From: iroderic@alfred.carleton.ca (Ian Roderick)
Subject: Re: It (sewer scene)
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 02:18:38 GMT

In <1992Aug13.235949.23486@news.Hawaii.Edu> teshima@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (A. Lani Teshima) writes:

>In article <1992Aug7.094419.1798@bvc.edu> frantz@bvc.edu writes:
>>>>>In article <Heilberg.12.712934004@FASECON.ECON.NYU.EDU> Heilberg@FASECON.ECON.NYU.EDU (Cindy Heilberger) writes:
>>>>>>How about the gang sex thing.  That wasn't in the movie (was it?  I saw it
>>>>>>ages ago and read the book even further back).  But that sex thing...with
>>>>>>Frannie doing all the boys, that remains in my mind.
>>>>>
>>>>>Wrong book... Frannie is in the Stand (I think...)  Beverly was in IT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Talk to me about that.  Was that the big moment when the kids conquer their
>>>>>>fear of the big unknown?  The big IT?  Doing IT??
>>>>>
>>>>>This is the one part of the book that i really didn't understand...
>>>>>WHY did they do this?
>>> 
>>>>Easy one. In the act of physical bonding they created far more than a
>>>>physical bond. It was an emotional, spiritual bonding that took
>>>>place--perhaps the only thing strong enough to bring them back together
>>>>thirty years later.
>>> 
>>>I have just taken a fantasy (including horror & sci-fi) literature course and
>>>we discussed this exact story and scene (part).  It mostly has to do with the
>>>fact that a major portrail of a strong woman was that of a whore. Most of the
>>>actresses in old English theatre doubled as prostitutes.  The was also some
>>>mention by our instructor about something in Medieval times of knights having
>>>sex with a "public" whore that stayed with the regiment or whatever.  Can
>>>anyone expand upon this?  It was mentioned that it was strange of King (being
>>>a fairly liberal type of guy) to include such an old stereotype of women.  
>>>Any comments?
>>
>>Beverly was hardly the perfect image of the "public whore" you're 
>>describing.  Instead, I think she fits King's pattern of turning most of 
>>his female characters into victims--mostly at the hands of men (exceptions 
>>might be Annie Wilkes, Frannie Goldsmith, and Mother Abigail).  Don't get 

>Why do you all think Beverly was submissive? She was the one to use
>the slingshot on It, and frankly, I think being with the group gave
>her the strength she didn't have. I could hardly agree with the idea
>that she "gave in" or was a "public whore." Because of her abuse from
>her father, she was already aware that her body was a "commodity." By
>giving and sharing her body willingly, she was giving the boys
>something that meant the most to her--her choice to say
>"yes" (versus wanting to say "no" to her father). And by giving the
>boys her priceless gift, she was helping seal their bond.

>At first I found this scene somewhat strange, until I thought about it
>and realized the power involved in it. The love for eachother
>culminated in this (after all, isn't life conceived this way?), and I
>thought it was pretty awesome. Maybe this is just coming from a female
>perspective.



>--
>A. Lani Teshima, UH School of Library & Info Studies   o | /_/_/ "Sea Hare"
>A small mind is easily filled with faith.               o|<0_0>--------*
>Blessed is a mind too small for doubt.                    \=^-| |____| | 
>teshima@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.edu                                 \_}B   \_}B



Superb thoughts on the matter.  When I first read that scene I was not
too pleased with it but I think you have provided a great take on the
actual play of power relations be realized in the book.

                                                  Ian
Newsgroups: alt.horror