Twilight
discussion
Is Stephenie a bad writer?
Jesse wrote: "It's because I'm of the opinion that she didn't do it well that I don't think so. There were no character growth, and I don't think she told the story particularly well. So i don't think someone could teach students about those topics with Twilight if it isn't in a 'how not to' fashion. Fair enough. Although, I disagree that there isn't character growth. Not liking the direction that a character goes in is not the same thing as no growth. The biggest problem with using Twilight to teach something like that imo is that much of it happens over the course of the entire series rather than in just one book.
You also don't necessarily need "growth" to teach characterization nor does any growth that does happen necessarily have to be positive. Depending on the story, characters can evolve or devolve. They can also stay the same and other characters are the ones who experience growth or change. I also think that character growth doesn't always have to mean some kind of drastic "change". I think growth can also be demonstrated through an increase in resolve. Forgive me fo saying this as I could be wrong, but I think people are so caught up in judging Bella and her choices as "bad" that they fail to see her characterization or her growth.
Mochaspresso wrote: "Btw, I'm not advocating that Twilight should be used in the classroom. I'm just not so rigid and inflexible enough to definitively say that it can't be used at all under any circumstances."I actually agree with you quite strongly here. I think that Twilight would be an excellent book to teach in the classroom. It would engage readers and provoke debate on the exact kinds of topics we are discussing now. And no, I don't think it's the teachers job to stand up and say "Meyer is shit!" either - I think it would just be very interesting to teach Meyer to kids as fiction, and not as a fluff romantic movie...
Olivia, why do you keep pointing out that if the books had never been written, the movies would never have been made? I suspect that many people would consider that a plus.
Mochaspresso wrote: "Not liking the direction that a character goes in is not the same thing as no growth. The biggest problem with using Twilight to teach something like that imo is that much of it happens over the course of the entire series rather than in just one book. "No, it wasn't that I didn't like the direction, I just flat out didn't see any growth in the characters, in a significant and noticeable amount at least. I feel that the characters didn't change at all because they never learned from their mistakes, they just got rewarded for them. Do dangerous things, break the trust of a father and leave him worried, go head first into danger because of someone else's stupid stunt? Get the boyfriend back. Emotionally and physically cheat on said boyfriend? Boyfriend stays with the knowledge that you are in love with another and just has to deal with it. Have a dangerous pregnancy that you know could kill you? it's okay, you'll just turn into a vampire, what you always wanted.
There aren't any consequences to their bad decisions. The same Bella in book one is the same Bella in the last book. In the short time that the events of the series transpired she has learned nothing and got everything she wanted without any sacrifices. It was a perfect happy ending that wasn't satisfactory. With a situation like Bella was in one should expect some turmoil, sacrifices having to be made, betrayal and love lost and gained, epiphanies to be had and maturity to gain. But instead none of that happened.
"You also don't necessarily need "growth" to teach characterization nor does any growth that does happen necessarily have to be positive. Depending on the story, characters can evolve or devolve. They can also stay the same and other characters are the ones who experience growth or change. I also think that character growth doesn't always have to mean some kind of drastic "change". I think growth can also be demonstrated through an increase in resolve. Forgive me for saying this as I could be wrong, but I think people are so caught up in judging Bella and her choices as "bad" that they fail to see her characterization or her growth. "
And I agree that character growth doesn't have to mean good character growth and that it doesn't have to be drastic, I just flat out saw no growth from any o the characters. They were all the same was when we were first introduced to them and they all have their happening ending. Boring.
I don't think she's a bad writer, I loved the books and got immediately caught up in them. There are some mistakes that even I can see (English is not my first language) but over all I don't think they matter that much. The important thing to me is the storytelling an that part is fantastic. I've re-read it quite a few times and now, almost 5 years after I first read it, it's still one of my favorites. If this would be the case if I would read it for the first time now when I'm 17 and not 13, or if I simply love it because I did the first time I read it, that I can't tell. But I would probably like it.
Jesse wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Not liking the direction that a character goes in is not the same thing as no growth. The biggest problem with using Twilight to teach something like that imo is that much of ..."I think you've expressed, far better than I could, my thoughts on the 'characterisation' completely. Truthfully, in twilight, there are only three characters - Bella, Edward and Jacob - and a bunch of cardboard cut-outs who might slightly resemble one of those three.
Jesse wrote: "No, it wasn't that I didn't like the direction, I just flat out didn't see any growth in the characters, in a significant and noticeable amount at least. I feel that the characters didn't change at all because they never learned from their mistakes, they just got rewarded for them. Do dangerous things, break the trust of a father and leave him worried, go head first into danger because of someone else's stupid stunt? Get the boyfriend back. Emotionally and physically cheat on said boyfriend? Boyfriend stays with the knowledge that you are in love with another and just has to deal with it. Have a dangerous pregnancy that you know could kill you? it's okay, you'll just turn into a vampire, what you always wanted.There aren't any consequences to their bad decisions. The same Bella in book one is the same Bella in the last book. In the short time that the events of the series transpired she has learned nothing and got everything she wanted without any sacrifices. It was a perfect happy ending that wasn't satisfactory. With a situation like Bella was in one should expect some turmoil, sacrifices having to be made, betrayal and love lost and gained, epiphanies to be had and maturity to gain. But instead none of that happened.
"They never learned from their mistakes"
"...someone else's stupid stunt..."
"Have a dangerous pregnancy that you know could kill you?"
"...bad decisions"
Those are just a few examples, but the entire tone of your post is judgmental toward the characters actions. The problem with that is 1) not everyone sees the book in the same way. 2) for the purposes of whether or not Twilight could be used in a classroom, I firmly believe that it's not the teacher's job to tell students how they should feel about a character or their actions or about the book in general.
Imo, those types of questions should be left open to interpretation and debate. For example, was Bella right to continue with her pregnancy is very clearly a judgment call that might be better served to let kids decide for themselves for a myriad of reasons. (fwiw, I completely understood her reasons for continuing with the pregnancy and I completely understood Rosalie's reasons for supporting her.)
I also disagree that Bella does not change. She gains maturity and she becomes stronger in her resolve to choose her own path in life. Imo, Bella primary "fight" is for the right to choose her own destiny. People pass judgment and reduce this to her choosing "her boyfriend and to become a vampire" because they don't agree w/ her choices. For me, the issue is not whether or not I agree with everything Bella does, it's that I understand and agree with her determination to have the right to make choices for herself. The wolves and the vampires don't always have that type of choice. Especially, the wolves. They are born into it and they follow an alpha without question. Jacob struggles with that same issue and breaks from his pack over it and becomes an alpha, himself. None of the Cullens had a choice either. Bella, as a human does have the ability to choose, yet many of the people around her trying to choose for her and that's what she fights against several times. When it comes to making choices, she also struggles with "what"s right" (ie what she's supposed to want for herself based on the expectations of others) vs what she truly knows that she wants. In the end, she decides to follow her heart and her own mind and Edward learns that he shouldn't and can't force Bella to do anything that she doesn't want to do.
Mochaspresso wrote: "Those are just a few examples, but the entire tone of your post is judgmental toward the characters actions. "Yes, I am judging their actions because they were stupid ones.
"1) not everyone sees the book in the same way. "
I cannot express enough how much I know the that this statement is true. If everyone saw it the same way as I do no one would like the series. The thing is though is that a great amount of people see it the same way I do, but I don't really see how this was relevant?? Like, I already knew this, I don't see where I was subconsciously implying that I didn't.
"2) for the purposes of whether or not Twilight could be used in a classroom, I firmly believe that it's not the teacher's job to tell students how they should feel about a character or their actions or about the book in general."
I know this as well. That whole rant post was just wholly my opinion on the matter of characterization.
"She gains maturity and she becomes stronger in her resolve to choose her own path in life. "
As you can clearly see, I do not think she has matured at all. As for her resolve, she only want out of life was to be a vampire and she was going to get it regardless of how it happened, so I don't see it as her needing to stay firm on her own chosen path when she was never prompted or forced to stray from that path.
"People pass judgment and reduce this to her choosing "her boyfriend and to become a vampire" because they don't agree w/ her choices. For me, the issue is not whether or not I agree with everything Bella does, it's that I understand and agree with her determination to have the right to make choices for herself. When I answered this earlier, I skipped over this because I was skimming. And now that I see it I would like to know, what did you see as her choices in the story? What did you see as the path she wanted to take that wasn't as her wanting to be with Edward and to be a vampire? Because that's the only thing I saw.
Jesse wrote: "Yes, I am judging their actions because they were stupid ones."
"I cannot express enough how much I know the that this statement is true. If everyone saw it the same way as I do no one would like the series. The thing is though is that a great amount of people see it the same way I do, but I don't really see how this was relevant?? Like, I already knew this, I don't see where I was subconsciously implying that I didn't."
"I know this as well. That whole rant post was just wholly my opinion on the matter of characterization."
I thought it was relevant because we were discussing whether the book could be used to teach characterization. I don't believe that a character has to make "universally agreed upon wise choices" to teach that. The character doesn't have to be "good" or a "positive role model". In fact, I think it makes for a better lesson and more interesting discussion if the character doesn't or if people disagree on that issue.
"As you can clearly see, I do not think she has matured at all. As for her resolve, she only want out of life was to be a vampire and she was going to get it regardless of how it happened, so I don't see it as her needing to stay firm on her own chosen path when she was never prompted or forced to stray from that path. "
No one truly close to her wanted that for her, though. Edward didn't want her to become a vampire. Neither did Jake. Rosalie was opposed to the idea. I disagree that she was never prompted or forced to stray from that path. Imo, all of the books carry a common thread where people are constantly attempting to either prompt, force or manipulate Bella into doing something that she doesn't want to do in many different aspects of her life.
When I answered this earlier, I skipped over this because I was skimming. And now that I see it I would like to know, what did you see as her choices in the story? What did you see as the path she wanted to take that wasn't as her wanting to be with Edward and to be a vampire? Because that's the only thing I saw.
The concept of choice in Twilight, to me, was bigger than just Bella wanting to become a vampire and there were so many instances of it throughout the book. (...and not just for Bella, btw. For many of the main characters in general.) Jake chooses to break from his pack and Leah and Seth choose to follow him. The Cullens choose to be "vegetarians" and live among humans. Edward chooses to be with Bella even though he knows that it's hard for him to control himself and it might be dangerous for her. As it pertains to Bella, she chooses to come to Forks even though she doesn't really want to. She knew Edward was a vampire and therefore, dangerous for her (....doesn't someone from the tribe also try to warn her away? Harry or Billy?) and she chooses to be with him anyway. Edward warns her that the wolves are dangerous and tries to stop her from seeing them, she chooses to befriend them anyway. Characters in Twilight are constantly trying to deter Bella from doing something dangerous, and she chooses to do it anyway. She chooses to attempt to save her mom. She chooses to go to the Volturi to save Edward. She chooses to cut herself to distract Victoria. She chooses to continue w/ her pregnancy. She has her reasons for making these choices. Regardless of whether anyone thinks these are sound or stupid choices....it's her life and she should be free to make these choices for herself.
I also think Bella is aware of the things that she should do or is supposed to want for herself.....she is supposed to like a nice, normal boy like Mike. She is supposed to have friends. She is supposed to want to wear pretty dresses and be excited about the prospect of going to the prom. She is supposed to want to go to college. She is supposed to wait to get married and not be "that girl" who gets married straight out of HS. She is supposed to want to put her safety above everything else. She is supposed to want to stay human. That's why I think that Twilight has a coming of age element to it. Bella wants things that are different from what she is supposed to want or what others are expecting of her and she chooses against the "norms" because she is discovering who she is as a person and what will make her happy as opposed to always choosing to do what will make others happy.
Mochaspresso wrote: "I thought it was relevant because we were discussing whether the book could be used to teach characterization."Yeah, at that point I was rambling on my own, completely swerved away from the topic.
"No one truly close to her wanted that for her, though. Edward didn't want her to become a vampire. Neither did Jake. Rosalie was opposed to the idea. I disagree that she was never prompted or forced to stray from that path. Imo, all of the books carry a common thread where people are constantly attempting to either prompt, force or manipulate Bella into doing something that she doesn't want to do in many different aspects of her life. "
Jacob never actually tried to keep her from becoming a vampire, just made complaints. And that was because he knew he'd lose her if he actually tried anything other than trying to talk her out of it. And Edward went from not wanting her to be one - with good reason, she irrationally wanted to be a vampire within months of knowing him-, to wanting her to be older before he turned her- to willing to turn her if she married him. So it was only these two and again Edward never actually tried to stop her, just give her advice on the when and how because of her irrational want to be a vampire before turning another age. Alice was all for it, and I don't think we can count the other Cullens because she wasn't as close to them as she was with Jacob and Edward and Alice.
"The concept of choice in Twilight, to me, was bigger than just Bella wanting to become a vampire and there were so many instances of it throughout the book. "
But I'm referring to her choices, not anyone else's. You said you don't like it when people boil it down to Bella's choice in life as wanting to be with Edward and be a vampire. What else is there that she wanted out of life that she had to fight for besides that?
"As it pertains to Bella, she chooses to come to Forks even though she doesn't really want to. "
And this is a choice she made, yes. And while it is her choice her mother and father both are given ample reason why she shouldn't stay. To me that was just another irrational choice she wanted to make because of Edward. It just seems like all her choices ultimately are made because of Edward, not for herself.
So yes, these are all her choices, and I don't like them because better choices could have been made, but all the choices she made were still so she could be with Edward and be a vampire.
Mochaspresso wrote: "Jesse wrote: "Yes, I am judging their actions because they were stupid ones."
"I cannot express enough how much I know the that this statement is true. If everyone saw it the same way as I do no ..."
I feel as though this topic has been changed did everyone forget the original question? It was do you think Stephanie Meyer is a bad writer and the fact that she makes us think and get angry and want to go to a discussion board makes me believe that she is not a bad writer,not a classic but not a bad writer.
Chanin wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Jesse wrote: "Yes, I am judging their actions because they were stupid ones."
"I cannot express enough how much I know the that this statement is true. If everyone saw it th..."
We are well aware of the original topic, we can read, silly. We are allowed to talk about different things, yeah? What's so wrong with that?
One word: yes. Yes, she is.
If you're looking for a good Teen Vampire read, read The Coldest Girl in Coldtown.
Christina wrote: "If you're looking for a good Teen Vampire read, read The Coldest Girl in Coldtown."Ooh, I want to read that so bad!
Personally i would have to say...YES SHE IS!!!!!! Her technique, her choice in words, she doesn't create that type of illusion that something is happening. If feels like i'm reading a brochure about STD's. No. Just no.
Mochaspresso wrote: "Jesse wrote: "Yes, I am judging their actions because they were stupid ones."
"I cannot express enough how much I know the that this statement is true. If everyone saw it the same way as I do no ..."
Boy, I wish I'd read the book you did.
Here is what happened to me. I am 51 years old, living downstairs from a young woman who was working toward her masters in children's literature. She was bored and angry that she had to do this work, completely disengaged from her dissertation, she only saw it as work and stupid. She had a tattoo on her back, from her waist to her shoulders of Patterson, I kid you not. She honestly though this was "literature"- she really believed this. She begged me to read this book, and so I tried but it wasn't anywhere near challenging, it was complete dreck. I worry though, because now this woman is teaching with a masters- and she thought this book was a great example of american literature...
Jesse wrote: "Chanin wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Jesse wrote: "Yes, I am judging their actions because they were stupid ones."
"I cannot express enough how much I know the that this statement is true. If eve..."
Nothings wrong with it but dont you think this thread is so big that now we could idk maybe move it to a different one so we could only see that one.If we are talking about a different subject so intently we should just start a new thread over it.
Jordan wrote: "Christina wrote: "If you're looking for a good Teen Vampire read, read The Coldest Girl in Coldtown."Ooh, I want to read that so bad!"
About to read that one myself I've heard many mixed reactions
Chanin wrote: "Nothings wrong with it but dont you think this thread is so big that now we could idk maybe move it to a different one so we could only see that one.If we are talking about a different subject so intently we should just start a new thread over it. "You can make a new thread to discuss what you want, I'm fine with staying in this one.
Chanin wrote: "Jesse wrote: "Chanin wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Jesse wrote: "Yes, I am judging their actions because they were stupid ones."
"I cannot express enough how much I know the that this statement i..."
No offence, but this is how it works - someone makes a proposal. People discuss their views. It turns out, we all have widely different views. The debate evolves as we continue, sometimes returning to points, but generally staying on track. Is Stephenie a good writer? Would she be one in this situation? Why or why not? It's how natural conversation flows, and it's interesting to see each other's side.
What you're actually saying, through the subtext I'm getting in your choice of words, is that you don't like that the opposing view is getting so much opinion, and you don't like how the arguments are structured because you're failing to produce a come back. So you're trying to stifle everyone else with their interpretations of how this question can be answered so you can continue to feel comfortable in any and all threads. And that's fine, if that's how you want to be, but anyone who rated this book has the right to say their views. I've seen threads just dedicated to being fans, and I've left those alone. This is a thread for both, and fair game.
If it helps you sleep at night, this thread is a tenth of the size of one of those 'one word' games or whatever it is people do to make threads seem popular.
Maven wrote: "Here is what happened to me. I am 51 years old, living downstairs from a young woman who was working toward her masters in children's literature. She was bored and angry that she had to do this w..."A Masters does not a cultured person make?
I got nothing. For my literature classes I had to spend several hours analyzing one paragraph of Faulkner. Stupid Faulkner.
I think she's a great author, her plotlines are great (except maybe Breaking Dawn), but how she chooses to portray her characters is the problem.
Jesse wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "I thought it was relevant because we were discussing whether the book could be used to teach characterization."Yeah, at that point I was rambling on my own, completely swerv..."
Why attempt to dictate what "better" should be for someone else, though? Is it actually better for them if it's ultimately not what they truly want? I've gotten "better" jobs and been miserable. In some instances, the concept of "better" is actually very personal and subjective.
To me, it doesn't matter what else she fights for besides Edward and becoming a vampire because I think the concept of having a choice is bigger than that. I also think that I am separating the concept of "choice" from my personal opinion of the actual choice while you may not be. I can understand saying that SM is a bad writer for technical issues in her writing. But I don't understand saying she's a bad writer because you don't happen to like the main character. That's not a fair reason. I hated all of the characters in "The Great Gatsby" and could go on forever about the poor choices characters make in that book, yet I don't think F. Scott Fitzgerald is a bad writer. I don't think that a personal dislike of a character is grounds to warrant a "bad writer" label. I don't think a personal dislike of a character is a fair reason to claim that something is wrong w/ SM's characterization of Bella. I think those are two completely different issues.
Mochaspresso wrote: "Why attempt to dictate what "better" should be for someone else, though? Is it actually better for them if it's ultimately not what they truly want? I've gotten "better" jobs and been miserable. In some instances, the concept of "better" is actually very personal and subjective."And I agree, but when ones choices effect everyone else like Bella's did, better choices could have been made. Better, healthier ones. What she wants is miniscule to everyone's livelihood hanging in the balance. Her wants and her life choices were selfish and put everyone in danger. So yes, better choices should have been made. Were they? No, and nothing can change that. I'm just giving my opinion on her poor choices.
"To me, it doesn't matter what else she fights for besides Edward and becoming a vampire because I think the concept of having a choice is bigger than that. "
But you said that the choices she made were more than just being with Edward and being a vampire so I wanted to know what other choices you saw her fighting for. Are you now saying that was the only thing she was fighting for?
" But I don't understand saying she's a bad writer because you don't happen to like the main character."
But I never said that I didn't like her writing and thought her a bad writer because I didn't like her characters. My reasons for thinking of her as a bad writer exceeds my personal opinion, though that is included, and are mainly things I can point out and say are bad examples of writing.
Jesse wrote: But you said that the choices she made were more than just being with Edward and being a vampire so I wanted to know what other choices you saw her fighting for. Are you now saying that was the only thing she was fighting for?She also fights for her survival and the survival of her family. She fights for the choice to at least try to save loved ones rather than cut and run in the face of a dangerous situation. Also, what I am trying to get across is that there were many instances where people were trying to get Bella to do something that she didn't want to do because they were convinced that they knew what would be best for her. Bella wanted to decide for herself. She wanted to decide whether or not to continue her pregnancy. She wanted to decide what college to attend or whether she even goes at all. She wanted to decide whether she has sex while still human or not. She wanted to decide whether or not to keep her old truck. Some were major issues and others were minor. She compromised on some issues and refused to budge on others. I totally understand that Edward was clearly a major influence on many of her decisions but I don't believe that this was ALL that she cared about. If that were the case, they could have simply hatched a plan to run away together from the very beginning. Yes, she wanted to be with Edward but she also cared about their families and cared about how she was going to be with him and what kind of life they were going to have together.
Mochaspresso wrote: "Jesse wrote: But you said that the choices she made were more than just being with Edward and being a vampire so I wanted to know what other choices you saw her fighting for. Are you now saying tha..."I wouldn't say she fought for it. She angst end over it and got handed it on a platter.
Siobhan wrote: "I wouldn't say she fought for it. She angst end over it and got handed it on a platter. Fair enough. Although, I will say that there are popular vampire series out there that are worse culprits of this than Twilight. In The Black Dagger Brotherhood series, the Scribe Virgin hands out miracles to characters at the end of novels like candy at Halloween. The only caveat is that the character has to be willing to give up something to have their wish granted.
Josh wrote: "I'd say no author that gets published is well and truly terrible. It's only once you've read several really good books and your standards are pushed a bit higher that you start calling stuff like T..."
Which is why you should never rate books on star scale, but we do anyways :P
Which is why you should never rate books on star scale, but we do anyways :P
I think that people who are critical of Meyer's writing are forgetting who her audience is. Tweens! She is not writing the great American novel! I read her books because my early teen daughters read them and liked them. They were good for what they are- teen romance. We had some fun discussions and laughs about the books and for that I am grateful! As my girls have gotten older they think the books are kinda of silly but still fun. Meyer is definitely a better writer and story teller than E.L. James, but that is a whole other discussion! Ha! Ha!
I could write a 100 page novel on why she's a horrible author, and never run out of material. Let me sum it up as best as I can. Her books are unbelievably offensive to women in too many ways to count. She uses rape as an easy back story cop out. She throws together a climax at the end of the second twilight book with a premise out of nowhere (Walking shirtless in the middle of Rome to commit suicide? What?) Her characters are one dimensional, her vampire rules are abhorrent and laughable (and inconsistent) there are millions of implausibilities in her books, some come down to opinion but who can argue that if people are immortal they would choose to spend all that time going to high school (and doing nothing else fun)
But to simplify things, she can't write. There is no skill or talent in any of it. The books are her own fantasy, which is kind of awkward because you can tell she must masturbate thinking about this stuff (the last parts a joke and open to interpretation, but I also do believe it)
April wrote: "I think that people who are critical of Meyer's writing are forgetting who her audience is. Tweens! She is not writing the great American novel! I read her books because my early teen daughters rea..."There's some amazing kid, tween and teen books out there, why should others get to slide because of their intended age range? Unless it's intentional, like Roald Dahl, they should be held to a higher standard, because your younger years are the ones that shape you.
Mochaspresso wrote: "She also fights for her survival and the survival of her family. "She never actually fought for her family's survival (I'm talking physical fighting) or her own survival. She only ever evaded the problem/enemy(ies) and let everyone else fight for her. Yes, vampire v.s. puny human Bella (she's no Buffy, that's for sure) would've ended badly, but even when she was a vampire she still let others do the fighting for her.
"She fights for the choice to at least try to save loved ones rather than cut and run in the face of a dangerous situation. "
Again, that's all she did, she never fought. And these two aren't things that she had to fight for in that it was her choice and she had to fight/argue for her to continue to make her own choices.
" Some were major issues and others were minor."
But why look at all the choices she is faced with when they're not important to the story or her overall choices? That's very nit picky, kinda of. The minor choices doesn't really matter, especially when they don't pertain to the story and can show Bella as being selfish, stubborn, and/or uncompromisable. Yes, she has to keep firm on choices that she wants to make on her own, but at what point should she continue to keep firm on her own decisions when she's blatantly making bad decisions? At what point is she just being firm on a stupid choice when there are better ones to be made? I do believe that that point had been reached in book three and continued to make bad choices because she didn't care what happened as long as she and Edward were together.
" I totally understand that Edward was clearly a major influence on many of her decisions but I don't believe that this was ALL that she cared about. If that were the case, they could have simply hatched a plan to run away together from the very beginning. Yes, she wanted to be with Edward but she also cared about their families and cared about how she was going to be with him and what kind of life they were going to have together. "
The way I see it, Bella didn't care for her mother or father and only cared about Edward or at the very least cared more about Edward than anything else. That all her choices and decisions were based on what outcome would keep Edward and by extension the Cullens close. In New Moon she was very mentally ill and would've healed better if she went to her mother, someone who could handle her emotionally better than her father could. But because her every choice is made with Edward in mind, she refused and began doing dangerous things to see Edward, not caring about herself, her friends, or her family.
Every choice she made was her choice, and she had the right to make her own choices. I just believe that better ones should have been made. Healthier ones that were clearly the better route.
April wrote: "I think that people who are critical of Meyer's writing are forgetting who her audience is. Tweens! She is not writing the great American novel! I read her books because my early teen daughters rea..."That's not true though. Her audience is made up of women 14-45.
Yeah. Yeah, she is!
When I read the first book (must have been five years ago or so) all I wanted to do was take a red pen to it. She made grammatical errors and spelling mistakes, basic comma usage. I get that we all make mistakes, ask my editor I'm sure I do all the time. That is why you pay big money for just that, AN EDITOR. And, just throwing it out there but the Bella character is a HORRIBLE role model for teenage girls. Stop crying and whining and get over it. He is just a guy, and not even a living guy. I wanted to punch her during the second one. I wish I never paid that kind of money to have that series.
Jesse wrote: "She never actually fought for her family's survival (I'm talking physical fighting) or her own survival. She only ever evaded the problem/enemy(ies) and let everyone else fight for her. Yes, vampire v.s. puny human Bella (she's no Buffy, that's for sure) would've ended badly, but even when she was a vampire she still let others do the fighting for her."When I used the word fight, I wasn't speaking literally. Perhaps, I'm assuming a regional colloquialism and meaning is more widely known than it truly is? If so, I apologize. NYers "fight parking tickets" and "fight traffic". We also call verbal arguments "fights". (ex. "I had a fight with my sister because she borrowed my clothes.") Standing your ground on an issue is also considered "fighting". My union is "fighting for a fair contract". People aren't literally brawling in any of these scenarios.
Fwiw, the nerd in me wants to add that I don't think it's fair to compare Bella to Buffy in that regard (physical fighting) because the vampires in Buffy's (TV show) world are very different than the ones in Twilight. Buffy's vampires have some of the more "traditional" vampire weaknesses that the Twilight vampires don't have. Buffy's superior fighting skills would not have benefitted her at all against a Twilight vampire. I suspect that she wouldn't fair well in the Black Dagger Brotherhood universe either because the vampire in question would either "scrub her" (erase her memories and plant an alternate thought in her mind.) before she could even get close enough to do any real harm or in a physical fight just dematerialize and reappear behind her and snap her neck or slit her throat. I readily admit that I have issues with and a very clear bias against Buffy....but I firmly believe that Buffy's "strength" and "kick-assedness" only work in Buffyverse.
But why look at all the choices she is faced with when they're not important to the story or her overall choices? That's very nit picky, kinda of. The minor choices doesn't really matter, especially when they don't pertain to the story and can show Bella as being selfish, stubborn, and/or uncompromisable. Yes, she has to keep firm on choices that she wants to make on her own, but at what point should she continue to keep firm on her own decisions when she's blatantly making bad decisions? At what point is she just being firm on a stupid choice when there are better ones to be made? I do believe that that point had been reached in book three and continued to make bad choices because she didn't care what happened as long as she and Edward were together.
It's not nit-picky to me nor do I agree that minor choices don't matter because I think the concept of choice was a recurring theme in Twilight. You also keep referring to Bella's "blatantly bad decisions" and "better choices". Better for who? If it's not want she wants, it's not really a "better choice". I still don't see what personal opinions on her choices has to do with it. Is the concept of choice only valid if the person in question makes a decision or chooses something that others approve of?
The way I see it, Bella didn't care for her mother or father and only cared about Edward or at the very least cared more about Edward than anything else. That all her choices and decisions were based on what outcome would keep Edward and by extension the Cullens close. In New Moon she was very mentally ill and would've healed better if she went to her mother, someone who could handle her emotionally better than her father could. But because her every choice is made with Edward in mind, she refused and began doing dangerous things to see Edward, not caring about herself, her friends, or her family.
I agree with you about New Moon for the most part. Her mother would have been better equipped to deal with her emotionally...but I'm not entirely sure about the "she would have healed better" part. I think she would have done the same things that she did with Charlie, go through the motions thinking that no one sees or notices what's really going on with her.
I strongly disagree that she didn't care for her parents. I think she clearly demonstrated repeatedly that she does care. Also, even if it is true that she cares for Edward more than them (...and I am not convinced that it is true. At least, not in the most literal sense that you seem to be implying).....he's the man that ultimately becomes her husband and the father of her child. When you get married and have your own family, familial loyalties and ties can shift a bit. In the end and with Jacob's help, they found a way where Bella wouldn't have to sever her ties with her family. If Edward was all she cared about, why even bother go through the motions of visiting and allowing Charlie to spend time with Renesme?
This is completely unrelated to the original topic but I admit it. I am a sentimental nut. I re-watched "Breaking Dawn pts 1 and 2" on cable tonight and it's my favorite of all the Twilight movies. I hated how they portrayed the wolves telepathy, but I love love loved the ending when she lets him see her thoughts. I was smiling and saying "awwwww!!!" like a nitwit. The male counterpart just rolled his eyes and muttered what I am sure were obscenities under his breath and went back to watch college b-ball on his tablet. (I sort of hijacked and hogged the big tv for Twilight. He was sure he would get it because there is no Scandal on Thursday's for the time being. WRONG!!!!!!!!!!! :) I also liked the way they did the final scenes w/ the "Thousand Years" song and the flipping of the book pages visual.
I think she is a good author considering what she managed to accomplish with a debut novel and a debut series.
Mochaspresso wrote: "When I used the word fight, I wasn't speaking literally."I meant in a physical and argumentative way. She never did fight for their survival or her own. She always ran while others fought for her. And while understandable as a human, even as a vampire she still let others fight for her while she did nothing.
"It's not nit-picky to me nor do I agree that minor choices don't matter because I think the concept of choice was a recurring theme in Twilight. "
But that's like saying her choice of what to read or what to wear were apart of it when it wasn't. Her every choice in the series didn't matter, regardless of the theme you see in the series.
"You also keep referring to Bella's "blatantly bad decisions" and "better choices". Better for who? If it's not want she wants, it's not really a "better choice". "
As I said before, better for everyone, including her. When her choices effect more than just her, she needs to consider better, less selfish choices. But she did not.
" Is the concept of choice only valid if the person in question makes a decision or chooses something that others approve of?"
It is valid when other lives rely on what choice she makes. And she's made bad ones that hurt other people. It's not seeking the approval of others, it's saving others from pain based on what choice she makes.
"but I'm not entirely sure about the "she would have healed better" part. I think she would have done the same things that she did with Charlie, go through the motions thinking that no one sees or notices what's really going on with her. "
But she knows her mother is more attentive than her father and knows that because of their closer relationship that she'd be kept under a closer eye than with Charlie. She certainly wouldn't have any cliffs to throw herself off of, or shady guys to approach while with friends, or have found the motorcycles to take to Jacob to fix. Would she have done stupid stunts still to see Edward? Maybe, but it would've been a whole different matter, much more difficult, and would've ended with her in some type of hospital if she tried.
"I strongly disagree that she didn't care for her parents."
While I do think she didn't care for Charlie, I feel that she cared for Renee slightly more, which is why I said that she cares about Edward the most. If there were to be a totem poll of the people she cares about, Edward and Jacob would top, followed by Alice, then Renee, then Charlie, then her.
"...and I am not convinced that it is true. At least, not in the most literal sense that you seem to be implying"
As I am not in your head nor you in mine, I have no clue what you think I'm implying.
"he's the man that ultimately becomes her husband and the father of her child."
And before that he was the boy who she knew for all of several months and immediately put in higher regard than her mother and father. What he becomes doesn't negate how she put him on a pedestal and how quickly. She favored his opinion over her fathers, became secretive and betrays her father's trust multiple times all because she favored Edward's opinion on things.
" If Edward was all she cared about, why even bother go through the motions of visiting and allowing Charlie to spend time with Renesme? "
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Charlie doesn't actually know what Bella is and doesn't actually get to see Nessie in the end of the book.
Maritza wrote: "I feel that SM is a good author. I have only read the twilight series, but i think most of the disdain for her comes from the dislike of her characters, and since the series was written in Bella's ..."I think SM is a sloppy writer. While I enjoyed the first three books for what they were, my disdain for the last book comes from the mass of illogic, plot holes and errors that she served up. It could have been an epic ending, but because she didn't put her best work into it, it was an epic disappointment. She was good enough to get by, but I feel like she didn't respect her art enough to put her best work into the final installment.
Stephanie is a good writer...but not a great one. Twilight is a pretty good read but only until you outgrow it. The narration is ordinary and it doesn't have it's own individuality. I remember being crazy but Twilight when I was 13 but once I read Harry Potter..man, you've got to admit that Twi stands nowhere near that. Twilight is written flawlessly but the characters are all very flat. They don't have that striking personality that you find in other books.
I think that the only reason that Twilight even made big (especially with the teens) was because of that dreamy quality that teens usually fantasize about(but that was obvious). Stephanie just gave all the teenagers what they were expecting and what clicked because they don't go about commenting on the writing prowess and just concentrate on the romance(at least a majority of them do) . It just doesn't make the whole thing unique.
I don't think so, coming from someone who doesn't like Twilight. I loved The Host though. It may have something to do with the sparkling vampires and that Bella is annoying in Twilight that people just hate it. I would love to read a story about Jasper, Alice or Rosalie. Bella and Edward is too hyped, boring and annoying, and I want to chop their heads off.
Jesse wrote: "I meant in a physical and argumentative way. She never did fight for their survival or her own. She always ran while others fought for her. And while understandable as a human, even as a vampire she still let others fight for her while she did nothing."She came up w/ the plan that would lead James away from Charlie. She told Alice that her vision was of the dance studio. She tried save her mother but James overpowered and injured her. That is not doing nothing.
She negotiated w/ the Volturi on Edward's behalf. That is not doing nothing.
She cut herself to distract Victoria and that distraction saved Edward and allowed him to get the upper hand.
She used her powers to protect everyone during the stand-off with the Volturi.
I don't view any of these things as not "fighting" (in my colloquial/slanguage meaning of the word) or as doing absolutely nothing. Not liking what she did isn't the same as doing "nothing"
Unless you are also using "nothing" in a colloquial/slanguage way that NYers also do, as in meaning "not important or significant enough". (ex..Winning that $1 in the lottery does nothing for me except buy me a candy bar.) If so, that's your opinion and that's fine, but that's a very subjective opinion of the books, not an entirely factual one. Some people are thrilled to win anything in the lottery. Others only want the biggest prizes and think the smaller ones are insignificant.
But that's like saying her choice of what to read or what to wear were apart of it when it wasn't. Her every choice in the series didn't matter, regardless of the theme you see in the series.
I wasn't referring to such minor details like that but since you mentioned what she wears, Bella's identity and view of who she was as a person was partially tied to the style of clothes she wore. She identified herself as a girl who isn't into fashion. Alice trying to dress her up in more fashionable clothes is part of people trying to get her to do things she's not comfortable with. On that minor issue of clothes, she does give in a few times to appease Alice but that is actually an example of the recurring theme that I saw in the books. By the way, when it comes to motifs and recurring themes, I don't think that I agree that every instance doesn't matter. Only that some instances are more significant than others.
But she knows her mother is more attentive than her father and knows that because of their closer relationship that she'd be kept under a closer eye than with Charlie. She certainly wouldn't have any cliffs to throw herself off of, or shady guys to approach while with friends, or have found the motorcycles to take to Jacob to fix. Would she have done stupid stunts still to see Edward? Maybe, but it would've been a whole different matter, much more difficult, and would've ended with her in some type of hospital if she tried.
You're presuming an awful lot. Shady guys are every where. So are motorcycles. (I ride myself and didn't see anything wrong w/ Bella riding...just her reasoning for doing so which encouraged her recklessness about it.) There are thrill seekers in FLA, too. Maybe she would tried swimming with sharks or wrestling gators or exploring the glades.
And before that he was the boy who she knew for all of several months and immediately put in higher regard than her mother and father. What he becomes doesn't negate how she put him on a pedestal and how quickly. She favored his opinion over her fathers, became secretive and betrays her father's trust multiple times all because she favored Edward's opinion on things.
See, I don't think that she put him in higher regard. She loved Edward in a completely different way than she loved her parents. I don't know if I want to label that as loving him more than them. When you get married, you have a closer and more intimate relationship with your husband, I guess.....but I don't think that equates to loving them any less or more. I could be projecting with that opinion from my own personal experiences, though. I'd have to think about it.
btw, I get where you are going about Edward just being a boyfriend in the beginning....but my point is that their relationship was serious. It wasn't the typical fickle and fleeting HS romance as evidenced by the fact that they eventually do marry and start a family. Edward wasn't some random dude.
Charlie has an idea of what Bella is but chooses not to seek confirmation of it. He also does get to see Nessie in the books.
Mochaspresso wrote: "She came up w/ the plan that would lead James away from Charlie. She told Alice that her vision was of the dance studio. She tried save her mother but James overpowered and injured her. That is not doing nothing."And she still ran. Her help was meaningless when she walked right into the trap. That is the opposite of doing nothing, that is making the problem worse. And I hated that scene with a passion. They can hear the most quietest noise a mile away from them, can hear a heartbeat from within a human's chest, but oh no, not a phone call /sarcasm. Like I said, as a human she was useless and her only option was either run towards the trouble and get hurt, or run away. Even as a vampire she was still useless in helping her own self.
"She negotiated w/ the Volturi on Edward's behalf. That is not doing nothing."
I'm not sure how fuzzy your memory of that scene is, but she did no such thing. Aro did all the talking, and when the possibility of Bella becoming a vampire comes up, she says all of five words and that's towards Edward who did the negotiating, begging him to 'mean it' when Aro brought up changing her. And it was Alice who sealed the deal by showing him the memory of the vision she had of Bella being a vampire. so she did nothing but begging for her life.
"She used her powers to protect everyone during the stand-off with the Volturi. "
And that she did. It's as I said before though, it doesn't change very much when she becomes a vampire. But yes, she did protect them.
"Unless you are also using "nothing" in a colloquial/slanguage way that NYers also do, as in meaning "not important or significant enough". (ex..Winning that $1 in the lottery does nothing for me except buy me a candy bar.) If so, that's your opinion and that's fine, but that's a very subjective opinion of the books, not an entirely factual one."
And I never implied that I was posting under a factual tense.
"I wasn't referring to such minor details like that but since you mentioned what she wears, Bella's identity and view of who she was as a person was partially tied to the style of clothes she wore. She identified herself as a girl who isn't into fashion. Alice trying to dress her up in more fashionable clothes is part of people trying to get her to do things she's not comfortable with. On that minor issue of clothes, she does give in a few times to appease Alice but that is actually an example of the recurring theme that I saw in the books. By the way, when it comes to motifs and recurring themes, I don't think that I agree that every instance doesn't matter. Only that some instances are more significant than others. "
But you said that you don't think minor choices don't matter. that is a minor choice, just like her clothing. And when ti doesn't pertain to the plot, a choice like that is completely irrelevant.
"You're presuming an awful lot. Shady guys are every where. So are motorcycles. (I ride myself and didn't see anything wrong w/ Bella riding...just her reasoning for doing so which encouraged her recklessness about it.) There are thrill seekers in FLA, too. Maybe she would tried swimming with sharks or wrestling gators or exploring the glades."
But if she went to her mother would the shady guys she'd probably not meet in FL look the exact same as the shady guys who approached her in Twilight? No. would she in FL have a friend who's a mechanic who can teach her how to ride said motorcycles? No. Even if she did come across motorcycles needing fixing and thus would be within her budget to buy -which is highly unlikely- her thought process would be different because she'd be no where near Jacob.
And it's as I said in that part of my post, her mother's attentiveness would've had her caught on to Bella very early on if she tried to put herself in dangerous situations, not because she's a thrill seeker, but because she wanted to conjure up hallucinations of her ex. She would've been to therapy very fast.
"See, I don't think that she put him in higher regard. She loved Edward in a completely different way than she loved her parents. I don't know if I want to label that as loving him more than them. When you get married, you have a closer and more intimate relationship with your husband, I guess.....but I don't think that equates to loving them any less or more. I could be projecting with that opinion from my own personal experiences, though. I'd have to think about it."
you keep referring to when they got married and how things changed but they were not married at that point. Them when they're married is not relevant to how she acted with him and because of him when they were still boyfriend and girlfriend. As such her mannerisms were very bad because she cared more about Edward than her mother and father.
"btw, I get where you are going about Edward just being a boyfriend in the beginning....but my point is that their relationship was serious. It wasn't the typical fickle and fleeting HS romance as evidenced by the fact that they eventually do marry and start a family. Edward wasn't some random dude."
It was as serious as any other HS relationship. It wasn't any different than a regular couple who get together in HS and then get married. Their feelings for each other aren't any different than what any other couple in HS feels. I don't know what HS relationships you're referring to when you say they're fickle and fleeting, but couples do stay together past HS. As such, that you keep referring to them when they're married to answer this seems very irrelevant. I'm glad you see where I'm coming from but to keep referring to when they're married when what I'm talking about is when they're not married seems just so irrelevant, I'm sorry.
"Charlie has an idea of what Bella is but chooses not to seek confirmation of it. He also does get to see Nessie in the books. "
That still means he doesn't know what she is. His willful ignorance doesn't mean he knows, he doesn't know and doesn't want to know.
And yes, he does see her, as Edward's niece. So he doesn't actually know about her either.
Charlie has an idea of what Bella is but chooses not to seek confirmation of it. He also does get to see Nessie in the books.I wouldn't say Charlie knew what she was. Jacob changed into a wolf in front of him, to show him what could be, but wasn't. All Charlie knew is that she was very, very sick for a long time, and knew that she was cool to the touch, and was, perhaps a little stiff & kept excusing herself periodically (to change contacts). But she was careful not to touch him too often & thawed considerably by the second time she saw him. So I think he may have thought that something was off, but he didn't want to know. Didn't want Jacob to tell him, he asked if she was a wolf (he said no) and he said, "you know what? I don't want to know. Just let me see her." He cared that she was happy, but you are right, he didn't need confirmation. In that way, I applauded him considerably seeing as curiosity is a human trait, and all he wanted to know, is that she was happy. And not dying.
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...
It's because I'm of the opinion that she didn't do it well that I don't think so. There were no character growth, and I don't think she told the story particularly well. So i don't think someone could teach students about those topics with Twilight if it isn't in a 'how not to' fashion.