hi, people.
As you probably know, Richard Bachman is a pseudonym used by Stephen King to sell some of his books. Stephen King supposedly created and used the pseudonym to try and determine whether his success in writing was caused by luck or his talent for writing.
Below, a writer argues with an alter ego of herself(the writer) the difference between the books authored by Stephen King and the books authored by Richard Bachman in the sense that Richard Bachman is an alter ego of Stephen King hence there are differences in writing patterns and overall satisfaction.

Bear in mind that this writer is new at writing, so offer only constructive criticisms.

Stephen King VS Richard Bachman i would argue who the best is among two of the finest writers ever known.

Tobiey : i find it proper hilarious that you would disagree with me , it is well known that stephen king is the KING of horror novels, The master of fiction in itself.

Zainab : Tobiey, yes stephen king is a good writer i would never argue that, he may be the so called king of horror, but all he is is just good for a 'genre writer' or good if you are deserted with no other book to read, Richard Bachman on the other hand the right one of course may seem like the rainy day sorta guy without being a best-seller like king, he doesn't get his name on some forbes list of entertainers, but you have to respect his work, his skill in writing can not be matched by king.

Tobiey : king's novels send chills down your spine and his horror movies contain a lot of learian phrases that gives an eerie supernatural atmosphere, i would give you an example, IT is a compelling novel, the movie is also good because it seemed that by reciting idiosyncratic phrases and squirting camphor water a creature with immense power could be destroyed, but the movie could not live up to half the novel, many authors have written wonderful books but stephen king is the best, and quite a number of his novels have been made into movies, but i am a firm believer that the books are better than the movies

Zainab : Yeah, king's screenplay's are pretty good, but then i have two words for you 'THE MIST', that movie was boring and also annoying, people keep on saying all 13 collection of stephen king contained stories with novel potentials, the mist is a typical example of how wrong that is, when you read his short stories you realize that they are quite better because you do not have to deal with the unnecessary nonsense he writes, the mist was okay as part of his collection in skeleton crew, but when he made it a novel, it was really boring. Bachman is a very precise writer, he writes what he needs to, and still you have a very vivid imagination.

Tobiey: The doses of king's humour are given out in chilly measures, his tales are so cinematically told that they appear so real on the screen in your mind as you read, king messes with you because he can, he lets you know he is in charge of what you're imagining, what i mean is you may think for a long time that he is writing about kids when he is writing about adults, and he does this without flaws . King taps into many creative wellsprings with accurate atmosphere of dread, its underlying sarcasm is finely rendered with scenes of horrific violence and human compassion, and i should remind you that stephen king has written 56 novels, 13 collections, 5 books , 2 comics and 1 script, and Bachman has what 7 novels.

Zainab : I do not know how you manage to drink this much without me but somehow you do it, for you have to be loaded to praise king this much, you stephen king fans are not grieved by his dull constructs, his cheesiness, king appeals to the aggrieved adolescent or aggrieved nerdy adults like you, you can not argue the fact that he goes on and on about matters not vital to the subject of the book, you know like show off. Bachman is the vampire side of king's existence always killed by the sunlight of his disclosure, Bachman's view of people are simultaneously funnier and more cold-hearted. Bachman said the things king could not, and i must remind you this is a comparism of quality not quantity.

Tobiey: yeah, he goes on and on maybe 150 of 700 pages about a lot of things not related to the subject of the book, but who does not like to be educated? king in my humble opinion goes on and one about a lot of things because he loves to, writing fulfills him and maybe pays his bills, and got his kids through college, but those things are on the side he does it for the buzz and the pure joy of the thing, lets allow him digress once in a while, or maybe often, that way things are not left out.

Zainab : Things are not left out you seem to be so much in love with him that your mind overlooks his flaws impulsively. Dreamcatcher by King is a typical example of a 'good writer' bad book scenerio, it was highly flawed, somethings felt left out, he lost a chapter there alright, there seemed to be a great uselessness to the actions of whatever anyone does, human or alien, and when you drop the book it leaves you with more questions than answers.

Tobiey : Yeah you are right about me being in love with king, but my eyes are not closed to his flaws, dreamcatcher is deeply flawed alright. heck it might as well be his weakest book, but he also had a lot going for it, it was entertaining, awesome jokes with king's great sense of humour.

Zainab : King writes mainly fiction, and i am not one to judge people who read fiction to escape from life, when he writes literary he fails e.g christine, that novel was okay, pretty okay story, but it was too predictable, he was failing, the narrator was poor, failed in homour and what counts, it was really cheesy, i mainly read fiction but i want something different from what his readers get, i am just more demanding. Bachman on the other hand has better dialogue and delivery, the long walk and the running man are good examples.

Tobiey : you are wrong, and very wrong, king writes good non-fiction, two words 'danse macabre' Stephen King investigated what terrifies his fans and wrote beautifully, king has always understood that the good guys do not always win, pet semetary, cujo and christine are exmoles, but he also understands that they mostly do, everyday in real life the good guys win.

Zainab : I do not disagree with his philosophy, and he is good but not good enough for me, Bachman writes fiction too and does it better than Bachmann. Too bad Bachman had to die to avoid a whole lotta mess for stephen king. But his pseudonym was better at writing. And Tobiey if you want to read a good fictional book, try any of Denis Johnson's book, my personal favorite is his collection "Jesus' son"