Twilight
discussion
Is Stephenie a bad writer?
She's not a bad writer, but she's far from the best. One of my biggest problems with Twilight is that I found myself more interested in the peripheral characters than the main ones, who are supposed to be the most gripping. I found myself thinking "Wow, Carlisle must have such a good back story!! That human that likes Bella (Michael??) must be so heartbroken about Bella being tossed around between supernatural beings! How come Alice is psychic??" Everyone was so two-dimensional, she could have used the space where she repeatedly described Edward's chest so much better.Another problem was the last book. Everything happened so neatly it was impossible for me to be satisfied. I wasn't expecting a bloodfest of death a la Harry Potter and Hunger Games, but when everyone finds a love life, the ancient and powerful vampires just kinda give up and go home and her baby conveniently ages enough to be the replacement Bella for Jacob... well... it's a little hard to swallow. Especially after they've been agonising over these problems for 3 books straight. Charlie accepting that his daughter is marrying a vampire and staying eternally young when he was literally ready to bust a cap in Edward's ass in the beginning isn't character development, it's just convenient.
That being said, she seems to be showing room for improvement. The Host was a pretty interesting read, as was The Short Second Life Of Bree Tanner. In addition, she got a lot of young people reading, which is always a plus in my book. So hey, it's just an opinion.
Hannah wrote: "There are so many long posts and it is far too much for me to read right now, so I'll give my shortest version of my answer: I have only read the Twilight series by Stephanie Meyer, and was just ..."
Yes, my main problem with Twilight and thus what stunted my enjoyment of the series is Bella. I can't stand her and hated her when she became a mary sue vampire.
I meant to get back to this earlier, but I got sidetracked by preparations for next semester and Diablo III."...it does still baffle me that you're stuck on one ideal of a vampire."
This is a lot trickier to answer than you might think, so I'm going to start from the very, very beginning.
I learned how to read by myself. Even in my earliest childhood memories, I could read store signs, menus, etc. without any kind of trouble. When most kids were struggling with "A, B, C..." I was tearing through Dr. Seuss.
(Math, on the other hand... that's still a lot of blood, sweat, cursing and tears. There truly is balance in the universe.)
By the time I hit the age where Twilight would have been age-appropriate, I had read all of Stephen King's novels released to date (it was a lot easier when that number had barely cracked the double digits) and had solidified my taste for horror novels of all types. I was also aware of a lot of different types of vampires and variants that existed.
They were all over the place. It wasn't just friendly old Count von Count ("One! One fang-punctured neck! Ha-ha-ha!"), either, but an episode of Space Ghost on Saturday morning cartoons that introduced me. It was an energy-leech that sucked life force from its victims.
There was the vorvon in Buck Rogers which did the same thing (and burned up in the intense energy of a star). Ditto the comet vampires from Lifeforce.
There were water vampires in Sandworld which leeched the moisture from their victims. That was a fun book, and I need to find a copy of it somewhere so I can re-read it... I barely remember it after 30-odd years.
The point is, I really don't find it necessary to have a vampire that feeds solely on blood to survive in order to enjoy the book or movie. What bothers me, however, is when those vampires can somehow survive without feeding on humans at all.
Lestat was able to bring himself out of his hibernation spot by feeding on small animals, so I'm not averse to a leech temporarily sustaining on non-human blood. When he was out, however, he needed to prey on humans to actually function. That's the mark of a true vampire.
Jesse wrote: "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.It didn't make the problem worse. They needed to find James and Bella going to meet him allowed them to do that. Running away would have solved absolutely nothing and just prolonged the inevitable. That's why the original plan was get Bella somewhere safe and find James before he finds her. He was was a tracker and was hunting her. He would have eventually found her.
I'd have to read it again, but didn't Alice originally think she was talking to her mother? Maybe they didn't bother to listen because they assumed it was Bella's Mom worrying.
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.
Actually, she didn't beg for her life. She begged Jane to stop torturing Edward. Even though she didn't do much in the literal sense, I thought it was admirable of her to 1) be willing to rush to stop Edward for doing something crazy 2) keep her calm w/ the Volturi even thought she was completely terrified. I also think her presence helped the situation because Aro was intrigued by her an her power just as much as he was by Alice and Edward.
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.
Isn't that kind of like saying that every instance of Holden Caulfield calling someone a phony in "The Catcher in the Rye" is a minor detail that's irrelevant? It may not be directly relevant to the plot every single time it happens but it is relevant to his mindset and his overall character. It also happens frequently enough that it becomes a motif or a recurring theme in the story.
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.
Perhaps.....or perhaps without Jake (ie a friend) in FLA, she might have been even worse. Hanging out w/ Jake and rebuilding the bikes wasn't bad for her. In fact, it helped her. If she'd gone to her mother, its possible that she could get better, but it's also possible that she'd still be sitting in a bedroom staring out of the window at FLA scenery rather than Forks, all day.
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.
She fell in love with a boy and it was obvious (to me) that she still cares for her parents. Does she seem more passionate about Edward than about her parents? Yes....but imo, that's only because romantic love is completely different from filial love. I don't think that it meant that her love for Edward diminished or negated her love for her parents. This is evidenced by the fact that she's perfectly willing to leave and be with Edward....but only if she is certain that her parents are safe and will be ok. She won't go otherwise.
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.
SOME couples stay together past HS. Some don't even last the week. Even though they are only boyfriend and girlfriend, it seemed clear (at least, to me) that Bella and Edward were committed and were on the path to marriage or something like it. You seemed to be saying that just because they are boyfriend and girlfriend and weren't married yet, certain things shouldn't have happened between them. I'm saying that it was probably because they were much more committed to each other than the "boyfriend and girlfriend" label implies.
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.
You should go back and re-read at 68%. (ch. 26) Charlie knows that she's not his niece. Charlie sees the resemblance between Renesme and Bella tells Bella that she looks her. He also becomes angry and tells Bella and Edward to stop lying to him. He knows something isn't right and it's not pat of the "natural world". He knows it's something along the lines of paranormal/supernatural like Jake being a werewolf. He just prefers to remain on a need to know basis about the specifics.
Mochaspresso wrote: "It didn't make the problem worse. They needed to find James and Bella going to meet him allowed them to do that. Running away would have solved absolutely nothing and just prolonged the inevitable. That's why the original plan was get Bella somewhere safe and find James before he finds her. He was was a tracker and was hunting her. He would have eventually found her."And James was going after Bella, if she didn't fall for the trap he would've went to them anyway. And since they were having her run away in the first place and letting them do all the fighting, what you said is moot. She didn't have to go into the trap since the original plan was for her to be hidden away. It's not like Bella became An Hero and knew it was a trap and decided that if something were to happen it'd be on her own terms in a place she knows. She blindly went there and got very hurt. You just said everything I just said (I typed this after looking at the first sentence.) Her only option was to run, she blindly went into a trap because Alice and Jasper suddenly had selective hearing, and got hurt. What's the disagreement on this?
"I'd have to read it again, but didn't Alice originally think she was talking to her mother? Maybe they didn't bother to listen because they assumed it was Bella's Mom worrying."
James was talking the whole time, with Renee's voice in the background asking for help. They can't misconstrued that as a harmless conversation. I hated that Meyer had it happen like that, it was so stupid.
"Actually, she didn't beg for her life. She begged Jane to stop torturing Edward. Even though she didn't do much in the literal sense, I thought it was admirable of her to 1) be willing to rush to stop Edward for doing something crazy 2) keep her calm w/ the Volturi even thought she was completely terrified. I also think her presence helped the situation because Aro was intrigued by her an her power just as much as he was by Alice and Edward.
"
I'm telling you, it didn't happen as you're remembering it.
Aro wanted to know if Bella was immune to their talents (Of fucking course she is, she's a mary sue). She's immune to Aros so he called upon Jane. Jane tried to hurt her but nothing happened. Edward launched himself at Jane, Jane took him down, Bella said stop and tried to throw herself in the way though it doesn't work like that, Alice held her back. She didn't beg Jane to stop, all she said was stop, which I don't find to be begging. After that Bella had to beg Edward to mean it when Aro brought up Bella being turned because they couldn't walk away with just saying yes, they had to mean it. And Alice showed them they did mean to, that they did mean it. I didn't find Bella's presence in there to have helped because I feel the conversation would've went the same way were she not there. So yes, she begged for her life. How is it crazy of him to want to stop Jane from hurting Bella?
"Isn't that kind of like saying that every instance of Holden Caulfield calling someone a phony in "The Catcher in the Rye" is a minor detail that's irrelevant? It may not be directly relevant to the plot every single time it happens but it is relevant to his mindset and his overall character. It also happens frequently enough that it becomes a motif or a recurring theme in the story."
I wouldn't know because that comparison flies over my head. I didn't read that book. Regardless, not every minor choice she makes matters because it doesn't pertain to the plot. What she choose to wear that day, what she read or ate doesn't matter if it doesn't flow into the direction of the plot or enhance it or advances the plot. They're all just pointless things Meyer wrote to fill in the book.
"Perhaps.....or perhaps without Jake (ie a friend) in FLA, she might have been even worse. Hanging out w/ Jake and rebuilding the bikes wasn't bad for her. In fact, it helped her. If she'd gone to her mother, its possible that she could get better, but it's also possible that she'd still be sitting in a bedroom staring out of the window at FLA scenery rather than Forks, all day."
as I remember it, she only used Jacob to do dangerous things and that quickly stopped when he got her grounded. I don't feel that she used him as a friend but as an enabler to her dangerous stunts. She had other friends she could've confide to because of the break up, Jessica or Angela would've understood perfectly, but they wouldn't have helped her or made her realize that dangerous things made Edward come to her. So no, I don't think she would've gotten worse, because without the motorcycles Bella wouldn't have gotten the thought in her head that she could ride them and wouldn't gotten hurt and saw that dangerous things brought her Edward. Her mother would've been very quick to mandate therapy and made sure she attended the sessions.
"She fell in love with a boy and it was obvious (to me) that she still cares for her parents. Does she seem more passionate about Edward than about her parents? Yes....but imo, that's only because romantic love is completely different from filial love. I don't think that it meant that her love for Edward diminished or negated her love for her parents. This is evidenced by the fact that she's perfectly willing to leave and be with Edward....but only if she is certain that her parents are safe and will be ok. She won't go otherwise.
And that's you. I feel that she didn't give two shits about Charlie in the first place and felt that her mother was a friend more than a mother and when Edward came she cared for him more than anyone, even herself.
"SOME couples stay together past HS. Some don't even last the week. Even though they are only boyfriend and girlfriend, it seemed clear (at least, to me) that Bella and Edward were committed and were on the path to marriage or something like it. "
And some stay together past HS and get married, like they did. Their insta love and infatuation with each other didn't inflict in me the thought that they would get married, based on their feelings and their relationship alone. Of course I knew they'd get married and stay together, because this is Meyer and at that point I already knew it from reading other reviews. But based on their feelings for one another and their relationship I wouldn't assume that they'd be together forever. To me they were never in love, just infatuated with each other. They didn't have any real reasons to love one another.
" You seemed to be saying that just because they are boyfriend and girlfriend and weren't married yet, certain things shouldn't have happened between them. I'm saying that it was probably because they were much more committed to each other than the "boyfriend and girlfriend" label implies."
No....I'm saying that because they are not yet married that Bella shouldn't have acted like Edward was suddenly the messiah and knew all and cared about him more than she cared about others in her life. To reiterate, I saw them as any normal couple who got together because of shallow reasons and stayed together, they were just a normal HS couple to me, nothing special about their feelings.
"Charlie knows that she's not his niece. Charlie sees the resemblance between Renesme and Bella tells Bella that she looks her. He also becomes angry and tells Bella and Edward to stop lying to him. He knows something isn't right and it's not pat of the "natural world". He knows it's something along the lines of paranormal/supernatural like Jake being a werewolf. He just prefers to remain on a need to know basis about the specifics."
I read that part when I posted that, he gets told that she's Edward niece. He never gets told otherwise. He doesn't like that they're lying but knows that they're lying for a reason. He never gets told that she's his biological granddaughter and not his adoptive granddaughter. For him to know would mean that he would have to know about them being vampires. He doesn't want to know and they don't want to tell him. So he knows of her as Edward's niece.
Just interjecting on one point, as I remember it, Charlie was making Bella go out and socialise, in the belief that it would help her heal. She latched onto Jacob as an easy solution, and began the stupidity because she was forced out of the house. At home, she was practically comatose, but not seeking danger. She only went on a bike in the first place because she felt forced to socialise with Jess, who she treated abominably. This is what happens when Bella doesn't get her way.However, in Florida, her mother would have resumed their old relationship, or tried to. She wouldn't have been so awkward about making Bella socialise with her peers, but would have invested the time in talking to her daughter. She would have used one of the old hippy projects to try to relate. She would not have given up, or gone with the seemingly easier option. Her mother would have healed her. And she knew it, that's why she didn't go.
Also, it never seemed obvious that Bella loved Edward most over all. Bella loved Bella, then the notion of immortality, then the person who could have enabled it (Edward). That's why Jacob was never a viable option, he couldn't transfer his immortality over.
Jesse wrote: "And James was going after Bella, if she didn't fall for the trap he would've went to them anyway. And since they were having her run away in the first place and letting them do all the fighting, what you said is moot. She didn't have to go into the trap since the original plan was for her to be hidden away. It's not like Bella became An Hero and knew it was a trap and decided that if something were to happen it'd be on her own terms in a place she knows. She blindly went there and got very hurt. You just said everything I just said (I typed this after looking at the first sentence.) Her only option was to run, she blindly went into a trap because Alice and Jasper suddenly had selective hearing, and got hurt. What's the disagreement on this?No, he wouldn't have because he clearly didn't want to take on the Cullens in a fair fight. That's why he came up with his plan to lure Bella away from them. He called her. He clearly knew how to find her. The disagreement was that I thought it was brave of Bella to go into a situation that was dangerous for her. She knew that she could get hurt or even die and she went anyway because she felt that she at least had to try to save her mother (evidence that she does care about her much more than what you have implied in other comments). You say that it was stupid of her to do it. I say that running and hiding in that situation is what is cowardly. I wouldn't have gone alone, but I wouldn't run and hide either. I would have told the Cullens and devised a plan to ambush him. Which is exactly what eventually happens anyway. Nothing was made worse by Bella going to meet James. That confrontation was going to happen inevitably anyway.
Bella said stop and tried to throw herself in the way
Bella throwing herself in between Edward and another vampire to try and stop what was happening is evidence of loyalty and bravery to me. That's also not "standing there doing nothing while other people do all the fighting for her". According to what you just said, she tried and was held back. That's not "nothing".
I wouldn't know because that comparison flies over my head. I didn't read that book. Regardless, not every minor choice she makes matters because it doesn't pertain to the plot. What she choose to wear that day, what she read or ate doesn't matter if it doesn't flow into the direction of the plot or enhance it or advances the plot. They're all just pointless things Meyer wrote to fill in the book.
Those things are a part of her character. Characterization does enhance a plot. (Well, not for you because you didn't like the character or where the plot was going anyway.) When I originally talked about the recurring theme of choice, I never said that small details like her choosing to eat fried chicken on her honeymoon was important to the theme of choice. It wasn't important because no one tried to deter her from doing so. I wasn't being that literal. I was actually referring to the choices that were being challenged by other charactersin some manner. Clothes actually was one of those choices.
James was talking the whole time, with Renee's voice in the background asking for help. They can't misconstrued that as a harmless conversation. I hated that Meyer had it happen like that, it was so stupid.
That's not exactly how it happened. He calls and Alice answers, hears Bella's mother sounding hysterical and assumes it's because she's worried and immediately gives the phone to Bella. James doesn't start speaking until Bella takes the phone. Bella talks to James, hears her Mom's voice and thinks that James has her. That's why I said that it's possible that Alice assumed she was talking to her mother and didn't bother listening to the conversation.
....if it's necessary, I will drag out my old compaq laptop to post the exact parts that I am referring to. (kindle cloud reader and kindle for mac doesn't allow you copy text and paste it elsewhere but the old kindle for pc still does. I don't want to be anymore anal than I already am, though.
as I remember it, she only used Jacob to do dangerous things and that quickly stopped when he got her grounded. I don't feel that she used him as a friend but as an enabler to her dangerous stunts. She had other friends she could've confide to because of the break up, Jessica or Angela would've understood perfectly, but they wouldn't have helped her or made her realize that dangerous things made Edward come to her. So no, I don't think she would've gotten worse, because without the motorcycles Bella wouldn't have gotten the thought in her head that she could ride them and wouldn't gotten hurt and saw that dangerous things brought her Edward. Her mother would've been very quick to mandate therapy and made sure she attended the sessions.
She used Jacob but not for the reason that you are saying. He was a friend and being with him was helping her deal w/ losing Edward. Jessica was not Bella's "friend". Especially, not a close one that she could confide in. Frenemy is more accurate. I don't even know why you'd mention her. Angela was nice, but Bella wasn't close enough to her to confide in her either. Besides Edward, the only friend that she was that close to besides Jacob (and she was rather selective in what info she shared with him) was Alice.
And some stay together past HS and get married, like they did. Their insta love and infatuation with each other didn't inflict in me the thought that they would get married, based on their feelings and their relationship alone. Of course I knew they'd get married and stay together, because this is Meyer and at that point I already knew it from reading other reviews. But based on their feelings for one another and their relationship I wouldn't assume that they'd be together forever. To me they were never in love, just infatuated with each other. They didn't have any real reasons to love one another.
This is precisely what I was saying.....you trivialized their relationship. You wrote it off as insta love and infatuation and say that they were never really in love to begin with. That's not what the book says, though. That's not what the characters say or demonstrate through their actions. You also don't always need a "valid reason" for love in a book. Bella and Edward were supposed to be star crossed. You also don't have to approve of the relationship between the characters to enjoy the story. Gatsby had no reason to love Daisy (The Great Gatsby) but did anyway. I don't know what he saw in her that was so great. Rhett had no reason to love Scarlett (Gone With The Wind). I thought Darcy was a complete ass and I don't know why female readers swoon over him to this very day. (Pride and Prejudice). I wouldn't run off to go be a vampire with Edward, but Rochester (Jane Eyre) is the man, though. I would have eschewed conventions and lived in sin with him in a heartbeat. :)
I read that part when I posted that, he gets told that she's Edward niece. He never gets told otherwise. He doesn't like that they're lying but knows that they're lying for a reason. He never gets told that she's his biological granddaughter and not his adoptive granddaughter. For him to know would mean that he would have to know about them being vampires. He doesn't want to know and they don't want to tell him. So he knows of her as Edward's niece.
You didn't mention the part where Edward tells him that he has to go along w/ the lie of Renesme being his niece if he wants it to remain safe enough for them to stay in Forks. You also didn't mention the part where Charlie looks and Renesme and Bella and starts hyperventilating. You can clearly tell that Charlie knows. It's at 68% location 7447 in the kindle edition. He just doesn't want to know the details and is willing to go along with the lie.
she's worse than better...
Siobhan wrote: "Just interjecting on one point, as I remember it, Charlie was making Bella go out and socialise, in the belief that it would help her heal. She latched onto Jacob as an easy solution, and began the..."I think Charlie was actually right in saying that the reason that she didn't go to FLA was because she didn't want to leave Forks as it was her only (perceived) connection to Edward and she was holding on to the hope that he might come back.
......btw, I saw this while re-reading that part. On pg 95 of New Moon "I'd thought I'd been fooling him. Keeping Charlie from suffering had been the point of all this effort."
....she kept her grades up and went through the motions because she didn't want Charlie to suffer or worry about her. Is that something that someone who doesn't care about her father would say?
Mochaspresso wrote: "No, he wouldn't have because he clearly didn't want to take on the Cullens in a fair fight. That's why he came up with his plan to lure Bella away from them. He called her. He clearly knew how to find her. The disagreement was that I thought it was brave of Bella to go into a situation that was dangerous for her. She knew that she could get hurt or even die and she went anyway because she felt that she at least had to try to save her mother (evidence that she does care about her much more than what you have implied in other comments). You say that it was stupid of her to do it. I say that running and hiding in that situation is what is cowardly. I wouldn't have gone alone, but I wouldn't run and hide either. I would have told the Cullens and devised a plan to ambush him. Which is exactly what eventually happens anyway. Nothing was made worse by Bella going to meet James. That confrontation was going to happen inevitably anyway. "Have you ever heard of live today, fight tomorrow? A quote from The Mummy but I like it. I don't find that running to regroup and brain storm on a plan is cowardly. They were tracking him anyway and Bella could've easily told them where he was and planned around it.
But yes, you find it brave that she went there blindly and got hurt, and I find it stupid. Oh well.
And on her mother, I'm not saying she doesn't care period. As I've said at other points, I find that out of all the people she's close to she cares about Edward the most and when it's him or someone else it is always him.
"Bella throwing herself in between Edward and another vampire to try and stop what was happening is evidence of loyalty and bravery to me. That's also not "standing there doing nothing while other people do all the fighting for her". According to what you just said, she tried and was held back. That's not "nothing"."
I didn't say it was? As always for these past few posts, I've said that her as a human can't do anything but let others fight for her. Truly, what can she do up against the vampires as a human? Nothing but get in the way and get hurt. Which she would've gotten hurt had Alice let her get in the way. So strategically, her only option is to run and hide and let the vampires fight. Live today, fight tomorrow. Or survive as a human and fight as a vampire.
"Those things are a part of her character. Characterization does enhance a plot. ""
Not everything she does or chooses to do is apart of characterization. Her deciding to make pancakes or a sandwich or wear that blue long sleeve shirt instead of the green one are not characterization. All the pointless detail where Bella is doing mundane things is just that, pointless. It to me was Meyer trying to fill the book and take up time.
"When I originally talked about the recurring theme of choice, I never said that small details like her choosing to eat fried chicken on her honeymoon was important to the theme of choice. It wasn't important because no one tried to deter her from doing so. I wasn't being that literal. I was actually referring to the choices that were being challenged by other charactersin some manner. Clothes actually was one of those choices. "
But you said minor choices do matter. Pardon me for taking it literal but you did say her minor choices mattered and things like what she'll wear or eat or read to me are minor choices and are pointless when it doesn't pertain to the plot. Not everything she does matters.
"That's not exactly how it happened. He calls and Alice answers, hears Bella's mother sounding hysterical and assumes it's because she's worried and immediately gives the phone to Bella. James doesn't start speaking until Bella takes the phone. Bella talks to James, hears her Mom's voice and thinks that James has her. That's why I said that it's possible that Alice assumed she was talking to her mother and didn't bother listening to the conversation. "
And I still find this scene to be stupid because of how illogical it is to me. Her body language changes as soon as she hears James' voice. Jasper can feel other people's emotions so he should've felt how fearful and distressed she was. They should've known that something was wrong with Bella and tune back into the phone conversation. Alas, because Meyer has not thought of everything that could happen, it did not. oh well.
"She used Jacob but not for the reason that you are saying. He was a friend and being with him was helping her deal w/ losing Edward. Jessica was not Bella's "friend". Especially, not a close one that she could confide in. Frenemy is more accurate. I don't even know why you'd mention her. Angela was nice, but Bella wasn't close enough to her to confide in her either. Besides Edward, the only friend that she was that close to besides Jacob (and she was rather selective in what info she shared with him) was Alice. "
She only used him for what he could give her. He didn't try to comfort her on Edward being gone, he tried to get her to move on and be with him. She didn't deal with losing Edward, as is shown by how she threw herself into dangerous situations to see him and hear him. That's not dealing.
I don't see how you thought their relationship to be frenemies. If anything Bella was a bad friend, it's understandable that Jessica would feel ire for her when she gave them all the cold shoulder and nearly walked them right into a gang rape. What ever ties she had to the kids from HS that got pulled taut and was strained is her own fault, but they still wanted to be friends with her, for some reason unknown.
"This is precisely what I was saying.....you trivialized their relationship. You wrote it off as insta love and infatuation and say that they were never really in love to begin with. That's not what the book says, though. That's not what the characters say or demonstrate through their actions. You also don't always need a "valid reason" for love in a book."
What more is there to their relationship but inconsequential and shallow emotions? While a valid reason would be nice, a reason in the first place would do in a pinch. They had no reason to be in love so fast and so deep as they were months into their relationship. That's why I am of the opinion that their relationship and feelings for one another are no different than any normal HS relationship. They never show why they love each other, certainly not Edward and Bella right from the start has a unhealthy co-dependency issue, even before they get together. This is why I feel that they were infatuated with each other, not in love.
"Bella and Edward were supposed to be star crossed. You also don't have to approve of the relationship between the characters to enjoy the story."
They were the opposite of star crossed. Their families were not in disapproval over the relationship enough to merit saying they were star crossed, and the Volturi didn't care that they were together so long as Bella turned or died. And it wasn't because they were together but because she was a human who knew too much. Star crossed they were not.
"You didn't mention the part where Edward tells him that he has to go along w/ the lie of Renesme being his niece if he wants it to remain safe enough for them to stay in Forks. You also didn't mention the part where Charlie looks and Renesme and Bella and starts hyperventilating. You can clearly tell that Charlie knows. It's at 68% location 7447 in the kindle edition. He just doesn't want to know the details and is willing to go along with the lie. "
That is your interpretation. Because it's never told I will be of the mindset that he doesn't actually know because he doesn't want to know. His ignorance is his bliss so long as everyone is safe and happy.
Ashley wrote: "I disagree. People get emotional and upset over the silliest things. Her writing, her story isn't making us think. The fact that half of us hate twilight and half of us love it is the only reason. "
Actually, it's closer to maybe 20% loved it, 20% hated, and the remaining 60% aren't that passionate either way. I'm in the 60 percentile. It wasn't bad, but not worth a re-read either.
Jesse wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "No, he wouldn't have because he clearly didn't want to take on the Cullens in a fair fight. That's why he came up with his plan to lure Bella away from them. He called her. He..."I don't have the energy to cut and paste any more and I adamantly refuse to be anal and directly quote from the books, so sorry for just responding randomly....
I like the phrase/quote "Ride or Die" when it comes to fantasy and fiction. "Blaze of Glory" (Young Guns). "I ain't going out like no punk bitch..." (House of Pain lyric from the song "Jump Around".) Cleo calmly lighting a cigarette and then setting it off at the end of "Set it Off". If Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid had embraced that live today/fight tomorrow philosophy at the end of the movie, it would have ruined the entire movie for me. These movie and song references may or may not go over your head again, but I'm basically saying that there is an appropriate time and a place for each of those philosophies. In fiction and in real life. Speaking as a minority, I don't think I would have some of the freedoms that I enjoy if no one had been willing to stand up and fight out of fear of being hurt.
You seem to be focused on what's right and valid and wise and appropriate behavior. I've stated that I don't require that from literature. According to you, Bella's doesn't exhibit bravery because trying to save her mother was a stupid move and running and hiding like a good little girl would have been the smart thing to do. The more I discuss it, the more I actually like Bella (...and that's saying something because I actually thought she was an annoying nitwit, but I did like her grit when it came to life or death situations.) Nice and sweet as she is, there is a reason why the book isn't about a girl like Angela Webber.
Jessica and Bella's frenemy status is alluded to in Twilight and you can pick up on it via inferencing. However, in Midnight Sun, Edward is privy to some of her thoughts and she's not such a good friend to Bella either. Not as bad as Lauren, though.
Rosalie and Jasper were not keen on their relationship initially. Neither was Charlie at certain parts of the series. The volturi not caring that they be together as long as Bella was either turned or died is not "approval" or even remotely "not caring". That's the epitome of star crossed, actually. They are star crossed because of the forbidden love element. He's a vampire and she's human.
Regarding what Charlie knows and doesn't know, it's not my interpretation. I really do think the book is pretty clear about it even though it isn't expressly stated. This reminds me of people debating whether Idgie and Ruth were lovers in "Fried Green Tomatoes...". There is no debate, they were. The book is quite clear even though it's not explicitly stated. People obstinately refusing to make the necessary inference because of personal biases and preferences is not the same thing as it being "open to interpretation". That's really just the same level of blissful ignorance that Charlie embraces in Breaking Dawn.
Mochaspresso wrote: "I like the phrase/quote "Ride or Die" when it comes to fantasy and fiction. "Blaze of Glory" (Young Guns). "I ain't going out like no punk bitch..." (House of Pain lyric from the song "Jump Around".) Cleo calmly lighting a cigarette and then setting it off at the end of "Set it Off". If Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid had embraced that live today/fight tomorrow philosophy at the end of the movie, it would have ruined the entire movie for me. These movie and song references may or may not go over your head again, but I'm basically saying that there is an appropriate time and a place for each of those philosophies. In fiction and in real life. Speaking as a minority, I don't think I would have some of the freedoms that I enjoy if no one had been willing to stand up and fight out of fear of being hurt. "Shame that you find running to be cowardly. and it's not that being hurt that should be feared, it's dying. she could've died multiple times had she not ran and let others fight for her and protect her.
"You seem to be focused on what's right and valid and wise and appropriate behavior. I've stated that I don't require that from literature. According to you, Bella's doesn't exhibit bravery because trying to save her mother was a stupid move and running and hiding like a good little girl would have been the smart thing to do."
You see it that way but it isn't so. I'm not saying it isn't brave of her that she went to save her mother, I'm saying it was stupid of her to fall into his trap, especially when she is given big red flags as clues to it being a trap. Bravery and stupidity fall very close together but are very different, which is why we see it differently.
"Jessica and Bella's frenemy status is alluded to in Twilight and you can pick up on it via inferencing. However, in Midnight Sun, Edward is privy to some of her thoughts and she's not such a good friend to Bella either. Not as bad as Lauren, though. "
I count all published books of Twilight, not a rewritten version which would've been nothing more than Meyer trying to milk the franchise more. For this I'd just have to reiterate that what ever strain on their would be friendship came from Bella being a bad friend. Sure Jessica didn't like that Bella got the one guy who no one could get plus three other guys, but she was the typical preppy girl who wanted to be her friend and Bella didn't want that to happen.
Fucking Lauren! Oh my god. I hate Lauren, but not for normal reasons. Lauren was placed in the story to be hated, just like Rosalie. Rosalie is the vampire version of Lauren and she's hated all because Lauren doesn't like that Tyler is infatuated with Bella. Past that we literally get nothing else about Lauren. And then because Meyer can't be a grown woman and move on from her past, she makes Lauren in the image of some girl who picked on her and thus gave her the ending of being scammed out of money and her hair cut. There is literally no other point to Lauren than hate, and it's stupid and petty and a waste of words to create the character.
"Rosalie and Jasper were not keen on their relationship initially. Neither was Charlie at certain parts of the series. The volturi not caring that they be together as long as Bella was either turned or died is not "approval" or even remotely "not caring". That's the epitome of star crossed, actually. They are star crossed because of the forbidden love element. He's a vampire and she's human. "
And no one cared. Charlie didn't like Edward because he's her father and it's practically his job to grill the boyfriends of his daughter. That doesn't give it a point in the forbidden love/star crossed category otherwise all relationships would be forbidden love. Rosalie didn't like Bella, because she was human yet wanted to throw away being human and being a woman who could have children. She didn't hate her because she was with Edward and didn't want them together. As for Jasper I don't remembering him caring either way since he knew of Alice's vision of Bella being a vampire with them.
"Regarding what Charlie knows and doesn't know, it's not my interpretation. I really do think the book is pretty clear about it even though it isn't expressly stated.
The book is quite clear even though it's not explicitly stated. People obstinately refusing to make the necessary inference because of personal biases and preferences is not the same thing as it being "open to interpretation". That's really just the same level of blissful ignorance that Charlie embraces in Breaking Dawn. "
And his bliss is what makes him refuse to believe that Nessie is his biological granddaughter, because there's no way that she could be, the numbers don't fit together, so he accepts his ignorance. As I said, for him to actually know he'd have to have it explained that they're vampires.
Ok everyone is writing paragraphs and paragraphs here over something that is very straightforward. Bella is a horrible character and a horrible person, the books are offensive to women and vampires and fans of the vampire genre, and SM is a terrible author in every way possible. Even you people who are saying "She is good but not great" are way off base, this isn't a thing where there's a gray area and everyone can have different opinions, this is very clear cut on how terrible she is, and if you don't think so then the only explanation for that is that you haven't taken many English classes, whether it be focusing on grammar or writing structure, or appreciating literature, or any classes on social issues or women's rights, so you aren't able to see the subtle but very blatant offenses in the book. Or maybe you haven't haven't had any positive female role models, or don't read often, or are in high school. That's understandable if that's the case, but please do yourself a favor and start reading important stuff, and give the fan-fiction a rest.
Jesse wrote: "Shame that you find running to be cowardly. and it's not that being hurt that should be feared, it's dying. she could've died multiple times had she not ran and let others fight for her and protect her.You can die anywhere at any time. People die in freak accidents at home, the very place where they thought they would be perfectly safe. Safety is a bit of an illusion in that regard.
You see it that way but it isn't so. I'm not saying it isn't brave of her that she went to save her mother, I'm saying it was stupid of her to fall into his trap, especially when she is given big red flags as clues to it being a trap. Bravery and stupidity fall very close together but are very different, which is why we see it differently.
Bella knew it was a trap. However, she didn't want to risk her mother's life. I distinctly remember her saying that she was probably going to die, but she had to at least try. Regardless of whether it was a stupid decision or not, I completely understood the motivation for her decision.
btw, forgive me for saying this, but if we were ever fighting in a war, I don't want to be in the same squad with you.
btw #2....have you ever read "The Red Badge of Courage" by Stephen Crane? It's actually related to what we are talking about. The main character is a soldier who flees from a battle that he is sure that his regiment is not going to win. It turned out that they were successful and he is ashamed of his cowardice. He tries to squash the guilt by telling himself that he was smart and did the right thing and that the others were fools for fighting in what seemed like an impossible situation.
I firmly believe in the power of self fulfilling prophesies.
I count all published books of Twilight, not a rewritten version which would've been nothing more than Meyer trying to milk the franchise more. For this I'd just have to reiterate that what ever strain on their would be friendship came from Bella being a bad friend. Sure Jessica didn't like that Bella got the one guy who no one could get plus three other guys, but she was the typical preppy girl who wanted to be her friend and Bella didn't want that to happen.
Even without the extra input of Midnight Sun, Jessica's behavior makes it quite clear that she wasn't interested in befriending Bella for Bella. It was for the attention that Bella was inadvertently attracting and Bella knew it. I'd say that the strain in their relationship started when Mike decided that he liked Bella.
Fucking Lauren! Oh my god. I hate Lauren, but not for normal reasons. Lauren was placed in the story to be hated, just like Rosalie. Rosalie is the vampire version of Lauren and she's hated all because Lauren doesn't like that Tyler is infatuated with Bella. Past that we literally get nothing else about Lauren. And then because Meyer can't be a grown woman and move on from her past, she makes Lauren in the image of some girl who picked on her and thus gave her the ending of being scammed out of money and her hair cut. There is literally no other point to Lauren than hate, and it's stupid and petty and a waste of words to create the character.
No arguments there. That's probably why they didn't include her character in the movie.
And no one cared. Charlie didn't like Edward because he's her father and it's practically his job to grill the boyfriends of his daughter. That doesn't give it a point in the forbidden love/star crossed category otherwise all relationships would be forbidden love. Rosalie didn't like Bella, because she was human yet wanted to throw away being human and being a woman who could have children. She didn't hate her because she was with Edward and didn't want them together. As for Jasper I don't remembering him caring either way since he knew of Alice's vision of Bella being a vampire with them.
Midnight Sun offers more input on this but I won't go there since you aren't interested. Plus, there is really no need to. The books offer enough info on it. Bella and Edward face plenty problems over him being a vampire and her a human.
Just because some of the main characters eventually come around and all have different motivations for their worry and for overcoming it doesn't mean that no one cared. Over the course of the story, several people did actually care at one point or another. Edward and Bella cared. He tried to warn her away. They eventually stopped caring, though. Regardless of reasons, both their families cared at different points and that was eventually overcome. Jacob, Billy and the wolves cared and that was eventually overcome. The most dangerous of them all, the Volturi only stopped caring when Bella became a vampire (...had that not happened, they certainly would have continued to care) and then they cared again when there was concern over Renesme being an immortal child. You choose to trivialize it and say no one cared, it was really no big deal.....but the books actually say differently.
I loved her style of writing. I had never read a vampire novel before and really didnt want to but once I read twilight I was hooked on Vampire novels. I tried reading the host and really did not like it. Her style did change then I thought and found it difficult to get on with and understand so only read about 100 pages and gave up.
Sarah wrote: "Ok everyone is writing paragraphs and paragraphs here over something that is very straightforward. Bella is a horrible character and a horrible person, the books are offensive to women and vampires..."Yet another person on their high horse of what good literature is and anyone thinks differently is uneducated, not well read or too young to understand.
Instead of giving generic opinions, make a definitive argument with concrete examples of bad writing. Something beyond "I took English courses and therefore, can recognize bad writing and Twilight has it."
Here's my view on the actual writing.....I don't think Twilight was well-written, mainly due to purple prose and awkward sentence structures but that wasn't significant enough to interfere with my overall enjoyment of the story. I'm not young and I am educated. I also think that I am well-read. My goodreads shelves are like the junkfood drawer in my house. If that's all you chose to look at, you'd come to the conclusion that I wasn't healthy. However, if you looked in the fridge and in the cabinets and at the fact that I am a total gym rat, you'd see that your initial impressions were way off base. I consider myself a feminist even though I firmly do believe that many aspects of modern feminists movements are largely misguided. Not all, but many. The characterization of Bella Swan in Twilight is not a women's rights issue. It is a work of fiction. It's hard for me to entertain commentary that Bella's decision to eschew college in favor getting married and having a child is a women's rights issue or that this sets women's right back 30 yrs when in the real world that I live in, I see very real things like pregnancy discrimination still happening in the workplace even though the law, from over 30 yrs ago, supposedly forbids it. Don't get me wrong, some aspects of the feminist movement do address issues like this and I appreciate that....but I have a problem with other aspects that amount to nothing more that a lot of empty rhetoric about either non-existent issues that don't matter to the real world (Bella's Twilight saga) or self-serving interests that only affect and benefit a very narrow segment of the female population.
Louise wrote: "I loved her style of writing. I had never read a vampire novel before and really didnt want to but once I read twilight I was hooked on Vampire novels. I tried reading the host and really did not ..."I wasn't able to finish The Host either. I fell asleep on the movie, too. Ironically, that is the book that most people say is the better of the two. Story of my life. I couldn't get through the book that most say is "good" and I enjoyed the one that many say is "bad".
Mochaspresso wrote: "You can die anywhere at any time. People die in freak accidents at home, the very place where they thought they would be perfectly safe. Safety is a bit of an illusion in that regard."Irrelevant, seeing as that was never even a possibility in the series. It is fact that she was safer as a human by hiding and letting the supernaturals fight it out.
"Bella knew it was a trap. However, she didn't want to risk her mother's life. I distinctly remember her saying that she was probably going to die, but she had to at least try. Regardless of whether it was a stupid decision or not, I completely understood the motivation for her decision.
btw, forgive me for saying this, but if we were ever fighting in a war, I don't want to be in the same squad with you. "
Bella did not know it was a trap. Having just read that last bit of chapter 26, Bella didn't know at all that it was a trap. She was completely convinced that he had her mother.
Seeing as I just woke up I can't find it in my to care at all.
"btw #2....have you ever read "The Red Badge of Courage" by Stephen Crane?"
Everything in that paragraph after this I feel is irrelevant because I haven't read this and don't care to so I wouldn't know.
"Even without the extra input of Midnight Sun, Jessica's behavior makes it quite clear that she wasn't interested in befriending Bella for Bella. It was for the attention that Bella was inadvertently attracting and Bella knew it. I'd say that the strain in their relationship started when Mike decided that he liked Bella. "
This is another thing we'll have differing opinions on. If she befriended her for the attention then everyone who befriended her would've been doing it for the attention. Jessica stuck it out and tried to be her friend even after the attention on Bella waned and she became ostracized. Any feelings of friendship Jessica had left completely when Bella nearly got them raped.
"Bella and Edward face plenty problems over him being a vampire and her a human."
My view of forbidden love and star crossed lovers is the very blunt meaning of those terms, where there is something keeping them back, be it people, or age, or race, something more substantial than a few people not agreeing. Him being a vampire and her being a human to me was never an obstacle to them because they dated regardless of what they were and the only thing Edward did was complain about the concerns that he couldn't have been really concerned with because he still saw her. Them being what they are is no longer a forbidden love nowadays.
Sarah wrote: "Ok everyone is writing paragraphs and paragraphs here over something that is very straightforward. Bella is a horrible character and a horrible person, the books are offensive to women and vampires..."Sarah why do you feel the need to insult people just because they enjoyed a book you didn't?
I read the Twilight series because my granddaughter was reading them. I thought the idea of the books was interesting, but that the writing was simplistic and there were too many grammatical errors. These were a case of some good ideas poorly executed.
I am not sure that there is much editing going on anymore. Or at least not the line by line correction editing of the past. I may be wrong, but I do find many more errors in books than I have found in the past. I am talking about finished, purchased copies, not advanced reader copies. And I am NOT an editor or consider myself a grammatics police person!
Sarah wrote: "Ok everyone is writing paragraphs and paragraphs here over something that is very straightforward. Bella is a horrible character and a horrible person, the books are offensive to women and vampires..."
Unfortunately, it will fall on deaf ears. No one wants to accept that bad grammar, prose, etc. are anything but "stylistic choices" as opposed to Can't Write For Shit Syndrome™.
Jesse wrote: "Irrelevant, seeing as that was never even a possibility in the series. It is fact that she was safer as a human by hiding and letting the supernaturals fight it out."She technically did let the supernaturals fight it out, though. Her actions just brought them together so that they could. That wasn't her intention in going there, but that is what her going to dance studio accomplished.
Besides, how long would she have had to hide from James? Who wants to live a life where you are running and hiding, anyway? That problem with James was the type of problem that you can't run from because it's always going to be a cloud over your head. He was never going to stop. She probably shouldn't have gone alone but going to meet him wasn't stupid as that confrontation was going to happen sooner or later anyway. Imo, this goes back to what I was saying about choices. Not every single situation is always as impossible as it seems and sometimes there are other options. What is the best option to take depends on what your end goal is....do you want to live to fight another day or do you want to fight to live your life your way?
Do you also think it was stupid of the other vampires to risk their lives to stand with the Cullens against the Volturi at the end of Breaking Dawn? Do you think it would have been better for all of them to run and hide and stay out of it?
Bella did not know it was a trap. Having just read that last bit of chapter 26, Bella didn't know at all that it was a trap. She was completely convinced that he had her mother.
That's not exactly what I meant. Not knowing all of the details of a trap doesn't necessarily mean that you don't realize that the trap exists. I know that she thought he had her mother. I meant that she knew that his plan was to get there alone and that he intended to kill her.
Everything in that paragraph after this I feel is irrelevant because I haven't read this and don't care to so I wouldn't know.
That's too bad. I thought It was a great book, imo.
If she befriended her for the attention then everyone who befriended her would've been doing it for the attention.
I don't understand your logic here. Are you saying that if Jessica was Bella's friend for the attention, then it means that Mike and Angela were also?
Jessica stuck it out and tried to be her friend even after the attention on Bella waned and she became ostracized. Any feelings of friendship Jessica had left completely when Bella nearly got them raped.
Jessica never had any genuine feelings of friendship and she actually didn't stick it out. When Bella called Jessica to go out in New Moon, they hadn't spoken to each other in quite some time and Jessica reluctantly accepted that invitation.....and this was before the "almost rape" <---- which didn't actually happen, btw. Bella approached and talked to a stranger outside a bar on a dark street. While it was a stupid and dangerous thing to do, there was absolutely nothing in the text to indicate that the man actually intended to rape her or Jessica. The only thing he did was offer to buy Bella a drink. He didn't follow her. He didn't try to detain them. He didn't attack them. He didn't threaten them physically or verbally. Bella talked to him, he offered to buy her a drink, she declined and walked away and he didn't stop her. They all went about their business. That is not "nearly got them raped".
My view of forbidden love and star crossed lovers is the very blunt meaning of those terms, where there is something keeping them back, be it people, or age, or race, something more substantial than a few people not agreeing. Him being a vampire and her being a human to me was never an obstacle to them because they dated regardless of what they were and the only thing Edward did was complain about the concerns that he couldn't have been really concerned with because he still saw her. Them being what they are is no longer a forbidden love nowadays.
They dated anyway but it was not without obstacles. They started as star-crossed. They just didn't end that way. Never mind their families agreeing or not. A vampire overcoming his bloodlust to date a human is an obstacle. A vampire overcoming his bloodlust to date a human when such a thing is forbidden by the governing powers of his world is an obstacle. A vampire dating a human when his coven has signed a treaty saying that they wouldn't do anything that threatens humans is an obstacle.
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..."Her writing style is kind of tedious, going over every detail "I woke up and then I brushed my teeth, and then I walked to the bedroom, and then I looked for something to wear, and then I wore it..." ad nauseum.
furthermore, she doesn't really depict emotions in a believable manner. there is no way anyone can stand to be around another person like that without not wanting to kill themselves; I don't care how in love they are. My antipathy was increased because I'm a huge Outlander fan which is another love story extraordinaire, but very very believable.
Mochaspresso wrote: "She technically did let the supernaturals fight it out, though. Her actions just brought them together so that they could. That wasn't her intention in going there, but that is what her going to dance studio accomplished. "And that is what I've been saying.
"Besides, how long would she have had to hide from James? Who wants to live a life where you are running and hiding, anyway? That problem with James was the type of problem that you can't run from because it's always going to be a cloud over your head. He was never going to stop. She probably shouldn't have gone alone but going to meet him wasn't stupid as that confrontation was going to happen sooner or later anyway. Imo, this goes back to what I was saying about choices. Not every single situation is always as impossible as it seems and sometimes there are other options. What is the best option to take depends on what your end goal is....do you want to live to fight another day or do you want to fight to live your life your way?"
Hypothetically speaking? It all would've depended on their ability to track. If he didn't get her that day he would've tracked Bella some other way or actually got her mother instead of the video with her voice on it. It's more likely that she would've went to him to save her mother and she was there than them tracking him first, seeing as Alice's visions didn't help them at all.
"Do you also think it was stupid of the other vampires to risk their lives to stand with the Cullens against the Volturi at the end of Breaking Dawn? Do you think it would have been better for all of them to run and hide and stay out of it? "
Actually yes, I do. They weren't needed because there wasn't a fight, it was just a waste of their time and a waste of characters for Meyer to bring them all together, have everyone training and in the end there was no fight.
On the other hand, it is good to have all the allies that they could have had there been a fight. But they didn't run and hide, they took their time, since apparently it took the Volturi forever to get to Forks, and they got together all the people they could have needed. It as still stupid on Meyer's part though.
"That's not exactly what I meant. Not knowing all of the details of a trap doesn't necessarily mean that you don't realize that the trap exists. I know that she thought he had her mother. I meant that she knew that his plan was to get there alone and that he intended to kill her. "
You said that she knew that it was a trap. She did not know this. She 100% believed he had her mother and that she needed to go there alone to get her and get her ass handed to her and have her mother and herself die. So no, she knew what he wanted, what his plan was, but she didn't know it was a trap, that he didn't have her mother and she had no need to go there. Knowing his endgame and knowing he was setting up a trap for her are two different things.
"I don't understand your logic here. Are you saying that if Jessica was Bella's friend for the attention, then it means that Mike and Angela were also? "
Yes. Every one of them, Eric, Mike, Tyler, Jessica, and Angela befriended her to get whatever attention there was to be had from befriending the new girl. I am saying that because they had no other reason to befriend Bella, just like Jessica. Which makes no sense. What attention could Jessica get from befriending the new girl? She got none. She gained no popularity because Bella didn't suddenly rocket up the social ladder in school by being new there. There was nothing for Jessica to gain from befriending Bella and she gained nothing from being her friend but a scarring experience.
"Jessica never had any genuine feelings of friendship and she actually didn't stick it out. When Bella called Jessica to go out in New Moon, they hadn't spoken to each other in quite some time and Jessica reluctantly accepted that invitation.....and this was before the "almost rape" <---- which didn't actually happen, btw. "
That's why the word almost was before the word rape. Since Bella rarely interacts with her 'friends' in HS we can't actually glean what their intentions or true feelings were, Bella's omniscience doesn't count because Bella doesn't know what they don't tell her, regardless of what Meyer wants us to believe. And why should she be Bella's lap dog and be excited that Bella called her? Bella didn't want to go out with her which she expresses throughout their outing and didn't care about them right from the start. Bella gave them all the cold shoulder in New Moon after Edward broke up with her. I don't know how you do friendships but I wouldn't be chomping at the bit to hang out with someone who before didn't give me the time of day and didn't seem as invested in the friendship as I was.
"Bella approached and talked to a stranger outside a bar on a dark street. While it was a stupid and dangerous thing to do, there was absolutely nothing in the text to indicate that the man actually intended to rape her or Jessica."
Bella approached a group of men who she thought were her attackers. They could've gotten very hurt and at worse raped. Even Jessica was worried that would happen because she didn't want the attention of the shady men in the first place. Bella notes that the men practically ooze menace, she knew they were a threat to her and Jessica and because of that threat, that they could've possibly been the men who were harassing her before, she approached them. This all tells me that they very well could've almost gotten raped because of Bella.
"A vampire overcoming his bloodlust to date a human is an obstacle. A vampire overcoming his bloodlust to date a human when such a thing is forbidden by the governing powers of his world is an obstacle. A vampire dating a human when his coven has signed a treaty saying that they wouldn't do anything that threatens humans is an obstacle. "
And he very quickly got over that obstacle, so it was no longer a problem that made it forbidden and made them star crossed. I think it got over it by the first book. And once more, the Volturi didn't care that he was dating her, it was the fact that she knew too much about vampires and they wanted her turned or dead. It was never because they were together. Him dating her was no threat, if it were they would've pressed the matter more than just warning Bella about how dangerous being with him was. When the solution to their problems is very simple, it makes everything less forbidden and star crossed, especially when few people cared.
Maybe she's bad at creating her characters and their personalities...?Because I have read the Twilight books and The Host and honestly I liked the characters from the Host much more than the Twilight's characters.
Stephanie Meyer is a TERRIBLE author.
I don't think she's a bad writer but there are other authors I enjoy reading more than her
Vickie wrote: "I am not sure that there is much editing going on anymore. Or at least not the line by line correction editing of the past. I may be wrong, but I do find many more errors in books than I have fou..."
Same, Vickie! I can forgive a couple of typos in a self-published ebook, because maybe the format was wrong? But trad publishing, whether ebook or hard copy, should be gone over with a fine-toothed comb. They can still take around 2 years to publish new work, what are they doing in that time if not heavily editing? And this kid-glove mentality being used for the likes of E L James makes it far worse. I'm increasingly losing faith in the trad publishing world, no matter how emphatic the likes of John Green are about the industry.
I'm with Narnian on this one. This is the literature equivalent of asking if Tommy Wisseu or Ed Wood are bad film directors. YESSS!For the last time YESS!
Bella settling down and getting married was not what I was referring to when I said it was offensive to women. I'm not going into all the examples, are you kidding, they are on every page. Millions of young impressionable girls read these books and read about this girl that falls apart without a man in her life, a man who is obsessive and controlling, and those young girls will think its romantic if their boyfriend takes apart their car to stop them from going somewhere. Subtlety matters, and I sincerely hope you don't have any daughters. Awkward sentence structure is the least of this book's problems. Maybe you were "educated" a long time ago because you aren't able to grasp the complexities or the blatant overtones and undertones. The fact that you assumed I meant the marriage and baby thing proves how you don't grasp the below the surface stuff. And its not that far below the surface. My 13 year old sister read these books and made comments to me about how helpless and dependant Bella is, and that is only the most obvious example of sexism.
I'm not trying to insult any of you because you enjoyed a book I didn't enjoy!! argghh whoever said 'it will fall on deaf ears' is completely right and I'm also impressed that you trademarked the name. There's nothing wrong with you enjoying bad literature people, there's plenty of bad literature I enjoy just like I enjoy junk food. But the topic is whether it is bad literature or not, and the answer to that is assuredly yes, whether you enjoy it or not.
I love her writing. Yes she may have mistakes, but every author does, and then gets an editor to fix them. At least we know that SHE wrote HER book.
I read the Twilight Saga a few years back and all I remember is that I couldn't put it down. I didn't really like the story all that much and Bella Swan annoyed me slightly, however, that doesn't mean that I think that Meyer is a bad writer. Her writing rendered me unable to put the series down, so even though I didn't like them, I think that she is still a good writer. But that is just my opinion, so feel free to disagree : )
Ian wrote: "I'm with Narnian on this one. This is the literature equivalent of asking if Tommy Wisseu or Ed Wood are bad film directors. YESSS!For the last time YESS!"Well, now, hang on a minute. Plan 9 From Outer Space was unintentionally brilliant, so you may want to leave poor Ed out of this. Substitute Uwe Boll instead, because holy FUCK that guy is an assclown.
Bill wrote: "Ian wrote: "I'm with Narnian on this one. This is the literature equivalent of asking if Tommy Wisseu or Ed Wood are bad film directors. YESSS!For the last time YESS!"Well, now, hang on a minute...."
Please do not swear.
Jesse wrote: "Bella approached a group of men who she thought were her attackers. They could've gotten very hurt and at worse raped. Even Jessica was worried that would happen because she didn't want the attention of the shady men in the first place. Bella notes that the men practically ooze menace, she knew they were a threat to her and Jessica and because of that threat, that they could've possibly been the men who were harassing her before, she approached them. This all tells me that they very well could've almost gotten raped because of Bella. "You pick and choose when you want to count Bella's omniscience. What she says about Jessica when she is lucid doesn't count, but what she says when she's having delusions of hearing Edward's voice and mistaking bystanders for her attackers does? That's very convenient.
Btw, you also totally changed the meaning of the text there with your word choices. Since you are counting Bella's pov here, you should also count how Bella herself refers to it as an "implied menace" (<---exact phrase from the book) only stemming from the fact that it was dark and that they were strangers. (pg. 109) You conveniently reworded it to say that they "oozed menace" to support your biased pov. Bella doesn't say that they oozed menace. Bella says that the menace is implied for no reason other than the fact that they were strangers in the dark and she'd been attacked by a group of strangers before. Bella was attacked and almost raped in Twilight. She was not almost raped in New Moon. "Almost raped" is huge exaggeration of the incident in New Moon because those guys did nothing to them and there was nothing that they did or said in the text that indicates that they intended to. I'm not saying that Jessica didn't have a right to be wary given the situation and I even understand her anger. I'm just saying that there is no need to exaggerate by saying that Bella almost got them raped. You also said that Jessica got nothing out of their friendship but a scarred experience. There was nothing in the 3 books that indicated that Jessica was "scarred". She was angry with Bella for a while and then she got over it. That's not "scarred". By Eclipse, they are all sharing the same lunch table again. If you are exaggerating a minor detail like that, it also makes me wonder what biases are influencing your pov's on bigger issues.
btw, a good friend wouldn't have just stood far away across the street while their friend did something crazy. I'll tell you exactly how I do friendships.....I wouldn't have let my friend walk over to that guy alone. I would have said more than just "Come on!". I would have gotten in her face and stopped her if I had to. Not just standby and watch from across the street. I wouldn't date a guy that I knew liked my friend even if she told me it's okay because I have no interest in being someone's second choice by default. If my friend was suffering from depression (a situation that I have been in irl), I would have called to see how she was doing...even if she didn't take my calls. I would have stopped by even if she refused to see me. I would have tried and would have kept trying. I wouldn't let pettiness like a bruised ego over being "blown off" get in the way. Notice how Bella and Jacob still try to reach out to each other even when one is angry and is not taking the others calls? They still try. Bella and Jacob were close friends. Bella and Jessica were not.
Mochaspresso wrote: "You pick and choose when you want to count Bella's omniscience. What she says about Jessica when she is lucid doesn't count, but what she says when she's having delusions of hearing Edward's voice and mistaking bystanders for her attackers does? That's very convenient"I have no clue what you mean, can you elaborate?
"Btw, you also totally changed the meaning of the text there with your word choices. Since you are counting Bella's pov here, you should also count how Bella herself refers to it as an "implied menace" (<---exact phrase from the book) only stemming from the fact that it was dark and that they were strangers. (pg. 109) You conveniently reworded it to say that they "oozed menace" to support your biased pov. "
So I worded it differently than what the book says, it doesn't mean I'm trying to turn it around to suit my needs. She still says they are a threat to her and doesn't care, which is very stupid of her and could've put her and Jessica in danger.
" I'm just saying that there is no need to exaggerate by saying that Bella almost got them raped. You also said that Jessica got nothing out of their friendship but a scarred experience. There was nothing in the 3 books that indicated that Jessica was "scarred". She was angry with Bella for a while and then she got over it. That's not "scarred". By Eclipse, they are all sharing the same lunch table again. If you are exaggerating a minor detail like that, it also makes me wonder what biases are influencing your pov's on bigger issues. "
Can it be called a bias if I just plain hate Bella? Maybe. But that doesn't cloud my judgement of the series.
From Jessica's pov it indeed can be seen that they could've gotten hurt because of Bella's stupidity, what Bella feels of the guys and her omniscience for the situation notwithstanding. And yes, I may exaggerate Jessica being scarred over it, but because she doesn't get anything positive from her friendship with Bella like popularity, which was my point.
"btw, a good friend wouldn't have just stood far away across the street while their friend did something crazy."
Seem like you're implying that Jessica didn't care that Bella would've gotten hurt. Jessica is afraid in that scene and don't want to engage these men like Bella does. She said she knew them, why should Jessica try to pull her away from guys she says she knows?
"I wouldn't date a guy that I knew liked my friend even if she told me it's okay because I have no interest in being someone's second choice by default. "
Jessica liked Mike before Bella came along and Bella had no interest in Mike, why do you see some kind of foul in this? If anything Bella helped them get together, what's the problem here?
" If my friend was suffering from depression (a situation that I have been in irl), I would have called to see how she was doing...even if she didn't take my calls. I would have stopped by even if she refused to see me. I would have tried and would have kept trying. I wouldn't let pettiness like a bruised ego over being "blown off" get in the way."
And that is well and dandy, but Jessica just wasn't written to be Bella's friend, otherwise I think she would've done better because she doesn't come off as someone who is a shitty friend, not like Bella is. From what we can gleam of her personality, she doesn't seem like the type to keep trying when someone isn't as invested in the friendship as she is. There is a point where one just has to give up and drop that friend because they're toxic, and Bella is that toxic friend, especially because she didn't care about them in the first place.
"They still try. Bella and Jacob were close friends. Bella and Jessica were not. "
I never said otherwise. I've stated that Bella is a shitty friend and that Jessica had no ulterior motives to befriending Bella like you say she did.
Sarah wrote: "Bella settling down and getting married was not what I was referring to when I said it was offensive to women. I'm not going into all the examples, are you kidding, they are on every page. Millions..."They aren't offensive to "women". They are offensive to you. You don't speak for all women, nor do I and I don't presume to try. You raise your daughters and I will raise mine and I do not need any help from any moral majority. I firmly believe that if you talk to your children and raise them to have the common sense to distinguish fact from fiction and reality from fantasy that books like Twilight are not a problem. Yes, I enjoyed the books. However, I didn't think Edward disabling her car was romantic...nor did I approve of it when her own father did the same exact thing. Bella didn't see that as romantic either so I am confused as to why these supposed impressionable young girls would if they are indeed taking their cues from her like you say they are.
My father wouldn't have gone to all of that subterfuge to stop me from going out anyway. (Mainly because he was a mechanic and thanks to him, I have the ability to reconnect the cables myself.) He would have just been direct and demanded my keys. If any teenaged girl is getting her romantic ideas from books rather than from talking her parents, she and her parents already have a problem that started way before Twilight. My parents have been talking to me about these things way before I was a teenager and I wasn't raised in a household where I had to sneak or hide things from them and I would never want my children to feel that way toward me.
btw, I didn't assume you were just speaking of marriage and baby. There have been many discussions of Twilight being considered anti-feminist in goodreads and that was one of things that came up. I just used it as an example because it is a real life issue that I have witnessed and still see happening. Regardless of what issue(s) you were speaking of, I still find it hard to be upset over the content in a fiction book when there are genuine issues in the world affecting real people. I also don't have the time or the inclination to insult readers of books that I didn't like. Probably because defending the controversial books that I do like takes up so much of my time :).
Mochaspresso wrote: " Bella didn't see that as romantic either so I am confused as to why these supposed impressionable young girls would if they are indeed taking their cues from her like you say they are."
Well a lot of people are easily swayed by things like that, or stupid. I've seen many a Hush Hush fan say they would gladly let Patch kill them because he's Patch.
Sarah wrote: "I love her writing. Yes she may have mistakes, but every author does, and then gets an editor to fix them. At least we know that SHE wrote HER book."An editor is not a ghost writer, an editor says when grammatical errors are rife, learns the tone of the piece and offers rephrasing that would suit, questions the validity of the structure of story lines etc. their job is to improve you and motivate you! An editor is essential!
Mochaspresso wrote: "Sarah wrote: "Bella settling down and getting married was not what I was referring to when I said it was offensive to women. I'm not going into all the examples, are you kidding, they are on every ..."Everyone assumes I am meaning to insult them. I was being completely serious, you legitimately don't see the problem with the book in regards to feminism, and that can only indicate you don't have a clear grasp on the subject. Bella and Edward's relationship is that of an abuser and the woman he's controlling, taking the car apart to control where she goes is romanticized, are you kidding me, the whole book is just chick lit fantasy gone wrong, and this is what I mean, you aren't able to see the whole book in the proper context. This is not just me who feels this way. If you want a full account of exactly what is wrong with these books, http://markreads.net/reviews/2010/11/... this blog 'Mark reads Twilight' goes chapter by chapter, and I have read the entire thing, not because I agree with everything he says, which I do (and I thought all those things before I read it anyway) but because it is thoroughly entertaining and funny. Don't even tell me you don't have time to read it, after you post pages and pages on this forum every couple of hours.
Yes in a perfect world parents wouldn't need to worry about their kid being swayed by peer pressure, or fantasy fiction, or influenced by any outside sources besides them but you seem to already be a mother so I would really hope that you already understand that this isn't the case.
Jesse wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "You pick and choose when you want to count Bella's omniscience. What she says about Jessica when she is lucid doesn't count, but what she says when she's having delusions of hearing Edward's voice and mistaking bystanders for her attackers does? That's very convenient"I have no clue what you mean, can you elaborate?
On pg 71 of Twilight, Bella says that Jessica makes a half-hearted attempt to convince her to go the dance. Bella also says that she suspects that Jessica "enjoys my inexplicable popularity more than my actual company."
When I mentioned that Bella felt this way earlier, your response was that her omniscience doesn't count. Those were your exact words. Yet, now you're choosing to count her pov when she is in one of her delusional and hearing Edward's voice in her head phases.
So I worded it differently than what the book says, it doesn't mean I'm trying to turn it around to suit my needs. She still says they are a threat to her and doesn't care, which is very stupid of her and could've put her and Jessica in danger.
Word choice changes are not a big deal when the interchanged words are genuine synonyms. (ie beautiful vs gorgeous) When a word choice change has the ability to change the entire connotation, it is sort of a big deal. (thin vs. anorexic).
Can it be called a bias if I just plain hate Bella? Maybe. But that doesn't cloud my judgement of the series.
If you are allowing your dislike of her to skew your views of what happens in the book, it does.
From Jessica's pov it indeed can be seen that they could've gotten hurt because of Bella's stupidity, what Bella feels of the guys and her omniscience for the situation notwithstanding. And yes, I may exaggerate Jessica being scarred over it, but because she doesn't get anything positive from her friendship with Bella like popularity, which was my point.
The book makes it clear that she does, though. 1) Bella suspects it, 2) Edward reads her thoughts and tells Bella what she's thinking from time to time. 3) Jessica demonstrates it through some of the things that she says and does. She was a popular girl and liked being seen with the new girl. She also liked having more opportunities to hang around Mike since she had a crush on him. She was also a gossip and when Bella started dating Edward, the kids at school all took notice. Jessica liked being in a "friend" position to get the skinny on their relationship and became annoyed when Bella wouldn't confide much to her. The vast majority of Bella's conversations with Jessica involved Jessica grilling her about Edward and Bella thinking of ways to either dodge the questions or change the subject.
Seem like you're implying that Jessica didn't care that Bella would've gotten hurt. Jessica is afraid in that scene and don't want to engage these men like Bella does. She said she knew them, why should Jessica try to pull her away from guys she says she knows?
She didn't have to engage the men....just Bella. The men were not doing anything. Regardless of whether she knew them or not, I wouldn't have let her go over to them alone.
"I wouldn't date a guy that I knew liked my friend even if she told me it's okay because I have no interest in being someone's second choice by default. "
Jessica liked Mike before Bella came along and Bella had no interest in Mike, why do you see some kind of foul in this? If anything Bella helped them get together, what's the problem here?
Girl Code.....Jessica didn't know that Bella didn't have any interest in Mike until she asked. I will give Jessica credit for the fact that she at least, asked Bella how she felt about it first. That is something a decent friend would do.
And that is well and dandy, but Jessica just wasn't written to be Bella's friend, otherwise I think she would've done better because she doesn't come off as someone who is a shitty friend, not like Bella is. From what we can gleam of her personality, she doesn't seem like the type to keep trying when someone isn't as invested in the friendship as she is. There is a point where one just has to give up and drop that friend because they're toxic, and Bella is that toxic friend, especially because she didn't care about them in the first place.
I'm inclined to say that you either completely misread Jessica's character or you are letting your intense dislike of Bella cloud your perceptions. Jessica was a stereotypical phony friend. She wasn't outwardly mean or nasty like Lauren. She was the smile in your face type and gossip behind your back type.
I think the main problem, that's led to these back-and-forth posts, is that Mochaspresso believes that Bella is a reliable narrator, whereas the rest of us know her to be unreliable. And I think that has its basis purely on the fact that Bella will identify early on the problems to be dealt with in the books, focus on edward's eyes/abs/chest/whatever and then be surprised when her predictions come true. She lies to herself as much as to the other characters, and she lies to the reader. Which is even more unreliable, given that one of her first statements is about how honest she is and how poorly she lies. We see evidence to the contrary throughout the books, and I don't believe a word she says. You're going by her perspective, by her tell-don't-show, rather than the evidence in the subtext.For instance, in the Bella vs Jessica thing, Mocha, you're seeing Jessica as the inflammatory one, rather than the reactive one, because Bella forgets to associate herself with her actions. So she puts Jessica at risk, hears Jessica saying she's not comfortable, and narrates it as Jessica killing the moment she gets to hear Edward again. Bella initiated that example, not Jessica. Meyer tried to justify it in Midnight Sun, but Edward is an unreliable as Bella, since he spends most of what's written telling us he doesn't give a shit about Bella, when clearly he's besotted from the first line. And yes, he can hear thoughts, but he never explores the intent behind them, he makes assumptions, as Bella does.
The sad thing is, and this is what I think makes Meyer a poor writer, is that she didn't consider the way her word usage would affect perceptions. She hasn't sat back and really studied her work in an unbiased manner, to see what could and couldn't work. She missed the moments where she made Bella rude, and uncompromising and selfish. Maybe because that is inherently who she is?
Without tooting my own horn too much, I've been writing a series for a few years. I can tell you one of my main characters is pretty heinous right now, he just sort-of cheated on his girlfriend then blamed her (long story). I know exactly what that boy is, but I also know he can be likeable. However, my beta readers have picked up on one of the other characters, who doesn't get many chapters, and they've read her to be a similar way, although that was never my intent. When I looked back, a couple of months later (for fresh perspective) I could see what they were talking about, and could see what I could do to make her the person I know her to be, while still keeping the story lines in tact. I'm not saying I'm better than Meyer - not by a long shot - but if I'm aware as an unpublished writer, why is she not aware when she has been through that process?
Sarah wrote: "Everyone assumes I am meaning to insult them. I was being completely serious, you legitimately don't see the problem with the book in regards to feminism, and that can only indicate you don't have a clear grasp on the subject. Bella and Edward's relationship is that of an abuser and the woman he's controlling, taking the car apart to control where she goes is romanticized, are you kidding me, the whole book is just chick lit fantasy gone wrong, and this is what I mean, you aren't able to see the whole book in the proper context. This is not just me who feels this way. If you want a full account of exactly what is wrong with these books, http://markreads.net/reviews/2010/11/... this blog 'Mark reads Twilight' goes chapter by chapter, and I have read the entire thing, not because I agree with everything he says, which I do (and I thought all those things before I read it anyway) but because it is thoroughly entertaining and funny. Don't even tell me you don't have time to read it, after you post pages and pages on this forum every couple of hours.Yes in a perfect world parents wouldn't need to worry about their kid being swayed by peer pressure, or fantasy fiction, or influenced by any outside sources besides them but you seem to already be a mother so I would really hope that you already understand that this isn't the case.
I have very serious issues with certain facets of the feminist movement. You say the word "feminism" as an all encompassing, generic, all embracing umbrella term. Hence, I don't have a clear idea of which branch of "feminism" you hail from and are espousing. If the movements were unified, it wouldn't matter but if you know as much as you claim to about the feminist movement you know for a fact that it is most certainly not a unified movement. It is a collection of movements, some of which are at odds with one another.
I actually agree with you to a certain extent about Edward and Bella's relationship. I thought it was unhealthy, obsessive and highly dysfunctional. That has nothing to do with my ability to enjoy a book, though. I also don't think it is a "feminist" issue because both main characters, male and female, are equally dysfunctional and are adversely affected. I will also say that you and others who think like you are the ones who romanticized the car thing. I didn't, the book did not either....nor did Bella, the main character.
I also can name several classic novels that featured unhealthy relationships that "impressionable" kids are being assigned to read all across this country. The Great Gatsby, Wuthering Heights, Romeo and Juliet, East of Eden, Gone With the Wind, The Color Purple, The Cider House Rules to name a few.
In the case of younger children, have you read any of "The Diary of a Wimpy Kid" books? Young Greg Heffley is certainly no role model either. Everything he does revolves about his ultimate dream of being BMOC in middle school and he is willing to be mean and sometimes literally even screw over his best friend Rowley to achieve it. This theme repeats itself over and over throughout each book in the series. Those books have sold millions and have been turned into movies. Many parents haven't even read the books. All they know about it is that "Yeah, my kid loves those books."
I hate hypocritical bull. Many parents will lambast Twilight as a crime against girls because of all the potential damage it might cause it but yet let their sons sit in a room for hours on end playing Call of Duty. (btw, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that game for sane, rational, normally well adjusted kids whose parents set boundaries and limits with regards to gameplay. I've played the game on occasion myself. It's fun in moderation. However, I control the xbox in my home because that's my job. I don't need anyone else to do it for me. I don't need anyone to tell me what is or is not appropriate. I sit myself down and play it for myself, watch it for myself or read it for myself and I decide.)
By the way, stop trying to speak for me with the "..and don't tell me..." condescending foolishness. I'm already familiar with that blog as well as others of its ilk. That link has been posted in Twilight threads before. If you had ASKED ME, I wouldn't have said that I don't have time. I honestly don't like those types of "literature" blogs....snarky line by line analysis of a book. I don't find them to be objective.
Jesse wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: " Bella didn't see that as romantic either so I am confused as to why these supposed impressionable young girls would if they are indeed taking their cues from her like you say..."I haven't read Hush Hush, so I wouldn't know. From the context of the book, what is so great about being killed by Patch?
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 have only read the Twilight series by Stephanie Meyer, and was just as obsessed with it as I was with Harry Potter, because I am a love story fanatic. Sadly, though, that was all Twilight ever was to me- a love story I was dying to see the end of. I liked it, I thought it was cute, but it just didn't have the lasting effect on me that Harry Potter did- as Harry Potter stands fine without the love stories- or The Seer and the Sword, or The Lightning Thief(I'm big on YA fiction). I do not, however, hate on it, as I am an aspiring author and I prefer not to criticize in any way that is non-constructive.
I think people dislike Twilight because they dislike Bella, and all the things Bella puts up with. For instance, I personally would find it extremely creepy if a man snuck into my room at night to watch me sleep. People also do not like the way she handled the break up in the second book, because she acted as if someone had died. Don't get me wrong; it is important and encouraged to grieve when someone you love breaks it off with you. But after about a month, you are supposed to be able to start healing and moving on with your life. The fact that Bella not only closed herself off to her friends, but also hung on to her obsession with Edward, leads us to wonder whether she had some sort of mental illness or depression, because that just isn't healthy psychologically. You get frustrated with her and the other characters, because it is obvious that she needs outside help, but no one is willing to admit it or intervene so that she gets it- including her. And then, she starts putting her own life in danger in order to imagine she can hear Edward's voice inside her head. You have to admit, it is very worrisome to see this behavior portrayed as normal and healthy.