Sparrow's Reviews > Twilight

Twilight by Stephenie Meyer
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
1302775
's review
Oct 13, 2010

did not like it
bookshelves: reviewed, influenced-me, pacific-northwest-glory, monsters, motherless-daughters
Read in October, 2010

Okay, the star rating is a lie. Twilight rox. But you know what does not rock and gets only one star? Real-life Twilight experiences. Twilight tells the basic creepy-old-man-stalks-young-girl story. You know the one. It’s everywhere. He woos her by being vaguely threatening and manipulative. She sees his condescension as the patient musings of a wiser soul. It’s fun in a book, but when you see it in real life, walk the other direction. In my experience, it is possible for creepy stalkers to come around almost anywhere, and the internet is no exception.

I don’t want to get lecturey on you, but I think that, especially for people who are the typical targets of stalkers (all you Bellas out there), but really for everyone, it is important to be aware and smart and even suspicious. Don’t give your address to people you don’t know. And don’t think that a compliment is always what it seems. Sometimes compliments are manipulation. If someone makes you uncomfortable or seems suspicious, don’t be afraid to tell them that. Don’t feel pressured to keep yourself in an uncomfortable situation or to talk to people who skeeze you out. You don’t have to be afraid, just remove yourself from the situation. If a friend tells you to watch out for someone, give that advice a chance. I know it’s obvious to say, but I like being reminded every once in a while that you can’t control other people’s actions, but you can control your own.

As an example, I’ll tell you a story of one time when I wasn’t smart and didn’t remove myself from a situation. This is a pretty specific situation, and it takes place in Ukraine, but I really think things like it could happen anywhere.

So, my friend, Vanessa, lived in the middle of the country, and I was going to visit her. We met in Kyiv to take the bus back to her city. The bus we got on was old and rickety, and the only seat was right in the front. We were exhausted and Vanessa fell asleep against the window. The bus driver kept looking at us in the rear-view mirror, but I didn’t think anything of it because we were American and got stared at all the time. He must have been going about thirty miles an hour the entire way there, because I think we got in about two hours after we were supposed to. Vanessa told the driver, in Ukrainian, where to drop us off, but he drove right past the stop down to the regular station. We got out at the station and Vanessa was pissed. It was really late, and it would have been easy for them to let us off at her stop. She had just woken up, too. We had both been sleeping off and on.

We got out of the bus to get our luggage, and as we were grumbling and trying to find our bags, the driver’s assistant came up to us and explained that they were actually going to let everyone off and drive us BACK to her stop. Oh! We slapped our foreheads. That makes so much more sense. We got back into the bus. (NEVER GET BACK INTO AN EMPTY BUS.) Duh. We were really tired, so that’s some excuse, but not much. Anyway, the driver’s assistant got behind the wheel, and took off in the opposite direction of the town. So, there we are, driving out in the middle of the country (but really the middle of nowhere because there aren’t even houses or lights or anything) with these two old, creepy Ukrainian guys.

Vanessa was freaking out a little bit, and started gathering weapons around her. She had her keys out and some kind of antenna from the dashboard. I don’t remember what else, but that is exactly what you should do if you find yourself in a situation like that. Self-defense 101. The driver, now freed from his driving responsibilities, sat across from me and asked us the Ukrainian for “do you girls like to party?” We quickly answered “no.” He told us that he had a stash of vodka stored in the back of the bus for just such an occasion. He slid his hand over onto my leg. Vanessa immediately slapped it off. You could see the gears in our brains turning. What if we were murdered, there in the Ukrainian countryside, and just left out to rot? What if we escaped, but spent days wandering in circles in the empty fields and eventually died of thirst? Could we jump from a moving bus? Why did we get back on the fucking bus?

Then, after about ten or fifteen minutes, they pulled up to a gas station – in the middle of friggin’ nowhere, mind you – got gas, and headed back to town. We were fine. We were shaken, and it wasn’t a safe situation, but we were fine.

What I’m telling you is this: it’s not your fault if you are the victim of unwanted attention, but there are a lot of things you can do to be smart and safe. Take a self-defense class. Be honest with other people. Listen to your instincts. Block people on the internet if they are making you uncomfortable. Don’t harass people yourself, but if you’re uncomfortable, be smart. Learn from your mistakes.

Twilight is fun. I’m the first to admit it. Fictional Edward is a boyfriend you could buy at Claire’s™. How much does that rock? But in real life Edward is just an old, bossy man with a thirst for blood. That’s not romantic. It’s gross. While awesome, fictional Edward got into Bella’s home through her window, gross, real-life Edwards get into our homes through our computers. (Not literally, although, oooo sci-fi fan-fic waiting to happen?)

It recently came to my attention that a member of goodreads was accused on another website of using Goodreads(.com) and other places on the internets to harass people - basically he was accused of being a real-life Edward. (I expressly claim the content of that link, though I apologize for its graphic nature. Goodreads(.com) does not claim the content of that link. : this should in no way constitute legal advice to anyone, including Goodreads(.com) or affiliated agencies, but according to §§10, 12, and 14 of my and the accused member's contract with Goodreads(.com), as well as U.S. federal law, 47 U.S.C. sec. 230(c)(1), and U.K. law, Defamation Act of 1996 §1(3), Goodreads(.com) is only a content provider, not a publisher of my statements, and has no liability for what I say on here. Although Goodreads(.com) may not be convinced that any users of its service are creepy, I am persuaded. We are separate. Please don’t blame it for what I say. I have talked to both parties involved in the incident. Below are the accused’s responses to me. The girl who originally posted the accusations has asked that we not contact her, as all of the harassment she has received from questions about that post has been just about as awful as the original harassment. I hope you will respect those wishes. I would be glad to answer any questions I can about this either in the thread below or in a private message.

You might not think that the accusations are true, and that is entirely valid. I did the investigation I needed to do in order to confirm for myself that the accused member of Goodreads is creepy, you can do what you need, or ignore the situation entirely, as you like. I understand the importance in a trial of presuming someone innocent until proven guilty, but I do not believe that I need to wait to have an opinion about someone until that person has gone through a trial. I can have an opinion based on whatever standard of evidence I like, and the testimony of a witness, combined with my own experience, and countered by nothing, is enough evidence to persuade me. Also, I am willing to err on the side of caution where the potential for harm is either exposing Bellas to stalking and harassment, or exposing an innocent man to loss of business. Both are horrible, but the former is more horrible to me. Again, everyone should balance that for themselves. Honestly, beyond blocking him myself, I'm not very interested in this particular person, as I don't think he's at all unique. He serves as a symbol in this review, yes, but a symbol of something much larger and more ubiquitous. If someone STARTS harassing the accused member because of the things I wrote here or for whatever reason, I will think that harassment is as stupid as any other harassment.

The community manager of Goodreads(.com) has informed me that the appropriate way to deal with a potential predator on Goodreads is to inform the community manager of where the offensive posts exist, and he will delete them. That seems to me like just about the worst way possible to deal with situations like this. Not only does it cover up for the offender by erasing evidence, it also makes it difficult to warn people in the future of patterns. I think the stupidest (bless their ‘lil hearts) way to deal with stalking is to pretend you can stop it by erasing it. I have already blocked the accused member because I don’t want him to access my friends through my profile, but I think censoring his account or his comments is a ludicrous way of “dealing” with a situation. Also, I frankly think that crazy people have the right to read books and talk about them, too. Just because I don’t want to be friends with the accused member, doesn’t mean other people, who are not in danger of being targeted by him, shouldn’t. Plus, deleting his account or comments doesn’t accomplish anything, as he can make a new profile, or write new comments. The point is that we should all be careful (especially the Bellas). Again, trust your instincts and learn from your mistakes. If you have bad instincts, trust your friends. Do the opposite of what Bella does because Edward, in real life, is the opposite of what Edward is in fiction.

I’m a big fan of the Take Back the Night movement, but I don’t think the night is the only thing that shouldn’t be dominated by fear. So this is your call to take back the internet. When goodreads originally took down this review and the others like it, I had invited people to copy my review and write about their own experiences with real-life Edwards. I invite you to do that again if you would like. You are definitely responsible for whatever you copy or change from this review, but you are welcome to it. The world is there for all of us to enjoy, for men and women. Parents shouldn’t be afraid to let their kids use the internet. We are real people on here and should treat each other as such. Don’t let people gain power through fear.

______________________________________

POSTS from me to the accused Goodreads(.com) member

message 10: Sep 26, 2010 09:14am

People around here seem to be very concerned, and with good reason, about this: http://morbidprose.livejournal.com/24399...

Do you have a response to these accusations? More specifically, have you given attention to other people that they have perceived as unwanted or offensive, or have you threatened people? I'm also specifically interested to hear what you have to say about the accusation of racism.

For myself, I'm not very concerned about being friends because if you harass me, I can always block you. I don't want my posts to expose other friends of mine to that kind of harassment, though. If you don't respond to this with some kind of reasonable explanation, or if you delete this post, I will probably block you. I would rather not block anyone, but I don't want people I care about to feel uncomfortable posting on my threads. I look forward to your response.

message 11: Sep 28, 2010 07:54am

I had hoped you would be upfront about answering the livejournal accusations because it seems both childish and overly formal to need to set a deadline for you. However, because you have not responded, I will be more clear. I am willing to wait until 11:59 p.m., PST, on Wednesday, September 29, 2010 for you to provide a reasonable explanation for the accusations listed on the livejournal link in my comment below.

If you delete either of these posts, or if you do not respond by that time, I will understand that as you acknowledging that the accusations are true. At that point I plan to block you as a user and do what I can to make it known on goodreads that you have acknowledged the accusations. I recommend you post your explanation here on your own profile for future reference in case this issue comes up again.

(At this point, the accused member sent me a PM with the quoted language in the message below.)

message 12: Sep 28, 2010 01:45pm

[The accused member] Wrote: "I saw the first line on your comment to me and couldn't read any further. I don't read or discuss Bad News. I cannot read anything that will be hostile or minatory or derisive."

It surprises me that you say this, given the books you seem to usually read. I'm left to assume that you mean that you cannot read anything derisive about yourself. I think it has come to a point where you might need to learn how to read that type of material, as many people, including myself, are prepared to take your silence on the topic as admission of guilt.
38 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Twilight.
Sign In »

Comments (showing 1-50 of 62) (62 new)


message 1: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine HI!

According to the recent National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction Report to Congress, there has been a sharp increase in sexual predators using the internet to entice children.

I am surprised by this. I thought this had gone down. which I think is a bit terrifying because lets be honest the idea that it is a less big deal people won't be as careful.

While awesome, fictional Edward got into Bella’s home through her window, gross, real-life Edwards get into our homes through our computers (not literally, although, oooo sci fi fan-fic waiting to happen?).

I just realized how creepy teleportation is.


Sparrow No, apparently the researchers think it's pretty much exploded, but they don't have real statistics about it because they can't send around a survey or something. I'm doing a big research project on child trafficking, and it looks like one of the ways that the more elaborate groups of traffickers get to kids is through the internet. There are a lot more intricate systems of predators now, and the trafficking thing is outrageously huge and organized. Not to be a fear-monger or anything. Again, I think it's easy to keep yourself safe, you just have to be aware. I also think that kids are a lot more aware now than they used to be about internet predators, so that can help combat it.

While awesome, fictional Edward got into Bella’s home through her window, gross, real-life Edwards get into our homes through our computers (not literally, although, oooo sci fi fan-fic waiting to happen?).

I just realized how creepy teleportation is.


Now that I think about it, is this what Tron is about? I never saw it, but I've decided that it's about that.


message 3: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine Meredith wrote: "Now that I think about it, is this what Tron is about? I never saw it, but I've decided that it's about that. "

I don't know I've never heard of it. But I have so many male friends that I have discussed how awesome it would be if they could teleport to new york since I can never manage to make friends in my own city. Now I don't really want people to learn to teleport anymore.


Sparrow Totally. Unless you had a teleportation shield, which they would invent, like 2-3 years after teleportation became a problem


message 5: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine From now on my male friends are allowed to teleport but not into my bedroom, that just isn't kosher. it's like vampires you have to be invited.


Eh?Eh! Very nice, Meredith! We need the post-pillow fight story exchange, soon.

Tron is about corporate espionage, I think. The machinations of executives are represented by figures inside the computer, I think. Except one of the researchers gets zapped into the computer and has to help his computer figure win, I think. I remember the glowing motorbikes were cool. Oooh, and the throw-y discs!


Sparrow Elizabeth wrote: "You're my hero. Twilight is about a stalker and I'm really glad every time someone reminds us of that. And you're amazing for taking the time to explain all this. Awesome."

THANK YOU!!!


message 8: by Whitaker (last edited Oct 04, 2010 08:46PM) (new)

Whitaker Defamation and Goodreads

Anything I say below is based on English law. It may be that US law is different, and if so, I would be interested to know.

The test for defamation under English law is that the statement must be one that tends to lower the estimation of the person in the eyes of reasonable people. Calling someone a stalker is likely to be caught under this test.

Defamation on the internet is potentially liable worldwide (based on case law in UK and Australia). Accordingly, the defamed person could sue you or Goodreads in the UK, and persons have actually been successfully sued in the UK for defamatory internet statements. Under UK law, a person can be liable as a publisher for defamatory statements made available publicly on its site and which it is aware of. As a corporation with shareholder interests to take care of, it is likely that Goodreads would prefer to err on the safe side rather than risk an expensive and potentially damaging law suit.

Goodreads doesn't care what you do in a private message because it is not liable for what you say in that. If you are sued for defamation, it's none of Goodread's concern (or mine).

Creepy People

Let me be clear on my views.

If you regard someone as creepy and dangerous, you should definitely stay away from that person.

If you regard someone as creepy and dangerous, you should definitely warn children in your care to avoid that person. Hell, I was just told to not talk to strangers, creepy or otherwise.

If you regard someone as creepy and dangerous, you could well say, "Gee, that person looks creepy and dangerous." You could go around telling your friends that and I would have no major issues with that.

If you regard someone as creepy and dangerous, what you should not do is take out an advertisement in a publication stating, "Individual XYZ is a dangerous man. Stay away from him. Here is his name, his town, and his office address. He has done acts 3, 4 and 5 to young women."

Context and detail are everything. What is an appropriate and even sensible reaction in one context may not be in another.

The Nature of Internet Statements

Perhaps it is because I grew up in an age without the internet, but I definitely do not regard the internet as a private space. It is publicly available information and should be treated as such. There is a world of difference between gossiping with your friends in the privacy of Starbucks and making public written statements about a person as if they were fact.

Collectively, the various reviews and posts stated, "Individual XYZ is a dangerous man. Stay away from him. Here is his name, his town, and his office address. Here is what he looks like. He has done acts 3, 4 and 5 to young women." No one single person put up all that information, but since the entire chain with helpful click-on links was available to any reader, the review, posts and links would be judged as a whole. So, even if all you did was post a picture of the individual with his name, you would have, under English law at least, adopted the rest of allegations made by others about him. (Unless like Emma you specifically and categorically disaffirmed the truth of the statements made.)

I hope this clarifies where I stand on this matter.


Sparrow I'm glad you brought this up, Whiteaker. It's frustrating not to be able to discuss this topic in any one place without it all being deleted.

California law governs goodreads (see subsection 16 "General" under the "terms" in the lower right side of the screen.

The relevant language that we all agree to in the terms is under subsection 2 as follows:

"You are solely responsible for your User Content that you upload, publish, display, link to or otherwise make available (hereinafter, "post") on the Service, and you agree that we are only acting as a passive conduit for your online distribution and publication of your User Content."

Moira linked elsewhere to a discussion of Napster liability that is relevant if you are interested: http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellect...

We are all liable for anything slanderous that we say about anyone on here, just as in any other venue. California slander statute is here: http://law.onecle.com/california/civi...

In order for something to be slanderous, it must be false in the US. Is that not true in the UK as well?

Is there something false that I have posted about this person that you are able to clarify? I have certainly not intended to post any false information.


message 10: by Whitaker (last edited Oct 04, 2010 09:19PM) (new)

Whitaker Meredith, short of carrying out it's own due diligence, Goodreads has no way of knowing whether the statements you made about a person is true. Nor is it it's business to make that decision of fact. Rather than carrying out a very expensive due diligence, or risk a law suit, Goodreads sensibly made the decision to remove the reviews and posts.

The terms of conduct posted by Goodreads may work in a Calfornian court under California law. I am in no position to judge. Under English law, the terms of conduct would not exonerate Goodreads as courts look at the substance of what is done and not the form. Conflict of laws rules extend long arm jurisdiction for tortious conduct carried out in a country's territory. It is on this basis that England and Australia have found publishers like Goodreads liable for statements published on internet sites accessible in their countries. That Goodreads comes under California jurisdiction is not the end of the matter.

As you should know, truth about the statement is a question of fact. I am in no position to determine whether anything that was said by you or anyone else about this person is true or false. I may privately believe your views. I may even verbally say so to persons who are my friends. But in a civil society, I do not have that power to decide on veracity in a legally binding manner. Only a court (or in your country, a jury) has that power, and rightly so.


message 11: by Whitaker (last edited Oct 04, 2010 09:38PM) (new)

Whitaker I should add that Goodreads has no reason to believe the truth of your statements about any individual merely on faith in your character or on your say-so. It has no idea who you are.

The truth is, neither do I. I do not have a long personal history with you in the real world. I cannot speak to you or question you closely to assess your reactions to my questions. The same applies to me viz-a-viz your interaction with me. For all you know, I could be Osama bin Laden or the neighbourhood dirty old man on your street. Do you really know?

Interestingly, under my country's Penal Code--a relic of British rule--the acts that were described would be criminal:
509. Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
It's perhaps a pity that similiar statutes don't exist in your country.


Sparrow Well, consider me duly chastised. And I do encourage you to believe whatever you want. And, for good measure, I'll say again that the referenced person has done nothing to me.


message 13: by Manny (last edited Oct 05, 2010 12:18AM) (new) - rated it 2 stars

Manny I've always found it a little surprising that so few people make the Twilight/paedophile connection. I wonder if it would be possible to cross it with Phantom of the Opera. I admit that the details aren't all clear to me yet, but I can already see Alice's hag-like face reflected in the mirror, as she helps ghastly, wizened Edward put on his mask so that he'll look like a cute teenager. At the end, Edward and his family are dramatically revealed in their true forms. Heroic Jacob comes in to rescue Bella from them, and she falls weeping into his strong, manly arms while the Cullen residence burns to the ground.

If any Hollywood studio would like to pick this up, I'll be delighted to help develop the idea further.


message 14: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine Manny wrote: "I've always found it a little surprising that so few people make the Twilight/paedophile connection. I wonder if it would be possible to cross it with Phantom of the Opera. I admit that the details..."

people also really like the creep in phantom of the opera


message 15: by Msmurphybylaw (new)

Msmurphybylaw And most people don't fault Humbert


message 16: by Miriam (new)

Miriam real-life Edwards get into our homes through our computers (not literally, although, oooo sci fi fan-fic waiting to happen?

There is a short story about computer "bugs" getting out of the computer as gremlin-like things. Maybe by Esther Friesner.

Now that I think about it, is this what Tron is about?

Tron is about people getting digitalized into the computer and having to fight through (super old-skool) computer games to defeat the Evil Super Computer Mind and shut it off. No teleportation.


message 17: by [deleted user] (new)

There is a short story about computer "bugs" getting out of the computer as gremlin-like things. Maybe by Esther Friesner.

There's something by Charles DeLint called "Pixel Pixies" about this, and it's really embarrassing to read.


Eh?Eh! Elizabeth wrote: "Buffy! The demon that get scanned into the computer and then convinces willow that he's a sweet guy who loves her."

Oh! Isn't that the episode where Jenny Calendar is killed? And Giles gets all tough?


Eh?Eh! "techno-mage"! Wasn't that used?


message 20: by [deleted user] (last edited Oct 05, 2010 06:49PM) (new)

Oh! Isn't that the episode where Jenny Calendar is killed? And Giles gets all tough?

Edit: spoilers!

Not to have my head come to too much of a point, but no, Calendar gets it near the end of the season. It may be the one where Jenny C. is introduced though, and she does call herself a techno-mage. (I just finished watching seasons 1-3, so it's all really fresh.)


message 21: by trivialchemy (new)

trivialchemy oh my god you guys are talking about buffy.

flag.

unfollow.


message 22: by [deleted user] (new)

Isaiah wrote: "oh my god you guys are talking about buffy.

flag.

unfollow."


Buffy would just stake Edward.


message 23: by [deleted user] (new)


Eh?Eh! Ceridwen wrote: "Not to have my head come to too much of a point,"

No reply, I just love this phrase.


message 25: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine everytime people start talking about buffy I start thinking about clarissa explains it all. there is no good reason just how it happens.


message 26: by [deleted user] (new)

Jasmine wrote: "everytime people start talking about buffy I start thinking about clarissa explains it all. there is no good reason just how it happens."

Didn't Suzanne Collins write for Clarissa? Why do I think this?


message 27: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine I have no idea but I hope so.


Sparrow Ceridwen wrote: "Jasmine wrote: "everytime people start talking about buffy I start thinking about clarissa explains it all. there is no good reason just how it happens."

Didn't Suzanne Collins write for Clarissa?..."


She did. http://www.suzannecollinsbooks.com/bi...


message 29: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine From amazon:

Suzanne Collins has had a successful and prolific career writing for children's television. She has worked on the staffs of several Nickelodeon shows, including the Emmy-nominated hit Clarissa Explains It All and The Mystery Files of Shelby Woo. Collins made her mark in children's literature with the New York Times bestselling five-book series for middle-grade readers The Underland Chronicles, which has received numerous accolades in both the United States and abroad. In the award-winning The Hunger Games trilogy, Collins continues to explore the effects of war and violence on those coming of age. Collins lives with her family in Connecticut.


Eh?Eh! Ceridwen wrote: "In fact...."

I love that her hair changes with nearly every cut.


message 31: by Miriam (new)

Miriam flag.

unfollow.


I believe the technical term for this is flounce, no?


Manny Brian wrote: "Gotta give credit where credit is due: Mike made the connection back in May 2009!"

I think I may have been even earlier with this Quiz question.


message 33: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine Manny wrote: "Brian wrote: "Gotta give credit where credit is due: Mike made the connection back in May 2009!"

I think I may have been even earlier with this Quiz question."


heh caris got it wrong.


message 34: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine wait can we talk about this a minute:

a. The Picture of Dorian Gray 244 (15.1%)

b. Lolita 490 (30.4%)

c. Frankenstein 44 (2.7%)

d. Breaking Dawn 835 (51.8%) *


really?


message 35: by Msmurphybylaw (new)

Msmurphybylaw Ceridwen wrote: "Oh! Isn't that the episode where Jenny Calendar is killed? And Giles gets all tough?

Edit: spoilers!

Not to have my head come to too much of a point, but no, Calendar gets it near the end of the..."


Willow's computer boyfriend 1st season I robot you Jane. I think episdode 7.

Calender gets killed by Angel in second season episode 17 Passion. Giles burns down the factory.

I watch Buffy, Muppet Treasure Island and occasionally snatch to put myself to sleep at night because reading makes my brain stay awake.


Manny Jasmine wrote: "wait can we talk about this a minute:

a. The Picture of Dorian Gray 244 (15.1%)

b. Lolita 490 (30.4%)

c. Frankenstein 44 (2.7%)

d. Breaking Dawn 835 (51.8%) *


really?"


What do you mean, really? There's certainly no centenarian/teenager sex in the other books. For calculations about Edward's age, see another of my Quiz questions.


message 37: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine Manny wrote: "What do you mean, really? There's certainly no centenarian/teenager sex in the other books. For calculations about Edward's age, see another of my Quiz questions. "

no that's what I meant. 15% said dorian grey?? really I mean there is some centenarian sex but not with teenagers. and 44 people said frankenstein? there is no sex in that book. idiots


message 38: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine Brian wrote: "I don't think Dorian could have been quite 100 by the end of the book; his friend (God, I'm bad with names) whose hot daughter Dorian was hitting on, who Dorian knew from youth, was elderly but not..."

god the world was so different back in the day when people use to die at 12.


Manny Brian wrote: "I don't think Dorian could have been quite 100 by the end of the book; his friend (God, I'm bad with names) whose hot daughter Dorian was hitting on, who Dorian knew from youth, was elderly but not ancient. I don't know if you can put a definite number on it, but Dorian was probably in his 60's or 70's. I think."

Yes, Dorian can't possibly reach 100. And isn't it only in the movie that he gets involved with Lord Henry's hot daughter?


message 40: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine whatever my point was how could only about 50% get that right I mean.

Caris needs to give us an explanation.


message 41: by Whitaker (new)

Whitaker Manny wrote: "What do you mean, really? There's certainly no centenarian/teenager sex in the other books. For calculations about Edward's age, see another of my Quiz questions."

OMG! I can't believe you had Oscar and Star in that! LOL!


Sparrow You should unvote and vote again every time I have to do a new version. It's part of the game.


message 43: by trivialchemy (new)

trivialchemy u r so smart n sexy 2 what is ur address?


Sparrow Isaiah wrote: "u r so smart n sexy 2 what is ur address?"

hai ther! u r hawt, 2! 555-2312!


message 45: by trivialchemy (new)

trivialchemy thx lol do u lik corona?


message 46: by trivialchemy (new)

trivialchemy Too soon?


Sparrow omg, u knowz it. tho 4 me a zima.

It's never too soon for stalking jokes.


message 48: by trivialchemy (last edited Oct 13, 2010 01:39PM) (new)

trivialchemy I guess the real question is, does #52 meet the uniform five-pronged test for the betterment of the Goodreads(.com) community?

If not, I'm tempted to flag it.


message 49: by Sparrow (last edited Oct 13, 2010 01:51PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Sparrow That's a really good point. It's tough to say, since I'm not Patrick, and he's really the only one who's allowed to know what betters the Goodreads(.com) community. All I know is that, according to Patrick, saying, Stephenie Meyer has daddy issues, betters the community, but saying you have personal knowledge that an author plagiarized, without making a wikipedia page to back yourself up, does not better the community. I'd say corona is more like daddy issues, but my instincts tend to be different than Patrick's, so he might think it's more like plagiarism. It's a tough call. Should we vote?


message 50: by trivialchemy (new)

trivialchemy I don't know, would voting better the Goodreads community? The question seems to carry sticky normative implications for questions of political sovereignty, social contract theory, etc. Frankly, I think that some form of absolutist monarchy with succession dictated by an open election among a genetic aristocracy would really maximize the Goodreads community good. From that perspective, rather than vote, we should first unanimously proclaim the members of the aristocracy as the Goodreads members of the "Classical Age" (if unanimity is impossible here, we could easily execute dissenters), who would then elect the monarch in perpetuity. The monarch would then have the prerogative to declare whether corona bottles in vaginas have the ethical élan of daddy issues, literary plagiarism, or something else entirely -- like penis envy.

As for initial monarchic accession, I'd say Patrick is a natural choice.


« previous 1
back to top