Is Stephenie a bad writer? Showing 1,851-1,900 of 2,281

[Martine]

Rel8tivity wrote: "Martine wrote: "The Transformers was awesome. So was Jerry Springer. ;)"

LOL! Hey, I'm not gonna stand between somebody and their Jerry Springer. If that (or Breaking Dawn) floats yer boat, more p..."

:D

[Mochaspresso]

Kitty Totally agree with you...tbh I didn't really mean the last part of that comment as a comparison against Elizabeth Bennet, more against all heroines in general...and I only mentioned Pride and Prejudice in reaction to somebody else and would never have done so otherwise, because they are, as you said, incomparable!
It's just that second book...where you turn the pages and it's listing the months and they are literally empty because Edward is away? Well I found that insanely pathetic and boring, as well as lazy writing. I also never really liked the whole selfless sacrifice stuff, like where is the spunk or will to live? But hey, that is personal opinion.


Even though New Moon was my least favorite Twilight novel for different reasons, I actually thought the empty pages were pretty good in clearly depicting just how depressed she had become. It's also not a literary device that is completely unheard of. I've read a couple of epistolary novels that have done something similar to this.

Many people say that Bella is pathetic for her response to losing her boyfriend......but to Bella, Edward was more than just her boyfriend. Right or wrong, they were in love. She viewed him as her soulmate and as the one that she was going to be with forever. Even if I don't personally agree with how she handled it, I was able to understand her loss. I didn't think her reaction was completely unrealistic. I have seen people who were a complete mess after a break-up and have witnessed a wide variety of craziness in their reactions and behavior.

[Martine]

Mochaspresso wrote: "Kitty Totally agree with you...tbh I didn't really mean the last part of that comment as a comparison against Elizabeth Bennet, more against all heroines in general...and I only mentioned Pride and..."

I also enjoyed the empty pages. I had seen that before as well. Did you ever come accross this book called: "What men know about women"? It's actually a book, and ALL its pages are blank lol.

[Utari]

She's not that bad. I just don't like the way she make the story too cheesy. All story that related to vampire should badass right? Well in my opinion yes. But she makes the story like how a girl can't stand for about 5 minutes without her boyfriend. Look at other heroines. They don't need boys to stay strong.

The worst thing is, she came up with a ridiculous idea about vampire. Seriously, sparkling? and where are the fangs?

[Elizabeth]

Terrible. I hate her books.

[[deleted user]]

Utari wrote: "She's not that bad. I just don't like the way she make the story too cheesy. All story that related to vampire should badass right? Well in my opinion yes. But she makes the story like how a girl c..."
Beats me. Whatever happened to vampires like Dracula?

[Kirby]

Martine wrote: "I also enjoyed the empty pages. I had seen that before as well. Did you ever come accross this book called: "What men know about women"? It's actually a book, and ALL its pages are blank lol. "

I actually had never seen anyone use the blank pages like that, so I thought it was very creative and loved it.

And the concept of that other book is quite hilarious, but wouldn't someone be angry if they paid for it and got nothing but blank pages? LOL

[Martine]

Kirby wrote: "Martine wrote: "I also enjoyed the empty pages. I had seen that before as well. Did you ever come accross this book called: "What men know about women"? It's actually a book, and ALL its pages are ..."

I guess some people probably bought that blank book as a joke - gift.... I thought it was hilarious as well when I saw it! I found this one on goodreads and another on amazon:


http://www.amazon.com/What-Men-Know-A...

[Kirby]

Martine wrote: "Kirby wrote: "Martine wrote: "I also enjoyed the empty pages. I had seen that before as well. Did you ever come accross this book called: "What men know about women"? It's actually a book, and ALL ..."

LOL, someone's "currently reading" the blank book!

[[deleted user]]

Sorrel wrote: "Tinath wrote: "I HATE HER.
Flaws:
Bella: Too obsessed with Edward. Edward, Edward, Edward. She has to stop living his life.
Edward: Too perfect. Flawless.
Jasper: Too flawed. Excessively.
Rosalie: ..."

Yes, but the writing's as bad as the plot and characters! it's TOO descriptive, and to plain and boring. And since her writing's boring, Bella's boring.

[Topaz]

I think she's quite a good author. She must be, if she has so many fans...

[[deleted user]]

Topaz, she has so many fans only bcuz around the time Twilight was published, the amount of vampire-and-human love books were very little in number. Since now, these type of books are everywhere, Twilight hit the bottom.

[Martine]

Kirby wrote: "Martine wrote: "Kirby wrote: "Martine wrote: "I also enjoyed the empty pages. I had seen that before as well. Did you ever come accross this book called: "What men know about women"? It's actually ..."

LMAO

[Ashley]

I feel like it depends on which book of her's. Twilight was different when it came to her writing style. However, I enjoyed it because it was different. Stupid or not.

[Martine]

Martine wrote: "Kirby wrote: "Martine wrote: "Kirby wrote: "Martine wrote: "I also enjoyed the empty pages. I had seen that before as well. Did you ever come accross this book called: "What men know about women"? ..."

I just looked up that user... He's "currently-reading" 28 books... Joined in October 2013. He's probably still figuring out a few things ;)

[Rafael]

Definetly no, she is not a bad writer. She is a terrible writer, horriple, nigthmare writer.
(excuse my english, obviously english is not my mother tongue)

[Jane]

I think Stephanie is a good writer because she really describes the scenes so imagery that you feel like you are really there in the books.

[Rebekka]

Yes, yes she is. Her charactiazions, plots, her whole style of writing, I really do not like. I think characters are her weakest spot of many. They are all stucked in a box, with only a few main charactistics, with no development. In the last Twilight book, Bella did develop, but it's not exactly something groundbreaking that happened to her - she was really just the same, flat character, that just got more physically strong and stubborn because she realized that listening to her all-dominating boyfriend wasn't right when it came to a living child.

And when I say "flat" I mean without many sides. Like a human being, we all have different faces when we are with people from school, family, different friends and such. But I found that many of her characters where almost just the same - maybe a little more awkward or such with people they weren't so open with, but they were really just behaving the same way, all the time.

And then there's stuff in her books that just makes no sense. Like, being awkward, bad at talking and just very plain, does have consequences. The lack of UNDERSTANDING of other characters, and ONLY writing things from this one, completely one-sided character, it just doesn't work when it feels like the author agrees with her - because there are no realistic consequences of protagonists actions.

I dislike many things about her writing.

[René]

Hell to the yes, I have read the Twilight series ( just for the heck of it). And her plots are lazily written and very ignorant. Her characters are quite stereotypical and unintelligent. The way she tells her stories are overly visualized for you in the text and Bella's thoughts are both uninteresting and childish. She seems to see the world very two-dimensionally. Edward's character feels unfinished and "overly polished." And to be honest, I really don't see why girls seem to fawn over this series. And it wouldn't stand out in a crowd of vampire love stories if it wasn't for the fact that there were the movie adaptations that were even worse than the books. Bottom line: her books feel dry, emotionless, and are basically just money makers since teens seem to have an obsession with sparkling vampires.

[Esperanza]

one word her writing is "AMAZING"...!!

[Bill]

Holy shit... people are still posting to this topic?!?

We settled the issue pages ago: SM sucks, and only obsessive fangirls disagree.

[brooke1994]

Yes she is a bad writer. Her characters never learn any lessons. She also tried to cram everything in at the last minute to make a better fit for Breaking Dawn. Bella and Edward aren't compatible and then all of a sudden in Breaking Dawn they get along. What's up with that?

[[deleted user]]

O.o

[deedee]

Okay obviously there's a trend in this discussion.

Typically the rare people who rated Twilight with five stars are saying briefly that her writing was off-the-hook-amazing. Well woot woot.

While the one's who rated it one star- are the ones who are typically saying the writing was horrible. And are the ones who have the most to say.

Just to briefly hit some spots that I saw were a lot of people's concerns.
1. Stephanie Meyer, is a decent writer. She's not the best, but come on. That obviously leads up to personal preferences, but the majority of the public mass can agree that there are worse. Oh ho for the love of all that is good, there are much. much. more worse writers out there. Which leads me to
2. The editing. The editing process of books is a pretty tedious and usually complex process from rereading to the repeat of rereading and then to the physical editing part. So the editing wasn't that well done in Twilight. There were typos. But out of the many books you've read. Please tell me honestly, that there are only A FEW books you've seen that don't have ONE typo in them. It happens. Get over it because that has nothing to do with the author's evident talent.
3. Let's all not get too hasty about a topic like this, and be reminded that this is just an opinionated topic. So some of us. Come on just suck on an ice cube and go take a breather outside. and 4. Okay. This is probably, well should be the most obvious one, but just because Fifty Shades of Grey was based off Twilight- does. Not. In whatsoever discredit Twilight. -____- That is the biggest "duh" in this entire discussion.

[Lara]

I think Meyer's writing is simplistic and two-dimensional. Certain phrases are overused and lose their potency. Despite that, her stories are plot lines are very compelling, which often trumps lackluster writing. No one would care to read fabulous prose with a blah story. She's obviously done something right to pump out four best-sellers with five movies attached.

[Alys]

M.R. wrote: "I think most of the problems with Twilight could actually be blamed on bad editing. Most books undergo intensive rewriting AFTER the author has completed the final draft. The editing is supposed to..."

Yes I agree, Bella was a bit boring.

[Lindsey]

I read only the first book after seeing the movie (for free, come on I have some self respect) thinking there would be more to a 400+ page book than could be fit into an hour and a half movie...but there wasn't.

And THAT is why SM is a bad writer. 400+ pages should contain more than a few intricate subplots that couldn't be included in the movie, but the book is essentially the same as the screenplay. All the extra pages were merely used for drivel about smoldering eyes and the insecurities of a completely unlikable heroine.

[[deleted user]]

I think SM is a good writer. Just because someone doesnt like the plot or the idea of twilight or even the host, doesnt mean shes bad at what she does. I enjoyed the host over twilight because there was more depth and story to it than twilight. shes a good writer and i dont its fair she to say shes not because you didnt enjoy the plot of her books.

[[deleted user]]

Tinath wrote: "BookWorm wrote: "one word her writing is "AMAZING"...!!"

You're choice of writers sucks. No offense, but 90% hates SM."

just because they enjoy sm doesnt mean her choice of writers suck, its her opinion. Also, even though "90%" hates sm the other 10% like her and shouldnt be looked down on for that opinion.

[brooke1994]

Aley wrote: "Tinath wrote: "BookWorm wrote: "one word her writing is "AMAZING"...!!"

You're choice of writers sucks. No offense, but 90% hates SM."

just because they enjoy sm doesnt mean her choice of writer..."
I don't hate fans of Twilight, I just hate Twilight itself and the whole saga.

[Hanna]

I personally think that Twilight went downhill the minute it was turned into a movie. I read it in middle school and thought that it had an interesting plot and the twist in how vampires are perceived or described. I mean those were the times when vampires dominated the supernatural fiction world and SM didn't stay in the norm of that stereotype.
I mean kudos to her for having an imagination. Her writing style really isn't that bad. It's bearable.
I've heard not one complain about the story before it was turned into a movie, and honestly i think most of the criticism comes to the choice of actors for the characters, not the characters themselves.

And am i the only one who hates seeing books getting turned into movies?

[Claire]

I don't think shes bad at all. I loved reading all of her books.

[[deleted user]]

Hanna wrote: "I personally think that Twilight went downhill the minute it was turned into a movie. I read it in middle school and thought that it had an interesting plot and the twist in how vampires are percei..."
Rest assured you are not.

[Bill]

Aley wrote: "the other 10% like her and shouldnt be looked down on for that opinion."

Yes... yes, they should. They're the bunch that keeps her in the spotlight, and anyone that does that with Meyers should be publicly shamed and ridiculed.

[Odetteehh]

I Really liked the Twilight-serie. And She isn't a bad writer. Just because you dont like the books doens't make her a bad writer. Everyone has a own opinion. You can hate the books, thats up to you. But dont say that she is a shitty writer.

[Raquel]

Haley wrote: "I hear a lot of people criticizing Stephenie's writing style (I don't know if they are talking about her grammar, her technique, her editing, or if Twilight is just a stupid book) and I just want t..."

Bella has no real traits or personality because she's written to be so vague that any girl can insert herself into the character. She's a total Mary Sue, too. Despite being hyperbolically awkward and socially distant, the second she's at school everyone loves her (as I remember, there are like 3 guys falling over each other to ask her to a girl's-choice dance). The only explanation given is that it's a small town and she's a cop's kid but what real group of teenagers would immediately want to be friends w/ a cop's kid? In what universe is that a cool thing instead of a prevents-fun-illegal-activities thing?

Bella isn't the only character that is barely one dimensional. Edward is just as empty. SM just threw as many outrageous "hot" traits at him and then made gloomy and sad in a way that isn't specific or real because flawed characters are hard to write. This is literally just a generic teen girl fantasy (I would know). He's saddish but gorgeous and in deep, deep love with you. It's great because the gloominess and hardship of being a vamp dating a human shows just how much he loooooooves Bella (the reader) in that rom-com, fantasy, not-reality-love-but-movie-love kind of way.

Jacob is "every other hot trait not on Edward" guy and he's meant to be just a different every-girl fantasy guy who drives the plot a little and also shows just how much everybody loooves Bella for (let me just stress this next bit) no fucking reason because she's basically just a quiet girl who reads and exists like 99.99% of all teenage girls on the planet. But no, in this universe, everyone sees just how *special* and *different* Bella is, and they can't help but love her and want to be with her because it's a badly written universe centered around a boring Mary Sue.

Also, SM's view of relationships are really creepy? The Natl Domestic Violence Hotline has a 15-item checklist for abusive relationships and Bella/Edward fit EVERY SINGLE ONE:
"* Look at you or act in ways that scare you?
Duh
* Control what you do, who you see or talk to or where you go?
Werewolves/Jacob
* Make all of the decisions?
In their relationship? Yes
* Act like the abuse is no big deal, it's your fault, or even deny doing it?
"If I wasn't so attracted to you, I wouldn't have to break up with you."
* Threaten to commit suicide?
"I just can't live without you. In fact, I'll run to Italy and try suicide by vampire if anything happens to you."
* Threaten to kill you?
On their first date.
* Tried to isolate you from family or friends?
Bella had friends in the first book for like five minutes. Then when Edward leaves (in the second book?) her life grinds to a fucking halt so much that we get just blank pages for months. Even clueless Charlie is worried.
* Damaged property when angry (thrown objects, punched walls, kicked doors, etc.).
Check.
* Pushed, slapped, bitten, kicked or choked you.
Tossed through a glass table and the sex in the last book
* Abandoned you in a dangerous or unfamiliar place.
Leaves her in the forest after the breakup
* Scared you by driving recklessly.
Every single time she gets in the car with him
* Forced you to leave your home.
She had to run away with him to flee from the other vampires in the first book, and she had to drop everything and run to Italy in the second.
* Prevented you from calling police or seeking medical attention.
Check. Even in the hospital, nothing is a big deal.
* Views women as objects and believes in rigid gender roles.
Well, we only see him interact with Bella and his own family but think about the proposal scene where he asks Charlie for his permission and the way the vamp-family is structured.
* Accuses you of cheating or is often jealous of your outside relationships.
Jacooooob!!"

BTW, if you're thinking right now "well yeah, that's all true but he's a vampire which means he can't help it! He's always sorry after! Bella thinks she can change him! He's just protective!" keep in mind that A) those are all common thoughts among abused partners and B) Yeah, Meyer didn't have to write vampires as jealous, reckless drivers, and everything else. She didn't have to isolate Bella or write the plot so that Bella has to abandon her family, etc. She wrote the rules of this universe, so you can't say she was constrained by them because she could just, you know, change them.

[Jessie]

I'm not saying the lady is a good or bad writer, only that upon reading vampire diaries, the opening chapter is eerily the similar. So Vampire diaries was published in 1991 and twilight was published in 2005, could just be coincidence but eh

[Bill]

Just thought I'd add (since it's been several hundred posts since it was last mentioned...

Raquel wrote: "BTW, if you're thinking right now 'well yeah, that's all true but he's a vampire'..."

...then you're clueless, because (I cannot stress this enough)...

THERE ARE NO VAMPIRES IN TWILIGHT .

Reasons for Edward's non-vampirishness are given earlier in the discussion.

[Carolyne]

Yes, she is a very bad writer, BUT if you compare her to E.L James she is not that bad.

[Siobhan]

If you really want to go in depth with Stephenie's capabilities as a writer, read www.das-Sporking.livejournal.com every book is in the main Sporking page. They put forward clear arguments as to why Stephenie's grammar, syntax, characterisation, descriptions, research, plot developments and attitude are so poorly done. Plus, they have a lot of Supernatural macros and gifs and introduced me to a wonderful show while tearing apart a truly badly-written book. They've been doing twilight for years, and still haven't finished Sporking Breaking Dawn. Those crazy kids!

[Dorothy]

90% ... where the hell did that absurd statistic come from? A book that is hated by 9 times the amount that like it becomes insanely popular anyway? More likely is you identify with the negative reviews more than the positive ones, and therefore both seek out and remember them. Come on. Is it really that important to you that Twilight be hated? It's a book. It's not real. It won't hurt you.

This conversation is so incredibly, incessantly circular. You have those who love it, those who hate it, and of course preference is indicative of good writing. /sarcasm

Creative writing is art, and art is subjective. While the technical aspects of Twilight and the Host can be debated as right or wrong (still with no clear answer), the purely imaginative aspects cannot be weighed in terms of good or bad.

[Dorothy]

And for the love of all that is holy, VAMPIRES DO NOT REALLY EXIST. THEREFORE IT IS NOT A TRAVESTY WHEN SOMEONE CHANGES THEIR MYTHOLOGY. GET OVER IT.

[Meeeriams]

Mickey wrote: "Thinking it over, I don't think that people who read only in a certain genre are a lower class of reader than those of us who "play the field". There are good books and excellent writers in every g..."

Exactly. Judging an author just because a lot of people feel the same way about her is not okay or mature.

[Mirkat]

Siobhan wrote: "If you really want to go in depth with Stephenie's capabilities as a writer, read www.das-Sporking.livejournal.com every book is in the main Sporking page. They put forward clear arguments as to wh..."

Shioban, I love das_sporking! I'm a regular there in the "Twilight" and "FSOG" sporkings. Feel free to PM me if you'd like to share who we are on LJ. :)

[Bill]

Dorothy wrote: "And for the love of all that is holy,

VAMPIRES DO NOT REALLY EXIST. THEREFORE IT IS NOT A TRAVESTY WHEN SOMEONE CHANGES THEIR MYTHOLOGY. GET OVER IT.

"

"Changes" their mythology? More like "completely ignores it in favor of something warm and fuzzy that somehow fits the acid trip that inspired this inbred fuckfest of a series."

There are no vampires in Twilight. Vampires drink human blood... that's what makes them vampires.

Since Edward drinks animal blood, he cannot technically be a vampire.

There is no "BUT HE'S A VEGETARIAN VAMPIRE" bullshit because a.) vampires drink human blood, and b.) "vegetarian vampire" is the single most retarded oxymoron ever created, and people who use it need to be euthanized for the sake of our gene pool.

Using the whole "vampires don't exist" argument doesn't work, either, because vampire lore exists, something that Meyers had absolutely no interest in researching because she's fucking stupid lazy.

...but hey, you'd already know all of that if you had deigned to read over the thread before posting.

[Jordan]

Bill wrote: "Dorothy wrote: "And for the love of all that is holy,

VAMPIRES DO NOT REALLY EXIST. THEREFORE IT IS NOT A TRAVESTY WHEN SOMEONE CHANGES THEIR MYTHOLOGY. GET OVER IT.

"

"Changes" their m..."

There are some vampires in this book that drink human blood… James, Victoria, Laurant… and if we are counting the rest of the series there are actually very few covens that drink animal blood.

And I agree with Dorothy, because as an author you should have the freedom to change up the story. She wanted her vampires to be different, so that's what she did.

[Jessica]

Dorothy wrote: "And for the love of all that is holy,

VAMPIRES DO NOT REALLY EXIST. THEREFORE IT IS NOT A TRAVESTY WHEN SOMEONE CHANGES THEIR MYTHOLOGY. GET OVER IT.

"

It is not simple to 'get over it' when Meyer didn't change the mythology, she took away everything that made vampires recognizable to the people at large. When Meyer made this series she didn't do it with the mythology in mind. She did not because she did no research on vampires and the mythology about them. I find this disrespectful because as a writer you're supposed to write what you know about. A writer cant write about people falling in love if they never been in love, a writer can't write about vampires if they don't research vampires. They are more Fae like than actually vampires.

I've been reading this thread for a while and one of the posters, Jocelyn, I agree with when she said that Meyer built the vampires around the story, instead of building the story around the vampires because in the end, Twilight isn't a vampire book series, it's a romance series. This is not the series for people who like romance and like vampires. This is a series for people who don't like vampires or haven't read for a while (most likely the last thing they read was school mandated).

If people want a vampire romance story they'd be better off reading Vampire Diaries, Vampire academy, or The Sookie Stakehouse series if they want a romance story with and about vampires instead of a romance story with barely plausible vampires.

[Jordan]

Jesse wrote: "Dorothy wrote: "And for the love of all that is holy,

VAMPIRES DO NOT REALLY EXIST. THEREFORE IT IS NOT A TRAVESTY WHEN SOMEONE CHANGES THEIR MYTHOLOGY. GET OVER IT.

"

It is not simple ..."

Stephenie Meyer said that she came up with the idea through a dream. Now, a lot of people don't believe it, but I do so I am using it. Have you ever dreamt of falling in love, even if you haven't yet? I have, and I have written many drafts of stories about two people falling in love. I get that people are disappointed about the vampires in Twilight, but in her dream she said that Edward was beautiful and sparkly. She can't help that, but she was entranced by the dream, so she wrote it down. Doing research is a big part of writing, and she did research (go on her website to read more), just not about vampire mythology. But she isn't stupid. She knows what a vampire is, I am sure that she has read plenty of vampire novels herself. But she liked her idea better. That's why when Bella is talking to Edward in the car, she makes a point to mention that all of these things that usually describe a vampire are myths. I appreciate that she change things up.

[Jessica]

Jordan wrote: "Have you ever dreamt of falling in love, even if you haven't yet?"

No. For the simple fact that the emotions wouldn't be there because I have not experienced that emotion. I can be scared in dreams, angry, sad, any range of emotion except feel romantic love for a person in my dreams because I've never been in love.

This doesn't negate the fact that writers shouldn't write about what they don't know and don't educate themselves on. Wonderful, she had a dream about a vampire, cookies for her. That doesn't suddenly give her knowledge about vampires. Like I said, she made this story not with vampires in mind, but with the romance in mind. If Edward were any other creature the story would still be the same.

"I get that people are disappointed about the vampires in Twilight, but in her dream she said that Edward was beautiful and sparkly"

This wouldn't be a problem if Meyer gave the sparkling a purpose and actually cared to research vampires to add her own twist to, but she did not.

"Doing research is a big part of writing, and she did research (go on her website to read more),"

She admitted to not doing anymore research than Bella did which was one Google search and one link. That's not researching. That is the same as using Wikipedia and Wiki only for essays.

"But she isn't stupid. She knows what a vampire is, I am sure that she has read plenty of vampire novels herself. "

On the contrary, she has not seen a vampire movie nor read a book about vampires because she finds them scary. Her vampires are a watered down, safe version, there's nothing actually vampiric about them.

"I appreciate that she change things up. "

I'm sure she's glad for the people that appreciate it but for the people who are mythology fanatics or vampire fanatics, they were most unamused and unimpressed with her failure in mythology.

[Jordan]

Jesse wrote: "Jordan wrote: "Have you ever dreamt of falling in love, even if you haven't yet?"

No. For the simple fact that the emotions wouldn't be there because I have not experienced that emotion. I can be ..."

Okay, I actually did not know that she has never seen a vampire movie or read a vampire book. Sorry about that :)