Lilja's Library (15 page)

Mick Garris:
Michael Jackson’s Ghost
was a very complicated affair. King wrote the first couple of drafts of the script, after working out the idea with Michael. Then, when I was asked to direct it, I did some writing on it myself, as King was not available to continue working on it. I directed two weeks of shooting, then the production closed down when the so-called “scandal” broke around Michael. When it was resumed three years later, I was getting ready to shoot
The Shining
, and not available to finish
Ghosts
. I suggested that Stan Winston, who had been in charge of the FX and was a friend of Michael’s, should finish directing, and he did.  

Lilja:
Next you’re doing
Riding the Bullet
, and then
Desperation
, right? Tell me a bit about them. Have there been any actors or actresses chosen yet? Will there be future movies or miniseries?  

Mick Garris:
Riding the Bullet
is a feature film, with a limited, independent budget. I wrote the script from King’s ebook, which on its own is only about a third or half a movie. We’re in the casting stages now, but nobody is set in stone yet. We’ll follow that with a three-hour television version of
Desperation
for the ABC network, who we did
The
Stand
and
The Shining
for.  

Lilja:
I know King did a script for
Desperation
. Is that the one you’ll be using?  

Mick Garris:
King did three feature drafts; I will put it into the television format, then King will do a final polish. But it will be very faithful to the book.  

Lilja:
Is it possible that (if all goes well)
Riding the Bullet
will premier next year, and
Desperation
the year after that?  

Mick Garris:
Yes. The hope is that
Riding the Bullet
will be in theatres in 2003, and
Desperation
will air in 2004.  

Lilja:
I looked through the list of your movies and saw that most of them have been made for TV. Why is that? Do you prefer to work with that format instead of the big screen or is it just a coincidence?  

Mick Garris:
I would never choose television over feature films, but TV was the only way to do
The Stand
and
The Shining
. Most of my success has been in television, and that’s where I’m able to do the best material. I am not so established in features, though that’s the format I far prefer for many reasons: budget, censorship, no commercials, etc.  

Lilja:
If you could pick one of King’s books to adapt, any one, which would it be, and why?  

Mick Garris:
I’ve already been allowed to do my two very favorites, but I’d love to do
Bag of Bones
.  

Lilja:
Your wife Cynthia Garris has appeared in most of your King adaptations. How is it working with her?  

Mick Garris:
I love working with her. It’s hard to be off on location for a long time (I was away for a full year doing
The Stand
), and it’s hard to be a set wife, away from home without anything to do but watch. This gives us a good reason to be together. And besides, she’s a good actress, and I love having her around.  

Lilja:
You have also appeared in several of your films. Have you ever considered taking on a leading part?  

Mick Garris:
I’m not a good enough, nor handsome enough, actor to inflict myself onto the screens of the world for longer than a few minutes at a time. 

**** 

M
ichael Collings 

Posted: January 16, 2003  

I recently spoke to Michael Collings, the author of
Horror Plum’d
and other books about King. Here is what he said:  

Lilja:
Hi Michael. First let me thank you for doing this interview. I’m really happy to chat with you. Who is Michael Collings? What do you do for a living besides writing books about Stephen King?  

Michael Collings:
In “real life” I am a professor of English at Pepperdine University in Malibu, California. Actually, I have three titles, each with a slightly different responsibility. As professor of English, I teach British literature, emphasizing the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries; my area of specialization is Milton and the Epic, hence my interest in the epic quality of King’s writings. As Director of Creative Writing, I administer and teach in the CW program; my main interest there is poetry—and again, hence my interest in King’s poetry. And as Poet in Residence at Seaver College for the past six years, I present poetry readings and generally encourage greater interest among my students for poetry. To fill out my time, I design and make wire-wrapped jewelry (I’ve been the featured artist for Wire Artist magazine, an international trade journal; and a number of my pieces have been showcased there), play the organ for my church and write poetry.  

Lilja:
When I read
Horror Plum’d
I sensed that it was made for the really die-hard King fan. The one that wants to know everything about King’s work. Was that your intention?  

Michael Collings:
You are certainly correct in thinking that
Horror Plum’d
is not just “another book about Stephen King.” But, at the same time, I hope that it has interest for more than just the die-hards. It is also intended for students of King’s works (high-school students looking for material for term papers, college students interested in genre literature and popular culture), for scholars writing about him and for anyone interested in a book that demonstrates how influential to a part of our times and our culture he has become. In the narrowest sense, it is almost a sociological study of the way he exports American society throughout the world; in a wider sense, it suggests how remarkably well received his stories are throughout the world.  

Lilja:
How did you research for
Horror Plum’d
? There’s a lot (to say the least) of information in the book, and it must have taken some time to gather it all, right?  

Michael Collings:
Oh, yes! This book has been nearly fifteen years in the making. It started out as part of the original Starmont series I wrote around 1985-1990. After writing a number of individual volumes (
Stephen King as Richard Bachman
,
The Many Facets
,
The Shorter Works
, etc.), I agreed to do a final volume devoted to bibliography—
The Annotated Guide to Stephen King
. The title described the book nicely; it was intended more as a guide than a full-fledged bibliography, with entries and brief discussions for all of his published writings. Several years later, Ted Dikty, then publisher of Starmont House, transferred copyright of the guide to Rob Reginald at Borgo Press, who asked me to enlarge it for his series.
The Work of Stephen King
appeared in 1996, a decade after the original guide. For it, I rearranged all of the initial material into a new format, then brought the data up-to-date, including both works by King and works about him. Already the task had become daunting; the book ended up about five hundred pages long (using very small print). Borgo had designed the format so that the bibliographies could be updated with a minimum of effort, so I had kept current with new information about King, assuming that there would eventually be a revised edition. Instead, Borgo closed its doors, leaving me with a huge stack of new material and nowhere to market it. 

About that time, Dave Hinchberger of Overlook Connection arranged for me to complete a bibliography he had begun of the works of Peter Straub. He published
Hauntings
in 1999. We followed that up with a full, annotated, definitive bibliography of Orson Scott Card, author of the popular
Ender’s Game
and other novels. Card is one of my favorite writers, and I had been collecting bibliographic data on him for as long as I had been working with King. In 2001, OCP published
Storyteller
, the international guide to Card’s works. 

Then we decided to tackle the “biggie”—a revised, updated, completed version of the King bibliography. We originally intended to catalogue both primary and secondary works (works by King and works about him), but it became obvious that the resulting book would simply be too long to be practical. So, for the first time, I concentrated exclusively on King’s writings and opened the book up to international editions as well. Much of the actual research was done through the Internet, using such resources as the Library of Congress, the British Library and various national libraries throughout Europe and South America, plus publication records from many companies and invaluable help from King fans across the globe. When
Horror Plum’d
appeared in late 2002 (publication date: January 2003), it intended to provide an intensive study of King’s publications for over a quarter of a century, closing with the year 2002. Again, however, the format allows for additions, so if need be, it can be revised and updated further.  

Lilja:
You have done several books about King. Is there any kind of book about King or his work that hasn’t (in your opinion) been written yet, or have all aspects of his work and person been examined?  

Michael Collings:
Without a doubt, King is among the most closely scrutinized of contemporary writers. Some years ago, I mentioned to a colleague here that I was working on a five hundred page bibliography of King, and he just stared at me. “Five hundred pages? For a living author?” He was stunned at the degree of interest King engenders. 

And perhaps he was right to be so startled. I originally intended a follow-up volume to
Horror Plum’d
that would concentrate on works about King; by now, I’m not sure I could handle the project…there is simply so much out there that it is intimidating even to contemplate. I’m used to doing research on people like Shakespeare and Milton, about whom there have been literally shelves of books written. King might not yet have as many titles associated with his name, but he’s getting there. I’m really not sure that there are any “undiscovered lands” in King scholarship, at least not for this generation. I would like to see work done on his poetry—a small body of poems, but really interesting in light of his novels. And he did some interesting things while a student that might illuminate his subsequent career. But he hesitates to encourage study of either. And I would like to see more solid historical criticism of his major novels—books and articles that point out not which literary theory King uses or anything that abstract, but rather the ways in which his books describe, define and influence our world. He is a contemporary writer—we should take advantage of that fact and work with his writings in context.  

Lilja:
Compared to other books about King, yours are less commercial-oriented and are more underground (i.e. they are more for research for the average reader who is curious about King). Do you ever feel like doing a book that would be more “mainstream” (if you allow me to use that term)? A kind of book that is more likely to be bought by people who aren’t die-hard King fans, people that are just a bit curious about King as a person and writer?  

Michael Collings:
Because I am a university professor, I don’t rely on book-income for a living, so I am a bit more free in the kinds of books I write. And in the publishers I choose. I long ago decided that I had no interest in university presses that seem to survive by publishing unintelligible books on uninteresting subjects. My first book was a small monograph on Piers Anthony for Ted Dikty at Starmont House; I stayed with Starmont exclusively until Ted’s death, in part because he was one of only two markets at the time for Science Fiction and Fantasy, in part because he was a kind man who won the loyalty of his writers. After his death, I wrote for Borgo—again, a small independent publisher, and the second of the two markets for the genre. By the time Borgo ceased publishing, Science Fiction and Horror (and King specifically) had become increasingly the province of academic publishers and popularizing presses. 

I don’t feel comfortable with either. The books I write are intended to allow readers to see into the books I discuss. My goal is to give those readers information and insight that they might not have (and that I might have, thanks to the fact that I can spend much more time on the books than most general readers)…and through that information, to impel the readers back to the books. I write for a young audience, late high school and early college, because they are the ones who read King for pleasure; my books try to suggest ways he created that pleasure, and simultaneously suggest ways that they are literature.