Is Stephenie a bad writer? Showing 1,101-1,150 of 2,281

[S.L.J.]

Peace wrote: "interesting point there."

Reality can be suspended quite easily if you simply say it's magic or some other supernatural explination. If you give that magic a semi-reasonable idea behind it, it'll be okay.

But try and explain the supernatural with scientific means and you damn well better have done your research or you are just going to box yourself into a corner.

That's what SM did. Adding the chromosomes idea really screwed over her own creations.

[Be]

Why is it whenever she does an interview for the series the questions asked are never these ones ? It's always some BS "like do u see Bella in yourself?" I hate those questions

[Fairy Jane]

NO, SHE'S NOT A BAD WRITER. LOVE HER OR HATE HER, SHE HAD ACCOMPLISHED EVERYTHING A WRITER CAN EVER DREAM OF.
AND...
THE HOST IS AMAZING! That is all.

[S.L.J.]

Fairii wrote: "NO, SHE'S NOT A BAD WRITER. LOVE HER OR HATE HER, SHE HAD ACCOMPLISHED EVERYTHING A WRITER CAN EVER DREAM OF.
AND...
THE HOST IS AMAZING! That is all."

Thank you for bringing constructive caps-lock to this discussion.

That is exactly what we were missing.

[Angie Elle]

S.L.J. wrote: "Fairii wrote: "NO, SHE'S NOT A BAD WRITER. LOVE HER OR HATE HER, SHE HAD ACCOMPLISHED EVERYTHING A WRITER CAN EVER DREAM OF.
AND...
THE HOST IS AMAZING! That is all."

Thank you for bringing constr..."

Because judgement and sarcasm are so much better.

[S.L.J.]

Angie wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Fairii wrote: "NO, SHE'S NOT A BAD WRITER. LOVE HER OR HATE HER, SHE HAD ACCOMPLISHED EVERYTHING A WRITER CAN EVER DREAM OF.
AND...
THE HOST IS AMAZING! That is all."

Thank you for ..."

At least they are honest.

[S.L.J.]

There are many escapism in this world and they all feel good at the time.

But are they anything but a drug? A distraction that blinds us from the horrible truth that we live in.

Does it make the truth more bareable? Yes. But does it make the problems go away? No.

Fiction is so much more beautiful than reality sometimes, but that doesn't change the fact that we live in reality.

[Angie Elle]

S.L.J. wrote: "Angie wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Fairii wrote: "NO, SHE'S NOT A BAD WRITER. LOVE HER OR HATE HER, SHE HAD ACCOMPLISHED EVERYTHING A WRITER CAN EVER DREAM OF.
AND...
THE HOST IS AMAZING! That is all."

..."

I wouldn't go so far as to equate sarcasm with honesty.

[S.L.J.]

Angie wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Angie wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Fairii wrote: "NO, SHE'S NOT A BAD WRITER. LOVE HER OR HATE HER, SHE HAD ACCOMPLISHED EVERYTHING A WRITER CAN EVER DREAM OF.
AND...
THE HOST IS AMAZING! ..."

What would you equate sarcasm with then? I always thought it was a blunt way of pointing out others stupidity.

Isn't that just being honest without the sugar-coating?

[Angie Elle]

S.L.J. wrote: "Angie wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Angie wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Fairii wrote: "NO, SHE'S NOT A BAD WRITER. LOVE HER OR HATE HER, SHE HAD ACCOMPLISHED EVERYTHING A WRITER CAN EVER DREAM OF.
AND...
THE HOS..."

I would equate it with snobbery and being a bitch. But that's just me.

[Larysa]

I used to think Twilight was absolutely terribly written, but now I'll take back that statement. I've only read the first two books, and awhile back at that, but skimming through portions of the latter two, I think they're okay. Average, at best, but not terrible.

It really depends on what you define a 'bad' writer to be. For some people, a 'good' book means it's fast-paced, you read it quickly, it captures your attention. I would chance to say this is what the typical reader would be looking for: I have a busy life, and I should spend my time reading as a recreational activity of escapism and entertainment. If you want something on that level, like enjoying an action movie or your favorite TV show, that's not wrong. Twilight, personally, didn't really capture my interest, minus the last 100 pages or so of the first book. I was pulled into the chase part. I definitely think this is a good element of good writing, but as a standalone I don't think it carries enough weight.

Personally, though, I'm a reader who looks at books at several levels; the most important question I would like to answer is, after closing this book and putting it back on my shelf, what has it done to benefit me in real life? I used to think wordiness and saturated language make a good writer, and that obviously has its place; when done right, even if a book seems 'dense', it takes obvious talent to use a wide vocabulary and to describe many things.

Take Tolkien, for example: you might get bogged down by his slow scenes, but I think anyone who says he isn't a good writer for not having a fight scene in every chapter is seriously kidding themselves. He's a linguist, a master of language; when comparing him to Stephanie Meyer, we see an obvious difference in talent. However, this is a trap I used to fall for, and don't encourage. You can't compare every writer to every other writer; people write for different audiences, purposes, times. People who complain on Charles Dickens' writing are also missing the point.

But I digress. So, at the end of the day, what has Twilight taught me? Nothing, really. It's entertaining at parts, it had a nice title drop in the first book, and it has a massive and often-disturbing fanbase. I don't think it used symbolism or diction or any literary device an English teacher or a connoisseur of books would applaud. But does that mean it's a bad book and Meyer is a bad author? Not really. She wrote to express an idea, a dream she had, and likely her target audience was fellow romantics who also like the supernatural. Like other people have been saying, if you expand your reading to books that are classics or above the Young Adult group, you'll see why it's not deserving of a medal, but it's escapism at its best.

[Be]

Peace wrote: "just a thought here. somone fond somting from online so i though i add on here.


http://www.bellasdiary.com/2010/04/ja..."

Thanks for adding this, read the Jacobs entry its interesting im going to follow up are you?

[Benjamin]

S.L.J. wrote: "There are many escapism in this world and they all feel good at the time.

But are they anything but a drug? A distraction that blinds us from the horrible truth that we live in.

Does it make th..."

Judgement and sarcasm at least require intelligence :) THAT IS ALL!

[S.L.J.]

Benjamin wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "There are many escapism in this world and they all feel good at the time.

But are they anything but a drug? A distraction that blinds us from the horrible truth that we live in.

..."

Does that mean I can't be sarcastic anymore? :(

[Marigold]

she's not a great writer, though i can say she's not bad either coz the success she had with twilight is for realz.
personally i just found her writing lacks details and intricacies.

[Mochaspresso]

I wonder what is it about Twilight that draws so many Tolkien fans to its threads.

Wouldn't comparisons of LOTR to books like Chronicles of Narnia or to Games of Thrones (for an old vs. new/classic vs. contemporary spin) be more applicable, generate more discussion and be much more interesting to a fan of Tolkien?

[Erin]

Mocha Spresso wrote: "I wonder what is it about Twilight that draws so many Tolkien fans to its threads.

Wouldn't comparisons of LOTR to books like Chronicles of Narnia or to Games of Thrones (for an old vs. new/class..."

I am a Tolkien fan but I am also interested in vast majority of other books as well. It's not like Tolkien fans are only interested in one type of literature. I myself enjoy historical fiction, particularly about ancient Egypt and Rome. I also like vampires and find conversations about them interesting. The thing about people is that they like to find patterns in things and compare them to other things (I'm not trying to sound condescending though I see that this sentence could be read that way, just think of it as a statement of fact that you probably already know). Twilight is an interesting book to talk about because people actually participate in these discussions frequently. There are some good points that have been made that made me glad I read this thread. Plus I haven't finished Game of Thrones so I can't go read those threads yet. My last point is... it isn't really surprising to me that a book about vampires draws people who enjoy books like LotR. I mean elves! and dwarves! and hobbits! and nazgul! and other such creatures. They might not be vampires but they are supernatural creatures that are interesting and people enjoy comparing books that have any similarities at all, no matter how vague they are.

[Bridget's Quiet Corner]

I just think its all in that individuals perception. Some books that are popular and people have loved...Ive hated and couldnt finish....And vice versa....So, its all about what that person likes...I dont believe in making a judgment for everyone else...Just speak your personal opinion and leave it at that. And then, you've got people who take their assholes...excuse me...opinions.... a little too far...Like some of the comments Ive seen here...and Ive only read a few...

[Katarina]

She is not the best writer in the world. I have read better books before. but all in all I think she is an ok writer.

[Mochaspresso]

Erin wrote: I am a Tolkien fan but I am also interested in vast majority of other books as well. It's not like Tolkien fans are only interested in one type of literature. I myself enjoy historical fiction, particularly about ancient Egypt and Rome. I also like vampires and find conversations about them interesting. The thing about people is that they like to find patterns in things and compare them to other things (I'm not trying to sound condescending though I see that this sentence could be read that way, just think of it as a statement of fact that you probably already know). Twilight is an interesting book to talk about because people actually participate in these discussions frequently. There are some good points that have been made that made me glad I read this thread. Plus I haven't finished Game of Thrones so I can't go read those threads yet. My last point is... it isn't really surprising to me that a book about vampires draws people who enjoy books like LotR. I mean elves! and dwarves! and hobbits! and nazgul! and other such creatures. They might not be vampires but they are supernatural creatures that are interesting and people enjoy comparing books that have any similarities at all, no matter how vague they are.



Fair enough. Although, it just seems that so many of the Tolkien fans that post in the Twilight threads VEHEMENTLY hate Twilight and are quite vocal about it. Bashing it at every opportunity and I don't understand what drives that particular need.

For example, I don't particularly care for Tolkien and there is a thread in the LOTR forums right now about Faramir and Eowyn's relationship and whether there's was a genuine love match
I don't see the point of joining in that discussion if my only goal and the only thing that I am going to add to it is voicing my opinions on how much I disliked Tolkien. It also would not be appropriate for me to say that Tolkien is an awful writer simply because Faramir and Eowyn's relationship wasn't central to the plot of LOTR.

These are types of things that seem to happen more frequently in the Twilight threads and I don't understand why it seems to happen so often.

[Erin]

Mocha Spresso wrote: "Erin wrote: I am a Tolkien fan but I am also interested in vast majority of other books as well. It's not like Tolkien fans are only interested in one type of literature. I myself enjoy historical ..."

That is a good question that I have no inkling of an answer for. I myself feel one big giant MEH towards Twilight. I don't think it is well written but I have no issues with other people liking the book. Everyone has their own experiences and those experiences effect the way people look at certain books. Plus opinions change. I don't see the problem with people talking about Twilight when they don't like it. It leads to interesting discussion and potentially more in depth understanding of why people like it or different parts of the book. But as to why there is a crusade against the book where some people seem to think that their life purpose will only be fulfilled if they can get others to dislike the book, well I just don't get why anyone would care so much. I do think that sometimes it is nice to read about books you don't like so that you can understand why others like it. I don't understand why some people feel the need to be mean to others, I think that is just a big waste of time and don't see the point, no matter how bored someone is. Oh well.

[[deleted user]]

I'd like to ask a question, everyone: do you think Twilight has the potential to become a classic?

In all honesty, I have to admit that I DO think Twilight has the potential. Not exactly because I think it has any substantial literary merit, but because of its controversial themes, which could possibly be debated far into the future. I think even the people who hate Twilight with the most violent passions can admit that the controversy surrounding Twilight is pretty intriguing that could last for a long time.

[Maddie]

I agree, I think because of the stage where it was amazingly popular and was the book being talked about everywhere, it will always have that behind it. It's still a pretty popular book, I often see people around reading it.

[Bill]

Jocelyn wrote: "I'd like to ask a question, everyone: do you think Twilight has the potential to become a classic?"

Hell, no. I give it 5 years, and a lack of output from Meyers, and people will completely forget about it (except the Twitards, of course... fanatics and cockroaches are the only things guaranteed to survive disaster).

Why even ask? It's not like you'll get anything resembling an unbiased answer.

[[deleted user]]

Yeah, I said it might survive as a classic not based on its merit but its controversy.

[Be]

I think so the movies should be done over hopefully in about six to ten yrs there should be another adaptation come out but the books will definitely become classic

[Be]

my boyfriend says that the twilight series will not be a classic because there is no cross gender all crossgenerational appeal

[Mochaspresso]

Jocelyn wrote: "I'd like to ask a question, everyone: do you think Twilight has the potential to become a classic?

In all honesty, I have to admit that I DO think Twilight has the potential. Not exactly because I..."

I don't think it will be a traditional literary classis. Good or bad, those books tend to be reflective of the times in which they were written in some way. I also don't think Twilight is really all that controversial. I do think Twilight has more potential to be more of a cult classic. Along the lines of The Rocky Horror Picture Show or Star Trek. Just not nearly as enduring. I guess in literature, it would be along the lines of Valley of the Dolls or The Thorn Birds. Extremely popular in its heyday and fondly remembered by those who are old enough to remember it. Others in the future may read it out of curiosity because it may frequently show up on some memory-lane list somewhere, but it won't be a "classic".

[Angeline]

I think the reason they say that is mainly because the Twilight Saga is too slow for them but as for me,I LOVE her because most of her writing is metaphorical.

[Erin]

Angeline wrote: "I think the reason they say that is mainly because the Twilight Saga is too slow for them but as for me,I LOVE her because most of her writing is metaphorical."

It is? Do you have examples of how so? I'm just trying to understand because I never saw that anywhere. I saw it is a very straightforward story that lacked a lot of depth in regards to most things. There was no underlying meaning that I could see and I never saw how it could be metaphorical. I'm not trying to be mean, that's just how I viewed it but if you could explain to me how it is metaphorical I would very much appreciate it so I can understand.

[Maegen]

She's a pretty bad writer- not in how she strings words together, that she does okay enough, but in how she constructs her characters and her plots are the reasons I would call her a bad writer. Her characters, the lead ones anyway, are chock full of stereotypes and tropes over used way too many times. It is also a bit sexist and the two male leads are a way too overbearing and controlling.

[Mickey]

Erin wrote: "It is? Do you have examples of how so? I'm just trying to understand because I never saw that anywhere. I saw it is a very straightforward story that lacked a lot of depth in regards to most things. There was no underlying meaning that I could see "

Some quick examples of metaphorical language: Bella calling Jacob her sun, Edward likening Bella's impact on his life as an eclipse, the entire second part of New Moon in which Bella is comparing her choices between Jacob and Edward to Juliet's choice between Paris and Romeo. She also discussed dreaming of a fairy tale life (with Edward) and settling for reality with Jacob.

Some underlying messages (and by messages, I'm going to suppose you mean themes and not morals): compulsion vs choice in a relationship centering on which is better and explored mainly by Bella in New Moon and by Jacob and Leah in Breaking Dawn. The theme of belonging to a group of people and one's duty towards them rather than being unfettered and unconcerned with others (the former evidenced by the Cullen family and the werewolves). There are different kinds of love on display and exploring the parameters and limitations of each is a theme that I saw.

I see a lot of depth in the series. Perhaps you missed it.

[S.L.J.]

Maegen wrote: "She's a pretty bad writer- not in how she strings words together, that she does okay enough, but in how she constructs her characters and her plots are the reasons I would call her a bad writer. He..."

I hated the characters. The Cullens claim to be moral people but when they get all their allies together in BD they just let them go off and kill people as long as it isn't close by. So really, they are just fine with killing humans.

And the fact that Bella had to lose her pulse in order to become self sufficient.

These things speak volumes about what kind of people they really are.

[Kiernan]

I started to read like, the first chapter- and it absolutely sucked. I mean her author's persona needs a lot of work, she was just basically telling you everything, not showing or explaining. The story would have been good if she didn't spend half the book talking about how hot Edward is...

[Tyler]

ehh

[David]

i think she made some mistakes. some people are saying breaking dawn was the best book because it made more sense. i haven't read it yet. some people absolutely hate it. what is your oppinion?

[Tyler]

hi

[BookHeroin]

well... she's a whole lot better than E.L. James

[Carol]

She's a good storyteller but a terrible writer.

[Be]

OK SO I'm watching the Movies tonight while im doing my homework,and you guys want to know what I find most ironic?
In Twilight (the movie and book) at the end when Bella is in the hospital and Edward tells her she might be better off in Jacksonville and she freaks, he soothes her by telling her he doesn't want her to leave and how he can't live without her. THEN in New Moon he ups and vanishes just because Jasper tried to eat her.

Then in New Moon when Bella and Jacob are at the movies and their waiting for Mike to come out of the bathroom. She tells him how she is broken and he says he knows what Edward did to her and he would never do something like that to her.But in Eclipse when the vampires Battle the New Borns He tricks her into kissing him by saying how she really doesn't care for him so he is going to go and get himself killed.She kisses him in a last ditch attempted to keep him close and then he leaves any way.
Is it just me or are Edward and Jacob the cutest supernatural Ass Wholes you've ever read about?

[Be]

Peace wrote: "Be wrote: "OK SO I'm watching the Movies tonight while im doing my homework,and you guys want to know what I find most ironic?
In Twilight (the movie and book) at the end when Bella is in the hospi..."

no not all of it, it just surprises me what i catch on to everytime i watch the movies

[Be]

OK so I'm up to eclipse. Great example hoe Edward shows just how over controlling he really his. Like in the one scene where Bella is trying to go see Jacob and Edward messes up her car very creepy.
Plus in breaking dawn when Bella mom and dad are trying to have a moment with her and Alice is like "Don't mess up my master piece makeup". OR when she leaves for her honeymoon and she steals a moment with her dad Alice is all like "Bella its time to go now." Is it just me or did that seem awkward.

[Be]

IDK im catching things that creep me out, maybe its too late for me to be up lol

[Mickey]

Mocha Spresso wrote: "You keep saying that the inner conflicts don't build up to any plot points. However, it does if you happen to think that the depiction of their romance IS the primary plot. As I said, I think the problem here is that you don't think of the depiction of the development of their relationship as a valid plot, and as such, you discount anything in the story that pertains to it. To me, this is like saying that the main plot of books like The Things They Carried or The Red Badge of Courage should have been the details surrounding specific war/battles and therefore, nothing that pertains to main character's inner conflicts is truly relevant to the plot."

This reminds me of criticism that I've heard against Jane Austen, that she lived during the time of the Napoleonic Wars but never put them in her stories. There's so much more to living than the political or historical part of things. While history happens, there are still people dealing with universal human issues and milestones: falling in love, having a family, dealing with deaths of love ones, growing old.

[Mickey]

S.L.J. wrote: "P.S. The XYY and the XXYY only ever occure in males since females don't have X chromosomes."

Is this a typo? Females have X chromosomes. We could talk about the obvious irony inherent in your mistakes in presenting science while harping on another's taking creative license.

[S.L.J.]

Mickey wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "P.S. The XYY and the XXYY only ever occure in males since females don't have X chromosomes."

Is this a typo? Females have X chromosomes. We could talk about the obvious irony inhere..."

LOL. Yep, my bad. I meant to put it the other way around. :P

With all the X's and Y's I got a bit mixed up. Females have XX males have XY. And after reading up on it, I actually believe Bella might have had extra chromosomes since having an extra X chromosome usually results in females having a lower IQ.

The point still stands. The more chromosomes you add, the worse people end up. And yet, SM's vamps are supposed to be perfect in just about every way.

Really doesn't make sense.

[S.L.J.]

Peace wrote: "if werewolves have more chromosome then vamp, would that mean they are stonger & faster to heal then vamp can heal?"

Nah, they'd be autistic.

Hmm...autistic werewolf. It would definately be original. :P

[Mickey]

S.L.J. wrote: "The point still stands. The more chromosomes you add, the worse people end up. And yet, SM's vamps are supposed to be perfect in just about every way.

Really doesn't make sense."

These aren't regular people any longer, but something else. Not to mention many of the problems you mention happen in the developmental stage of a person (in utero). I don't think you can predict what's possible when a supernatural virus attaches to a person and creates new chromosomes (as with vampires).

[S.L.J.]

Mickey wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "The point still stands. The more chromosomes you add, the worse people end up. And yet, SM's vamps are supposed to be perfect in just about every way.

Really doesn't make sense."

T..."

That's exactly my point. If SM had kept it supernatural, calling it a curse or magical in origin then their condition would simply be accepted as something spooky but she went down the science road instead. And the science road is very well established and tends to win out in arguments.

I'm not even going to get into the discussion about venom being a substitute for sperm because then I just get an image of vampires cumming into peoples necks.

[Be]

This is for S.L.J you are freakin hilarious vampires cumming in people necks! Talk about original.