The Colorado Kid by Stephen King (2005)

Many readers of this novel have complained about the failure of its author to end the book with a solution to its central mystery. Posters to the message board on SK's official website speculate freely, attempting to piece together clues to solve this unexplained (more to the point, unsolvable) mystery--the details of which form the heart of this novel. SK tells us throughout the book--via the voices of the main characters--that there is no solution (that indeed the point of his story is: no solution equals no viable newspaper story), yet some people in this forum play Sherlock, as if the point of the book is for the reader to analyze the fragmentary clues and solve the mystery themselves. If that's a fun thing for you to do, that's fine; just realize that SK means it when he says (in the afterword): "I'm really not interested in the solution but in the mystery." I personally have no problem with the ending.
Having said all that, my problem with the book is in the beginning and the middle. The beginning is S-L-O-W. The main characters--two crusty newspapermen and their young female intern--are introduced, the setting is well-delineated (I would never call into question SK's knowledge of, and feelings for, coastal Maine), but the conflict--that essential element, which is the jumping-off point for plot development--is barely hinted at. It isn't until Chapter 4 that things really get rolling; in one of SK's longer works that might be okay, but to basically write nothing but setup and background material for the first 25% of a short novel? I had to force myself to keep reading.
The middle at least has the intriguing story of the Colorado Kid himself--a dead body found on the beach way back in 1980; nobody knows if he died from natural or unnatural causes--although the way it is told, with newspapermen Vince and Dave swapping anecdotes during a VERY long afternoon, is interesting but not exciting. Characters need to be in action; they need to be doing things. Sitting and discussing an historical incident, drawing conclusions about what it means . . . that's what readers do in their minds when they read a book; when the characters you're reading about spend all their time doing the same thing . . . it's like reading the transcript of a college lecture, including the question and answer session at the end ("School is in?" Stephanie [the intern] asks when one of the old men starts spinning his yarn.). The quality of the writing is good, but the way in which the story is told makes it boring.
Putting the character of Stephanie in action would make her more interesting than does this story of a girl who, in doing her internship (Webster's definition: supervised temporary work in a field to gain experience), is basically just sitting in class again--for the entire length of the book.
I have certainly read worse books than this one--books where the quality of the writing or characterization was poor, or where the plot was haphazard (full of coincidence or lucky breaks or gaps in logic); I find none of those problems with this book, and to reiterate: The Ending Is Fine! It's the way that this interesting idea with interesting (or potentially interesting) characters is formulated into a story--that is where the weakness with this novel lies.
The best thing about this book is the throwback cover painting; never mind that it has nothing to do with the story--if it did there might be a lot more action happening on the printed page.