<p>Twilight has done nothing but create mass hysteria in young teenage girls and produce a pretty penny for the author.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I donât think the authorâs the only person to have made a pretty penny.</p>
<p>^^^^ Thatâs worth as much as a penny.</p>
<p>Also, thereâs no definitive thing you have stated, Ricrosscountry.</p>
<p>completely irrelevant.</p>
<p>Still havenât answered my question. What makes Shakespeareâs writing better than Twilight?</p>
<p>
Are you describing every post youâve made since I asked you to answer my question?</p>
<p>
Increased economic consumption is a net benefit b/c economic collapse leads to global thermonuclear war and nuclear winter.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um, for starters, Shakespeareâs writings arenât about a somewhat morbid romance full of dark gothic undertones⊠Oh, wait, never mind.</p>
<p>Stephanie Meyer from Chapter 23 of âNew Moonâ:</p>
<p>Before you, Bella, my life was like a moonless night. Very dark, but there were stars - points of light and reason. And then you shot across my sky like a meteor. Suddenly everything was on fire; there was brilliancy, there was beauty. When you were gone, when the meteor had fallen over the horizon, everything went black. Nothing had changed, but my eyes were blinded by the light. I couldnât see the stars anymore. And there was no more reason for anything.</p>
<p>William Shakespeare from Sonnet 43:</p>
<p>When most I wink, then do mine eyes best see,
For all the day they view things unrespected;
But when I sleep, in dreams they look on thee,
And darkly bright are bright in dark directed.
Then thou, whose shadow shadows doth make bright,
How would thy shadowâs form form happy show
To the clear day with thy much clearer light,
When to unseeing eyes thy shade shines so!
How would, I say, mine eyes be blessed made
By looking on thee in the living day,
When in dead night thy fair imperfect shade
Through heavy sleep on sightless eyes doth stay!
All days are nights to see till I see thee,
And nights bright days when dreams do show thee me.</p>
<p>I vote for Shakespeare.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To make this point more explicit, the main problem with greatness in creative writing is that the only objective metrics tend to be external.</p>
<p>
Whatâs the RFD? Why is Shakespeare better?</p>
<p>I can copy/paste too!</p>
<p>âWhy you fool, itâs the educated reader who can be gulled. All our difficulty comes with the others. When did you meet a workman who believes the papers? He takes it for granted that theyâre all propaganda and skips the leading articlesâŠHeâs our problem. We have to recondition him. But the educated public, the people who read the high-brow weeklies, donât need reconditioning. Theyâre all right already. Theyâll believe anything.â</p>
<p>C. S. Lewis was awesome.</p>
<p>I actually would rather read Twilight to be perfectly honest.</p>
<p>Guise guise guise.</p>
<p>Itâs neither Stephanie Meyer nor Shakespeare.
Dr. Seuss is clearly the best writer in all of eternity.</p>
<p>Would you like me to lay it all out for you? Okay!</p>
<p>Stephanie Mayer/Twilight: Original thought? Zero. Many, many similar romances. The only thing remotely original is the whole âvampireâ aspect. Whereas Shakespeare was the main creative writer of the time, meaning that he had nothing to base his writing off of other than pure original thought.</p>
<p>Whatâs so genius about Shakespeare? Talk about massaging the literary system. Your argument is based on the modern day literary bias this world has towards Shakespeare, coining him a âgeniusâ, and making every work of his great. Your analysis and arguments by using this bias are misconstrued and barely supportable, if at all.</p>
<p>William Shakespeare from âRomeo and Julietâ
How is that different from the Twilight passage bar the Shakespearean language?</p>
<p>
Oh right, Shakespeare was the only playwright of his time and the story of Romeo and Juliet was definitely the product of his âpure original thoughtâ. You are an idiot.</p>
<p>Shakespeareâs formula got used up too much. It became monotonic, and lost its appeal.</p>
<p>From what i heard about the uneditted version of Twilight, the editor of that book is a good writer, not Stephanie Meyers</p>
<p>Are you guys really arguing that Shakespeareâs works arenât better than Twilight, or is it just a way of saying that it is impossible to judge literature objectively?</p>
<p>Alright, MIT, then why is Shakespeare taught so hardcore in all public high schools, especially in the honors courses, if he is so irrelevant? at least you seem to think he is irrelevant.</p>