So King is \”extremely good at what he does\” but . . . he\’s not a \”writer of capable prose\”? Cuz that\’s a pretty low bar to beat, and considering he\’s been awarded a National Book Award for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters and people still read books he wrote 35 years ago as avidly as they read anything today, I would think he\’d at least written something \”capably\”. Not saying you have to praise the guy as a modern master or anything, but admitting that he can do pretty good work sometimes isn\’t much of a concession.

That is, if I\’ve correctly understood your sentence. Because you imply his fans think being \”prolific\” is the same as being sort of an okay writer, which they don\’t because they actually think he\’s a really good writer and read his books over again repeatedly. You do remember the definition of the word \”prolific,\” right?

Sorry for being so snarky, but you were snarky (and incoherent) first.