Stephen King's "On Writing": Sections 1 to 3

I was disappointed with King's narrow approach to the craft of writing in this section. I've enjoyed everything else I've read from the book, but this passage struck me as cynical and self-serving. Throughout it, he seems to assert that his own method of writing is the only road to success.

While I agree that reading is incredibly important in the development of a writer, I disagree that it's impossible for a writer to develop without reading four to six hours a day, as King encourages. There's no proof that Shakespeare - undoubtedly the greatest writer of all time - was as avid a reader as King. Until the 19th century, in fact, only the educated and elite could afford the luxury of books.

Shakespeare appears in the section as a "Great writer," along with Dickens and Faust and Chaucer. The passage in which King seperates all writers into four categories is, for lack of a better term, a load of old twaddle. To take something as subjective as literary quality and create a strictly structured categorization is shortsighted and beneath King's considerable talents.

My favourite thing about the article was when King described his experience with a story that used the word "zestful" in almost every sentence. He compares it to an antibiotic drug, pointing out that he has never used the word "zestful" since.