All else aside for a moment, the first thing the observant reader is likely to notice about Bag of Bones, in comparison to other King novels, is that unlike most, if not all, this one is written in the first person. King is hardly in need of my advice, but if asked, I would recommend wholeheartedly that he continue the practice whenever it's feasible. Anyone who's read any of King's work that uses his own voice (the autobiographical On Writing, for instance) already knows how strong that voice is; it has a familiar, personable quality that makes it difficult for the reader to extricate himself. These aspects of King's personality are readily transferred to novelist Mike Noonan, the protagonist of Bag of Bones, who speaks very much in King's voice. Let's face it; most or all of King's novels are written in that voice. But the idiosyncrasies of his style are much less grating and seem much more natural when issuing from a character's mouth or pen than when they are the products of an incorporeal, omniscient narrator. Likewise, allowing Noonan to dictate the narrative makes that character instantly likable; one of the benefits of first-person is that very little of Noonan is hidden from us.

To make a rather long story short (no spoilers here; this is essentially what you would find on the cover), Noonan, plagued with writer's block since his wife's death, retreats to his cabin, where he gets mixed up with a young widow, her daughter, and her wealthy and vindictive father-in-law. In the meantime, he must deal with a haunting, or hauntings, the cover-up of a long-past sin on the part of the townspeople, and a series of mysteries regarding his dead wife. I don't think I would be ruining anything if I pointed out that it all winds up being connected. The question, of course, is how, and don't think for a second that you've got a chance of figuring it out much sooner than Noonan. The boon (or curse) of the first-person narration is that his thoughts are the only ones to which we are privy; if he overlooks something, we overlook it as well, which is not to say it isn't great fun watching it all come together. In fact, there are quite a few little observations and coincidences (such as the similarities between the names of widow Mattie's daughter and Noonan's own, once-hoped-for, little girl) that seem silly or extraneous; I must advise you to keep them in mind, as I promise you they will ultimately be resolved.

If there is any quibble with the way in which the plot unfolds and the revelations proceed, it might be that the novel is too heavily dependent on the supernatural (i.e. the imparting of vital information by means of dreams or communication with the beyond), especially considering that, absent those elements, this is essentially a mystery story. If Noonan seems too much at the mercy of powers beyond his control, all I can say is that that seems to be the thesis of the major body of King's work: the things we consider markers of power (money, social standing, even physical strength) are of no use when the familiar drops away and we are confronted with the way King's world really works; when that happens, we must marshal powers we never knew we had, or didn't think existed, if we are to prevail. Noonan has unearthly help; that seems fair. The other side certainly has it share of unearthly power, and we get the feeling that Noonan wouldn't have any aid if he didn't deserve it. Mike Noonan, in fact, is an excellent exemplar of the philosophy undergirding King's universe; he has wit, intelligence, and resources--is, in fact, a millionaire, which would seem to put him on an even keel early on, when he believes that a court battle with a vengeful industrialist is his biggest problem. Suffice it to say that by book's end he learns exactly what money is worth.

As it happens, I really have no quibble with Bag of Bones; for a King novel, even (or especially) a good one, that is saying

This book is creepy.
If you like ghost stories, with a twist its pretty good.
I enjoyed this book , however its not my favorite.
The reason I gave it a 4 star is because it maintained my interest.

Ask a King fan what book is his best, and you will most likely hear "It" or "The Stand" as the answer. Maybe the occasional "The Shining", or you may have asked a Dark Tower fan who puts those books above and beyond the rest of the canon.

As for me, I'd simply say "Bag of Bones". I've read almost everything King's done, and a lot of it is great. Really great. He's easily my favorite author, but in my opinion nothing he's written has topped Bag of Bones.

I don't want to say much about the story, as you really need to just experience it yourself, but it is poignant, scary, and somehow awe-inspiringly beautiful.

Read it. You won't be disappointed. Then read his new one, Lisey's Story, which is in more than one way a kind of "mirror piece" when compared to Bag of Bones. By the way, I actually think I read once that King himself believes Bag of Bones to be his best. If so, he and I agree.

King did an excellent job keeping you guessing in this one. There were some areas that could have been condensed and were sometimes confusing. For the most part, not bad. Would make a good movie.

Not to take anything away from my favorite author BUT I thought the book was way too long. The story was suspenseful and descriptive but I found myself getting lost in the superfluous background. (And this is someone who has read The Stand at least six times so it's not the length of the book that bothered me as much as the length of the storyline.) Stephen King fans will still enjoy the book but not as much as some others such as The Cell which I thought was great.