Apologies instead of Epilogues....
Holy crap. Stephen King writes a book without thinking it through and the moral's "I don't have to explain any of this crap to my readers?" So because people are unhappy that the book ends without ANYONE knowing what's going on that's the book's point? Did no one tell Stevie that that sounds a hell of a lot like a cop-out for not knowing how to finish his book? It wouldn't have been a big deal if Stephen "I want to be the Alfred Hitchcock of the Toilet (see Dreamcatcher inteview)" King hadn't ranted and raved about how SURE he was that the story's message was pure and holy and true. If he was so sure about it why the hell did he have to write a couple of pages about how his book's message was that some books don't need messages or even a point or to make sense? :sigh: I'll have to remember Stephen King's advice (I paraphrase): "If you have trouble finishing a novel, maybe that's your moral....sometimes the story doesn't have an ending." Oh God, is that advice retarded.
Moving on we have:
Dean Koontz's Tick Tock.
Before I get into this whole-heartedly, let me explain my thoughts on Dean Koontz. The guy writes great suspense. Lightning, Servants of Twilight, and Intensity were great. However the guy is also a Trekkie at heart and can't help but write goofy goofy sci-fi stories whenever he gets the chance. Half of Koontz's stuff is kick ass suspense, the rest is his hit or miss goofy Science Fiction stories....or so I feel. Let's use Tick Tock as an example:
The PLOT: A Vietnamese-American runs afoul of a voodoo witch lady who unleashes an animated voodoo doll after him that slowly mutates into a man-sized dinosaur monster. He runs his love interest who has potentially one of the worst character names ever (Deliverance Payne) who also happens to hang out with a dog with magic powers who's really an alien. How's that for a goofy sounding plot?
The Apology: Dean Koontz starts his afterword by apologizing to his "hardcore fans" for this book not appearing in hardcover. It's no shorter than some of his other books yet this one went straight to paperback because he "didn't like how it looked in hardback". That's a bad sign. When a publisher doesn't think a name-brand author has made something that won't sell in hardback. He talks about how he originally wrote this book without the main character being an immigrant from Vietnam and he decided to throw that part in to complete the book. If you've read the book you'll notice that that's pretty obvious. There are these completely random "cultural dramas" that randomly show up throughout the book that have nothing to do with the plot. Basically he says the book was pretty terrible so he tried to fix it by making the main character ethnic. When authors start ranting about how they tried to fix their books and confess to just randomly throwing in huge aspects of the story at the last minute, I don't know what else to call it but an apology.
I know that people write afterwords like this to defend themselves but for the love of God the only reason I remember how terrible these books were is because the authors felt so strongly about defending them. Note to self: If I write a crappy-ass novel DO NOT, under any circumstances, write an apology for it. Stand by my crap and no one will be the wiser.