Talk:Danse Macabre (book)
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled edit
Danse Macabre is in French for, obviously, macabre dance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.193.117.114 (talk) 21:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Danse Macabre is also an album from The Faint released in 2001. Caim 04:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, but that doesn't belong in this article. Canonblack 04:13, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
WikiProject class rating edit
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 13:34, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Influence edit
The opening line, "...a non-fiction book by Stephen King, about horror fiction in print, radio, film and comics, and the genre's influence on United States popular culture" doesn't seem right. The book discusses how changes in culture and society were reflected in the genre (eg mistrust of science/scientists in the post-war period because of fear of the atom bomb) and posits that horror writers and directors tap into existing subconscious and societal fears, not the other way around. King wrote: "If horror movies have redeeming social merit, it is because of that ability to form liaisons between the real and unreal - to provide subtexts. And because of their mass appeal, these subtexts are often culture-wide." Jeff Smith, in Film Studies, says: "The value of these subtexts is that they endow popular fictions with a social and cultural significance that allows them to tap into the deeply held fears and anxieties of their readers. It is through these subtexts that the horror film has commented on a host of social and political issues, including scientism, racism, consumerism, conformism and, of course, Communism." Neil Hampshire (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Paperback publication date edit
I have a copy of the Berkley paperback edition but it is dated May 1982, well before the December 1983 edition mentioned. It does not have the "Forenote to the Paperback Edition" so is presumably the uncorrected text. Oddly the copyright page identifies the first edition as having been published in 1979, not 1981. 2604:3D09:1F74:1C00:C53C:7C0A:5AD8:BC94 (talk) 17:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)