Twilight
discussion
Is Stephenie a bad writer?
Nuran wrote: "Erin wrote: "Nuran wrote: "Mocha Spresso wrote: "mkc120 wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "Kirby wrote: "anyone else notice this?"I think it may be due to the fact that Twilight is targeted mostly at girls,..."
That is true that men are much more visual than women are when it comes to sex. I wonder if it is one of those things where men are taught to be that way when their brain is still developing and so it has a visual focus that is paired with sex. While girls don't get that during the developmental stage and therefore resort to other means? Or it could be totally genetic. It sure would be interesting to study.
Jocelyn wrote: "Mocha Spresso wrote: "No one accuses Twilight of turning boys into stalkers."Well, I'll admit that I haven't seen that happen for Twilight, but you also seem to be talking about media in general,..."
I've read that book. I disagree about that assesment of it in the sense that the book doesn't give the impression that Travis's behavior is ok and isn't extremely problematic. In fact, it's quite the opposite. It is depicted as a HUGE HUGE HUGE problem in their relationship. It isn't like Twilight at all in the sense that in "Beautiful Disaster", the two main characters are actually depicted as "troubled" and their relationship is actually depicted as unhealthy and dysfunctional. In other words, I disagree that the book condones his behavior in any way...nor do any of the characters in the book.
...but I do stand corrected. Some do seem to worry about boys, too.
Mocha Spresso wrote: "I've read that book. I disagree about that assesment of it in the sense that the book doesn't give the impression that Travis's behavior is ok and isn't extremely problematic. In fact, it's quite the opposite. It is depicted as a HUGE HUGE HUGE problem in their relationship. It isn't like Twilight at all in the sense that in "Beautiful Disaster", the two main characters are actually depicted as "troubled" and their relationship is actually depicted as unhealthy and dysfunctional."
I think you missed my point. I wasn't talking about the content of the book, but its critical reaction as a part of what you consider "sexist media" to show that, indeed, people HAVE condemned the male part of a fictional relationship and worried about its influence on male readers.
I think you missed my point. I wasn't talking about the content of the book, but its critical reaction as a part of what you consider "sexist media" to show that, indeed, people HAVE condemned the male part of a fictional relationship and worried about its influence on male readers.
Nuran wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "I'm pretty sure that ladies enjoy sex just as much as men. Otherwise we'd never get laid. :P "Never said females don't enjoy sex, I certainly enjoy erotic books and have sexual fan..."
Kinky...but porn or no, I never imagine girls covered in glitter. Massage oil: yes, but sparkles: no. I guess guys like me just need a visual aid.
I think she has a nice enough writing style, but I don't like her choice of content. I not really a big fan of romance, so I just read it out of curiosity.
Lindsay wrote: "I don't think she's a bad writer exactly...But she's writing what is essentially disposable fiction. It isn't high literature and shouldn't be treated as much, nor should her writing be phrased f..."
I agree
Not a bad writer just not an extraordinary good one, her stories aren't very catchy because of the climax and she is famous because of us teenagers loving every single love story in the planet
Jocelyn wrote: I think you missed my point. I wasn't talking about the content of the book, but its critical reaction as a part of what you consider "sexist media" to show that, indeed, people HAVE condemned the male part of a fictional relationship and worried about its influence on male readers. ...fair enough. I stand corrected.
Mocha Spresso wrote: "...fair enough. I stand corrected."
I don't know if it's rude to say anything...so I won't!
Anyway, to be honest I haven't even read Beautiful Disaster nor do I have any intention to (I'd just stumbled upon the review because one of the people I was following had commented on it)...though, what you do say about how the abuse is actually portrayed as what it is sounds interesting. I wonder if I should check it out after all. Maybe Mcguire is one of those authors that just hits you in the face with things without trying to sugarcoat it.
I don't know if it's rude to say anything...so I won't!
Anyway, to be honest I haven't even read Beautiful Disaster nor do I have any intention to (I'd just stumbled upon the review because one of the people I was following had commented on it)...though, what you do say about how the abuse is actually portrayed as what it is sounds interesting. I wonder if I should check it out after all. Maybe Mcguire is one of those authors that just hits you in the face with things without trying to sugarcoat it.
It might sound odd but Bella's desire to become a vampire is the main thing that made me hate these novels.
Peace,to be fair even critically and publicly beloved authors and books have their detractors.
Jocelyn wrote: "Mocha Spresso wrote: "...fair enough. I stand corrected."I don't know if it's rude to say anything...so I won't!
Anyway, to be honest I haven't even read Beautiful Disaster nor do I have any int..."
first the disclaimers....I don't believe in book censorship at all, but I do believe in parental rights to decide what is best for their own children. For that reason, I'm not in the habit of recommending books with mature adule content to other people's kids. Not that I don't think you can handle it...that is between you and your parents..it's just not something I knowingly do. Having said that, I think I saw in one of your posts that you read Game of Thrones and that has mature content, too. So, I am guessing that your parents are probably fine with whatever you decide to read. I just hate the thought of some angry parent in the world somewhere saying "You told my child to read smut!!!"
I didn't get the impression that it would be your cup of tea, anyway. In fact, I think you'll end up throwing the book at the wall several times. It's a trashy guilty pleasure romance. It isn't particularly well written. At least, not by the standards that you seem to use for Twilight. There also isn't that much in the way of character development and while the book doesn't condone his behavior at all, the main characters don't do what I think they really should do about it either. In fact, what they decide to do at the end (no spoilers) is probably why the word "disaster" is in the title. (Although, to be fair, it is the first book in a series. The second installment is due some time this year. First installments usually tend to have a bunch of unresolved issues.)
eh. I would say skip it. I can't imagine that you would like it in a million years.
Mocha Spresso wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "Mocha Spresso wrote: "...fair enough. I stand corrected."
I don't know if it's rude to say anything...so I won't!
Anyway, to be honest I haven't even read Beautiful Disaster nor d..."
maybe I'll give it a shot of thirty pages or so before making a decision.
Haha, maybe I won't like it. It definitely doesn't sound like my sort of thing. I'll take your advice in mind; I won't buy it with money at the very least. :)
I don't know if it's rude to say anything...so I won't!
Anyway, to be honest I haven't even read Beautiful Disaster nor d..."
maybe I'll give it a shot of thirty pages or so before making a decision.
Haha, maybe I won't like it. It definitely doesn't sound like my sort of thing. I'll take your advice in mind; I won't buy it with money at the very least. :)
I've always been very skeptical of this "men are visual" argument. There's a strong tradition of men liking porn and certain types and representations that feature in porn and I suspect that men like this space where they're free to objectify women quite reprehensibly, excusing it by natural desires and in the same stroke denigrating and "othering" women's sense of sexual pleasure as fundamentally different. How and why should one worry about pleasing a woman when one cannot understand her anyway ... let her take care of her own pleasures!It's not really shockingly surprising that most women find it difficult to get into the world of visual porn, I imagine of the tables were turned then men wouldn't be able to be highly aroused by a world in which they were purely slabs of meat for another to pleasure themselves over. (quite literally in 98% porn videos.)
I think that romance and erotic novels are a probably quite a welcome outlet for women, a space where the male ego isn't stamped onto their stories and where they're free to feel erotic desire without having to meet arbitrary male demands.
It's not really about one book or one video game or whatever being able to influence someone in a derogatory fashion - people rarely imitate directly what they read in a book - it's about how representations of things in culture have subtle influences. The heaps of porn that guys watch, if they watch it uncritically, does at worst create a horrifying male monster who can't appreciate that a woman has an inner life, and at best seems to perpetuate this myth that female desire is a mysterious, alien unknowable. Female romance novels on the other hand create myths of fantasy men who don't exist in this world who will look after and take care of them and treat them like princesses.
I found this article about differences in reading taste according to gender. I don't necessarily agree with everything, because I think that these things run on a spectrum and not as two separate and distinct groups.http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/...
Another article about gender differences in reading:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/st...
The Host is well written, however I hated the Twilight books and felt cheated, having read the Host first.
S.L.J. wrote: "Read some stories about guys that went through WWII. They experienced loss and pain that goes way beyond not being able to talk to their sparkly boyfriend. Some went into a downward spiral that never ended, some got help and some managed to live again despite the horrible memories they carried.My point is that people have endured far greater hardships. And looking at their life stories inspires me to be better...."
I can follow you thus far, but what does it have to do with the question if Meyer is a bad writer or not?
I have read Twilight and the Host. I feel that the Host was written better than Twilight. My problem is the grammer and the simplicity of the writing. Now the other problem is we have a tendency to compare apples to oranges. You cannot compare a show like Game of Thrones or The Walking Dead to shows like Days of Our Lives or Young and the Restless, it just cannot happen. Twilight for a lot of people I know read it as a Days of Our Lives type show. It is entertaining for what it is.If Stephanie Myer writes another book (not related to Twilight) I think a lot of fans will be disappointed. Fans of Twilight have grown up and will expect better since she as an author should also have grown in her writing style. For me, she downgraded from The Host to Twilight in writing style and IF she writes again, I will expect nothing less then what she has already produced.
Jocelyn wrote: "Jordan wrote: "Me, too! I mean, if I love twilight, which a lot of people hate, and those same people love the Host, I think that's saying something..."Ah, thanks for supplying the right words--I..."
haha, yup!
Mickey wrote: "Jordan wrote: "Me, too! I mean, if I love twilight, which a lot of people hate, and those same people love the Host, I think that's saying something..."I didn't particularly like The Host, but, t..."
I don't really read Sci-Fi either, but I'll try it!
If you don't like her books you don't like her books, End of.If you like her books you like her books, End of.
It's your opinion!
I thought the host and twilight were pretty similar, it just worked better on the alien platform than an emo teenage girl obsessed with vampires.
Gerd wrote: "Rosa wrote: "They just go from being bad people to even worse versions of themselves."But then you can't claim that there's no development, can you?"
Touché. But you're right, I did mean that they don't develop for the better. Not that there's anything wrong with that, there are many well-written novels where the characters change from good to bad or from bad to worse. What I really meant to say is that the characters undergo no significant development that contributes anything substantial to the plot. Sure, they do turn into worse versions of themselves, which is technically considered a character development, but what purpose does this change serve to the plot, other than to frustrate the reader?
mkc120/ Haley wrote: "Rosa wrote: "Of course she's a terrible writer. The fact that the characters in her novels, specifically Twilight, go through no significant development as human beings is the first indication of h..."I mean, sure. You can say that she's talented.
If you know absolutely nothing about literature.
And for the record, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that this woman is lacking in the literary talent department. Like Darci said, you just have to be fucking literate.
Well, let's be honest, people don't/haven't picked up Twilight for its cunning plot and stellar vocabulary. It's meant to be (at least to me) a quick read about a love story (no matter how abusive, that's another issue altogether). Stephanie knew her audience and how to target it. If I want glorious prose, I'll read Tolstoy.
TheFeelsAreOnTheFloor wrote: "Yes, she is a horrible writer."agree.. her main heroine is a terrible role models.
Emily wrote: "Well, let's be honest, people don't/haven't picked up Twilight for its cunning plot and stellar vocabulary. It's meant to be (at least to me) a quick read about a love story (no matter how abusive,..."Yep, that's much the point isn't it.
You have to wonder with what expectations some people got into "twilight", it is after all only a story about a Schoolgirl falling in love with a vampire.
It won't teach anything about the human condition, or how to survive WW II. :D
mkc120/ Haley wrote: "poiboy wrote: "TheFeelsAreOnTheFloor wrote: "Yes, she is a horrible writer."agree.. her main heroine is a terrible role models."
Not all heroines have to be role models."
True, I hat when people say that! Like, do you want to learn from it or do you want it to be entertaining?
Not all heroines have to be role models, but they shouldn't be bad ones.
At worst, I think they should be neutral.
Btw, I'm not talking about Bella specifically, just in general, so I'm not gonna argue about whether Bella is a bad role model.
At worst, I think they should be neutral.
Btw, I'm not talking about Bella specifically, just in general, so I'm not gonna argue about whether Bella is a bad role model.
Regarding role models: It's a personal preference whether you want role models or not. (Personally, I have no interest in them, but it seems a lot of people do.) The problem is when it is taken out of the subjective realm and treated as an objective criticism of a book. I would say that role model characters are not more difficult to create and therefore, do not show any greater talent. I also think this is true with people who go on and on about "strong" characters. It's not actually any harder to create a "strong" character than it is to create a "weak" one. (I'm speaking in terms of character traits now.)
Jordan wrote: "True, I hat when people say that! Like, do you want to learn from it or do you want it to be entertaining?"
No, not really. But writing is a powerful mode of expression and I think it should be treated seriously. Books are more than just bound pieces of paper with weird lines on them. They're not just brain candy. It's a way of expression, a way of communication, and while it's not always direct, that doesn't make it any less powerful.
Personally, I don't really *care* about role models, as long as I don't find them overly offensive to my intelligence. They can be neutral. It's never good to feel like you're being mocked as a reader. (Again, I'm not saying this about Bella, I'm talking generally.)
A "good role model" I found absolutely despicable was Katniss Everdeen. I felt like she was molded specifically to fit the ideal YA heroine. She wasn't "strong" because it came naturally from her character, she was "strong" because Collins wanted a book that sold. It felt so contrived and forced. THG in itself is a book designed to sell by rehashing old tropes and featuring an ideal heroine, not a book designed to tell an intriguing story with a protagonist that was well done. That's an example of what I consider a "role model" horribly, horribly done. Many consider Katniss to be a good role model, but I still strongly disliked her. So as you can see, "good role models" are possible to screw up.
A good author, in my opinion, can create a character that passes under the feminist lens (i.e., at least NEUTRAL--I'm not demanding much, really) but still make her/him feel like a real character, not a stiff archetype.
No, not really. But writing is a powerful mode of expression and I think it should be treated seriously. Books are more than just bound pieces of paper with weird lines on them. They're not just brain candy. It's a way of expression, a way of communication, and while it's not always direct, that doesn't make it any less powerful.
Personally, I don't really *care* about role models, as long as I don't find them overly offensive to my intelligence. They can be neutral. It's never good to feel like you're being mocked as a reader. (Again, I'm not saying this about Bella, I'm talking generally.)
A "good role model" I found absolutely despicable was Katniss Everdeen. I felt like she was molded specifically to fit the ideal YA heroine. She wasn't "strong" because it came naturally from her character, she was "strong" because Collins wanted a book that sold. It felt so contrived and forced. THG in itself is a book designed to sell by rehashing old tropes and featuring an ideal heroine, not a book designed to tell an intriguing story with a protagonist that was well done. That's an example of what I consider a "role model" horribly, horribly done. Many consider Katniss to be a good role model, but I still strongly disliked her. So as you can see, "good role models" are possible to screw up.
A good author, in my opinion, can create a character that passes under the feminist lens (i.e., at least NEUTRAL--I'm not demanding much, really) but still make her/him feel like a real character, not a stiff archetype.
Rosa wrote: "I mean, sure. You can say that she's talented. If you know absolutely nothing about literature.
And for the record, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that this woman is lacking in the literary talent department. Like Darci said, you just have to be fucking literate."
Are you reading this thread? Half the people here, posting and obviously literate, think she has enough talent to have given this book plenty of stars. Take a second and look around you.
I agree with an earlier comment about grammar errors ect. being the editors fault. So with that being said if anyone thinks she's a bad writer for that needs to do research on how books are written and published. I think personally she did a good job. I want a book to sweep me away into a different world and she did that for me. Mission accomplished.
Jocelyn wrote: "Not all heroines have to be role models, but they shouldn't be bad ones..."Mostly agree there.
But the problem is that everybody draws the line at a different point what they regard to be acceptable.
As an author you tread a fine line there between coming across as too preachy or making your character too realistic to be still regarded suitable.
Mickey wrote: "Regarding role models: It's a personal preference whether you want role models or not. (Personally, I have no interest in them, but it seems a lot of people do.) The problem is when it is taken out..."I think it also comes down to what the author wants to convey. I think you can use the role model ideal to encapsulate a wide variety of personality traits. So would your protagonist be a role model because they are quick thinking? Fearless? Capable of growth? Because they reach a new level of understanding for their world? Because they're altruistic or sympathetic or full of great love or super intelligent? Or even because they're prone to mistakes which humanises them? That leaves a lot of room to be a role model IMO
You also have to take into account that Twilight was her very first book that was published. She is basically a newbie and most authors have been around for years before their books are made into movies. I think she did a great job since it was her first.
There's no such thing as a bad writer or bad book. Every writer has his own style to write his own story. I love Stephenie Meyer's style, she's amazing..
Do you think that it was Twilight's intention to present Bella as a role model in the first place?I don't think it was. Throughout all of the books, Bella seems to understand that she is making choices and going down paths that she probably shouldn't.
Another question is are there different types of role models? If so, what type is Bella? (...and I am referring to something a bit deeper than just "good" or "bad".)
I think there are actually many different types. There are the success story role models. There are the persevering to overcome major obstacles role models. There are saints or good girls who always do the right thing. There are the girls who really aren't looking to be role models but do so anyway because they defy some type of convention. (Madonna, Lady GaGa. I'd even put Daria into this category.) There are probably others but I think if Bella is actually a role model, she probably comes closest to this type.
If she is the wrong type of role model, is that Twilight's fault or is that society's fault for turning her into something she wasn't intended to be?
Mocha Spresso wrote: "If she is the wrong type of role model, is that Twilight's fault or is that society's fault for turning her into something she wasn't intended to be?"I always attributed Bella's "wrong-footedness" to Meyer's lack of immersion into literary trends. I think that people expect a certain type of character from popular authors today. "Strong, role model" girl characters are the norm. Meyer has discussed that she didn't read YA fiction even as a teen and with her upbringing as a Mormon, she probably didn't know that having a girl character cook for her father would be considered a problem and that she should make her a karate expert or a sharpshooter or something along those lines.
I like the fact that Bella is different. I see her as having more of a kinship with Beverly Cleary's Ramona. I don't think her bad choices are a drawback to her characterization, but, then again, I prefer a more realistic character than another one of the "approved" clones. It truly is completely subjective and based on what you prefer to see.
If you like role model characters and want to read about people who act perfectly all the time, there are plenty of books out there that cater to that. I don't think every book needs to portray what you like (for instance, I don't go into threads about role model characters and fault them for their perfection). There are plenty of books to everyone's tastes and it doesn't compute that every good character has to be "inspiring" or has to fit an approved template.
Mickey wrote: "Mocha Spresso wrote: "If she is the wrong type of role model, is that Twilight's fault or is that society's fault for turning her into something she wasn't intended to be?"I always attributed Bel..."
I totally agree with you :)
I think she ripped off Ann Rice and couple other authors when she was writing her books. There are alot of similarities in her books and some other authors I have read. I get what she was trying to do by making vampires more friendly but in the history of vampire books vampires are monster not glimmering angels.
Her pacing is very good. The beats are frequent but not TOO frequent. And the storyline flows start to finish without losing itself. It's all I need to be satisfied with a book. She's a perfectly fine author, it's just...I don't like teen romance.
I don't think she's a bad writer, but at the same time I don't think her story is about TRUE vampires. She should have come up with something else to call Edward.
mkc120/ Haley wrote: "The only similarity is the vampires.And so what they sparkle? Sparkles are cool. "
No, fezzes are cool.
She has potential to be a good writer, but that potential just isn't showing through in her books.
mkc120/ Haley wrote: "Alex wrote: "mkc120/ Haley wrote: "The only similarity is the vampires.And so what they sparkle? Sparkles are cool. "
No, fezzes are cool."
A lot of things are cool."
hahahah. yea, alot of things are cool
Nicole di Angelo wrote: "She has potential to be a good writer, but that potential just isn't showing through in her books."i definitely agree.. i thought she would redeem herself at breaking dawn.. but then i was sadly mistaken. i nearly threw breaking dawn.
Caeselyn wrote: "Nicole di Angelo wrote: "She has potential to be a good writer, but that potential just isn't showing through in her books."i definitely agree.. i thought she would redeem herself at breaking daw..."
The battle of the minds was the cheapest shot she could come up with. I thought when they said the movie ending was different we'd have more fighting and death and for twenty glorious minutes they delivered .... then Dallased that shit. Biggest anticlimax ever.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Sandworld (other topics)
Fire Light (other topics)
Fire Light (other topics)
Fire Light (other topics)
More...
J. Abram Barneck (other topics)
J. Abram Barneck (other topics)
Stephenie Meyer (other topics)
Elie Wiesel (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
Rescue Me Gently (other topics)Sandworld (other topics)
Fire Light (other topics)
Fire Light (other topics)
Fire Light (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
J. Abram Barneck (other topics)J. Abram Barneck (other topics)
J. Abram Barneck (other topics)
Stephenie Meyer (other topics)
Elie Wiesel (other topics)
More...
I agree with everything you said completely. It is rarely the men who are expected to change but the women. Women have to learn what to avoid in mates, what to not do to not be raped by limiting where they go, if they can walk places, and what people they can see. When the real lesson needs to be taught to the ones who are more likely to commit these crimes and to be stopped before it ever can become a problem. It is just another one of our society's failures to address the actual issue at hand. I find it very sad and extremely frustrating.