Breaking Dawn
discussion
Is the Harry Potter/Twilight debate really so one-sided?
I thought I was the only one who preferred Meyer's writing style! As great as Rowling is with language, I felt that Meyer knew how to sew together scenes better when it comes to words. Well said!
how is there a harry potter and twilight debate, its like trying to debate, tony the tiget frosted flakes, with presidents choice frosted flakes! they don't got shit on the tiger!
Jared, in some ways the Twilight/HP debate IS stupid, but they are compared because they share one thing in common: they are both literary phenomenons. And literary phenomenons are always compared dude, get over it. Before Twilight came out, there was a lot of Lord of the Rings vs Harry Potter. Literary phenomenons are analyzed for their influence over the people that read them.
Harry Potter will win every single time- the plot is so deep and well developed, the characters are real, it is about more than just romance, the entire series painted a vast and magical world, and the battle between good and evil was epic. Twilight lacks all of these things, its characters are not well rounded seemingly only made important by their human back stories,the plot is weak and commonplace, and in the end it didn't inspire an entire generation as I believe Harry Potter did. This is just my opinion, and I respect other peoples' views on the matter.
Exactly, Baylor. In my post, Harry Potter won most of the important things that I look for in a book: plot, characters, and thematic development. Twilight only won in pacing and writing. I just didn't like the way antis bashed Twilight without looking at the opposite views.
I really don't like Harry Potter at all. I found it to be incredibly predictable, filled with stereotypes, discrimination, and contradictory morals (considering that they were written for children. In YA or adult books, it doesn't matter to me so much)
And I was 10 when I started reading them, so I didn't dive in with an adult, critical mindset.
I don't like going off on rants about things I don't like, though.
I feel like there's a lot more to Twilight that I can enjoy. The "life lessons" I found weren't as cheesy or basic (At age 10, I didn't need books to tell me that friends are good and love is important).
I just got a lot more out of Twilight than I did out of any Harry Potter book.
Jocelyn wrote: "Exactly, Baylor. In my post, Harry Potter won most of the important things that I look for in a book: plot, characters, and thematic development. Twilight only won in pacing and writing. I just did..."
For me Twilights' pacing was off. It seemed to me towards the end that the author realized that the plot was thin and so she threw in the evil vampire; so it was rushed and didn't flow well for me. The writing was immature and the word usage was excessive- like she overused words. But that's just me.
For me Twilights' pacing was off. It seemed to me towards the end that the author realized that the plot was thin and so she threw in the evil vampire; so it was rushed and didn't flow well for me. The writing was immature and the word usage was excessive- like she overused words. But that's just me.
That's true. I did make a statement in my post that it was only the first book that was horribly written. After that it seemed Meyer had significantly improved her writing. I saw less typos, grammar mistakes, thesaurus rape, though she still completely fails at writing action.
I don't think Twilight's pacing was perfect. In fact, I hated it. I haaaaaate slow pacing. Slow pacing is done for a purpose, and Meyer had no reason to slow it down except she wasn't creative enough to follow the most basic of story structures. So I agree with you on that. I just thought that Meyer's writing after the first book had a better rhythm to it, while Rowling's writing is waaaaaaay too rushed.
Yes, the first book was an insult to the English language, but eventually I excused that because damn does Meyer have a way with words.
I don't think Twilight's pacing was perfect. In fact, I hated it. I haaaaaate slow pacing. Slow pacing is done for a purpose, and Meyer had no reason to slow it down except she wasn't creative enough to follow the most basic of story structures. So I agree with you on that. I just thought that Meyer's writing after the first book had a better rhythm to it, while Rowling's writing is waaaaaaay too rushed.
Yes, the first book was an insult to the English language, but eventually I excused that because damn does Meyer have a way with words.
Cassie wrote: "I really don't like Harry Potter at all.
I found it to be incredibly predictable, filled with stereotypes, discrimination, and contradictory morals (considering that they were written for children..."
Hmm. To each their own, I guess. I found Twilight also to be painfully predictable. Meyer has so little skill to build suspense it just felt insulting every time she tried to do it. But that's just me, I guess.
I have to disagree on the cheesy morals thing, though. It just sounds cheesy because the execution of Harry Potter is bad. Rowling doesn't try to be melodramatic. She lets her writing speak for itself. Meyer, on the other hand, well, if you've just skimmed through the books you'd think Bella had her entire family killed or she was raped or something.
As for the stereotypes...doesn't Twilight have stereotypes too? Besides the fact that what little story is in there is really generic? I think Rowling used stereotypes for a reason. She wanted people to relate to them more easily, and then as the series progressed, she went even farther to develop them. This is just an assumption and an opinion, btw--but take Neville Longbottom for example. He's plain, has low self-esteem, and bumbles a lot. Seeing as all of Stephenie Meyer's good guys are beautiful, perfect, and awesome in every single little aspect, if Meyer wrote Neville he'd probably end up like Mike Newton, dismissed and discarded. I just liked that Rowling decides to use normal, everyday people for her heroes, to show that anyone can make a difference in this world if they really try. I didn't like how Bella was so arrogant towards Eric because he was plain, then she treated Mike better because he was better looking. Maybe Bella keeps insisting that she's normal, she isn't. She's the only one Speshul enough to have the private mind powers, she's the top student without even studying, etc.
I guess for the thematic development...yeah. While both of them are not very subtle, Meyer definitely beats Rowling on that level, if you look at it that way. I agree that Rowling sometimes likes to shove her morals down the reader's throat way too often, while Meyer pulls it back and lets the reader just kind of chug along and learn it as they go. I suppose I was able to enjoy the meaning behind them more, like how it's harder to forgive someone for being right than being wrong, and the power of unity and teamwork if people really feel a connection to others.
But I'm glad you found enjoyment in Twilight that I didn't, though. I guess you found it to be more subtle and easier to relate to, while you found Rowling to constantly bash you over the head with morals that were in your eyes very cliche. I guess it is, Harry Potter is one of the farthest things to original I've ever read, even if I love it as much as I do.
I found it to be incredibly predictable, filled with stereotypes, discrimination, and contradictory morals (considering that they were written for children..."
Hmm. To each their own, I guess. I found Twilight also to be painfully predictable. Meyer has so little skill to build suspense it just felt insulting every time she tried to do it. But that's just me, I guess.
I have to disagree on the cheesy morals thing, though. It just sounds cheesy because the execution of Harry Potter is bad. Rowling doesn't try to be melodramatic. She lets her writing speak for itself. Meyer, on the other hand, well, if you've just skimmed through the books you'd think Bella had her entire family killed or she was raped or something.
As for the stereotypes...doesn't Twilight have stereotypes too? Besides the fact that what little story is in there is really generic? I think Rowling used stereotypes for a reason. She wanted people to relate to them more easily, and then as the series progressed, she went even farther to develop them. This is just an assumption and an opinion, btw--but take Neville Longbottom for example. He's plain, has low self-esteem, and bumbles a lot. Seeing as all of Stephenie Meyer's good guys are beautiful, perfect, and awesome in every single little aspect, if Meyer wrote Neville he'd probably end up like Mike Newton, dismissed and discarded. I just liked that Rowling decides to use normal, everyday people for her heroes, to show that anyone can make a difference in this world if they really try. I didn't like how Bella was so arrogant towards Eric because he was plain, then she treated Mike better because he was better looking. Maybe Bella keeps insisting that she's normal, she isn't. She's the only one Speshul enough to have the private mind powers, she's the top student without even studying, etc.
I guess for the thematic development...yeah. While both of them are not very subtle, Meyer definitely beats Rowling on that level, if you look at it that way. I agree that Rowling sometimes likes to shove her morals down the reader's throat way too often, while Meyer pulls it back and lets the reader just kind of chug along and learn it as they go. I suppose I was able to enjoy the meaning behind them more, like how it's harder to forgive someone for being right than being wrong, and the power of unity and teamwork if people really feel a connection to others.
But I'm glad you found enjoyment in Twilight that I didn't, though. I guess you found it to be more subtle and easier to relate to, while you found Rowling to constantly bash you over the head with morals that were in your eyes very cliche. I guess it is, Harry Potter is one of the farthest things to original I've ever read, even if I love it as much as I do.
Jocelyn wrote: "As for the stereotypes...doesn't Twilight have stereotypes too?"I think I used the wrong word. I maybe meant archetypes. I think the books were filled up to the brim with archetypes. too many of them, it my opinion.
Besides the fact that what little story is in there is really generic?
Not really a fact... I didn't find it to be generic. I think if it were generic, the vampires would die in the sun, drink from humans, and have ugly faces. They'd wear cloaks and live in dark dreary castles. Bella would be more afraid of them. Her friends and family would worry about her spending too much time with creepy looking people. Edward wouldn't bee such an old fashioned gentleman. Alice wouldn't be so friends. And Bella may be a little generic, in an "I don't really fit into any clique" kind of way.
I liked that the vampires weren't generic. Perhaps specific themes are generic, but I don't see how the story as a whole is generic.
I wasn't talking about the world-building, I was talking about the plot. What I meant by generic was the "steps" of the story. Which is, essentially, 1) the girl is plain and insecure. 2) Plain Jane meets tall, handsome, rude, aloof, emotionally distant and angst guy with a six-pack. 3) Plain Jane and New Hot Guy hate each other's guts. 4) New Hot Guy falls in love with the Plain Jane for the first time. 5) Plain Jane is mad for mysterious reasons. 6) Plain Jane remembers Hot Guy has six-pack abs and goes back. And so on. I just found it painfully, painfully predictable.
With your consent, I'd like to break off this discussion, if you don't mind. I don't want this thing to become a tangent like my other thread.
With your consent, I'd like to break off this discussion, if you don't mind. I don't want this thing to become a tangent like my other thread.
In that case, I think most books are generic. Especially Harry Potter and Twilight.
@ Cassie
I promised not to go on a tangent...but whatever, this'll be the last. I do agree with you on the archetypes/stereotypes. Rowling does overuse them a bit too much. I guess I just preferred the way Rowling did it as opposed to Meyer. Personal preference.
I promised not to go on a tangent...but whatever, this'll be the last. I do agree with you on the archetypes/stereotypes. Rowling does overuse them a bit too much. I guess I just preferred the way Rowling did it as opposed to Meyer. Personal preference.
All i have to say is harry potter/ twilight debate, is either 1 one of two things..one- the all time stupidest deabte in history debates if you want to dabate books, debate wheel of time and lord of the rings.
and the second- it might possibly be the funniest debate in the history of debates, the all time funniest debate belongs to trek/wars fans and cheerleader/vs anti cheerleader. just a heads up if you ever get a chance, dont miss out they get heated.
stupid books to debate. potter is good and all but has nothing on wheel. AND WHY IS TWILIGHT even being mentioned?
OK, to be perfectly honest, for me, I never actually consciously think about things like theme, pacing, writing style, character and plot development. I either enjoy a book, I don't enjoy it, or it was OK. I just don't analyse why.I pretty much agree with all the points in the original post, aside from the fact I never had a problem with Rowling's pacing. Loved reading the post by the way, very enjoyable!
When it comes down to it, though I can totally understand (and agree with) all Twilight haters on why the books are totally stupid and useless, it never affected my enjoyment, so I still like them. But I find it much harder to see other people's points of view when they are being negative about Harry Potter.
So, all in all, Harry Potter (despite enjoying both series) has always been far better for me, and has always been far more important to me than Twilight could ever be. They're in completely different leagues, in my opinion. Harry Potter will always be in my heart.
And I think that others will agree with me when I say that Harry Potter has been so many people's childhood - while when it comes down to it Twilight was a quick teenage-vampire fling.
Yeah. I DO prefer Harry Potter, by far. In fact, pacing and writing aren't really the MAJOR things I look for in a book, it's the characters, plot and thematic development, all of which Rowling accomplished with a few bumpy areas, but I thought it was better than Twilight.
I think some people like Twilight better though because they find it more subtle. While I love HP, Rowling does have a very annoying tendency to bash the reader over the head instead of letting it speak for itself. Personally, on the subtlety level I thought they were equally bad, but I can see how Twilight fans would prefer Meyer.
I still think Harry Potter reigns supreme, but it's no fun to feel like an angry douchebag at Twilight fans, besides being unfair. So I try to be objective as possible, though sometimes I might be biased.
I think some people like Twilight better though because they find it more subtle. While I love HP, Rowling does have a very annoying tendency to bash the reader over the head instead of letting it speak for itself. Personally, on the subtlety level I thought they were equally bad, but I can see how Twilight fans would prefer Meyer.
I still think Harry Potter reigns supreme, but it's no fun to feel like an angry douchebag at Twilight fans, besides being unfair. So I try to be objective as possible, though sometimes I might be biased.
Jocelyn wrote: "Yeah. I DO prefer Harry Potter, by far. In fact, pacing and writing aren't really the MAJOR things I look for in a book, it's the characters, plot and thematic development, all of which Rowling acc..."Good points! Although I must say, Rowling's "bashing over the head" as you put it never bothered me in the least - probably because, as I said, I mainly look for enjoyment in a book rather than analyzing. Plus, I guess I'm a bit sappy, so being beaten over the head with messages of love and whatnot doesn't seem awful to me. :D
Haha, don't get me wrong, Harry Potter does reign supreme! I was just saying I do still enjoy Twilight - maybe because I have a thing for vampires. :D But no, you are right, there is absolutely no fun in feeling angry at or discriminating hard-core Twilight fans. (Unless you find out they drink blood or something, that's a bit far...)
Plus, Harry Potter's got Severus Snape, and Twilight can't beat that. Can you tell I'm a Snape fan? :D
Haha, yes. I was able to find at least a LITTLE enjoyment in Twilight as well after the first book, which I deem the worst of the series in everything: character development, plot, pacing, writing and thematic development/entertainment value. Then Meyer's writing significantly improved. I in fact wish I could write as fluidly and beautifully as Meyer does, if you can look past her need to remind us so constantly of Edward's dazzling perfection.
Jocelyn wrote: "Haha, yes. I was able to find at least a LITTLE enjoyment in Twilight as well after the first book, which I deem the worst of the series in everything: character development, plot, pacing, writing ...":D "If you can look past her need to remind us so constantly of Edward's dazzling perfection". So true!!! To be honest I actually am far more into Jasper and Carlisle than I ever was Edward.
Yes, I suppose that Meyer does write well. Although New Moon was the hardest book and movie to get through for me - I mean, honestly! I'm all in favor of true love, but it was hard to read about Bella going almost comatose for months, trying to be in danger or almost commit suicide just to see hallucination-Edward, and treating Jacob really badly! I still enjoyed it, but it was by far the worst.
Cassie wrote: "I really don't like Harry Potter at all. I found it to be incredibly predictable, filled with stereotypes, discrimination, and contradictory morals (considering that they were written for children..."
What? I also started reading Harry Potter books when I was 10 and watching the movies when I was 7 and I can tell you that Harry Potter teaches a lot of "life lessons" and that at an age of 10 you "do" need to learn that love and friendship are very important. I also have read Twilight (at an age of 15 to be more specific)and... I learned nothing about it.
Cinthya wrote: "Cassie wrote: "I really don't like Harry Potter at all.
I found it to be incredibly predictable, filled with stereotypes, discrimination, and contradictory morals (considering that they were writt..."
Thank you!
People forget that Harry Potter's fan base includes both males and females of all ages while Twilight's target audience is women, mainly young women. This shows Rowling's talent.
Also, Rowling created a whole other universe for pits sake. You just can't compare the two because Harry Potter is on a whole other level.
Twilight is about romance. Harry Potter is about life.
I found it to be incredibly predictable, filled with stereotypes, discrimination, and contradictory morals (considering that they were writt..."
Thank you!
People forget that Harry Potter's fan base includes both males and females of all ages while Twilight's target audience is women, mainly young women. This shows Rowling's talent.
Also, Rowling created a whole other universe for pits sake. You just can't compare the two because Harry Potter is on a whole other level.
Twilight is about romance. Harry Potter is about life.
Gattaca wrote: "Cinthya wrote: "Cassie wrote: "I really don't like Harry Potter at all.
I found it to be incredibly predictable, filled with stereotypes, discrimination, and contradictory morals (considering that..."
I have to disagree with that though, Gattaca. Life does include romance in it as well.
And Twilight is escapist fiction, not realist fiction. It isn't meant to be realistic.
I found it to be incredibly predictable, filled with stereotypes, discrimination, and contradictory morals (considering that..."
I have to disagree with that though, Gattaca. Life does include romance in it as well.
And Twilight is escapist fiction, not realist fiction. It isn't meant to be realistic.
But life does not revolve around romance. Also, I never said romance is not part of life since Harry Potter has MANY romance stories.
When did I mention realism?!?
When did I mention realism?!?
When I said Harry potter is about life, it is because I felt the emotions that makes you feel like you are part of life and part of the people around you.
Harry Potter centers around growing up, finding friends, learning about yourself, experiencing the joy of feeling like you are part of something, learning about your parents and their self sacrifice for you, a parent's love for their child is one of the strongest forces on the planet, learning to love, falling in love, first kiss, the warm feeling of getting a present for the first time in your life, seeing what real friends are like, knowing that you will be with them forever, trusting someone, feeling let down, learning to forgive, changing, finding what you want to be in life, dreams, being afraid...terrified, feeling crushed, revengeful, knowing that you have to do the right thing, we all have a choice, make the right choice, know yourself and what you want, love yourself.
Harry Potter centers around growing up, finding friends, learning about yourself, experiencing the joy of feeling like you are part of something, learning about your parents and their self sacrifice for you, a parent's love for their child is one of the strongest forces on the planet, learning to love, falling in love, first kiss, the warm feeling of getting a present for the first time in your life, seeing what real friends are like, knowing that you will be with them forever, trusting someone, feeling let down, learning to forgive, changing, finding what you want to be in life, dreams, being afraid...terrified, feeling crushed, revengeful, knowing that you have to do the right thing, we all have a choice, make the right choice, know yourself and what you want, love yourself.
It feels so weird to stick up for Twilight :) But, I'll do it anyway.
Twilight is a romance. That's the genre. Should we say Pride and Prejudice is all about romance and not about life?
I agree that Rowling's thematic development is better, and sends out better messages. However, the execution of it his horrible. Rowling is definitely not very subtle. Also the fact that the messages about love and friendship are very, very, veeeeeeery generic. How many times have we heard that before? Yes, love conquers all. Move on, please.
Again, it feels very weird for me to stick up for Twilight. But...
Twilight is also about finding friends and learning about yourself. Bella also feels the joy of feeling like she is part of something--the Cullen family. Is there not love in the Cullen family as well? If anything, Meyer is far more subtle about this than Rowling is.
Again--Twilight is a romance. Your saying that life doesn't revolve around romance is not a legitimate argument--are you saying that romance books are all bad, unrealistic, and should never be written? Romance may not be the center of the universe, but it is the center of the conflict for all romance books, so of course Twilight's gonna center around a romance. And it does have other nice aspects to it too, like the ones I mentioned.
Make no mistake--from a literary standpoint, Harry Potter is better than Twilight BY FAR. It meets all the basic requirements of a book, unlike Twilight, such as having a conflict and character development and whatnot. But I think you're emphasizing the positive traits of HP while ignoring similar traits in Twilight.
Twilight is a romance. That's the genre. Should we say Pride and Prejudice is all about romance and not about life?
I agree that Rowling's thematic development is better, and sends out better messages. However, the execution of it his horrible. Rowling is definitely not very subtle. Also the fact that the messages about love and friendship are very, very, veeeeeeery generic. How many times have we heard that before? Yes, love conquers all. Move on, please.
Again, it feels very weird for me to stick up for Twilight. But...
Twilight is also about finding friends and learning about yourself. Bella also feels the joy of feeling like she is part of something--the Cullen family. Is there not love in the Cullen family as well? If anything, Meyer is far more subtle about this than Rowling is.
Again--Twilight is a romance. Your saying that life doesn't revolve around romance is not a legitimate argument--are you saying that romance books are all bad, unrealistic, and should never be written? Romance may not be the center of the universe, but it is the center of the conflict for all romance books, so of course Twilight's gonna center around a romance. And it does have other nice aspects to it too, like the ones I mentioned.
Make no mistake--from a literary standpoint, Harry Potter is better than Twilight BY FAR. It meets all the basic requirements of a book, unlike Twilight, such as having a conflict and character development and whatnot. But I think you're emphasizing the positive traits of HP while ignoring similar traits in Twilight.
Gattaca wrote: "When I said Harry potter is about life, it is because I felt the emotions that makes you feel like you are part of life and part of the people around you. Harry Potter centers around growing up,..."
But people fail to realize that Twilight is more than just a romance.
Twilight also deals with some of the things you've mentioned (growing up, finding friends, learning about yourself, experiencing the joy of feeling like you are part of something etc.).
And it's okay to prefer Harry Potter but saying Twilight has no other aspects other than romance would be wrong.
It revolved around life. Bella's life. And while you may not have related to it, that does not make her experiences invalid.
I feel like you are putting words into my mouth. When did I say romance is bad? I don't see it. Romance books should never be written? What?
Jane Eyre and Pride and Prejduice are one of my favorite books ever written. Along with other countless romance novels. Not all romance novels are written to equal level. Pride and Prejuice has stood the test of time along with other romance novels, why? Because they show a timeless romance. Twilight is popular now but will never stand the test of time because it is based on shallow characters and shallow plot. Pop culture.
Excuse me, but you are comparing Twilight and Harry Potter and I am giving out my opinions on how those TWO books differ from each other.
Harry never had a real family, never felt love after his parents died when he was a baby. His experience with a real and loving family was different. Bella was always loved by both her parents. I mean.....you just can't compare the two.
People grew with Harry. I did not feel like Bella grew and changed much. There was no development except maybe her love for her lover grew. Okay.
It seems to me that you very much prefer Twilight and that is your preference, but I disagree when you tell me Harry Potter is generic. Nobody had ever created a whole new world like Rowling did....she created so many new things we have never even heard of...from drinks...to candies...to spells...to people talking to you in fires....too many to name.
Harry Potter is brilliant literature.
Jane Eyre and Pride and Prejduice are one of my favorite books ever written. Along with other countless romance novels. Not all romance novels are written to equal level. Pride and Prejuice has stood the test of time along with other romance novels, why? Because they show a timeless romance. Twilight is popular now but will never stand the test of time because it is based on shallow characters and shallow plot. Pop culture.
Excuse me, but you are comparing Twilight and Harry Potter and I am giving out my opinions on how those TWO books differ from each other.
Harry never had a real family, never felt love after his parents died when he was a baby. His experience with a real and loving family was different. Bella was always loved by both her parents. I mean.....you just can't compare the two.
People grew with Harry. I did not feel like Bella grew and changed much. There was no development except maybe her love for her lover grew. Okay.
It seems to me that you very much prefer Twilight and that is your preference, but I disagree when you tell me Harry Potter is generic. Nobody had ever created a whole new world like Rowling did....she created so many new things we have never even heard of...from drinks...to candies...to spells...to people talking to you in fires....too many to name.
Harry Potter is brilliant literature.
It just seemed that Bella relied on males for her happiness (Jacob, Edward). And the fact that she was willing to hurt herself for a man rubbed me the wrong way.
And Harry Potter seems to have better female role models......
That is quite true, Gattaca. Bella is annoyingly dependent on males for happiness, which is clearly seen when she goes cationic when she's dumped. And HP DOES have better female role models, which seems even more ironic because Twilight is supposed to be a piece of feminist literature.
Gattaca wrote: "I feel like you are putting words into my mouth. When did I say romance is bad? I don't see it. Romance books should never be written? What?"
You didn't say it, but you did imply it by using the "life doesn't revolve around romance" argument to justify your reasoning.
You are right in the fact that Bella does not grow or change much, if at all, though, I agree with you on that.
It's perfectly fine to state your opinions, but it's fine if we state our opinions too, right? That's what these discussion boards are for, after all, to debate stuff by throwing around opinions.
I don't think Harry Potter is brilliant literature, though. The prose and pacing is off, the plot tends to ramble and suffers from Deus Ex Machina, Macguffins, plot convenience and lack of plot relevance. However, I can't discredit Rowling's amazing ability to imbed emotion into her writing. (Dude, I cried when Dobby died.)
Anyway Gattaca, I wanted to apologize if I came off as rude. :)
You didn't say it, but you did imply it by using the "life doesn't revolve around romance" argument to justify your reasoning.
You are right in the fact that Bella does not grow or change much, if at all, though, I agree with you on that.
It's perfectly fine to state your opinions, but it's fine if we state our opinions too, right? That's what these discussion boards are for, after all, to debate stuff by throwing around opinions.
I don't think Harry Potter is brilliant literature, though. The prose and pacing is off, the plot tends to ramble and suffers from Deus Ex Machina, Macguffins, plot convenience and lack of plot relevance. However, I can't discredit Rowling's amazing ability to imbed emotion into her writing. (Dude, I cried when Dobby died.)
Anyway Gattaca, I wanted to apologize if I came off as rude. :)
I also apologize for coming off as rude. I did not mean to offend people who love Twilight. I am just a die hard Harry Potter fan because I literally grew up with Harry. We have the same heart beat lol.
But I love romance and I am a hopeless romantic:)
I cried for days when Dumbledore died because I saw him as such a father/grandfather figure for Harry.
But I love romance and I am a hopeless romantic:)
I cried for days when Dumbledore died because I saw him as such a father/grandfather figure for Harry.
Oh and the Phoenix symbolism had me weeping even more. It was like he turned into a Phoenix and flew off:)
Gattaca wrote: "It just seemed that Bella relied on males for her happiness (Jacob, Edward). And the fact that she was willing to hurt herself for a man rubbed me the wrong way."Actually not only Bella. Men and women were portrayed more happy when they were part of a couple.
Diane wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "It just seemed that Bella relied on males for her happiness (Jacob, Edward). And the fact that she was willing to hurt herself for a man rubbed me the wrong way."
Actually not only..."
What do mean? You mean men and women in general are more happy when in a relationship? But Bella relied on men too much, it does not send out a good message to girls.
Hopefully, no one is relying on other people to be happy. We have to learn to be happy even when we are alone.
Actually not only..."
What do mean? You mean men and women in general are more happy when in a relationship? But Bella relied on men too much, it does not send out a good message to girls.
Hopefully, no one is relying on other people to be happy. We have to learn to be happy even when we are alone.
Gattaca wrote: "Diane wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "It just seemed that Bella relied on males for her happiness (Jacob, Edward). And the fact that she was willing to hurt herself for a man rubbed me the wrong way."Ac..."
Nope, I meant in twilight, people were generally portrayed to be more happy in a relationship. It was not only Bella who relied on other people to be happy, it was also Edward, Jacob, Charlie, basically most of the characters.
Yes, single people can be happy too. They were woefully unrepresented. Though to me, it is a case of what is not-written rather than what was written.
Diane wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "Diane wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "It just seemed that Bella relied on males for her happiness (Jacob, Edward). And the fact that she was willing to hurt herself for a man rubbed me the..."
I am talking more about reliance than happiness. It was good that they were happy when they were a couple but it seemed that Bella was relying on men to be happy.
I am talking more about reliance than happiness. It was good that they were happy when they were a couple but it seemed that Bella was relying on men to be happy.
I just wish she did not want hurt herself when not around Edward.
Gattaca wrote: "I just wish she did not want hurt herself when not around Edward."
I also wish that, I wish Bella had a little more self respect and better sense of self-worth...WITHOUT becoming a vampire. Becoming a sparkly supernatural goddess isn't an everyday solution to insecurity, which unfortunately Meyer doesn't seem to get.
I also wish that, I wish Bella had a little more self respect and better sense of self-worth...WITHOUT becoming a vampire. Becoming a sparkly supernatural goddess isn't an everyday solution to insecurity, which unfortunately Meyer doesn't seem to get.
Gattaca wrote: "Diane wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "Diane wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "It just seemed that Bella relied on males for her happiness (Jacob, Edward). And the fact that she was willing to hurt herself for a ma..."I don't see how Bella's situation was different from everyone elses though. Do explain.
Would Edward have been happy without Bella? Would Charlie have been happy without Renee or Sue? Would Jacob have been happy without Bella or Nessie?
Jocelyn wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "I just wish she did not want hurt herself when not around Edward."
I also wish that, I wish Bella had a little more self respect and better sense of self-worth...WITHOUT becoming a..."
Yea, I mean I get that was in love with him and they belonged together but you have to be strong girl! Don't sell yourself short and act crazy when not around him. I don't want girls to think that it is all right to become weak when not around your love.
Meyer could have portrayed Bella so much stronger but I don't think she did that..:\
I also wish that, I wish Bella had a little more self respect and better sense of self-worth...WITHOUT becoming a..."
Yea, I mean I get that was in love with him and they belonged together but you have to be strong girl! Don't sell yourself short and act crazy when not around him. I don't want girls to think that it is all right to become weak when not around your love.
Meyer could have portrayed Bella so much stronger but I don't think she did that..:\
Gattaca wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "I just wish she did not want hurt herself when not around Edward."I also wish that, I wish Bella had a little more self respect and better sense of self-worth...WI..."
Edward was also portrayed that way. Though it wasn't as in depth because we only get BellaPOV of things.
But I would argue that Edward was the weaker one in terms of coping. So it's certainly not as if women are (or just Bella is) generally depicted as weaker.
Diane wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "I just wish she did not want hurt herself when not around Edward."
I also wish that, I wish Bella had a little more self respect and better sense of..."
I think both characters were depicted as a little weak. I kept shouting at them "please don't try to kill yourself!"
I also wish that, I wish Bella had a little more self respect and better sense of..."
I think both characters were depicted as a little weak. I kept shouting at them "please don't try to kill yourself!"
Gattaca wrote: "Diane wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "Gattaca wrote: "I just wish she did not want hurt herself when not around Edward."I also wish that, I wish Bella had a little more self respect and ..."
I think they are weak in some aspects and in certain points in their lives/stories. I don't necessarily think there is anything wrong with that though.
Cinthya wrote: "What? I also started reading Harry Potter books when I was 10 and watching the movies when I was 7 and I can tell you that Harry Potter teaches a lot of "life lessons" and that at an age of 10 you "do" need to learn that love and friendship are very important. ..."Not really because I already knew all that. Harry Potter has very very basic life lessons that I learned from Sesame Street.
Cassie wrote: "Cinthya wrote: "What? I also started reading Harry Potter books when I was 10 and watching the movies when I was 7 and I can tell you that Harry Potter teaches a lot of "life lessons" and that at a..."
I can't deny that, the messages are rather generic.
I can't deny that, the messages are rather generic.
Cassie wrote: "Cinthya wrote: "What? I also started reading Harry Potter books when I was 10 and watching the movies when I was 7 and I can tell you that Harry Potter teaches a lot of "life lessons" and that at a..."
But grown men and women would not have loved Harry Potter if the main target/message was to little kids. I had professors and doctors tell me they loved Harry Potter lol.
There is more there than "hey guys, friendship is great" lol. Did you read all the Harry Potter books?
But grown men and women would not have loved Harry Potter if the main target/message was to little kids. I had professors and doctors tell me they loved Harry Potter lol.
There is more there than "hey guys, friendship is great" lol. Did you read all the Harry Potter books?
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
I deleted my old post because, well, I thought it was too long. I'm just going to pose a question: Is this debate so one-sided?