<p>twilight is the biggest load of crap, go harry potter!</p>
<p>I have actually found Twilight quite inspiring…</p>
<p>…if even Twilight can published, surely I can get a novel published!</p>
<p>
You can read books all you like, not everyone likes to do the same thing. And reading being “one of the best pastimes”, well, again, that’s what you believe.
Sorry I believe otherwise.
I wasn’t referring to the fact that your opinion wasn’t great, but rather, that most of the opinions in this thread have been negative. I was probably unclear.</p>
<p>
And I never claimed it to be a sin and otherwise. I was on the fact that you said “why pick at the book?” </p>
<p>Because people have opinions regarding it and they are free to make fun of it for all they like, regardless of whether who likes it or not.</p>
<p>I actually thought the first book wasn’t too bad. The plot kept moving at a decent pace. After reading the synopsis of the other books though, I realized that the Meyer probably got bored with the series and gave it a fairytale ending.
Some of the concepts that she introduces are pretty stupid though. Glittering vampires in the sun? I don’t know about you, but I think it would be pretty hot if supermodels glittered in the sunlight. Instead of vampires representing this dark symbol of doom, they are the obvious superiors of humans, with no weaknesses. Built like a tank, intelligent, agile, long lifespans, what’s not to like? Oh, and superpowers.</p>
<p>What part of “escapist fantasy” do you not understand? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How cocky is it to assume you could write something like Twilight? Mary Sues/Gary Stues are easy to write, but VERY VERY DIFFICULT to write well. Perhaps more difficult than any other type of character.</p>
<p>Stephen King’s right.</p>
<p>My thoughts on the Twilight Series:
- It’s fluffy. That doesn’t make it not worth reading, exactly- but it is NOT a masterpiece. It’s mindless beach reading. And I’m okay with that- not every book can be heavy or even meaningful. It’s the junk food of literature- you can’t survive on it, but it’s nice once and a while.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The writing style is not amazing. The plot is fast, so it hooks the reader interesting- but I have never found myself marveling over Meyer’s use of words.</p></li>
<li><p>I don’t think they’re seen as stupid because “girls like them.” There are plenty of books that have a mostly female audience- Pride and Prejudice, Jane Eyre, etc.- and are still considered great books. And are written very well- there are just some moments in P&P where you think “People ARE like that, that’s so true.” I love those moments.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>4.Perfect characters are what every amature writer uses. To get past that and write about real people who have real motivations is an accomplishment. It takes a real intelligence about how people work- a type of intelligence that not all people have.</p>
<p>In summary- the Twilight series are like McDonalds- they might sell, but it’s not because they are more amazing than a five course meal of cuisine. They fill a different niche. </p>
<p>Note: I borrowed the first three from the library. Not reading the fourth, bleeeargh.</p>
<p>I meant young women en masse like them. Do those classics qualify? It’d be nice if they did, but I don’t think they do. I don’t see the fervent admirers swarming the nets, anyhow. </p>
<p>I don’t see the scornful intelligentsia massing up against football either. </p>
<p>Anyway, like I said, I think Stephen King’s books are Twilight for guys, literature wise. So he’s not one to talk.</p>
<p>And also, what part. Of escapist fantasy. Don’t you understand. -hits head on keyboard-</p>
<p>i understand the backlash against the popularity of the serious but I don’t understand why people are like happy that Stephen King called her out or something…</p>
<p>i mean, has anyone ever argued that the author was a good writer?
nobody I know of has, because she’s not, the writing is pretty standard.</p>
<p>she’s a good storyteller, and there’s nothing wrong with that
people enjoy reading her books
it may not be good writing, but it is entertaining</p>
<p>and the main purpose of literature is entertainment
so I think its stupid that people are bashing her.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please tell me this is not really in one of the books.</p>
<p>LOL @ people **<strong><em>ing about “intellectual elitism.” *</em></strong> pop culture no homo.</p>
<p>@ThisCouldbeHeavn: Yes, it is. Alas.</p>
<p>Look at my first point again. I said it’s made to be fluffy, so it’s okay for it to be fluffy.</p>
<p>Just like it’s nice just to watch TV every once and a while, and if one of my friends/boyfriends likes to watch football, then that’s fine. I watch Gossip Girl (knowing that it’s melodramatic junk) after a full day of crazy classes, and that’s fine. Reading Twilight after reading Marx is REALLY nice. Everyone’s brain needs a break.</p>
<p>However, that’s it’s niche. If all someone ever does is watch football, I wouldn’t find them very interesting… Same thing with Gossip Girl and Twilight. And, yeah, people do make jokes about football- all that crap about men just sitting around on Monday nights to watch the game. Bleeeh.</p>
<p>And for literature’s primary goal- I think that could be argued. Entertainment is definitely part of it, but it can also be a commentary of society or a means to prompt change. Or something that makes you think. It’s fine that the Twilight books are primarily for entertainment, but books that do more than one of those goals are really amazing. They don’t even have to be crazy “elitist” famous books- Terry Pratchett’s books are a good example. They’re funny as heck, but they’re more than that, too.</p>
<p>This made my day, when I read it.</p>
<p>Can someone please explain something to me about Twilight? </p>
<p>I’ve never read the books or seen the movie or had any desire to, but on Facebook, there’s a lot of Twilight bumper stickers and they say something about Edward (the vampire) “sparkling” and then one had a pic of a vampire from Buffy and it said “Real men don’t sparkle” or something. What do they mean by sparkle?</p>
<p>@ molly4190: Edward is sparkly in the sunlight. Or something.</p>
<p>As an avid fantasy reader, I have to say, “Twilight” is … well … horrid, even by general fantasy standards. I can’t really say much more about it, though quite honestly, I’ve read better fanfiction. It’s worse than “Eragon” even, which I thought was complete dreck. 2D characters, 2D plot, horrible writing … I could go on. Now, I’m not saying that it has to have some sort of literary merit (because 80% of the fantasy genre doesn’t), but, by God, please please please improve the writing at least; after publishing so many books, you would’ve expected her to have gotten better–but no, the writing actually got worse.</p>
<p>That being said, the “Harry Potter” series isn’t that great either. The last book was something of a travesty (“Let’s wander around and see if something happens!”) and I think it went downhill ever since the third book. Still, at least Rowling knows how to tell a story effectively, and she skips on the purple prose (thankfully).</p>
<p>Stephen King … I’m not too fond of his writing style myself, but I respect his opinion regarding books. Read a couple of his books; not impressed.</p>
<p>As for the entertainment value of “Twilight” … Not entertaining at all if I can’t stop my brain from going on and on about how much her writing sucks. Again, if I want to read something entertaining, I can always just go onto fictionpress or fanfiction and find some better quality writing.</p>
<p>I have to agree about twilight sucking. I read all the Twilight books. The first was somewhat amusing, although definitely nothing special. The following books… new moon eclipse and breaking dawn were just stupid (imo).</p>
<p>However, I did enjoy her science fiction novel “The Host”. I liked the slow-paced writing and descriptions of everything.</p>
<p>twilight’s great for amusement, but does not have any depth to it.</p>
<p>it doesn’t have to be this awesome fantasy book with gorgeous writing and identifiable but uninterpretable symbols. hell, it doesn’t even have to use SAT words to be a book of depth.</p>
<p>i just felt like edward was a very shallow character in that you just KNEW what kind of person he was. edward hasn’t changed at all throughout the series, except for his tolerance for his girlfriend (then again, anyone who’s been in a relationship knows even they can do this)</p>
<p>bella is the most annoying character ever. she’s cheating on her boyfriend even when he comes back, she OPENLY cheats and her boyfriend is tolerant of even that, and many other things i don’t really have the time to write about. yes, those were generalizations, bella felt “guilty” that she was always in such a mess, that she was secretly in love with jake even though she was supposed to love edward.</p>
<p>i hated the werewolf thing. it felt extremely cliche.</p>
<p>Twilight is stupid and harry potter COMPLETELY kicks twilights a$$</p>
<p>Yeah how about they’re both garbage.</p>