Cujo by Stephen King Review

Stephen King knew he was an addict in 1975, when he was writing The Shining. It
manifested in his writing, as part of what he was doing; hidden from everybody
else, it was in him, and on the page. Back then, it was only alcohol. As he became
more popular, wrote more, earned more, took more time away from his family to
work, his addictions escalated. How could they not? He needed to hit deadlines,
and he liked the taste of what he was addicted to. You can see it through his
fiction: in Jack Torrance's alcoholic self-pity, desperately scared of becoming what
he's destined to be, trying to hold his family together even as he shakes it apart; in
Larry Underwood throwing his life (and money, and 15 minutes of fame) away on
drink and drugs at the start of The Stand; in his short stories, tales of addiction and
internal collapse and death. Then, in case all this passed you by, along
comes Cujo: and in the giant, slobbering, seemingly unstoppable dog, we find the
bluntest metaphor for addiction yet presented in King's oeuvre (a title it would hold
until Misery and The Tommyknockers).
No ghosts, only the vaguest hint of any supernatural aspects (see the Connections
section below), no secret government institutes: Cujo is simply a lovable St
Bernard. Until he isn't. His owners, the Camber family, are distracted by the day-to-
day hassles of their lives; and by Joe, the patriarch, being a bad father/husband (in
the grand King tradition of those). Because of this, they don't get poor Cujo a dog
that Joe is disinterested in at the best of times vaccinated against rabies. When
the dog goes poking his nose into caves, he gets bitten by a bat a nod to Salem's
Lot there that can't be ignored and becomes rabid. And so the book's bad guy is
born: a beast whose actions are beyond his control, who kills those inhabitants of
Castle Rock who cross his path, one by one. A lack of control leading to evil:
another of King's dominant themes in these early novels.

Sign up for the Bookmarks email

Read more
In fact, though, Cujo spends most of the book involved with Donna and Tad
Trenton. Recently moved to Castle Rock, the Trentons are nice, responsible
people, the sort who definitely wouldn't have forgotten to get their dog inoculated.
They're the sort of people who shouldn't be destroyed by forces beyond their
control. But when their own family patriarch, Vic, is away, Donna and Tad are
locked in the family car (and for a large portion of the book) while Cujo terrorises
them. For them, characters who are conventionally set up to be the survivors, the
book ends not with a bang but a whimper: Donna, having been bitten by Cujo,
eventually drives a broken baseball bat through the dog's eye. Tad isn't so lucky:
he dies in the car. Not because of Cujo, or not directly; but due to dehydration.
As I say, it's all one giant metaphor for King's addiction. Metaphor is there in all
fiction if you look for it, of course, but this book aches with symbolism. On the
outside, Cujo is cuddly, pleasant, likable. When he's bitten and maybe that bite
from a bat can be directly equated to King's Salem's Lot success he changes.
Filled with uncontrollable rage, foaming at the mouth, unable to be the good dog he
was. As King writes: "He had always tried to be a good dog. He had been struck by
something free will was not a factor." He Cujo, King is trapped inside
whatever's driving his body for him. He hurts those he loves. He is brutal and
remorseless, because he is not himself. Those who would stop him are cut down
or trapped. They can only look at him through windows and pray he leaves them
alone, or that they get a chance to stop him. Even when the demon is dead, it still
kills them. Well, no. Actually, what kills Tad is his desperate need for a drink.
Maybe that's too much. Maybe we have to come at this from a Barthesian position,
standing back: this is a scary book about a rabid dog. But I simply don't believe we
can. King cannot remember writing the book, but he did. Daily, he sat at his
keyboard and drank himself into a stupor and beat the keys, and at the other end
Cujo was sent to his editor. Somewhere inside, his subconscious was driving:
something had to be.
Many of his books from this point on are less than subtle with their metaphor. That
isn't a criticism: I think King does some of his best work when looking inward,
consciously or not. It's not always pretty, but it's always interesting. It's not as if
Cujo was the first of his novels to mine the alcoholism metaphor The Shining told
the story of an ex-English teacher with a drinking problem but this is the point at
which it became the book. Not a character, but the whole text.
Structurally, Cujo is fascinating. There are no chapters, no page breaks: it's a
constant rush of words, darting between characters and with reminiscing periods of
backstory, but always pushing forward. Like the plot and the dog and, yes, King's
addiction it's unrelenting. The book stops when the dog does, or just after, as the
families try to pick up the pieces of their lives in the wake of the chaos that has
wrecked them. The surviving members of the Camber family, Cujo's owners, buy a
new dog. This one is vaccinated, but here's the thing: it's still a dog. The potential
for what it could do, how it could turn on you, is always inside it.
Reading interviews with King from the time when his addictions weren't public
knowledge, he feigns normality, pretends he knew what he was doing when he
wrote Cujo. Now, after he's admitted that he was then suffering his worst bout of
alcoholic torpor, we know it was all a lie. Cujo is as much a surprise to him as it is
to the reader: the brutality, the pace, the agony inside. It's a tremendous book
more tremendous, in my view, when you know how it was written, and how absent
King really was. It's scary, it's tense, it's incredibly pacy. And it's another non-
supernatural book. It's a shame King can't remember writing it, that he can't revel in
his creation of something this good. But what's not a shame is that we have it: not
only as readers of great fiction, but as admirers of a man who was suffering and
couldn't face his demons in person, so put them directly on to the page.
Connections
Cujo either the dog itself or the deaths it rendered is invoked in several other
Castle Rock novels: The Tommyknockers, The Dark Half, Needful Things (all
books, incidentally, that deal with King's addictions in their own ways). There's a
bigger connection, though: to The Dead Zone, in which Sheriff George Bannerman
asks for John Smith's help to catch the Castle Rock Strangler, Frank Dodd.
Bannerman reappears in Cujo and meets his end at the dog's teeth. But another
character also makes the transition to this book: Dodd himself. It's weird, and
vague, but we're told at the start of Cujo on page one about Dodd, and that "the
monster never dies It came to Castle Rock again in the summer of 1980", when
Cujo is set. It's suggested, briefly, that Dodd is somehow the darkness haunting
Tad Trenton's closet; that he's a part of the darkness that fills Cujo and drives him
to commit his horrible killings. This is another common theme of King's: the sense
that evil is innate, and more powerful than the individual instance. It's never made
totally explicit in Cujo, but it's definitely suggested: Cujo, Frank Dodd, the other
darkness that will, in later books, invade Castle Rock they're one and the same.
Next time
We're raining fire, flying planes and somehow being played by Arnie in the film of
the same name: it's The Running Man.