Stephen King’s IT : The Injustice of Beverly Marsh

Listening to Stephen King’s IT I see his mastery of language to carve stories, horrors and characters. Male Characters specifically. His female characters of which we can only list a few in the whole XXX page story. The prominent ones in my mind are the Mother Figures - Bill and George’s cold and distant mother, Eddie’s mother has little character beyond overbearing and overweight, Beverley’s mother was scared but kind before she prematurely dies leaving Bev to fend for herself. The mother’s relationships to the kids almost one-to-one translate into the men’s wives later in the novel. Eddie marries a woman identical in description to his mother, Bill marries a woman identical to Bev (the only positive female figure in his adolescence) who, despite being a strong willed woman with a career, follows her husband, flings herself into Peril and is only saved by her husbands hand. Stan Eurice, who commit’s suicide once Called back to Derry appears to be married by a scattering and flimsy woman who is easily contained by a television show. Even the young woman we see working behind the counter of the pharmacy is seen to be a rebellious individual with little interaction beyond harshing off of her employer.

The only Female character we see “develop” (in quotes as she ages but changes very little) is Beverly Marsh. The daughter of an abusive Father and not only doesn’t develop out-with her role as an abused woman, accused of every unfaithful act and blackmailed or beaten into believing it - but her injustice starts when her character plays into it at every opportunity. In order of the book we see, like the boys and their mothers, Beverly marries a figure identical to her father. Abusive, controlling, aggressive and short tempered we are introduced to Beverley in her first act of independence where she leaves her husband only because she is called back to Derry. Although this is definitely a good thing for Beverley it’s Inaccurate to the reality of abusive relationships. Beverley mentally has no problems abandoning her home and husband and despite the fight that initially ensues feels little to no backlash externally or internally. I can imagine, as many woman with manipulative partners have before, it is never this easy. From a man’s perspective “Getting up and Going” seems easy. Every interaction a woman has with a man dangerous or unknown is a calculated one, approached with caution. We also see very little about Beverley leaving her Father behind in Derry.

As for the actual characteristics of Beverley we find out most about her through her accusations from men, which sadly develops into her actions. As a child her father accuses her of whoring herself to the boys in the Barrens, something that had no justification up until this point manifests when she encourages the boys at the end of the book to each sleep with her; one after another; in order to “help them escape” the tunnel system. Even as a bastardised symbol as a loss for childhood innocence it appears grotesque, unimportant and overly drawn out.

This hyper sexualisation is unfortunately beverley’s only other character trait. From her later actions such as sleeping with Bill days after leaving her husband - and when asked why not sleep with Ben, unmarried and in love with Beverley, Bill '“Happened to be there” - to leaving with Ben at the end of the book to live with him for a bit instead of furthering her career and becoming closer to her network beyond her husband.

If I were to play devils’ advocate where the devil in this instance is Stephen King and defend his choices as to make the tragedy of Beverleys flat character as a cycle of lifelong abuse, it doesn’t excuse her character being written as a sexualised body incapable of anything else. Her physicality is described as bewitching by the boys, “More filled out and beautiful compared to Bill’s wife” (according to Bill) with beautiful curves and luscious hair. No F. Scott Fitzgerald Beauty*. If it were written more poetically maybe we could see why the boys were interested in her so deeply, not just because she was a girl who played with the boys or because she grew up to be conventionally attractive.

*She was beautiful, for the sparkle in her eyes when she talked about something she loved. She was beautiful, for her ability to make other people smile, even if she was sad. No, she wasn't beautiful for something as temporary as her looks. She was beautiful, deep down to her soul.

The final offering of poor craftsmanship by King involves every action, even when It takes over and the horror ensues sexualises her body. When the group gets possessed briefly the boys spasm sporadically and appear legitimately in pain. Beverley? “Her hips bucked orgasmically” An action that happens multiple times in non sexual settings. Not only does this inform me that King has failed to satisfy a woman more than once and doesn’t know the complexity of the female orgasm but also that he doesn’t have any physical awareness of women outwith that mental image he’s created. We never at any point see the men “stir” outwith a sexual setting and when in pain or possessed we never see them become rigid, close fisted whilst they let out the saddest weasel of a breath and become limp.

IT 7/10 - Good book, beautifully written. The women can be skipped and the book would actually be better. Stephen King? Do better.

Previous
Previous

New Moon by Maoilios Caimbeul

Next
Next

Gender, Body, Water