Is Stephenie a bad writer? Showing 751-800 of 2,281

[Rebecca]

If she was a bad writer her work would not get published. I mean unless of course she paid them too, or it was a romance novel. Which neither of those is true. Is she the greatest writer of all time? No. She might not have been completely original, but honestly who can be with as many books and movies we have these days. There are bound to be similarities. I think people just like to find flaws if they dislike a book. And Bella being dependent on Edward pissed everyone off along with the whole vampires sparkling thing. :) I loved the books anyway!

[Andrea]

I wouldn't say she is "bad", but I don't think she is particularly good either.

[Bill]

A friend of mine put it simply and eloquently today:

"Popular just means it's popular. Doesn't mean it's good or bad... just popular."

A McDonald's hamburger is popular. People may like it, but it just means it's popular. Not good (quite bad, and unhealthy, actually)... popular.

Get it now?

Meyers may be popular, and people may like her, but that doesn't mean she's good... just popular. You can't argue that "She's popular, therefore she's good" because the two do not go together like that.

It's that simple. "Popular" doesn't mean good or bad... just "popular."

You can like Twilight all you want. No one is stopping you from doing so. All that means is you like it... it doesn't mean it's "good" or "bad" in an objective sense (which it isn't, on a technical level, for reasons that have been done to death).

I fully expect Mickey doesn't get it... she's wired not to twist everything said against Her Holiness to argue points that have never been made. I hope someone has a glimmer of intelligence left, and can grasp this oh-so-simple concept:

Popularity does not necessarily equate to quality. Popular does not equal good or bad... just popular. I can't stress that enough.

[[deleted user]]

Lina wrote: "Not at all! She is amazing and extraordinary. I love her writing. Its so deep and emotional! her writing finds the deepest part inside of me"

Same for me! I think Bella had a nervous breakdown in New Moon but did not go to the hospital. I really suffered with her as I read this book. I also suffered too much in the last one when she had Renesmee (msp).

Once again anyone who makes 50 million selling their books is not a bad writer. "The dogs bark but the caravan goes on...."

[[deleted user]]

Bill wrote: "A friend of mine put it simply and eloquently today:

"Popular just means it's popular. Doesn't mean it's good or bad... just popular."

A McDonald's hamburger is popular. People may like it, but i..."

I think what Bill is trying to say is that something may be popular...but it isn't the quality of it that causes its popularity, it's just a simple aspect that appeals to a large group of people. One of the main appeals of Twilight, I believe, is that Bella is relatable to its target audience. That does not make the writing quality writing (for starters I have no earthly clue how the relatability of a character has anything whatsoever to do with the quality of the prose, or the plot, or the pacing, or any other literary element), it just makes Bella relatable.

So I guess the best way to sum up Bill's point, or put it in a different way, is this: appeal is appeal, not quality.

[Bill]

Jocelyn wrote: "Bill wrote: "A friend of mine put it simply and eloquently today:

"Popular just means it's popular. Doesn't mean it's good or bad... just popular."

A McDonald's hamburger is popular. People may l..."

Exactly.

I also went back and looked, and I may have switched "subjective" and "objective" in a couple of places. That probably happened after several days of typing assembly code (when "addi $v0, 4 syscall" starts to make more sense than English, it's time for a break).

[Dorothy]

I like the story...but I wasn't a fan of the writing.

[Mickey]

Bill wrote: "A friend of mine put it simply and eloquently today:

"Popular just means it's popular. Doesn't mean it's good or bad... just popular."

A McDonald's hamburger is popular. People may like it, but it just means it's popular. Not good (quite bad, and unhealthy, actually)... popular.

Get it now?

Meyers may be popular, and people may like her, but that doesn't mean she's good... just popular. You can't argue that "She's popular, therefore she's good" because the two do not go together like that.

It's that simple. "Popular" doesn't mean good or bad... just "popular.""

This is probably the most reasonable you've sounded, Bill. Where is all the ranting about mindless hordes and cults? Where is all the arrogant pontificating and stating your opinions as fact? Where's all the equating hatred with intelligence?

The mass popularity of anything would be interesting to study to determine what it is that captures people's interest. With so many distractions and options out there, why does this thing appeal to so many and so strongly? I think to warp that into rants about "people not caring for quality" or people being stupid followers is self-serving and limited. Its purpose is to feed into a natural arrogance in the hater. It becomes: I'm better than you because I don't like this when it is a matter of personal taste as it is with all books.

[Carys]

Bad characters, Bella is pathatic and Edward sounds a bit abusive towards her. He writing is wordy, and really bad phrasing.

[[deleted user]]

My husband and I were discussing this yesterday:

"So I guess the best way to sum up Bill's point, or put it in a different way, is this: appeal is appeal, not quality."

and we agreed that what the intellectual's say is quality is often very boring trash but because they are the "creme de la cream" they make the rules. They are the ones who make the English teachers force us to read Heart of Darkness in high school, etc. Quality is also a matter of opinion.

[Alex]

Is Heart of Darkness trash because you find it boring?

What you mean is subjectively, you find it to be trash, as in, it's not trash you just don't happen to like it, right?

[[deleted user]]

You also note the intellectual snobs don't go after books that start out with endless cursing and go on and on! No, they attack Twilight because of jealousy since it is so popular. At least Twilight is a "clean" read.

Does it get any praise for this? Not today when people will pay for a book with a thousand curse words. I hope the pendulum will swing again from this sick environment to where its admired if a couple "love each other other for a thousand years"..what a nice sentiment.

[[deleted user]]

Carys wrote: "Bad characters, Bella is pathatic and Edward sounds a bit abusive towards her. He writing is wordy, and really bad phrasing."

Your last sentence is super bad! Bella is NOT pathetic. She is a fantastic heroine. Stephenie Meyer's writing is not wordy. Stephen Kings' writing is wordy...try reading 11/22/63. (on and one about a shade of orange until I could scream) Or how about some of the old classics that ramble on for 10 years before they start to get to the point. You have to suffer before you get to some excitement.

[[deleted user]]

Carys wrote: "Bad characters, Bella is pathatic and Edward sounds a bit abusive towards her. He writing is wordy, and really bad phrasing."

"He writing is wordy? ...you are using the WRONG pronoun. Before you criticize you should try to get your pronouns right.

[Alex]

~☆ Alice☆~ wrote: "You also note the intellectual snobs don't go after books that start out with endless cursing and go on and on! No, they attack Twilight because of jealousy since it is so popular. At least Twilig..."

But, but, but ...

Oh, fuck it.

[[deleted user]]

Carys wrote: "Bad characters, Bella is pathatic and Edward sounds a bit abusive towards her. He writing is wordy, and really bad phrasing."

Now I see you like Dark Lover. Talk about trash! and you attack Twilight? that is amazing. You should be attacking the very stupid writing that those books. The names in those books. They are hysterically funny. Did you give that book 5 stars?

[[deleted user]]

TheFeelsAreOnTheFloor wrote: "50 shades was based off of Twilight so...."

Fifty Shades should be sued within an inch of her stupid life. I just hate it that anyone compares that trash to Twilight. I keep hoping that Stephenie Meyer's publisher will sue that woman. If there is any justice they will do it. SM is probably too nice and kind to give that bitch what she deserves.

[[deleted user]]

I agree it is a harsh judgement:

Zoran wrote: "That SM is a horrible writer, is a fact. But what is interesting to me are the people who like those books anyway.

It reminds me of being 16, when I was completely into metal music. I only wanted ..."

That's kind of a harsh judgement."

I am old and have read thousands of books but Twilight is my favorite. I don't understand why people who cannot even spell or get sentence structure correct feel they can run down Twilight. I get so tired of it. Every time I turn around on goodreads someone who can't even spell or get a pronoun right is saying something nasty about it. It seems to me this group is supposed to be for fans. A fan is someone who LIKES Twilight.

[[deleted user]]

Alex wrote: "Is Heart of Darkness trash because you find it boring?

What you mean is subjectively, you find it to be trash, as in, it's not trash you just don't happen to like it, right?"

Hi Alex, I had to read it in high school and analyze it for forever it seemed to me. Our teacher was obsessed with symbolism, etc and would not let up on it. I still remember the torture after 50 years.

Why are you on a group for Twilight FANS when you gave this book 1 star? A fan is someone who LIKES something. This is very mysterious to me. Wouldn't you go get on the group for Heart of Darkness so you could have a pleasant time with others who think like you do?

[Alex]

~☆ Alice☆~ wrote: "Hi Alex, I had to read it in high school and analyze it for forever it seemed to me. Our teacher was obsessed with symbolism, etc and would not let up on it. I still remember the torture after 50 years.

Is the book bad, then, or was the teacher?

Why are you on a group for Twilight FANS when you gave this book 1 star? A fan is someone who LIKES something. This is very mysterious to me. Wouldn't you go get on the group for Heart of Darkness so you could have a pleasant time with others who think like you do?

Because a) I find Twilight and Twilight fandom very interesting. b) Twilight generates a lot of debate and discussion whereas "high art" books don't tend to.

[Bill]

Wow... okay, so we're opening a new level of insane now, are we? Alice makes some of the previous fanatics look kind of tame now... amazing.

As for the "intellectual" argument: it still comes down to a subjective evaluation of the material. It is absolutely possible to dislike a well-written book because it is not to your taste.

However, it is also possible to love a poorly-written book, in the intellectual sense of technical ability to write.

I'll bet that, if you picked up a book that you were forced to read in school and re-read it on your own terms, you'd find that your perception of it was very different the second time around. I re-read Romeo and Juliet after all of the comparisons to it from Hunger Games and Twilight readers, and actually liked it better than I did in 9th grade.

(By the way... most of the fans who use the comparison are way off of the mark. R & J is a tragedy for a reason.)

Similarly, despite the reputation as literary classics, Macbeth and Hamlet are actually closer to popular fiction than intellectual exercises. They weren't written for scholars and academics to circle-jerk over, but for the common folk (Macbeth, in particular, is quite bloody and brutal).

[[deleted user]]

Hi Alex, I just visited your page and I see you like The Great Gatsby. Did you know there is a big discussion about that? I just posted on it too. Since you are a fan of it you might enjoy that more.

If you find Twilight INTERESTING then you ought to give it more than one star.

I am not sure about the teacher as its been so long ago. I remember we were also studying Shakespeare which we read in class and she always had me read since I have always been a reader and could pronounce most of the words which so many could not. That is about all I remember now except for the torture of that book. There are many groups for "high art" on goodreads. I like Daphne du Maurier and there is a good group for that too. Have you read Rebecca yet?

[Alex]

Oh, let me rephrase then. What discussions I post in and why are my business. Thank you :)

[[deleted user]]

Bill wrote: "Wow... okay, so we're opening a new level of insane now, are we? Alice makes some of the previous fanatics look kind of tame now... amazing.

As for the "intellectual" argument: it still comes down..."

LOL! Bill, you are right. I have even traveled to Forks along with thousands of others from around the world. They have a map there and a pin from every country in the world except Greenland. I like to be with other fans not nay-sayers.

I am reading over books that I had to read when I was younger like Wuthering Heights and what I thought was great romance at age 16 turned out to be a true monster to my mind today. I thought Heathcliff was very evil. At age 16 I thought he was wonderful because I was told to think that way.

However, I will never read Heart of Darkness again as that was like being tortured by the Spanish Inquisition.

[Angie Elle]

~☆ Alice☆~ wrote: "If I see they did then to me this means jealousy and pettiness of spirit. I don't buy their book.

I am a REAL fan!"

I am a Twilight fan, but I have to admit this is a very narrow view. Why are you so unaccepting of others opinions?

FYI--the rest of us who like the books are real fans, too. We live and breath and everything! Not blacklisting authors who have their own opinions doesn't make us any less of a fan than you claim to be. It may, however, make us a bit more mature.

[[deleted user]]

I think this is because when I first got on goodreads I kept reading put-downs of Twilight here and there. I don't see that for other books but just for Twilight. Haven't you noticed this also? Twilight is most every Listopia and at the top of every hate list.

[Angie Elle]

~☆ Alice☆~ wrote: "I think this is because when I first got on goodreads I kept reading put-downs of Twilight here and there. I don't see that for other books but just for Twilight. Haven't you noticed this also? ..."

I have noticed this, but it's not something that effects my personally. I enjoyed the book. I don't care how many or what kind of 'Listopias' it tops. It doesn't change how I feel about the book.

My life's mission is not to make everyone else like it, or even to defend why I like the book. I tried that, but after being told my reasons weren't good enough, I wondered who the heck I was trying to please. For me, it's enough that I like it.

I have other things that are a much better use of my time than defending my perspective--like reading more books!

[Jordan]

Zoran wrote: "Jordan wrote: "the fast food thing is true with it not being healthy, but people still like it. "

The Twilight thing is true with it being badly written, but people still like it.

Jordan wrote: "..."

Really, or are you being sarcastic? If your not, then thanks!

[Heather]

I love Stephenie Meyer - having just finished reading The Host (after seeing the trailer for it when I went to see the last instalment in the Twilight saga) I think her story-telling is superb. Everyone is of course entitled to their own opinion, but I think her writing is great. Bring on the next instalment!

[Ree]

~☆ Alice☆~ wrote: "A fan is someone who LIKES something. This is very mysterious to me. Wouldn't you go get on the group for Heart of Darkness so you could have a pleasant time with others who think like you do?"

This idea of "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" is really annoying. You have a right to criticism and a right to utter it. This is the discussion forum - differing opinions are therefore necessary, otherwise it would be called an agreement forum. "I like Twilight." "Me too." - "I find Jane Austen books boring." "Me too." - "Draco Malfoy is the beeeest." "I so agree". - wouldn't that just be, um, boring?

Also, not being confronted with ideas you don't agree with, don't like, haven't thought of, would make us all very narrow-minded and that's never a good thing.

[Jordan]

Reese wrote: " ~☆ Alice☆~ wrote: "A fan is someone who LIKES something. This is very mysterious to me. Wouldn't you go get on the group for Heart of Darkness so you could have a pleasant time with others who thi..."

I actually kind of like the idea of a civilized conversation for once. i am tired of all the fighting.

[Ree]

Jordan wrote: "I actually kind of like the idea of a civilized conversation for once. i am tired of all the fighting. "

Agreed. I don't think I said I favor fighting.

[Jordan]

Reese wrote: "Jordan wrote: "I actually kind of like the idea of a civilized conversation for once. i am tired of all the fighting. "

Agreed. I don't think I said I favor fighting."

Yeah. No you didn't. I like criticism on here but not fighting. But at the same time, I agree, I hate the whole "one word boring answers"

[[deleted user]]

I'm so confused on what everyone is talking about. Can someone please fill me in?

[Jordan]

Abby wrote: "I'm so confused on what everyone is talking about. Can someone please fill me in?"

Me and Reese are talking about discussion boards. She said she doesn't like it when it's too boring. I said I didn't like it when everyone fights, she agreed with me and I agreed with her.

[[deleted user]]

I feel the same way. I don't like the ones that are boring or that no ones posting in. I'm not a big fan of fighting, but I do enjoy it if it's on a thread about Edward and Jacob.

[Jordan]

Abby wrote: "I feel the same way. I don't like the ones that are boring or that no ones posting in. I'm not a big fan of fighting, but I do enjoy it if it's on a thread about Edward and Jacob."

me too! Edward all the way, baby!

[[deleted user]]

Edward will always win!!! Jacob just sucks.

[Jordan]

Abby wrote: "Edward will always win!!! Jacob just sucks."

ikr? They are meant to be best friends! not together! in new moon it was just awkward.

[Lauri]

I think Twilight was terribly written but the host was exceptional so i dont know

[Jordan]

Lauri wrote: "I think Twilight was terribly written but the host was exceptional so i dont know"

I need to read the host...

[[deleted user]]

~☆ Alice☆~ wrote: "Stephenie Meyer's writing is not wordy. Stephen Kings' writing is wordy...try reading 11/22/63."

I am currently reading that book, and I can confirm that it IS wordy, but there is enough content to compensate for its length. THAT is the difference between King and Meyer's writing: while Meyer's writing is chock-full of pointless filler, King's writing is densely packed enough so that its length is perfectly acceptable.

[Angie Elle]

Jocelyn wrote: "~☆ Alice☆~ wrote: "Stephenie Meyer's writing is not wordy. Stephen Kings' writing is wordy...try reading 11/22/63."

I am currently reading that book, and I can confirm that it IS wordy, but there ..."

I tried reading Gerald's Game and Salem's Lot, and I can say there wasn't enough content in either to hold my interest. It was far too descriptive for me, and I enjoy a lot of description in the books I read.

This is another situation that's going to involve subjection.

[[deleted user]]

~☆ Alice☆~ wrote: If you find Twilight INTERESTING then you ought to give it more than one star.

I think Alex meant the discussions about Twilight were interesting, not the book itself. Just saying. :)

[[deleted user]]

Angie wrote: "This is another situation that's going to involve subjection."

That's a good point, and it's true. I was just saying it as a response to Alice's comment...she'd implied that King's writing was unacceptably wordy in 11/22/63. I was saying that King's writing is dense specifically in 11/22/63, partly because it was the book Alice referenced, partly because I've never read another novel by King besides that one.

[Mickey]

Angie wrote: "I tried reading Gerald's Game and Salem's Lot, and I can say there wasn't enough content in either to hold my interest. It was far too descriptive for me, and I enjoy a lot of description in the books I read.

This is another situation that's going to involve subjection."

I think it's all subjective when you start talking about "too much" or "not enough". People's tolerance levels and preferences are so different.

[Bill]

Angie wrote: "I tried reading Gerald's Game and Salem's Lot, and I can say there wasn't enough content in either to hold my interest. It was far too descriptive for me, and I enjoy a lot of description in the books I read."

You must not have gotten very far in Salem's Lot, because all of that description makes perfect sense by the end of the book.

Besides... it's one of his shorter novels, and before he got over-the-top with his word counts. How could you not stick it out for the 400ish pages of the novel?

...or is the real reason that it got intense very quickly? Some people have problems with some types of horror, and there's a nasty scene very early on with one of the Glick children that still upsets me (and I've read it several times). It's not something to be ashamed of, but if that's the reason for giving up, it's more understandable than the descriptiveness King uses in one his least descriptive novels.

[[deleted user]]

Alice wrote: "You also note the intellectual snobs don't go after books that start out with endless cursing and go on and on! No, they attack Twilight because of jealousy since it is so popular."

I hope I don't sound rude, I just can't think of any other way to phrase this.

This is the kind of thing I was talking about. academia is not an evil force who look down on "common" people. They are not snobs, and they are not jealous. And even if they WERE snobs, they sure as hell have a right to be proud of it, because their opinions are valued highly for a reason. But in any case, Alice, I think you're mistaken. They are, in general, not snobs. I'm sorry....it just bugs me when people act as though Academia is some cruel elite group trying to oppress people who do not share their education or something, because they are honestly not. That's just my 2 cents.

Of course, I could be wrong, and maybe you're not talking about academia and professionals, though it sounds like it to me. Let me know if I AM wrong that you are talking about academia.

[Angie Elle]

Bill wrote: "Angie wrote: "I tried reading Gerald's Game and Salem's Lot, and I can say there wasn't enough content in either to hold my interest. It was far too descriptive for me, and I enjoy a lot of descrip..."

I don't want to have to 'stick it out' through a book. Not when there are too many others that I would enjoy. I'm trying that right now, and it's just not working out for me. I haven't picked the book up for two weeks, and I finally had to move onto something else.

It's not because it was too intense; I don't mind intense. I just prefer it to be intense and interesting. SK missed the mark as far as that goes for me in both novels I tried. Maybe I just need to try another of his books. Also, this was years ago and my tastes have changed. If I tried reading him again, I might like his writing. I'm just not particularly motivated to try because I remember not enjoying it.

If I'm looking for intense, I prefer someone like Wally Lamb. (Different genre, but his reads are pretty intense. And interesting.)

[Carina]

Angie wrote: "It's not becuase it was too intense; I don't mind intense. I just prefer it to be intense and interesting. SK missed the mark as far as that goes for me in both novels I tried. Maybe I just need to try another of his books"

If SK stands for Steven King I'd recomend reading Green Mile or Carrie - I found both of those to be the easiest reads of his (excluding the second in the Dark Tower series but if you're not a fan I doubt you'd want to read a series!).