiobook sellers — including Apple Books — have already rolled out their own AI narrators.

King said that forbidding programmers from using his to teach AI is essentially pointless.

"I might as well be King Canute, forbidding the tide to come in. Or a Luddite trying to stop industrial progress by hammering a steam loom to pieces," King wrote.

Tuesday, August 02, 2022

Why Stephen King testified for the government in a major publishing merger trial
Hannah Murdock - Yesterday 

Stephen King testified Tuesday against his own publisher, Simon & Schuster, in a major antitrust trial.

© Patrick Semansky, Associated Press
Author Stephen King arrives at federal court before testifying for the Department of Justice as it bids to block the proposed merger of two of the world’s biggest publishers, Penguin Random House and Simon & Schuster, Tuesday, Aug. 2, 2022, in Washington. King gave testimony opposing the merger.

The horror author was the star witness for the government in a lawsuit against the proposed merger of Penguin Random House and rival publisher Simon & Schuster, The Associated Press reported.

The Department of Justice is suing to block the proposed $2.2 billion merger, which would bring the “Big Five” book publishers down to four, according to The Associated Press.

The government argues that the merger would create less competition in the publishing market, leading to fewer options for consumers and potentially leading to authors being paid less.

“The evidence will show that the proposed merger would likely result in authors of anticipated top-selling books receiving smaller advances, meaning authors who labor for years over their manuscripts will be paid less for their efforts,” the government argued in a brief, per Reuters.

King has been outspoken about his disapproval of the merger, tweeting last year, “The more the publishers consolidate, the harder it is for indie publishers to survive.”

While on the stand, King stated that “consolidation is bad for the competition.” He also talked about the difficulties to earn a living that authors experience in the publishing industry today.

“It’s a tough world out there now. That’s why I came,” he said, according to Deadline.

The trial is expected to last two to three weeks, according to Reuters.

Thursday, September 02, 2021

Jen Psaki schools male reporters after abortion questions: 'You've never faced those choices'

Sarah K. Burris
September 02, 2021

Jen Psaki (AFP)

White House press secretary Jen Psaki had little patience for male reporters demanding she addressed abortion at the Thursday press briefing.

President Joe Biden announced Wednesday and again Thursday that he was committed to protecting women's health and reproductive freedom after the Supreme Court nullified Roe v. Wade by allowing a Texas law to take effect. The key part of the court ruling gave the constitutional right to privacy and an explicit liberty provision. Individuals in Texas can now demand private health details from those they suspect have had an abortion.

"The effort and the focus of the federal government is to look for every resource, every level at our disposal to ensure that women in Texas have the ability to seek healthcare," said Psaki as questions about the ruling began.

"Why does the president support abortion when his own Catholic faith teaches abortion is morally wrong?" asked one reporter.


"He believes that it is a woman's right, a woman's body, her choice," said Psaki. "He believes it is up to a woman to make those decisions and make those decisions with her doctor. I know you have never faced those choices nor have you been pregnant. But for women out there who have faced those choices, this is an incredibly difficult thing in the president believes that their rights should be respected. Go ahead. I think we need to move on. You have had plenty of time today."

See the video below:

Jen Psaki schools male reporters after abortion questions: 'You've never faced those choices'youtu.be

Joe Biden slams US Supreme Court refusal to block Texas' new 'extreme' abortion ban

The US president said the Supreme Court's ruling was "an unprecedented assault on a woman's constitutional rights".


A protest against the six-week abortion ban at the Capitol in Austin, Texas 
Source: Austin American-Statesman

US President Joe Biden lashed out on Thursday at the Supreme Court's refusal to block a Texas law banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, warning that it threatens to unleash "unconstitutional chaos."

"The Supreme Court's ruling overnight is an unprecedented assault on a woman's constitutional rights under Roe v. Wade, which has been the law of the land for almost fifty years," Mr Biden said in a statement.

Roe v. Wade is the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case that enshrined a woman's right to an abortion in the United States.

"This (Texas) law is so extreme it does not even allow for exceptions in the case of rape or incest," Mr Biden said.


Texas valedictorian takes aim at state's 'dehumanising' new abortion law in viral graduation speech

The Democratic president took particular aim at a provision of the bill passed by Republican politicians in Texas that allows members of the public to sue doctors who perform abortions or anyone facilitating the procedure.

"By allowing a law to go into effect that empowers private citizens in Texas to sue health care providers, family members supporting a woman exercising her right to choose after six weeks, or even a friend who drives her to a hospital or clinic, it unleashes unconstitutional chaos and empowers self-anointed enforcers to have devastating impacts," Mr Biden said.

"Complete strangers will now be empowered to inject themselves in the most private and personal health decisions faced by women," he said.

Mr Biden said he was launching a "whole-of-government effort" to "see what steps the Federal Government can take to ensure that women in Texas have access to safe and legal abortions."


Stephen King buries Susan Collins: 
‘Women in Texas must pay the price for her gullibility’
Bob Brigham
September 02, 2021

Composite image of author Stephen King (screengrab) and Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins, photo by Gage Skidmore.

Famous Bangor resident and bestselling author Stephen King on Thursday slammed his home-state's senior senator after the United States Supreme Court refused to block the controversial anti-abortion law passed by Texas Republicans.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the high court and the vote has haunted her since the court's overnight decision, as she repeatedly insisted that Kavanaugh did not pose a threat to abortion rights.

King slammed Collins for being gullible.

"Remember when Susan Collins said she was convinced that Brett Kavanaugh believed a woman's right to choose was 'settled law?' She was wrong," King wrote.



"Women in Texas must pay the price for her gullibility," he added.

King had previously slammed the Texas law as religious extremism.

"The Taliban would love the Texas abortion law," he wrote.



Minnesota braces for influx of out-of-state abortion patients

The U.S. Supreme Court decision on Texas' 6-week ban means more patients will travel to Minnesota for care.

By Emma Nelson Star Tribune
SEPTEMBER 2, 2021 — 6:58PM

LM OTERO - ASSOCIATED PRESS
A security guard opened the door to the Whole Women’s Health Clinic in Fort Worth, Texas, Wednesday, Sept. 1, 2021.

Minnesota physicians and organizations that help women access abortions are bracing for a spike in demand, days after Texas enacted a law considered the most restrictive abortion ban since Roe v. Wade.

The law prohibits abortions as early as six weeks — before some women know they're pregnant — and is already pushing people in Texas and surrounding states to seek abortions elsewhere. Destinations include Minnesota, where abortion access is constitutionally protected and less restrictive than many states. Meanwhile, in neighboring North Dakota, lawmakers on Thursday signaled that they plan to introduce their own version of the Texas law.

Though reproductive health advocates in Minnesota were anticipating a major challenge to Roe v. Wade, many expected it would come next year, when the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban, said Megumi Rierson, communications manager for Our Justice, a Twin Cities-based organization that helps pay for abortions. The court's decision early Thursday not to block the Texas law changed that calculus.

"Providers and advocates were all preparing for an increase in requests, but we thought that we had a lot longer to develop some infrastructure," she said. "And we don't, because now it's here."

The pressure on Minnesota is only expected to rise if more states follow Texas' lead — something advocates say they predict after the court's decision. Minnesota is home to a handful of abortion clinics in the Twin Cities, Duluth and Rochester, as well as the telemedicine clinic Just the Pill, which provides medication abortions to women in Minnesota and surrounding states.

Dr. Julie Amaon, Just the Pill's medical director, said Thursday she's already hearing from patients in Texas and other states looking to travel to Minnesota for medication abortions. Just the Pill is not currently providing services to those patients and does not provide direct referrals for patients in Texas, according to a statement.

The availability of medication abortions via telemedicine helped lower some barriers to abortion that the pandemic created, and it is seen as a potential solution as state restrictions increase. But "it is not the answer to everything," said Dr. Sarah Traxler, chief medical officer with Planned Parenthood North Central States, which serves Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.

Patients may need or prefer surgical abortions, Traxler said. And though the pandemic prompted the Food and Drug Administration to temporarily allow doctors to mail the drugs to patients, most states surrounding Minnesota restrict telemedicine abortion, she said. Telemedicine laws apply to the state where the patient is, not the provider, so patients in other states would still need to travel to Minnesota to access it.

That means more pressure on brick-and-mortar clinics, which already face hurdles of their own. Though abortion access is constitutionally protected in Minnesota, there are restrictions including a 24-hour waiting period, mandated counseling and a requirement that minors notify both parents.

"If Minnesota ends up having to take care of a large number of women who come from outside of the state, that may create a further access-to-care problem," said Rep. Kelly Morrison, DFL-Deephaven, an obstetrician-gynecologist who has introduced legislation to strengthen reproductive rights. "This is an American problem, but because it's being fought in state legislatures across the country right now, some of the burden is falling disproportionately on certain areas."

In 2019, the legal and policy advocacy organization Gender Justice sued the state on behalf of a group of plaintiffs to challenge Minnesota's abortion restrictions, arguing that they are unconstitutional. The case is expected to go to trial in Ramsey County District Court in June, said Gender Justice Executive Director Megan Peterson.

Meanwhile, Peterson and other advocates said, abortion access in Minnesota remains unchanged.

"A lot of people, including people who maybe need abortion care, will see the news and be really worried about, what does it mean?" Peterson said. "This is very much worth freaking out over, but we don't want to have people think abortion is illegal in Minnesota — it's not."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Sunday, February 02, 2020

Stephen King quits Facebook, 'not comfortable' with false information in political ads

I HAD NO CHOICE THEY KICKED ME OUT SUMMARILY WITH NO NOTICE NOR CHANCE OF APPEAL SO THANKS FOR THE SOLIDARITY 

by WGME Staff Saturday, February 1st 2020

FILE - This May 22, 2018 file photo shows Stephen King
 at the 2018 PEN Literary Gala in New York.
 (Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision/AP, File)

BANGOR, Maine (WGME) -- If you're looking to keep up with Maine author Stephen King on Facebook, don't bother. He isn't there anymore.

Friday night, King tweeted he is quitting Facebook. A search for his page on Facebook Saturday morning came up empty.

According to his tweet, King said he is "not comfortable with the flood of false information that's allowed in its political advertising."

He also expressed doubts over Facebook's ability to protect users' privacy.

Concerns have been raised as to how accurate political advertisements are on Facebook and the company's apparent unwillingness to address those concerns.

Sunday, July 31, 2022

MONOPOLY CAPITALI$M
EXPLAINER: Bid to block book merger sets competition fight



Book Publishers Antitrust Explainer
FILE - Stephen King poses for a photo May 22, 2018, at the 2018 PEN Literary Gala in New York. The government and publishing titan Penguin Random House are set to exchange opening salvos in a federal antitrust trial Monday, Aug. 1, 2022, as the U.S. seeks to block the biggest U.S. book publisher from absorbing rival Simon & Schuster. The government’s “star” witness will be Stephen King, the renowned and genre-transcending author whose works are published by Simon & Schuster. 
Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision

MARCY GORDON
Sat, July 30, 2022

WASHINGTON (AP) — At a time of mega-mergers and flashy high-tech corporate hookups, the biggest U.S. book publisher’s plan to buy the fourth-largest for a mere $2.2 billion may seem somewhat quaint. But the deal represents such a key test for the Biden administration's antitrust policy that the Justice Department is calling an out-of-the-ordinary witness to The Stand: author extraordinaire Stephen King.

In Penguin Random House’s proposed acquisition of rival Simon & Schuster, which would reduce the “Big Five" U.S. publishers to four, the administration is burnishing its antitrust mettle and its fight against corporate concentration.

The Justice Department has sued to block the merger. The trial opens Monday in federal court in Washington.

The government contends the merger would hurt authors and, ultimately, readers, if German media titan Bertelsmann is allowed to buy Simon & Schuster from U.S. media and entertainment company Paramount Global. It says the deal would thwart competition and give Penguin Random House gigantic influence over which books are published in the U.S., likely reducing how much authors are paid and giving consumers fewer books to choose from.

An appearance at some point by King, whose works are published by Simon & Schuster, will be a highly unusual for an antitrust trial and will draw wide attention.

The publishers are fighting the lawsuit. They counter that the merger would strengthen competition among publishers to find and sell the hottest books. It would benefit readers, booksellers and authors, they say.

A look at the case:

PUBLISHING HEAVYWEIGHTS:

The two New York-based publishers each have impressive stables of blockbuster authors who’ve sold multiple millions of copies and have scored multimillion-dollar deals. Within Penguin Random House’s constellation are Barack and Michelle Obama, whose package deal for their memoirs totaled an estimated $65 million, Bill Clinton (he received $15 million for his memoir), Toni Morrison, John Grisham and Dan Brown.

Simon & Schuster counts Hillary Clinton (she received $8 million for hers), Bob Woodward and Walter Isaacson.

And King. His post-apocalyptic novel “The Stand," published in 1978, swirled around a deadly pandemic of weaponized influenza.

Bruce Springsteen split the difference: His “Renegades: Born in the USA," with Barack Obama, was published by Penguin Random House; his memoir, by Simon & Schuster.

___

THROWING THE BOOKS AT THEM

The Justice Department contends in its suit that as things now stand, No. 1 Penguin Random House and No. 4 Simon & Schuster (by total sales) compete fiercely to acquire the rights to publish the anticipated hottest-selling books. If they are allowed to merge, the combined company would control nearly 50% of the market for those books, it says, hurting competition by reducing advances paid to authors and diminishing output, creativity and diversity.

The Big Five — the other three are Hachette, HarperCollins and Macmillan — dominate U.S. publishing. They make up 90% of the market for anticipated top-selling books, the government’s court filing says. “The proposed merger would further increase consolidation in this concentrated industry, make the biggest player even bigger, and likely increase coordination in an industry with a history of coordination among the major publishers,” it says.

The Justice Department case reaches beyond the traditional antitrust concern of concentration raising prices for consumers, pointing to the impact on consumers’ choices and viewing authors as workers as well as sellers of products in the global marketplace of ideas. The notion is that fewer buyers (publishers) competing over the same talent pool reduces sellers’ (authors) bargaining power.

The case “potentially creates a precedent that could be used in the labor area," says Rebecca Allensworth, an antitrust expert who is a law professor at Vanderbilt University.

___

BIDEN’S COMPETITION CRUSADE

The Biden administration is staking out new ground on business concentration and competition, and the government's case against the publishers’ mergers can be viewed as an important step.

President Joe Biden has made competition a pillar of his economic policy, denouncing what he calls the outsized market power of an array of industries and stressing the importance of robust competition to the economy, workers, consumers and small businesses. He has called on federal regulators, notably the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission, to give greater scrutiny to big business combinations.

Biden issued an executive order a year ago targeting what he labeled anticompetitive practices in tech, health care, agriculture and numerous other parts of the economy, laying down 72 actions and recommendations for federal agencies. Targets range from hearing aid prices to airline baggage fees.

Another trial on competition starting Monday in federal court: The Justice Department is suing to block UnitedHealth Group, which runs the biggest U.S. health insurer, from acquiring health-tech company Change Healthcare. The government contends the $13 billion deal would hurt competition and put too much health care claim information in the hands of one company.

___

PUBLISHERS MAKE THEIR CASE

Hold on, Penguin Random House and Simon & Schuster say as they prepare to enter trial: The merger would actually strengthen competition among publishers to find and sell the hottest books, by enabling the combined company to offer greater compensation to authors.

It would benefit readers, booksellers and authors, the publishers say, by creating a more efficient company that would bring lower prices for books. The government has failed to show harm to consumers as readers because the merger wouldn’t push up prices, the companies contend.

“The U.S. publishing industry is robust and highly competitive,” they say in their filing. “More readers are reading books than ever before, and the number grows every year. Publishers compete vigorously to reach those readers, and the only way they can compete effectively is to find, acquire and publish the books readers most want to read. ... The merger at issue in this case will encourage even more competition and growth in the U.S. publishing industry.”

The companies reject the government’s central focus on the market for anticipated best-selling books — defined as those acquired for advances to authors of at least $250,000. They represent only a tiny sliver, about 2%, of all books published by commercial companies, according to the companies’ filing.

___

Follow Marcy Gordon at https://www.twitter.com/mgordonap

Sunday, January 07, 2024

BEST DAVID SOUL OBIT
David Soul, Stephen King and the terrifying power of Salem’s Lot

Alexander Larman
Fri, 5 January 2024

David Soul in Salem's Lot - Alamy

The actor and singer David Soul, who has died at the age of 80, will best be remembered for his iconic performance as the detective Kenneth ‘Hutch’ Hutchinson in the ever-popular TV series Starsky and Hutch. Soul tended to be associated with roles that played on his apparently straight-arrow persona honed in the show, which, as time went by, he tended to play up to for comic effect. The highest-profile parts that he took in later years, unsurprisingly, were self-parodying cameos in everything from the Irvine Welsh adaptation Filth to the likes of Little Britain and Holby City on British television.

Soul’s twinkly, likeable presence made him a natural fit for roles in comedy and light drama, but these unchallenging roles did his acting abilities a disservice. Not only had he managed to subvert his clean-cut looks as early as 1973, in which he played a treacherous police officer in the Dirty Harry picture Magnum Force, but his finest hour as an actor came when he starred in the lead role of the Stephen King adaptation Salem’s Lot in 1979, which was broadcast on CBS as a two-part drama just after Starsky and Hutch came to its conclusion. Had an impressionable teenager watched the miniseries because they were a fan of Soul’s, they would undoubtedly have been scared witless.

Although King was already a bestselling author with a considerable fanbase by November 1979, with several iconic novels including The Shining, Carrie and – naturally – 1975’s Salem’s Lot terrifying millions of readers worldwide, he was not yet a known quantity in TV and film adaptations.

Although Stanley Kubrick was hard at work filming The Shining, which would ultimately, and publicly, disappoint King upon its release in May 1980, the only film of his work that had been released prior to 1979 was Brian de Palma’s Carrie. It had been a considerable box office hit in 1976, as well as winning critical plaudits for the lead performances by Sissy Spacek as the telekinetic teen and Piper Laurie as her religious fanatic mother.


Stephen King in 1970 - Getty

Any adaptation of Salem’s Lot had to live up to this precedent, and Warner Bros Television, who produced the film on a $4 million budget, were careful not to derail the King bandwagon before it had begun. After all, if it was done properly, it could be the beginning of a long and lucrative association.

Yet King was unenthusiastic at first, later saying that “TV is death to horror. When [Salem’s Lot] went to TV, a lot of people moaned and I was one of the moaners.” Initially, attempts to adapt it were dismal; King complained that “Every director in Hollywood who’s ever been involved with horror wanted to do it, but nobody could come up with a script.”

For it to succeed, it would have to take risks, and for them to pay off admirably, and terrifyingly. Its story of a successful writer, Ben Mears – something of a King trope throughout his novels – who returns to his hometown of Salem’s Lot, only to realise that vampirism is rampant in the town, whipped up by the charismatic and villainous Richard Straker, was rich in potential but would need to find the right filmmakers and stars. Otherwise the results could be disappointing, or even ludicrous.


James Mason, Tobe Hooper and David Soul on the set of Salem's Lot - Alamy

The hot horror director of the moment, Tobe Hooper, was hired, fresh from the vast commercial success of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and veteran screen villain James Mason would prove to be a seductive and terrifying Straker, He managed to make even the words “Good evening” sound frighteningly ominous. But in the lead role of Mears, Hooper and the screenwriter Paul Monash – a King veteran, having already produced Carrie – needed to find someone who was a familiar face but not over-associated with the horror genre, who could stand toe-to-toe with Mason and also provide a steadying figure that the audience might empathise with amidst the scares. The producer Richard Kobritz met with Soul, in what the actor later described as an appropriately “black, bleak” office, and offered him the role.

Soul was delighted to be acting opposite Mason, which he called “a real kick”, and the production was set in the town of Ferndale in Northern California. The crucial location was the Marsten House of the novel, a hilltop property with a reputation for being haunted which Mears is planning on writing a book about. An elaborate set was constructed outside Ferndale, in the style of a New England house, although as Soul said “they built the exterior, [but] it wasn’t a whole house…it was a façade, and the interior was at the Warner Brothers lot back in California.

“One day, when we were preparing to shoot up at the house, we heard this horrible crash, and there was this car that had run into a telephone pole. When we reached the car, the driver had this look on his face like he’d seen something impossible, and sure enough, this man had lived in Ferndale for 30 years, and had never seen this before.” Soul would not be the only person aghast at what the production would conjure up there.




Several of Soul’s Starsky co-stars, including Juliette Lewis’s veteran character actor father Geoffrey and George Dzunda – later to meet a grisly end in Basic Instinct – were reunited with him in Salem’s Lot, and Soul enjoyed working with them. But he reserved his highest praise for Mason, who he called “absolutely a marvel…a legend, a real legend, someone who came out of the old school, and boy, you could tell the difference. He really knew his craft.” Belying his terrifying persona on-set, Soul praised Mason as “a joy to be with, and a joy to be around.”

The two may have been deadly adversaries on set, but when not filming, they would head to Mason’s trailer and play cards together, which Mason was a keen aficionado of. And the veteran actor was not above punning humour, either; he referred to Soul and his young co-star Lance Kerwin, who played Mark Petrie, a boy whose knowledge of horror film lore helps solve the mystery of Salem’s Lot, as “Lancesky and Hutch.”

One of the film’s most terrifying characters was that of Kurt Barlow, the Nosferatu-esque vampire who Straker has come to Salem’s Lot in order to resurrect. As played by the Austrian character actor Reggie Nalder, Barlow’s character was changed from the conventional-looking villain of the novel to a demonic apparition, on the grounds that, as Kobritz said, “I wanted nothing suave or sexual, because I just didn’t think it’d work; we’ve seen too much of it.” (The fact that he had the velvet-voiced Mason as his lead villain meant that suavity was also assured, too.)


Chilling: a scene from Salem's Lot - Alamy

Soul remarked that “Nadler was born to play this role. He didn’t like it very much, because he had to wear these contact lenses, and his make-up kept falling off, so we had to stop and reset his face, eyes, teeth and eight-inch fingernails.” He quipped that Nalder may have been dissatisfied with the requirements of the role – the actor commented “The makeup and contact lenses were painful but I got used to them. I liked the money best of all” – whereas, in Soul’s knowing words, “I did it for the art.”

The series was packed full of immediately iconic scares. The moment in which the child vampire Ralphie Glick tries to enter his brother Danny’s room from outside, while scratching terrifyingly at the window, remains the most memorable, and has been alluded to in everything from The Simpsons to Eminem’s song Lose Yourself. Guardians of the Galaxy director and DC supremo James Gunn wrote, after Hooper’s death in 2017, that the filmmaker “created the moment that scared me the most as a child – that floating, dead kid tapping on the window.”




Bearing in mind the demands of television, rather than film, it largely eschewed explicit bloodshed in favour of what Hooper called “the overtone of the grave.” He said “A television movie does not have blood or violence. It has atmosphere which creates something you cannot escape – the reminder that our time is limited and all the accoutrements that go with it, such as the visuals.”

Soul enjoyed working with “the very fine director”, who he praised for being “very well prepared”. There were lighter moments, too. The actor celebrated his birthday on set; he later quipped, “they told me I had a good time, but I don’t remember a hell of a lot...I’m told I was enjoying it too.”


Reggie Nalder as the villain of Salem's Lot - Alamy

Salem’s Lot was enthusiastically received on its first screening, and was later followed by a sequel, Return to Salem’s Lot, and another 2004 miniseries adaptation, this time starring Rob Lowe. It has subsequently proved to be one of the most influential of all modern-day vampire stories, inspiring everything from such Eighties classics as The Lost Boys and Fright Night to Buffy the Vampire Slayer and King regular interpreter Mike Flanagan’s 2021 Netflix miniseries Midnight Mass.

And another film remake is planned, this time directed by It screenwriter Gary Dauberman. Yet it will struggle to surpass the original, which remains one of the most successful King adaptations, with the emphasis on suggestion and subtlety over bloodshed making it all the more terrifying.

As Soul put it: “Salem’s Lot is responsible for a whole new genre, particularly in terms of television. I think the film we did is the legendary film, the real thing, and everything else tried to copy elements of what we accomplished.” The obituaries will salute this versatile actor for being forever Hutch, but Salem’s Lot is surely his truest – and longer-lasting – legacy.



STANDARD OBIT

Starsky & Hutch actor David Soul’s 50 years on screen and stage


Jordan Reynolds, PA
Fri, 5 January 2024

Actor David Soul was best known for his role as Detective Kenneth “Hutch” Hutchinson in the classic crime-solving television series Starsky & Hutch.

US-born Soul, who starred opposite Paul Michael Glaser, who played Detective Dave Starsky, in the 1970s US TV series, was also known for his roles in Here Come The Brides, Magnum Force and The Yellow Rose.

With a career spanning 50 years, Soul also made a name for himself as a director, producer, singer/songwriter and social activist.

David Soul (Yui Mok/PA)


David Solberg (Soul) was born in Chicago, Illinois, on August 28 1943, then spent the next 12 years between South Dakota and post-Second World War Berlin.

His father Dr Richard Solberg, a professor of history and political science and an ordained minister, moved his family to Berlin where he served as a religious affairs adviser to the US High Commission.

Soul was affected by his experiences in Berlin and initially considered following in his father’s footsteps, later becoming involved with the South Dakota Young Democrats.

He was also an avid sportsman and was offered a professional baseball contract with the Chicago White Sox after high school in 1961.


David Soul arriving for the Theatregoers’ Choice Awards, held at Planet Hollywood in central London, in November 2005 (Yui Mok/PA)

But instead, during his second year of college, he left to go to Mexico City with his father who went to be a professor at a graduate school for young diplomats.

Here he was introduced to the indigenous songs of Mexico and when he returned to the US, he secured a job singing folk music at a coffee house at the University of Minnesota.

It was in Minneapolis where Soul got his first taste of theatre.

He was 21, married and with a child when he took over his friend’s role as the “Pugnacious Collier” in the Firehouse Theatre’s production of John Arden’s Sergeant Musgrave’s Dance.

Then, separated from his wife, Soul sent an audition tape and a photo, calling himself “The Covered Man” – while wearing a mask and shortening his name to Soul – to the William Morris Agency in New York, which signed him.

Actor David Soul in 2004 (Ian West/PA)

Soul travelled to New York in 1965 and appeared on The Merv Griffin Show for multiple singing appearances, as well as with MGM Records.

His first release was The Covered Man. Soul wore a mask for four months and would not show his face, saying he wanted to be “known for his music”.

Studying in New York with Uta Haugen and Irene Daily, Soul was given his first television role in 1960s dolphin series Flipper.

He was spotted on The Merv Griffin Show by a talent executive at Columbia/Screen Gems, then signed a contract with Screen Gems which saw him move to Los Angeles.

Soul acted in Star Trek, Here Come The Brides, Perry Mason and Johnny Got His Gun, throughout the 1960s and 1970s.

He got his break as officer John Davis in Clint Eastwood’s police yarn Magnum Force, about Inspector Harold Callahan, which led to a part in Starsky & Hutch from 1974 to 1979.

David Soul arrives for the annual National Television Awards at the Royal Albert Hall in central London in 2004 (Ian West/PA)

In the years following, Soul directed different television series, produced and directed theatre shows and produced and directed three documentaries.

He also funded, produced and co-directed a documentary on the shutdown of Pittsburgh’s steel industry between 1982 and 1985.

At the height of his fame he released the UK chart-toppers Don’t Give Up On Us and Silver Lady, and the hits Going In With My Eyes Open and Let’s Have A Quiet Night In.

Soul toured across large parts of the world with his band and performed as part of the late Queen’s silver jubilee in 1977.

But in the 1980s Soul hit the headlines when he was arrested for attacking his then-wife, and he went on to be part of a BBC programme in the early 2000s which aimed to tackle domestic violence.

He also went on to appear in TV series Salem’s Lot, an adaptation of Stephen King’s novel of the same name, as Ben Mears, who returns to his home town, which has been taken over by vampires.

Soul was also in Miami Vice, Harry’s Hong Kong, Homeward Bound and a TV series remake of Casablanca.


David Soul on stage at London’s Phoenix Theatre (Rebecca Naden/PA)

In the last 30 years of his life, Soul moved from Los Angeles to New Zealand, then to Australia, where he performed in Willy Russell’s Blood Brothers, Paris and finally London where he worked in theatre, television and film.

In the 1990s, he made his debut on the West End stage in the award-winning play Blood Brothers while he was living in the UK.

Some of his many television and film credits in the UK include appearances on Little Britain, Top Gear, Holby City, Agatha Christie’s Poirot: Death On The Nile, as well as films Tabloid and Puritan.

He and Glaser reprised their roles in the 2004 remake Starsky & Hutch, starring Ben Stiller as Starsky and Owen Wilson as Hutch.

Soul, who was a dual US and UK citizen, was married five times, including to actresses Mirriam Solberg, Karen Carlson, Patti Carnel Sherman and Julia Nickson, and had six children and seven grandchildren.

Soul died on Thursday at the age of 80 surrounded by his family, his wife Helen Snell said in a statement.

Tuesday, February 11, 2020

What We Talk About When We Talk About Monsters



North American Lake Monsters
By Nathan Ballingrud
Published 2013-13-07
Small Beer Press
300 Pages



What We Talk About When We Talk About Monsters

By John Langan SEPTEMBER 19, 2013

THERE’S SOMETHING ALMOST non-descript about the title of Nathan Ballingrud’s excellent new collection of stories, North American Lake Monsters. It’s as if we’re being presented with a field guide — albeit, an eccentric one — rather than a selection of powerful and moving horror stories. And yet, unassuming as the title is, its naturalist overtones point to one of the book’s principal influences, the broad American tradition of fiction that flows from Hemingway and Faulkner down to Raymond Carver, Larry Brown, and Daniel Woodrell. At the heart of this tradition is a meticulous portrayal of men and women attempting to meet the challenges of living in an opaque, even hostile world, their struggles frequently engendered as much by their own shortcomings as by the recalcitrance of their environment. Such a characters’ fight to resist the world, even when it is doomed to failure, has provided the engine for a wide array of American novels ranging from The Sun Also Rises (1926) to Winter’s Bone (2007). 

Thematically, this genealogy also lies within hailing distance of the horror narratives of writers such as H.P. Lovecraft, whose characters also contest overwhelming forces, exterior and interior. While this convergence has received little critical attention, it has been recognized and exploited by writers in the horror field ranging from Ray Bradbury to Stephen King. Their narratives lavish as much attention on character and setting as they do on the threat to them, creating, as it were, an imaginary werewolf in a real subdivision. The result of this is twofold. At the level of narrative action, the horrific elements gain in credibility and effect. At the level of narrative resonance, the real-world trials the characters face intersect the symbolic implications of the horrific elements, creating a whole greater than the sum of its parts. Thus, in a novel such as Something Wicked This Way Comes (1962) the adolescent anxieties besetting Bradbury’s teenaged protagonists manifest in outsize fashion in the monstrous carnival that descends on Green Town, Illinois. Similarly, the protean monster that stalks the pages of It (1986) mirrors the plethora of fears that afflict King’s characters, first as children and then as adults.

What Nathan Ballingrud does in North American Lake Monsters is to reinvigorate the horror tradition in which he participates by returning to that Hemingway-Faulkner source. Though it would be glib to describe the stories in this collection as Stephen King by way of Raymond Carver, Ballingrud’s portrayal of women and men clinging to the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder rings as true as any of Carver’s efforts, and gives his work an impressive heft.

The protagonist of the book’s opening story, the blistering “You Go Where It Takes You,” is a case in point. The single mother of a three-year-old daughter, waiting tables during the morning shift at the local diner, Toni is living a life that is gradually coming apart at the seams. Abandoned by her child’s father, pursued by a social worker questioning the child’s psychological well-being, her daily existence has become a puzzle she cannot solve. When a large but friendly customer offers to take her out, she accepts not out of any expectation of a Cinderella-style rescue from her circumstances, but because it will be something different to do, a break in the routine that is grinding her down. Yet when this man reveals a fantastic and gruesome secret to her, Toni reacts, not with fear, but with jealousy and desire, seizing the revelation as a chance for her to escape from her life. Her response, and the action it subsequently engenders, closes the story on a devastating note. This showcases one of Ballingrud’s strengths as a writer, his ability to inhabit the emotional lives of his characters in a way that feels utterly authentic.

That ability is on display throughout the rest of the stories in this book. In “Wild Acre,” a remarkable werewolf story, the beast is glimpsed only briefly during the story’s opening pages, but the psychological damage it inflicts on Jeremy, the sole survivor of its attack, poisons his life. Within the narrative, it is possible to recognize the outline of one of the more familiar werewolf stories, that of the man unwittingly infected by the monster’s curse. But Ballingrud uses that structure to frame a story about the ways in which violence warps the lives of all who encounter it. He offers no satisfying confrontation with the monster, no climactic dispatch of the beast and exorcism of its evil. The werewolf devotes no more attention to its victims than does any of the other forces arrayed against them, from an economy in recession to a social milieu in which they are not welcome. For the monster, its victims are food, worth no more attention than a lunchtime hamburger. Confronted by such circumstances, Jeremy is subject to the very real and alluring temptation to become like the beast, to embrace the violence that has granted it so much sway over his life. It is a compelling anatomy of the effects and the attractions of brutality

“Wild Acre” brings its monster onstage momentarily, and at a distance. Not all the stories in this collection, however, play as coy. The brilliant “Sunbleached” portrays a situation by now familiar to readers of vampire fiction: the disaffected youth who longs for a vampire to confer on him the gift of its condition. From Anne Rice to Stephanie Meyer, this plot has been treated in quasi-romantic terms. Ballingrud shifts the scenario to the Freudian family romance, giving us Joshua, a fifteen-year-old boy living with his mother and younger brother. Wounded by his father’s abandonment, jealous of his young mother’s boyfriend, Joshua looks to the vampire who becomes trapped under his house as a means to take control first of his own life, then of his family.. Yet the state of the vampire with whom Joshua is attempting to negotiate gives a clue that the situation is far, far worse than he realizes. Charred by a brief exposure to the rising sun, this is no handsome prince of the undead. Rather, it is sharp teeth and an appetite. We can hardly be blamed for guessing that the story will not turn out happily; when that guess is confirmed, however, it is in a scene shot through with a pathos even more devastating than the horror it accompanies.

Joshua is like many of the protagonists in Ballingrud’s stories: emotionally scarred; uncomfortable in his own skin; desperate for some kind of change, no matter good or bad. The vampire embodies one of the collection’s recurrent motifs, that of consumption. Sometimes it is the monsters who do the eating, sometimes the human characters, but the world of this book is one of hunger real and figurative, in which everyone is riven by a fundamental lack. Indeed, it may well be the manner in which a character responds to this radical insufficiency that defines him or her as monstrous or human. The monsters embrace and indulge their hungers unabashedly. The humans wrestle with their deficits, and although that struggle may lead them to terrible decisions, there is still the sense of their choices as stays against the abyss. Of course, this results in an irony that pervades the collection. But it is not a cheap irony, the knee-jerk response of the amateur cynic. Rather, it is the earned response of a writer who has watched men and women try to escape the traps of their lives by constructing bigger and more elaborate traps for themselves.

Among aficionados of horror fiction, it has become something of a commonplace to say that we are living in a new golden age of the field. Given the work of writers such as Laird Barron, Glen Hirshberg, Victor Lavalle, and Livia Llewellyn, this is not an unreasonable view to take. Certainly, the innovative and exciting fiction currently being produced in the horror field calls to mind the mid-1980s, when Clive Barker, T.E.D. Klein, Stephen King, and Peter Straub were demonstrating the potential of the horror story to serve as a vehicle for serious and sustained literary expression. Like the work of those earlier writers, that of Barron, Hirshberg, Lavalle, Llewellyn — and of Nathan Ballingrud — is built to last. Today, we might reach for a book such as Barker’s The Damnation Game (1985) or Klein’s Dark Gods (1985) as an example of work that has weathered the last few decades and promises to survive into those ahead. North American Lake Monsters is such a book. 

RECOMMENDED








Saturday, March 16, 2024

New species of extinct turtle found in Amazon, named for Stephen King character

A sea turtle swims over corals on Moore Reef in Gunggandji Sea Country off the coast of Queensland in eastern Australia on Nov. 13, 2022. The Great Barrier Reef, battered but not broken by climate change impacts, is inspiring hope
The Washington Times - 
Saturday, March 16, 2024


A newly discovered species of extinct, fossilized freshwater turtle discovered in the Amazon rainforest in Brazil was named for Maturin, a character from the works of novelist Stephen King.

The fossil was given the scientific name Peltocephalus maturin by a multinational team of researchers. Maturin is a giant cosmic turtle featured in Stephen King’s novel “It” as well as his “Dark Tower” series in which it’s credited with the creation of the universe.


The turtle dated to the late Pleistocene geological era 40,000 to 9,000 years ago, meaning it lived alongside people, per a release from the Senckenberg Center for Human Evolution and Palaeoenvironment at the University of Tubingen in Germany.

“Age inferences pinpoint Peltocephalus maturin as the latest giant freshwater turtle, inhabiting the Amazonian rainforest on the fringe of human arrival,” the researchers wrote in their introduction to their study about the turtle, published in the British journal Biology Letters.

Researchers believe Peltocephalus maturin was one of the largest freshwater turtles on record. While the current largest species have carapaces no longer than 55 inches, the fossil turtle’s shell is estimated to have been 70 inches long.

Lead author Gabriel Ferreira, a paleontologist at the University of Tubingen, told CBS News, “What would our ancestors have thought if they really saw such a giant alive? Would they be afraid of it? Would they hunt it for food or worship it? Or both?”


The study connects the extinction of Peltocephalus maturin to the period’s loss of other large animals, such as the wooly mammoth and saber-toothed tiger, caused in part by humans hunting them too much.

“Human predilection for giant turtles, for example, has been linked to body size decline in tortoises … and the overexploitation of island species leading to their extinction is well documented,” the study’s authors wrote.

Wednesday, September 27, 2023

Stephen King Gives 'Jimmy' Jordan A Frightening Fact Check On Crime

Ed Mazza
Updated Wed, September 27, 2023 


Bestselling author Stephen King called out House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) for missing the point on crime even after holding a hearing on the subject.

With the federal government on the brink of a shutdown as House Republicans fail to advance funding bills, Jordan took the Judiciary Committee to Chicago for the hearing, which critics dismissed as a stunt.

Rather than focus on the actual causes of crime, Jordan blamed it on Democratic lawmakers.

“You’re not safe in Democrat-run cities,” Jordan wrote on X, formerly Twitter, as he shared a report on armed robberies in Chicago.

King, who has long spoken out against gun violence and in favor of tighter restrictions on firearms, pointed out what Jordan seems to have missed:



King has called out other lawmakers for failing to act to prevent gun violence.

Earlier this year he pointed to Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) for obsessing over Hunter Biden instead of the epidemic of deadly gun violence.

Wednesday, April 10, 2024


How Elite Infighting Made the Magna Carta


 
 APRIL 8, 2024
Facebook

The Magna Carta (originally known as the Charter of Liberties) of 1215

The papacy’s role as organizer of the Crusades empowered it to ask for—indeed, to demand—tithes from churches and royal tax assessments from realms ruled by the warlord dynasties it had installed and protected. England’s nobility and clergy pressed for parliamentary reform to block King John and his son Edward III from submitting to Rome’s demands to take on debts to finance its crusading and fights against Germany’s kings. Popes responded by excommunicating reformers and nullifying the Magna Carta again and again during the 13th century.

The Burdensome Reign of King John

John I (1199-1216) was dubbed “Lackland” because, as Henry II’s fourth and youngest son, he was not expected to inherit any land. On becoming his father’s favorite, he was assigned land in Ireland and France, which led to ongoing warfare after his brother Richard I died in 1199. This conflict was financed by loans that John paid by raising taxes on England’s barons, churches, and monasteries. John fought the French for land in 1202, but lost Normandy in 1204. He prepared for renewed war in France by imposing a tallage in 1207; as S.K. Mitchell details in his book on the subject, this was the first such tax for a purpose other than a crusade.

By the 13th century, royal taxes to pay debts were becoming regular, while the papacy made regular demands on European churches for tithes to pay for the Crusades. These levies created rising opposition throughout Christendom, from churches as well as the baronage and the population at large. In 1210, when John imposed an even steeper tallage, many landholders were forced into debt.

John opened a political war on two fronts by insisting on his power of investiture to appoint bishops. When the Archbishop of Canterbury died in 1205, the king sought to appoint his successor. Innocent III consecrated Stephen Langdon as his own candidate, but John barred Stephen from landing in England and started confiscating papal estates. In 1211 the pope sent his envoy, Pandulf Verraccio, to threaten John with excommunication. John backed down and allowed Stephen to take his position, but then collected an estimated 14 percent of church income for his royal budget over the next two years—£100,000, including Peter’s Pence.

Innocent sent Pandulf back to England in May 1213 to insist that John reimburse Rome for the revenue that he had withheld. John capitulated at a ceremony at the Templar church at Dover and reaffirmed the royal tradition of fealty to the pope. As William Lunt details in Financial Relations of the Papacy with England to 1327, John received England and Ireland back in his fiefdom by promising to render one thousand marks annually to Rome over and above the payment of Peter’s Pence, and permitted the pope to deal directly with the principal local collectors without royal intervention.

John soon stopped payments, but Innocent didn’t protest, satisfied with having reinforced the principle of papal rights over his vassal king. In 1220, however, the new pope “Honorius III instructed Pandulf to send the proceeds of the [tallage of a] twentieth, the census [penny poll tax] and Peter’s Pence to Paris for deposit with the Templars and Hospitallers.”1 Royal control of church revenue was lost for good. The contributions that earlier Norman kings had sent to Rome were treated as having set a precedent that the papacy refused to relinquish. The clergy itself balked at complying with papal demands, and churches paid no more in 1273 than they had in 1192.

The barons were less able to engage in such resistance. Historian David Carpenter calculates that their indebtedness to John for unpaid taxes, tallages, and fines rose by 380 percent from 1199 to 1208. And John became notorious for imposing fines on barons who opposed him. That caused rising opposition from landholders—the fight that Richard had sought to avoid. The Exchequer’s records enabled John to find the individuals who owed money and to use royal fiscal claims as a political lever, by either calling in the debts or agreeing to “postpone or pardon them as a form of favor” for barons who did not oppose him.

John’s most unpopular imposition was the scutage fee for knights to buy exemption from military service. Even when there was no actual war, John levied scutage charges eleven times during his 17-year reign, forcing many knights into debt. Rising hostility to John’s campaign in 1214 to reconquer his former holdings in Normandy triggered the First Barons’ War (1215-1217) demanding the Magna Carta in 1215.

Opposition was strongest in the north of England, where barons owed heavy tax debts. As described in J.C. Holt’s classic study The Northeners, they led a march on London, assembling on the banks of the Thames at Runnymede on June 15, 1215. Although the Archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen Langdon, helped negotiate a truce based on a “charter of liberties,” a plan for reform between John and the barons that became the Magna Carta, the “rebellion of the king’s debtors” led to a decade-long fight, with the Magna Carta being given its final version under the teenaged Henry III in 1225.

Proto-Democratic Elements of the Magna Carta

There were proto-democratic elements in the Charter, most significantly the attempt to limit the king’s authority to levy taxes without the consent of a committee selected by the barons. The concept of “no taxation without representation” appears in the original Chapter 12: “No scutage or aid is to be levied in our kingdom, save by the common counsel of our kingdom,” and even then, only to ransom the king or for specified family occasions.

The linkage between debt, interest accruals, and land tenure was central to the Charter. Chapter 9 stated that debts should be paid out of movable property (chattels), not land. “Neither we [the king] nor our bailiffs are to seize any land or rent for any debt, for as long as the chattels of the debtor suffice to pay the debt.” Land would be forfeited only as a last resort, when sureties had their own lands threatened with foreclosure. And under the initial version of the Charter, debts were only to be paid after appropriate living expenses had been met, and no interest would accrue until the debtor’s heirs reached maturity.

Elite Interests in the Charter

The Magna Carta typically is depicted as the birth of England’s fight to create democracy. It was indeed an attempt to establish parliamentary restraint on royal spending, but the barons were acting strictly in their own interest. The Charter dealt with breaches by the king, but “no procedure was laid down for dealing with breaches by the barons.” In Chapter 39 they designated themselves as Freemen, meaning anyone who owned land, but that excluded rural villeins and cottagers. Local administration remained corrupt, and the Charter had no provisions to prevent lords from exploiting their sub-tenants, who had no voice in consenting to royal demands for scutages or other aids.

The 13th-century fight was to establish what would become the House of Lords, not the House of Commons. Empowering the nobility against the state was the opposite of the 19th-century drive against the landlord class and its claims for hereditary land rent. What was deemed democratic in Britain’s 1909/10 constitutional crisis was the ruling that the Lords never again could reject a House of Commons revenue act. The Commons had passed a land tax, which the House of Lords blocked. That fight against landlords was the opposite of the barons’ fight against King John.

Notes.

1. William Lunt, “Financial Relations of the Papacy with England to 1327. (Studies in Anglo-Papal Relations during the Middle Ages, I.),” (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Mediaeval Academy of America, 1939) pp. 597-598 and pp. 58-59.↩

This article was produced by Human Bridges.

Michael Hudson’s new book, The Destiny of Civilization, will be published by CounterPunch Books next month.