I’ve been working my meandering way through books I feel I should’ve read years back. ‘Salem’s Lot is one of those, especially considering how much I’ve long enjoyed Stephen King (see https://mweald.com/2024/05/31/on-fairy-tale/ for more on that). So, what to say on this well-known tale of blood-sucking vamps? First off, surprise surprise, it was a fun read. Secondly, beyond the usual strengths of any Stephen King novel set in a small, nearly forgotten town in rural Maine, I quite enjoyed King’s take on vampires, always have. Their evil is shown as ancient and outside the boundary of any modern or known religion. The usual wards and tools work, crosses and holy water and the rest, but out of an innate desire to rid the world of an evil that drew breath before any Abrahamic figure was born, not out of specific ties to a human held deity. A vampire is the raw stuff of evil, and as such can be combated by a belief in something greater distilled. That take has always resonated with my agnostic self. There is a description towards the end of the book that really brought this idea home. It takes place as one of the main characters, the writer Ben Mears, swings a hammer as a man possessed, attempting to break through to the evil vampire Barlow before time runs short. ” … the possession was not in the least Christian; the good was more elemental, less refined … It was Force; it was Power; it was whatever moved the greatest wheels of the universe.” Good stuff, that.
This wasn’t the first time I’d encountered vampires in Stephen King’s oeuvre; I believe that honor goes to The Dark Tower series. But I think of ‘Salem’s Lot as a sort of origin story for King’s take on the vampire mythos, and I believe I have some grounds for that notion. ‘Salem’s Lot was published in 75′, years before the first of The Dark Tower series was published in 82′, and even longer before we get a more complete breakdown of vampire types in The Dark Tower V: Wolves of the Calla, published in 03′. I can imagine the gears of King’s mind working over the intervening years. And of course, we see the introduction of Father Callahan in ‘Salem’s Lot, the Catholic priest whose redemption comes in The Dark Tower as a member of Roland Deschain’s second ka-tet. I wish I would have read ‘Salem’s Lot all those years ago before I read The Dark Tower. It would have made Callahan’s arc all that more impactful. Nonetheless, I’ve read it now, and for that I’m grateful.
Of course, ‘Salem’s Lot is a King book, and that can tend to indicate a couple things. King is a master at creating a sense of place so detailed it becomes a character unto itself, at creating characters both to love … and to hate (i.e. Big Jim in Under the Dome). Some of those depictions of characters to hate, or even just dislike, what with their casual comments of racism, homophobia, or misogyny all the way to actions bloody and violent and heinous, are (at least as far as the slurs) unfortunately not out of place for the setting, and at times tough to stomach. There is an argument to be made that the usage of such backwards views to engender dislike of certain characters can be a bit heavy handed in King’s earlier works, but that terrifying ability of King’s to show otherworldly depravity in the mundane and familiar is also what has kept readers coming back again and again. Some of King’s works can have inconsistent pacing – looking at you middle half of The Stand – but I didn’t see that here. If anything, I actually thought ‘Salem’s Lot could’ve been longer. The only thing that stuck out as a pet peeve of mine was the treatment of Ben’s girlfriend Susan. A bit of fridging there it felt like. Google “fridging” as a literary trope if that doesn’t sound familiar. Wish Susan could have had a bit more agency. Nonetheless, I greatly enjoyed reading ‘Salem’s Lot and think it’s cultural significance well-deserved. King’s descriptions were, as always, both interesting and unsettling in that way only he can achieve.
All the best,
M. Weald
M. Weald 