35. Conclusion

I kept forgetting that this book was written in 1975 because it brought out the same feelings and meanings as it probably did for college students who read it in the 70s. That's how you know when an author has become succesful; when they can stand the test of time. Going into this novel, I think that I had a lot of expectations for Stephen King and it's great to say that he reached most of them if not all of them. I liked his use of symbolism through fire, time, cycles and the wind. I also liked how he could bring all of his characters to life so it felt like you were in the novel experiencing every twisting turn of the plot with them. When I can relate to the characters of a book, I tend to stay faithful from the beginning to the end.

If I had to find one thing that I would change about this novel, it would be that I would have liked to see Stephen King explore a little bit more with the vampire culture in 'Salem's Lot. As a reader I got to see the different people in the town turn into vampires, but I never heard from them again. I would have liked to know their thoughts and challenges after becoming a vampire.

I'm really glad I had the chance to read this for my english class. How many people can say that they read Stephen King for their class? I think that's pretty awesome. If I've learned anything from reading this book, it's that things aren't always what they seem and to stand up for what you believe in...even if it means believing in vampires : )

34. Relevance of Gay Terms

The term fag keeps popping up, accompanied by the occasional phrase, "they must be queer for each other." I'm not sure if these terms have any purposeful underlying meaning to the plot, but I can't help but notice how nonchalantly they have been thrown about by Stephen King.

The only possible explanation for the usage of these terms might have to do with the time this book came out. I'm assuming that society in the 70s wasn't very welcoming to the idea of gay couples being open to the public about their relationships. As a result, the term fag and queer made their way into society's language and giving off a negative connotation.

As far as their use throughout the novel, I noticed that they were used mostly when referring to outsiders. For example, Hank Peters and Royal Snow are dropping off the boxes for Larry Crockett and they start talking about the Marsten House and the new "outsiders" that live in it.

pg.101

"Those guys must be crazy, tryin' to live there. Probably queer for each other anyway," said Henry.

"Like those fag interior decorators," Royal agreed. "Probably trying to turn it into a showplace. Good for business."

Those comments are quite ignorant to say the least, but the thing that I questioned was why they used those terms in comparison to all of the other dirty words in the dictionary you can use to describe two people?

33. And So the Cycle Continues

pg.457

"The old-timers say this is where it started," Ben said. "Back in 1951. The wind was blowing from the west. They think maybe a guy got careless with a cigarette. One little cigarette. It took off across the Marshes and no one could stop it," said Ben Mears.

After I read this, the whole picture came together. Everything came full circle for me. Throughout the novel, Stephen King kept mentioning wind and fire. For example, one time he said, "When the wind was right, its irregular burping noise would come to their ears faintly, like an uneasy spirit." He would also refer back to the fire of '51 frequently. I never knew what he was talking about until Ben Mears and Mark Petrie went to revisit 'Salem's Lot to finish the job they had started; setting fire to the town. I think that the references to the wind and the fire in the novel represented history beginning to repeat itself. The cycle was starting over.

This scene is very significant because it is Stephen King's way of showing how 'Salem's Lot will be reborn again. It exemplifies a cycle. I can only assume that the fire of '51 occurred as a direct result of what was going on in the town in the present day. It also signifies a new life for Ben Mears and Mark Petrie.

What I like the most about the way this novel ends is the way it ends with the scene from the beginning of the book. Stephen King is describing how the man and young boy looked like father and son. There is a reason that he mentions this twice and why he specifically mentions it at the beginning and end. He is reiterating the fact that everything is starting over. And so the cycle continues...

32. Dracula's Influence

From the words of Stephen King, "...but none of them could match Bram Stoker's novel of old horrors colliding with modern technology and investigative techniques. That one was in a class by itself." In the introduction to 'Salem's Lot, Stephen King makes it quite clear that Bram Stoker's, Dracula, is at the top of his favorites list when it comes to vampire fiction. It is no surprise that we can see Stoker's influence in Stephen King's, 'Salem's Lot.

The first thing that I noticed that resembled Stoker's novel was the way Stephen King formatted his novel. Dracula is set up in journal entries. Similarly, 'Salem's Lot is set up by each character's personal story. Stephen King mimics the journal entry set up but he uses his own voice to describe each character instead of each character writing his or her own entry.

I also noticed a similarity between Dracula's, Van Helsing and 'Salem's Lot's Matt Burke. Both men exemplify scholarly researchers who look at the facts and try to come up with a solution. I also see a similarity between the main character Ben Mears and Dracula's, Jonathan Harker. First of all, both of them are men and second, both of them have experienced evil on a traumatic personal level. For example, Jonathan Harker meets Dracula himself and Ben Mears sees Hubert Marsten hanging from the attic of the Marsten House.

And last but not least, Stephen King goes as far as actually mentioning a line from Dracula in his book:

pg. 365

"We must go through bitter waters before we reach the sweet."

There's definitely no denying that Stephen King admires Bram Stoker. We see it throughout the whole book. I think Stephen King actually just attempted to take Dracula right out of Bram Stoker's novel and put him into an American small town called, 'Salem's Lot.

31. 'Salem's Lot Movie (1979)

I had the opportunity to view the 1979 movie version of 'Salem's Lot and was really happy I watched it, even though it was extremely long! I was really excited to see how it compared to the book because I feel that Stephen King's writing was almost made for movies. He gives a lot of description and dramatic effects in his novels that would work great for a movies. That is probably why he went on to have his books turn into movies.

If I had to choose between the movie and the book for 'Salem's Lot, I would have to say that I actually enjoyed reading the book better. I could be biased because I read the book first and had certain expectations for the movie, but either way, the concept of 'Salem's Lot remains the same and that's all that really matters.

One of the big differences that bothered me in the movie was that a lot of the characters had different names and were mixed up in the plot. For example, instead of Bonnie Sawyer having an affair with a young kid named Bryant, she had an affair with Larry Crockett. Floyd Tibbits name was Ned and Matt Burke's name was Jason.

Another thing that was different was that Susan Norton was not in the movie for most of the plot. The movie portrayed her as going off to Boston for a while. Ben Mears' late wife, Miranda, was never mentioned and his motorcycle accident was never brought up either. I felt that this part of the book was really important because it was part of Ben's motive to keep on going.

Besides other tiny things that were significantly different from the book, there was one other major difference between the two; time. In the movie, time did not play a role in the events that occurred. There was no significant scene that emphasized the importance of time at all.

I know that there is also a 2004 version, but I have not been able to see that yet. Let's just hope it did a little better of of interpreting Stephen King's novel.

30. Vampire Stereotypes

Compared with other novels we read this semester, the characteristics that the vampires displayed in 'Salem's Lot were stereotypical. The vampires were very typical in the sense that they only came out at night, they slept in coffins, their eyes were red, skin was pale, they hated crucifixes and garlic, and they could live for a long time. I was a little disappointed about this aspect of Stephen King's novel.

I really wish he would have spent more time on the relationships between the vampires and the humans instead of spending so much time building up the suspense. It seemed like Stephen King would spend 5o pages building up the suspense to a theme and then when it happened, it only took up one page. Although Stephen King did have a lot of really good passages that could be taken out and torn apart to make you think deeper about broader ideas, I was really looking to be a little more entertained. I just really wish Stephen King would have looked more at the life of the vampires and not just the victims. He hardly spent any time looking at how Barlow lived and his thoughts. He focused mainly on the fear that resided in the victims and just added in the stereotypical vampire characteristics.

29. Introducing the Characters

Introducing the different characters of 'Salem's Lot took a lot of time out of Stephen King's plot, but I think that at the same time, it was vital that the reader knew a little bit about each of the characters. He played off of the small town atmosphere and introduced all of the different families and people of the town in different chapters. He gave them each their own little story and small piece of background.


This format was effective because it went along with the idea that everyone who lived in 'Salem's Lot knew everything about each other because it was such a small town. It also helped give the reader an introduction and an insight of some of the underlying secrets and gossip that went on in the town. It also helped to create some sort of relationship with each character. If Stephen King would have just introduced a character and then have them being killed off in the same scene, the reader wouldn't have been able to get into the plot at all. The people in the novel made the plot interesting because they all had their own little quirks and they all added something to the functionality of 'Salem's Lot.

28. Black vs. White

This was probably one of the most important battles of the whole book; Father Callahan against Barlow himself. It wasn't just important because it symbolized good vs. evil, it was important because it showed how powerful the force of evil can be; even against a priest like Father Callahan.

pg. 380

Barlow said, "Then will you throw away your cross and face me on even terms - black against white?"

Barlow was referring to Father Callahan's faith and Barlow's faith. White is the symbol of purity. Therefore, Father Callahan would be represented by white. Black is the symbolizes death and mourning. Therefore, Barlow would be represented by black.

Right away, Father Callahan had used the cross against Barlow and Barlow just laughed in his face. He told Father Callahan that the cross meant nothing if he had no faith in his church and continued to make a mockery of Father Callahan's priesthood.

I think that the reason that Barlow ended up winning in the end was simply because he was feeding off of Father Callahan's uncertainties and doubts in his own church. In fact, Father Callahan said it himself earlier in the novel; the Force of the church was not something to be dealt with lightly. The Force meant nothing if the person using it was uncertain of it's power.

I found it very interesting that Stephen King used communion as a medium for Father Callahan's crossing over into the dark side. The bread and the wine that Father Callahan used to consider his religion's communion was replaced with the communion of Barlow's religion. The bread became flesh and the wine transitioned into blood.

27. Eva's Dream

I liked trying to interpret this part of the novel the most because it had so many hidden messages. I feel that it is very important in filling in the missing pieces as to how Barlow ended up in her house without anyone noticing.

The passage began with:

pg.400

"Eva Miller had been dreaming. It was not quite a nightmare. The fire of '51 was raging under an unforgiving sky..."

First of all, the dream hinted at a connection between the fire of '51, which seems to be an event that has been looming over 'Salem's Lot for years, and the present state of the small town. Not until the end did I understand that she was actually seeing the rebirth of the town all over again, just like in '51.

The second thing I noticed about the dream was that it probably wasn't a dream at all, but that she was actually falling victim to the vampire, Ed Craig. There was a reason she couldn't remember the vivid details. It was almost as if she was being distracted by Ed Craig.

Then I began to notice that she started to describe the night in terms like, "lined a face in blood - a face with a hawk nose, deep-set eyes, full and sensuous lips" and in a way, it sounded like she was describing Barlow. Was she really imagining Barlow in her presence? I think this detail is also significant because it suggests the correlation between Barlow's essence and the dark night.

Thirdly, Eva said that she heard a voice say, "The Welsh dresser" and described it as his voice. This led me to believe that Barlow really was in the room with Eva. Lastly, Eva glanced into a mirror and did not see her reflection, making it official; Eva was now a vampire too.

In brief, I've come to the conclusion that what Eva thought to be a dream, was actually her being distracted by Ed Craig while Barlow was making a little place for himself to stay in the cellar of her house and going unnoticed. Moreover, that explains how Ben Mears and Mark Petrie had no idea where Barlow was hiding. Barlow found a place that they would have never suspected...right under their noses.

26. Time

The timing of events in this novel was crucial to keeping it suspenseful. Stephen King dropped subtle hints throughout the novel about time, but it wasn't until I read the novel the second time that I picked up on those hints. For example, I never even noticed that when Stephen King introduced the Lot, every chapter started with a different hour of the day. For example, at 5:00 p.m. Matt Burke left the high school and at 7:30 p.m. that same night, Marjorie Glick saw her sons for the last time.

I can't ignore the fact that Ben Mears showed up in town around the same time that Straker and Barlow did either. That timing caused a lot of suspicion and gave Ben Mears a bad reputation right off the bat. At one point, Ben Mears mentioned to Susan Norton that the town had the wrong name and that it should have been named Time.

The most obvious use of time was in the end when Ben Mears and Mark Petrie were racing the clock to get a stake in Barlow's heart before sunset came at exactly 6:55 p.m. Stephen King's used of time really made the ending suspenseful and it really brought another thought to mind.

I find that it was really ironic that time was so prevalent in the novel because in actuality, time meant nothing to vampires. Vampires lived such long lives that time must not even matter to them. I think Stephen King might have been playing off of that idea and pointing out that time meanr everything to humans in this story and yet it had no meaning for the vampires.

25. Common Sense

One of the things that disappointed me the further I got into this novel was the fact that Stephen King really made Ben Mears and his clan seem rather dumb, if you will. I know that this might be kind of irrelevant to the whole picture, but I felt that it took them forever to realize that Straker and Barlow were actually really intelligent people. I mean, it's common sense to know that Straker and Barlow knew what they were doing when they arrived in the town. Barlow has been a vampire for hundreds of years. He knows what he is doing and he didn't come unprepared for the suspicions of a small town like 'Salem's Lot. I'm sure he's seen it many times before. Near the end of the book is when Ben finally said the following:

pg.356

"He's anticipated us...He's been four jumps ahead every mile of the way. Did we - could we - actually think that he would be blissfully unaware of us? That he never took the possbility of discovery and opposition into account?"

"It's about time" is what I wanted to tell Stephen King. But I guess that was part of his tactic when writing this. He had to drag out the drama. I think that in this case, it might have been better for him to cut down on some of the dramatic effects in order to keep his readers from losing their interest in the main character, Ben Mears. It made me think a little less of his intelligence. It also slowed down the tempo of the book. Maybe Stephen King wanted to slow down the tempo a little bit so he could lead into the ending with more suspense.

24. Freud's View of Evil

I could probably go on forever about Freud's philosophy, but I'm not going to because that would take days. I do, however, think that his name is worth mentioning because his idea of evil is mentioned in a very important scene of this book. He is mentioned when Father Callahan and Matt Burke are discussing the Force of the church against evil. More specifically, the Force of the church against vampires.

I found a website that had a lot of pertinent information on the philosophy of religion. Most of the information was based off of Freud's views of religion. What I have gathered from that site was that Freud thought that religion was just something that was made up in the human mind. But more importantly, his views on evil seemed to be very influential in the Catholic Church at the time Stephen King wrote this book.

What does this mean for Father Callahan? Basically it meant that Father Callahan had a lot of doubts going through his mind of his faith and the Catholic Church. Freud was changing the overall concept of evil in the church. The Catholic Church was beginning to look at evil as not one person, but like I mentioned earlier, evil in more than one form. This made a huge difference in how Father Callahan approached the vampires in the novel. His beliefs must be strong and focused if he was to agree to helping Matt Burke in his quest to destroy the vampires.

23. Callahan's Church

Out of all of the characters, Stephen King did a great job when he decided to create Father Callahan's presence in the novel. This is the first vampire fiction that I have read where a priest gets twisted in with the plot as much as Father Callahan did. Not only did Stephen King question Father Callahan's beliefs, but he questioned the belief of the Catholic Church through Father Callahan.

I really liked the part in the novel where Matt Burke was asking for Father Callahan's help and Father Callahan replied with the following:

pg.328

"I may be a poor excuse for a priest - at times I've thought so - a bit jaded, a bit cynical, and just lately suffering a crisis of...what? faith? identity?...but I still believe enough in the awesome, mystical, and apotheotic power of the church which stand behind me to tremble a bit at the thought of accepting your request lightly."

That statement was such a powerful statement for a priest to make and it really brought the situation to life. At that moment I really felt for Father Callahan because of the pressure put on him. If anyone was going to use the Force of the church, it was going to be Father Callahan...and that was a big responsiblity to carry on one's shoulders. But in the end, I think that Matt Burke was speaking to the whole town when he said, "On the contrary, I think it's your chance to put your church - your church - to the test." It meant that it was time for Father Callahan, along with Ben Mears and Mark Petrie to put their faith to the test and trust that everything would happen the way their God planned it.

22. Seduction

Seduction is one of the things that I noticed Stephen King really hadn't touched on too much in this novel so far. I've seen two sections where he briefly mentions the pleasure of being bitten by a vampire. The first one is when Jimmy Cody explains his experience to Ben Mears after being bitten by Mrs. Glick.

pg.293

"And when she was doing it, I liked it, Ben. That's the hellish part. I actually had an erection. Can you believe it? If you hadn't been there to pull her off, I would have...would have let her."

And then all of a sudden, the subject changes to Ben Mears punching Jimmy Cody in the face in order to make up some story to tell the police. Stephen King spends no time dissecting that experience in the least bit.

The second experience is in the same disturbing scene where Straker is beating up Mark Petrie and Straker is telling him what will happen to him when the Barlow gets to him. Straker tells him that Barlow will have intercourse with him and then set him free. I interpreted that as meaning Barlow would bite him and turn him into a vampire, therefore setting him free when he was done with him. I am making the assumption that biting a victim is the equivolent of having sex with for a vampire.

Other than those two instances, I can't find any other references to pleasure throughout the novel. I wouldn't really bring seduction up, but that has played such a huge part in the other few vampire fictions we have read in class such as Fledgling and Interview with the Vampire. It just surprises me that Stephen King would leave that out.

21. Mark Petrie the Houdini

The scene in the book that I keep coming back to occurs after Mark Petrie and Susan Norton break into the Marsten House. I keep coming back to it because it is so disturbing. The scene is where Mark is being carried to the attic by Straker. It is the first time that I saw the evil side of Straker. But even more disturbing is the fact that he practically beats up a child.

pg.309

"Mark bit his lip and writhed on the floor. Straker chuckled. 'Come, young master. To your feet.'"

"He kicked again, this time striking the large muscle of the thigh. The pain was dreadful, but Mark clenched his teeth together. He got his knees, and then to his feet."

The scene gets even more graphic when Mark gets out of the rope like Houdini and waits for Straker to come up the stairs so he can beat him to death.

pg.315

"He brought the leg down with both hands, not as hard as he could - he sacrificed some force for better aim. It struck Straker just above the temple, as he started to turn to look behind the door. his eyes, open wide, squeezed shut in pain. Blood flew from the scalp wound in an amazing spray."

As much as this scene was disturbing for me, I also felt that it was a turning point in the novel. If a young boy like Mark Petrie could kill a large, intimidating, evil man like Straker, there was still that hope that good could preside over evil. I think that if it was any other person put in the place of Mark, Straker would never have carried out his Master's plan. The reason Stephen King put Mark in that position goes back to the fact that he wanted the reader to think like a child. Mark Petrie was thinking irrationally. As stupid as his Houdini plan might have sounded to an adult, he made it work. I think that if an adult was put into that situation, they would have just waited for their death because they would have thought that they were already defeated.

20. Straker

Straker is a most peculiar character in this novel. First and foresmost, up until this point, all I knew about him was that he was holding the fort down until Barlow "supposedly" got back from his trip. He seemed to be able to have the men in the town scared of his intentions and the women in the town wrapped around his finger. Even Parkins Gillespie could not find any background on Straker that would lead him to believe that he was trouble. That says a lot, considering Parkins Gillespie seemed to have his nose in almost every corner of town. Stephen King made it a point to add that Straker was "Very Old World" charming. What does that even mean? It could have something to do with the fact that he is either a vampire or that he knows vampires like Barlow who are also "worldly".

I think that is why Straker's character was so intimidating. No one seemed to know much about him and yet he seemed to hold power over everyone because no one knew anything about him. It didn't take long, however, for Ben Mears to start questioning who or what Straker was.

pg.269

"Whatever Straker may be, he's not a vampire," Ben said, "unless the old legends are completely wrong. He's been highly visible in the daytime."

pg.346

"Well, I think I've put some of the pieces together. Straker must be this thing's human watchdog and bodyguard...a kind of human familiar."

It still isn't quite clear to me what Straker was, but I believe that he made some sort of deal with the devil as far as serving Barlow. I just wonder how the two met and what kind of a relationship they had. Was it simply business or did Barlow find something in Straker that he did not see in other humans? If Straker was completely human, he couldn't have just been thrown into the position to be Barlow's human watchdog. One little mistake and Straker's fate would have been at the hands of Barlow.

The novel quickly mentions that Straker had to perform several sacrifices for Barlow before Barlow even came to town, but it still doesn't explain how they met. How does one get into the business side of vampirism?

19. Miranda and Susan

About two-thirds of the way through 'Salem's Lot, Stephen King implied that there was some sort of connection between Miranda (Ben's late wife) and Susan Norton. Ben Mears had just given Susan Norton a cross to keep with her because he feared for her safety as they were about to go their separate ways. At that same moment, Ben Mears had a flashback.

pg.258

"For no reason at all he thought of Miranda and Miranda's dying: the motorcycle hitting the wet patch, going into a skid, the sound of her scream, his own brute panic, and the side of the truck growing and growing as they approached broadside."

"Susan."

"Yes."

"Take good care of yourself. Please."

Although Ben Mears appeared to have no reason as to why he was thinking about the accident, it is obvious that he had the same feelings for Susan Norton as he had for Miranda. He loved Susan Norton. He was subconsciously going back to a time where he felt the responsiblity of taking care of the one he loved and now that someone was Susan Norton.

At the end of the novel Ben Mears had another flashback of Miranda's body after the accident. Right after he killed Barlow, he thought about Miranda. I think that he subconsciously was thinking about his love for Susan at the same time. He was thinking about his revenge on Barlow for killing his new love, Susan Norton. Ben Mears had his love taken away from him not once, but two times. Ben Mears was blending his two loves together as one person.

18. The Crucifix

At this point in the book, religion becomes a prominent defense in the fight against vampirism. In particular, the crucifix becomes a mode of defense and it provides a feeling of safety. Ben Mears is about to leave the hospital after visiting Matt Burke who just had a heart attack, but before he leaves, he runs to the closet.

pg.249

"'Here, what are you doing?"

A nurse had come in with a pitcher of water and a bedpan with a towel spread decorously over the opening.

"I'm putting his cross around his neck," Ben said.

"Is he a Catholic?"

"He is now," Bens said somberly.

Immediately upon leaving Matt Burke's side, Ben Mears finds Susan and asks, "Have you got a crucifix?" When Susan found humor in Ben Mears's insistence upon wearing a cross, Ben Mears said, "Believe what you want, but make the cross."

Although Stephen King was trying to show how religion had its place in this horror novel, I can't help but question what the significance of the Catholic church was compared to other forms of Christianity? And what is the difference between a cross and a crucifix? Growing up Lutheran, I was exposed to both the cross and the crucifix and cannot recall if there was a difference.

After doing some research, I came across the New World Encyclopedia and found some information on the significance of the crucifix in the Catholic church. First of all, it says that the cross and the crucifix are related, but they should not be confused with meaning the same thing. The cross emphasizes Christ's resurrection because the cross is empty. It shows that Christ has risen. The crucifix emphasizes Christ's death for the sins of humanity. Therefore, Christ's body is on still on the crucifix.

Unlike the cross, the crucifix is known for exorcising demons. That would explain why the crucifix is more prominent in this novel. It would also explain why the Catholic religion is more prominent in this novel because it is the religion that identifies most with the crucifix. While I find this to be interesting, I question the accuracy of Stephen King's writing. From the previous examples I have shown, you can see that the cross and the crucifix are both mentioned in the novel as scaring away vampires. The facts, however, show that the crucifix is really the only effective form of exorcising. I guess we will never fully know until we come across a vampire and I don't plan on doing that any time in the near future.

17. Alone

pg. 222

"Alone. Yes, that's the key word, the most awful word in the English tongue. Murder doesn't hold a candle to it and hell is only a poor synonym..."

I don't know what is worse than being alone. Stephen King created a pattern of experiencing loneliness in each of the main characters at one point up until now. First it was the Glick boy who got swallowed by the dark when he was alone, Ben Mears was singled out as a newcomer, Mark Petrie was alone in the sense that his parents looked down on him for being wise beyond his years, Mike Ryerson was alone while he battled a sickness he couldn't understand, and now Matt Burke was alone as he traveled up the stairs of his home because heard a noise that Susan couldn't hear.

There really isn't anything worse than being alone in the world. In this novel, being alone made the characters question their own sanity. Stephen King keeps coming back to rational vs. irrational thoughts. When the irrational is confronted, how does one know that her or she is thinking irrationally or rationally? Who and what determines whether one is thinking rationally or irrationally? Stephen King starts to show the characters slipping in and out of madness. It really puts a pause on what is going on in the physical environment and distracts the characters. Their attention is diverted inward, creating another battle on top of the one that is taking place in 'Salem's Lot; the battle vs. loneliness.

16. The Emperor of Ice Cream

This poem is open to many different interpretations, but I thought I would try and find an interpretation that relates best to Part Two of the reading. The poem is as stated below:

Call the roller of big cigars,

The muscular one, and bid him whip

In kitchen cups concupiscent curds.

Let the wenches dawdle in such dress

As they are used to wear, and let the boys

Bring flowers in last month's newspapers.

Let be finale of seem.

The only emperor is the emperor of ice cream.

Take from the dresser of deal,

Lacking the three glass knobs, that sheet

On which she embroidered three fantails once

And spread it so as to cover her face.
If her horny feet protrude, they come

To show how cold she is, and dumb.

Let the lamp affix its beam.

The only emperor is the emperor of ice cream.

By: Wallace Stevens

Before beginning to interpret this however, I had to give a definition to some of the words that I wasn't quite sure of. I chose the definitions that made the most sense to this novel. The following definitions are what I came up with and they are from dictionary.com:

1. whip - to move and go quickly or suddenly; dart

2. deal - a board of fir or pine

3. fantails - a breed of domestic pigeons having a rounded, fan-shaped tail

4. horny - hornlike as a result of hardening; callous

The image I have created in my mind after reading this is a woman who has died and is covered in a sheet that she has created and kept in her dresser. Let be finale as seem makes me think that this is her death. She is done and we must come to terms with her death. At the same time, I am also seeing a celebration of some sort taking place because there are flowers and cigars. As far as I know, cigars are smoked on special occasions such as weddings and births. They must be celebrating her life.

The hardest part I had interpreting this was the line that said, "the only emperor is the emperor of ice cream." What does that mean? How does ice cream relate to death? There are two things that I could come up with. The first was that the ice cream represents life itself. You have no power over death. You will melt away at some point. You can't freeze time, but whoever presides over you can decide how long you will stay alive; that would be the emperor. Ice cream can be frozen by the one who has it in their control. They have complete control over when the ice cream will melt. The second thing I came up with was simply that the ice cream represented celebration along with the cigars and flowers.

The hardest part about interpreting this poem was trying to relate it back to Part Two of the novel. At this point in the novel, people are beginning to go missing and people are dying without explanation. There is a fear that runs through the main characters. Susan, Ben, Mark and Matt are all feeling that they no longer have control over what is going on. They fear for their own safety and the safety of others.

It seems like Stephen King was putting more emphasis on the line of the poem that says, "the only emperor is the emperor of ice cream," rather than putting emphasis on the celebration of life. He is showing that the fear of not knowing when your time to go is overshadowing Susan, Ben, Mark and Matt. Their time to melt away could be tomorrow...

15. Jeepers Creepers, Where'd Ya Get Those Eyes?!

'Salem's Lot brings whole new meaning to the term 'the eyes have it'. The eyes of the vampires in this novel had all the power. Stephen King made sure to let the reader know that the eyes played an important role when inviting a vampire in.

As more and more people were beginning to fall victim to vampirism, Stephen King gave us a closer look at how exactly the victim got drawn into the path of the vampire. The scene where Mark Petrie was visited by Danny Glick at night was probably one of the most important in understanding the concept.

pg.261

"'Yet if you looked in the eyes, it wasn't so bad. If you looked in the eyes, you weren't so afraid anymore and you saw that all you had to do was open the window and say, 'C'mon in, Danny,' and then you wouldn't be afraid at all because you'd be at one with Danny and all of them and at one with him. You'd be - No! That's how they get you!"

What I found most interesting about this instance was the fact that even though Mark knew he wasn't supposed to look into the eyes, he was curious and struggled to look away. This tells us a little about human nature. We are curious about evil and its depths. The best I can compare this to is a news story. Nobody really likes to turn on the television and watch a news story about how the flowers are bright and the sun is out and the butterflies are fluttering all over. No, we are drawn to news stories about murder mysteries and burglaries.

Another thing that I found interesting about this part in the book is that I could tie it back to the Marsten House. Since the beginning of the book, Stephen King has ended nearly every chapter with a character looking up at the Marsten House's bright windows and its shutters. Why is everyone so fascinated with looking up at the shutters? Could it be that the house imitates a vamire? The windows represent the vampire's eyes. The characters are curious about the evilness of the house and can't pull their attention away. They are drawn to the evil, just like they are drawn to the evil eyes of the vampire.

14. Personal Invite

As you've seen from my past two blogs, I have really been interested in the evil aspect of this book. I want to entertain one more thought, however, before I move on. We held a brief discussion in my english class about whether the town makes the people evil or whether people make the town evil. In terms of what I've discussed already about evil, I have come to the conclusion that the people must surely make the town evil. This place has already been contaminated with evil thoughts and actions long before the vampires arrived.

A little more than halfway through the book, I began to see that the town had a lot of underlying secrets. Weasel had an issue with alcohol, Bonnie Sawyer cheated on her husband with a young kid named Bryant, Mrs. McDougall hit her baby, and Larry Crockett liked to make deals with the devil. I can't help to see that all of these lies and secrets were a personal invitation for vampires to take advantage of.

It is a well-known stereotype that vampires must be invited in order to cause harm. King sticks with the logic that the people of the town and their petty lies invite the vampires in. The following passage confirms my thought process:

pg. 231

"These are the town's secrets, and some will later be known and some will never be known. The town keeps them all with the ultimate poker face. The town cares for the devil's work no more than it cares for God's or man's. It knew darkness. And darkness was enough.

Darkness was enough to invite Barlow and Straker and the Marsten House was their temporary home.

13. EVIL

The theory of evil is not strictly limited to Ben Mears and that's why I wanted to continue the conversation of how evil was represented in the book by a different character . I was really happy to see that Stephen King put Father Callahan into the novel because evil and religion go hand in hand. It's good vs. evil. If anyone would know what evil was, it would be a priest, right?

pg.167

"It was the steady, dead, onrushing engine of the church, bearing down all petty sins on its endless shuttle to heaven. It was the ritualistic acknowledgement of evil by a church now more concerned with social evils; atonement told in beads for elderly ladies whose parents had spoken European tongues. It was the actual presence of evil in the confessional, as real as the smell of old velvet. But it was a mindless, moronic evil from which there was no mercy or reprieve...In fact, he was being forced to the conclusion that there was no EVIL in the world at all but only evil - or perhaps (evil)."

When I read the previous passage, not only was I surprised that Father Callahan was having doubts about what evil was, I was also entertained with the idea that EVIL was not just one thing. It had many faces. Up until that point of the book, I was under the impression that if Ben Mears could just locate the source of evil, he could destroy it. That's not that case at all.

Father Callahan showed that he had experienced many faces of evil with each confession he went through. He saw that evil existed in every person dwelling in 'Salem's Lot. Each of them had their own source of evil living in them and they displayed that evil in various ways. It's almost scarier to think that evil does not exist in one form because then you know that you can't defeat it. Let's just say that evil was definitely not a new thing to the town of 'Salem's Lot. The vampires were just a different form of it. Evil existed long before the vampires came along and probably before the Marsten House was built too.

12. The Haunting of Hill House

As I was reading this, I stumbled upon a passage that mentioned The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson. I probably would have just read right over this because I wasn't familiar with the book, but the following passage from that book caught my attention. Ben Mears quoted:

pg. 127

"'And whatever walked there , walked alone.' You asked what my book was about. Essentially, it's about the recurrent power of evil."

I looked up a summary of The Haunting of Hill House online and read through it to get a feel for how it related to 'Salem's Lot and the Marsten House. The Hill House was set in a small town just like 'Salem's Lot and, SURPRISE, it was reported to be haunted. On a more serious note, however, I looked further into what Ben Mears was referring to when he was talking about the recurrent power of evil.

Like Ben Mears in 'Salem's Lot, Dr. Montague in The Haunting of Hill House was very interested in the supernatural and took interest in the Hill House. Similarly, Ben Mears took interest in the Marsten House because of his supernatural experience as a young boy. Ben Mears came back to 'Salem's lot for explanations, just like Dr. Montague went to the Hill House to investigate. From what I understand, anything that entered the Hill House became haunted. It was a symbol of evil. In some cases, people thought it was evil in the raw form. 'Salem's Lot also creates the idea that the Marsten House is evil. At one point in the book, the house is described as a "dark idol" sitting on the hill.

When Ben Mears spoke of the recurrent power of evil, I think that he was referring to Hubert Marsten himself. Anything that lived in that house, including Hubert Marsten, was evil. It seems to me that Ben Mears was looking at the death of the Glick boys and connecting that with the Marsten House. He suggested in a way that Hubert Marsten was coming back as an evil force through the Marsten House and wreaking havoc on the small town of 'Salem's Lot.

11. The Antique Business

King's choice to have Straker and Barlow open up an antique shop is a very interesting occupation for a vampire. In the beginning, I kept wondering why anyone would open an antique shop in a small town like 'Salem's Lot. First of all, the prices were probably really high and no one in the town would spend the money on anything. Second, if they did buy anything, they probably wouldn't buy another item in the near future. And there couldn't have been enough people traveling through the town to help their business either.

After I read the following passage where Straker is speaking with Parkins Gillespie, things started to fall into place a little better:

pg. 115

"'We have worked together in both London and Hamburg, This' - he swept his arm around him - 'this is our retirement. Modest. Yet tasteful. We expect to make no more than a living. Yet we both love old things, fine things, and we hope to make a reputation in the area...'"

It made sense at that point in the novel that Barlow and Straker's antique business was not just a cover-up for the reason why they moved into 'Salem's Lot. They didn't care if they made any money. The antiques were symbolic of their own lives as vampires. Barlow and Straker were just as unique and worldly as the antiques were. The way Straker noted that he loved old things and fine things, he was actually speaking of himself and what he brought to the town. As far as making a reputation, the only reputation Straker was referring to was creating a colony of more vampires.

10. Don't Take it the Wrong Way

One thing that I noticed about halfway through the novel is the way Stephen King grabs the reader's attention through some of the little sayings he uses. He'll randomly throw in things that could be taken literally and in a whole other direction.

Some of the phrases he used were:

"He was dead scared."

"The ghost of those days seemed to crowd in on her like..."

"...that took the heart out of you and made you no good."

"Her face was pale and ghostly."

"Someone who - shall I say? - has taken the word and made it flesh."

"A man can sink his teeth into one of those."

I think he just does that to throw you off guard and make you pay attention to the details. It could also just be the way he writes. You can tell that he writes to entertain his readers because he is really dramatic. He uses those lines to get a reaction and build suspense for what's to come. Sometmes they make me laugh because they are so corny, but then other times I find it really makes me want to know what he's implying.

9. Childhood Fears

One of the things that fascinated me the most about this novel was the way Stephen King plays around with the notion that our childhood fears are far more scarier than our adult fears. It draws upon the difference between our childhood fears and our adulthood fears. The following passage comes from the part in the novel where Hank Peters and Royal Snow are moving the boxes for Larry Crockett. This is one of the first instances I found in the book that really put childhood fears in perspective for the reader:

pg.101

"Hank felt a strain of fear enter his heart that he had not even felt in Nam, although he had been scared most of his time there. That was a rational fear. Fear that you might step on a pongee stick and see your foot swell up like some noxious green balloon, fear that some kid in black p.j.'s whose name you couldn't even fit in your mouth might blow your head off...But this fear was childlike, dreamy. There was no reference point to it. A house was a house-boards and hinges and nails and sills."

The difference that this passage shows us is that our childhood fears are irrational, whereas our adult fears are rational. Children have a much more open and imaginative mind than adults do. Hank and Royal are experiencing irrational fear when they enter the Marsten house. Like I mentioned in an earlier blog, the reason that irrational fear is so scary is because it is the fear of not knowing what's going on or why things are happening without an explanation. It's one thing to have a fear of heights because the consequence would be falling. That's a rational fear. An irrational fear, on the other hand, is fearing something that may or may not be true. You don't know if it is true or not and that is why it is so scary. You can't see an ending or a result to the fear and have no explanation for it.

Irrational fear was represented in 'Salem's Lot through vampires, the Marsten house, strange disappearances and reappearances of close friends and family. This aspect really made the book interesting because it opened up a realm of possiblities for where the plot might end up. This also continues my ideas that I mentioned about dreaming vs. realism. Are the characters believing what they're seeing or are they just dreaming it? In this case, irrational thinking might represent dreaming while rational thinking means realism.

*I ran across this site called Childhood Fears. It is a photographer who takes pictures using the theme of childhood fears.

8. Looking From the Outside In

At this point in the novel, people in the town aren't just becoming suspicious of the weird happenings in 'Salem's Lot, they are becoming suspicious of Ben Mears and anyone else they consider to be an outsider.

Parkins Gillespie actually went to Ben's place to investigate him, even though there was no evidence tracing him to the events going on in 'Salem's Lot. Ben's response to Parkins Gillespie's visit was honest and it expressed his irritation.

pg.112

"I'm just tired of being the stranger in town, getting pointed at in the streets, being nudged over in the library. Now you come around with this Yankee trader routine, trying to find out if I've got Ralphie Glick's scalp in my closet."

It just so happens that Ben Mears came to the town at the same time that Barlow and Straker did, which made him even more susceptible to judgment. Everyone was wondering why these two world travelers had come to the little town of 'Salem's Lot to open up shop. Although there was no physical or background connection between Barlow, Straker and Ben Mears, the three of them were automatically categorized as suspects because they were outsiders.

This element is crucial in how the plot turned out. The fact that Ben Mears was an outsider made it harder for the town to believe he was not a suspect, let alone, believe he was telling the truth about vampires living in town. There was nothing he could do to convince the town without looking like a complete crazy. So instead, he kept his mouth shut and ironically, wound up being the only one left standing besides Mark Petrie.

7. Let's Get Technical

As an avid watcher of the Discovery Health channel, I have to say that I am extremely interested in the human body and it's limitations. While reading this novel, I was curious to find out what the physical characteristics were of losing an excessive amount of blood. How much could the body physically handle until it gave up?

If I'm going to get technical, then I first have to understand how it is possible for a vampire to suck the blood out of a human as fast as they do without causing any trauma. In the novel, the vampires take literally seconds before they have drained a human excessively. Having given blood several times before, I know that even losing one pint of blood in a matter of minutes can be somewhat detrimental to the body. Vampires, however, nearly drain their victim completely.

According to an article I found called Blood Loss, Transfusions and Transfusion Alternatives, it all depends on how much blood you lose and how fast you lose it. Taking a look at vampires, I assumed that the loss of blood would be excessive and it would be lost at a fast rate. Some of the effects of that blood loss would be the following:

1. cool, clammy skin

2. dizziness, weakness or confusion

3. paleness

4. trouble breathing because not enough oxygen is being circulated

5. a fast, weak pulse

In the beginning of the, Mike Ryerson seemed to have all of those symptoms when he described them to Matt and Ben at the bar. Even if all of those symptoms were true, as they are in the novel, I can't help but conclude that the amount of blood taken from the victims would leave them dead. Especially if they don't call a doctor right away.

Another site that I found called innvista said that if the body loses more than 40-50 percent of it's plasma volume, it would go into severe shock. This makes it hard for me to believe that vampires can bite their victims once without actually killing them. Yes, the victim can have severe anemia like the Glick boy did and yes, the victim can be treated with B12, but technically, the victim would be dead right away...or UnDead in this case.

6. Like Father, Like Son, Like King

After reading Stephen King's introduction and the description of Ben Mears and Mark Petrie, I couldn't help but notice the similarities between all of them. I think that Stephen King put himself in the book through Mark Petrie and Ben Mears.


In the introduction to the book, Stephen King shared with us that he was really into what his mom termed, "bad trash" novels when he was a kid. He liked reading vampire novels such as Bram Stoker's Dracula and E.C.'s comic books. He was one of those kids who read books beyond his years. Which in turn, influenced his decision to create 'Salem's Lot.


One of the main characters in this novel was Mark Petrie. Stephen King made Mark Petrie a mere image of himself. When Mark Petrie's character was introduced, the Glick brothers were talking about going over to his house because he had all of those toys that many mothers, like Stephen King's, would term "bad trash". In a way, Mark Petrie was also interested in things beyond his years.


pg.83


"Danny made the mistake of telling his brother that Mark Petrie had the entire set of Aurora plastic monsters - wolfman, mummy, Dracular, Frankenstein, the mad doctor, and even the Chamber of Horrors. Their mother thought all that stuff was bad news, rotted your brains out or something..."


Right away I see the connection between Stephen King and his character Mark Petrie. on top of that, Stephen King proceeded to add another nearly identical character to the mix, Ben Mears. In the beginnig we don't know a lot about Ben Mears, only that he had lived in the town for about four years and had come back to write a novel. Sounds an awful lot like Stephen King writing a novel on vampires in small towns. Coincidence? I don't think so.


I'll talk a little more about this later, but the novel begins and ends with an image of Mark Petrie and Ben Mears looking like father and son. This image confirms my thoughts that Stephen King, Ben Mears and Mark Petrie are all one in the same. Stephen King doesn't really clearly state the similarity until the end.


pg. 340


"They looked at each other for no great space of time, but for Ben the moment seemed to undergo a queer stretching, and a feeling of unreality swept him. The boy reminded him physically of the boy he himself had been, but it was more than that."


Most importantly, the relationship between the two characters was important because it enabled them to develop trust throughout the rest of the novel. It allowed them to use their similarities and that trust to complete the ultimate goal; they would kill Barlow and give the town a new beginning.

5. It Was All Just a Dream, or Was It?

Dreaming played a huge role for the characters in this novel. Many of the characters were caught in a dream-like state when they first encountered the vampires knocking on their windows or front door to be let in. For example, when the Glick boy came to visit Mark Petrie while he was sleeping, Mark hesitated to open it. He subconciously knew that vampires did exist and he knew not to open the window. But for many others, their dreams became realities when they invited the vampires into their homes not knowing that they existed.

The novel also wrestled with dreaming in a non-literal sense. Many times when a person didn't want to believe that something was real, they tended to automatically assume they were dreaming. As a reader, this made the plot more complicated because I didn't know if the character was dreaming or if the character really did see something. And if the character did see something and didn't want to believe it, was it really there? The first instance of dreaming I came across was Ben Mears talking about an old dream.

pg. 45

"That night he had the old dream for the first time since he had come to Jerusalem's Lot...The run up the hallway, the horrible scream of the door as he pulled it open, the dangling figure suddenly opening its hideous puffed eyes, himself turning to the door in the slow, pudgy panic of dreams -"

Throughout the rest of the novel, Ben Mears struggled with whether or not he saw Hubie Marsten hung in the attic of the Marsten house or if his fears just took over and he imagined it. It wasn't until Ben finally found other people like Matt Burke and Mark Petrie who experienced the same thing did he begin to think it was a reality and not just a dream.

4. What's In a Name?

Jerusalem

Coming from a religious background, I can't help but connect the name Jersualem to the term used in the bible. Which in turn, opens up a whole other realm of possibilities as far as delving into this piece of literature and understanding it. What I want to focus on is the fact that Jerusalem is a holy city. In fact, it is "the" holy city. In the bible, this is the city that has been occupied by the Jews for thousands of years. And even more significant, this is the city where Jesus was put to death and where many believe he rose again. I am certain that Stephen King had a reason behind using this city as his setting for the novel. I think that in a way, this novel tests our own beliefs and has an underlying theme of being faithful to your religion.

I found this passage in the bible and online. It comes from Matthew 23:37-38 from the New International Version of the bible:

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. Look, your house is left to you desolate."

Now this can be taken several ways, but the biblical interpretation of this is referring to the people of Jerusalem refusing to believe in God and killing his one and only son, leaving them desolate. It could just be a coincidence, but I think that this passage can also be applied to 'Salem's Lot. Throughout the novel, there are people like Ben Mears, Mark Petrie, Jimmy Cody and Matt Burke who believe that there really are vampires. Most of them have seen them with their own eyes. But the fact of the matter is, they are too afraid to share this with the town because they know that the people of the town won't believe them. And in the end, they find out the hard way that the believers were right. Their house was left to them desolate.

3. Small Town Gothic

In literature, gothic refers to a certain genre or style of fiction writing. According to the Norton Anthology of English Literature, the term gothic refers to a work that has some element of terror and medievalism as well as a sense of pleasure in reading it. In other words, it's not terrifying to make you never want to read it again, but it's terrifying to entertain the reader. Part of the reason I think this novel is so terrifyingly entertaining is because it plays with our greatest fear...that is the fear of not knowing. Stephen King deals with characteristics of the gothic style such as dark cellars, bloody scenes, eerie winds and monster-like creatures such as vampires. All of which we don't see every day.

Like many other writers, Stephen King implemented the gothic style into a small town setting; the little town of Jerusalem's Lot, Maine. The novel wouldn't have been the same without this effect. It helped place an emphasis on the idea that a small town isn't always as safe as it seems. No matter how well you think you know someone in your town, you could be wrong. The small town gothic style also allowed Stephen King to implement history into the town and the house, making the novel come alive with small town gossip and making your mind wander.

p. 36

"They fell silent, both thinking of the Marsten House. This particular reminiscence did not have the pastel nostalgia of the others. The scandal and violence connected with the house had occurred before their births, but small towns have long memories and pass their horrors down ceremonially fromg generation to generation."

I think this small town gothic novel is successful because it hinted at that fear of not knowing what was going on right under your nose. The characters became real when they started fighting with the their own sanity as to whether to believe what they were seeing and hearing or to go on and pretend everything was okay. The small town atmosphere provided a place for fear to grow in the minds of the reader and helped the reader form a connection with the characters in the novel. The whole time I kept thinking, "What would I do in that situation and who would I trust myself to believe?"

1. A Little Introduction

My name is Kaleigh Robichaud and I am a journalism junior at Michigan State University. Writing a blog on this novel was actually something I enjoyed because my major doesn't usually allow me to read fiction a lot. I am always stuck writing and reading hard news stories, so reading fiction is great and reading Stephen King is even better.

One of the reason's I took particular interest in this book is because I actually have family that live in the beautiful state of Maine and have visited there many times. I'm actually planning to go there again this summer. Reading this novel I felt that I was able to relate to some of the characters because I have been to a lot of the little towns in Maine such as Portland, Bar Harbor, Angola, Camden, Rockland and Bangor. Just like 'Salem's Lot, the people in the towns know everybody else's business and can spot a tourist when they see one. Let's just say I've had that uncomfortable experience when my family decided to go to their annual Lobster Fest in downtown Camden.

Of course you're wondering if I have been by Stephen King's waterfront house. And the answer is, yes! I have not seen the front of his house, but I did see the back of the house when we went kayaking in Bangor. At the time I didn't really know who Stephen King was, but my dad sure did. My biggest fear was trying not to tip the kayak while my dad kept shouting for us to look to the right so we could see his house.

It's kind of funny to mention this, but the last time I went to Rockland with my family to visit my uncle for a week, it was foggy the whole time. I remember my uncle saying that sometimes it can be foggy for days and then all of a sudden it's gorgeous out again. I'm glad that I read this book after I had been there because otherwise, I probably would have been a little creeped by the dark, overcast skies.

2. Stephen King

I can't pretend that I was not excited to read this book, simply because it was written by Stephen King, because then I would be lying. His name alone, for many people, brings to mind feelings of terror, horrific images and downright good literature. In actuality, I am ashamed to say that I had not read any of Stephen King's novels before this one. Yes, I know I probably should have kept that last comment to myself, but it just reiterates the fact that I enjoyed it so much that I am writing this blog on it. However, I am not ashamed to say that I have heard of him many times growing up and have seen several movies of his including Misery and Rose Red, both of which I loved and both of which gave me nightmares as a child. Why my mother ever let me watch those movies I will never understand, but one thing is for sure, I never forgot them.

Although Stephen King's fame came before I was even alive, his work is timeless. There is a reason he is 19th on the Bestsellers of All Times list. Through his writing, not only has he been able to capture the reader's attention from cover to back, but he has provoked emotions, irrational thinking and challenged one's perspective on life all at the same time. He raises the question, "why?"

As you will see throughout this blog, I have taken it upon myself to try and answer the "whys" of 'Salem's Lot. I went into the novel with an open mind and came out with a really confused mind. But once I went back through and started taking note of things I hadn't noticed before, I began to gather some answers. I'm not going to say that I've figured Stephen King out completely, because I don't think anyone ever could, but I did find it to be an intellectual challenge and I tried not to bite off more than I could chew (no pun intended).