What Critics have said

In Janet Maslin's review Her Story of Him, Both Tender and Terrible (2006), she illustrates how Stephen King is a weird and really weird choice for him to be basing a story off of romance when he is a horror writer in Lisey's Story.  The author first critizes him for his use of his "version of Joycean wordplay, idiosyncrasy, voluptuousness, stuburness, and obsessive chronology in Lisey's Story" ( Maslin 1), she then shows more criticizing by criticizing "his use of language" with her saying "His use of language is so larded with baby talk that it borders on the pathological" (Maslin 3), and to conclude she makes it clear that he was not a good fit for this book with she saying "but the story delivers gale force emotions like that of naming a toilet" (Maslin 4). Her purpose is to show that while he might be good at horror he should only stick to that in order to spread the word that Stephen King is not the right author to be writing a book based on this story. She seems to have a literate and scolar audience in mind, because of the "Lisey's Story" being such a profound work the normal person might not think anything of it but the scholars have to come together to fight.

In Mark Singer's review "What are you afraid of" (1998), he actively shows that because of Stephen's past he was able to make so many profound works that transcend the realm of horror. The author first shows this message by attributing his sense of describing horror so well due to his poor past and his family with saying, "Those were very unhappy years for his mother" (Singers 2), he then talks about how because of his parents worldviews and what they saw as "social and political issues" which the author credits Stephen with him being able to make books with saying "A serious engagement with a wide range of social and political issues forms the current of much of King's works" (Singers 3), and to conclude Singer's attributes another reason to why King's books are so good is because of the characters and with us the readers being "lulled by the characters" with him saying "what makes Stephen's horrors so seductive is his skill at rendering scenes with us being lulled by the characters" (Singers 4). His purpose is to give insight to how King writes his books so descriptive and good by going back to his past and how he was able to make characters and make horror due to his rough past with his parents. He seems to have a Stepehn King fan base in mind because he is analyzing what made him such a good author which fans of Stephen King would love to hear and read more about. 

In Collins's review of "Stephen King's Desperation and the Regulators" (2012), in which he shows imagery of what his books mean. The author first tells us this by saying how he tries to make his horror character blend into the world in a way with him saying "he tries to intubate  the commodities of everyday America into his stories" ( Colling's 1). Another way the author shows us this imagery is through Stephens own fears for the world with the author telling us "Mr. Kings fears cut across the fear behind opinion polls, television talk shows, casual conversations, and the accelerating sense of the world going wrong is present in almost every book" ( Colling's 3), and finally the author concludes with telling us how King likes to stay active in our culture and saying "even Mr. King's trademark characterization by references to movie or music stars suggest his deep identification with America pop culture (Colling's 4). Her purpose is to show how he is able to provide imagery from his books from his own fears in order to provide a context that he is like all of us. He seems to have a newbie audience in ming who might want to know who Stephen King really is and how he is able to make fascinating books.