Twilight
discussion
Is Stephenie a bad writer?
Mickey wrote: You're completely right. They're not interested in anything but baiting. I was hoping that one would actually make a case for their assertions, that at least would be a novel experience, but they really don't do anything other than repeat complaints and insult fans. It's not interesting.
Why on earth do you generalize people like this? You scolded Zoran a while ago for doing the same thing....so why the hell are you doing it? How do you know? Do you know every anti-Twilighter personally? Just because people don't share your opinions doesn't mean you have to belittle them and whine about how "boring" it is. If it's boring? Too freaking bad. No one gives a damn but you, and it's not our fault that you're "not interested.
Why on earth do you generalize people like this? You scolded Zoran a while ago for doing the same thing....so why the hell are you doing it? How do you know? Do you know every anti-Twilighter personally? Just because people don't share your opinions doesn't mean you have to belittle them and whine about how "boring" it is. If it's boring? Too freaking bad. No one gives a damn but you, and it's not our fault that you're "not interested.
You need to reread the first page because you are completely wrong. He insulted fans, so he was not "speaking about himself"."
Yes, he was. It was pretty clear that it was what he imagined while reading.
What is this white knight complex with trying to defend grown men from their insulting behavior? Get over it, and mind your own business.
I agree that Zoran's behavior is insulting. I think he did it more out of ignorance than from a desire to insult fans, though. He even complimented you once, didn't he? The way you responded to him was rather harsh, too harsh IMO for what he really deserved.
I have no idea what's the point in you mocking me as the "knight." If I see someone being disrespected or belittled, I get annoyed. And this is a discussion, not some private conversation between you and Zoran.
As for me trying to get him to shut up, on the contrary, I was asking him for some analysis on his statements. That would be the opposite of telling someone to shut up.
You told him: "Wouldn't a better strategy be (if you are curious of other people's opinions) listening instead of talking?"
Listening instead of talking. That sounds like asking someone to shut up to me. And that was more of a general statement....it's hard to miss the change in tone in your responses to people who disagree and agree with you. To those who agree, you're civil towards. To those who disagree, you scold, mock, and belittle for no damn reason I can think of. You act like their reasons for disagreeing are stupid, which I can't really get.
Yes, he was. It was pretty clear that it was what he imagined while reading.
What is this white knight complex with trying to defend grown men from their insulting behavior? Get over it, and mind your own business.
I agree that Zoran's behavior is insulting. I think he did it more out of ignorance than from a desire to insult fans, though. He even complimented you once, didn't he? The way you responded to him was rather harsh, too harsh IMO for what he really deserved.
I have no idea what's the point in you mocking me as the "knight." If I see someone being disrespected or belittled, I get annoyed. And this is a discussion, not some private conversation between you and Zoran.
As for me trying to get him to shut up, on the contrary, I was asking him for some analysis on his statements. That would be the opposite of telling someone to shut up.
You told him: "Wouldn't a better strategy be (if you are curious of other people's opinions) listening instead of talking?"
Listening instead of talking. That sounds like asking someone to shut up to me. And that was more of a general statement....it's hard to miss the change in tone in your responses to people who disagree and agree with you. To those who agree, you're civil towards. To those who disagree, you scold, mock, and belittle for no damn reason I can think of. You act like their reasons for disagreeing are stupid, which I can't really get.
Mickey and Zoran, why don't you two start a new thread and title it "Why do you always disagree with everything I say about Twilight?" That would be awesome LOL...and never-ending.I'm not trying to be a snob - you both have some good points - but I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this is getting pretty ridiculous and pointless.
Mickey wrote: "Uncommon Sellsword wrote: "I'm pretty sure the only reason why people like Twilight (the majority being female young adults) is that Bella is practically the frame for any girl to fit in. She has n..."
Okay! Finally a debate!
I never said there was anything wrong with being young. I did however say that it is very easy for these young audiences to grow attracted to characters like the ones portrayed in the book whether or not they are well written. And I agree with you about older males, at least the ones I know of also indulge themselves in books that seem to be nothing more than a brainless exercise (including myself.) I have no issue with the demographic, that was just a reasoning behind the novel's popularity.
On Bella Swan. Well i never said she was an everyman character and you're right that there is nothing wrong with being one. But unfortunately, she's not an everyman character. I said she was a frame. The only thing she did for the story and that was provide the reader a point of view rather than provide an intake of personality.
As for Edward Cullen, that statement I made about his unconditional love wasn't meant to support my notion on him being a Mary Sue. And I'd have to disagree with you on him not being written as perfect at all. I am aware there are others that claim Edward not to be perfect but if the main focus does than what other evidence do I need? I mean if Stephanie Meyer didn't want him to be perfect than why portray him that way at all?! And I'm ONE HUNDRED PERCENT certain that she didn't intend Bella on being an unreliable narrator as the entire series is written from her point of view so that leaves for an unsettled disclosure. Edward Cullen was being carved as a perfect character from the moment he was introduced in the novel. Yes Bella is indeed in love but when he speaks, acts or even appears he bares no flaws (and don't tell me his vampirism is a flaw.)
When I say she sugarcoats everything, I mean there is nothing about the relationship that offered any realistic complexities such as the difference of opinion or an awkward sense of indirection. Rather, he's a vampire and she's not. What I mean by that is that the only thing that comes out of the relationship that is negative is her dilemma of becoming a vampire and her relationship with another attractive male presence. The relationship is built from pure lust rather than emotional connection. Bella was obsessed with Edward the first time they caught a glimpse of one another. From there, the relationship skyrockets. This book only offered the complexities of circumstance and plot (which is so much easier to write about) rather than delve into real relationship issues like the difference of opinion or the awkwardness of inactivity. Another thing I forgot to mention is the lack of realistic relationship qualities. Examples: like go on a date (Florida doesn't count), banter with one another, or even TALK ABOUT THEIR INTERESTS! So when I say she sugarcoats everything, I mean it in a few ways. The first being their lack of character difference. Being teenagers, relationships are always awkward in many aspects. With Bella and Edward? Their relationship seems to be built off nothing but lust. The story doesn't challenge itself or the readers to delve into their relationship psychologically at all.
"What insecure teen girl wouldn't want to have an Edward Cullen"
With that statement, I apologize if I offended you and I was a bit reluctant to even say it because I knew it was a little offensive.
But I have to say now that you are mixing up my review when you say, "I'm not sure how a favorable reaction to a male lead is a valid criticism"
Okay first off I NEVER said that statement in the context of it being a criticism as my entire argument really only focused on why Twilight was so popular. It was only an ALIBI for the book's popularity among young teen girls. I made that very clear. Mickey, I can see that you aren't stupid AT ALL and are pretty intelligent, so I don't see why you have to manipulate that fact in an attempt to devalue my argument. Perhaps I'm misunderstood and you misread my review?
Okay! Finally a debate!
I never said there was anything wrong with being young. I did however say that it is very easy for these young audiences to grow attracted to characters like the ones portrayed in the book whether or not they are well written. And I agree with you about older males, at least the ones I know of also indulge themselves in books that seem to be nothing more than a brainless exercise (including myself.) I have no issue with the demographic, that was just a reasoning behind the novel's popularity.
On Bella Swan. Well i never said she was an everyman character and you're right that there is nothing wrong with being one. But unfortunately, she's not an everyman character. I said she was a frame. The only thing she did for the story and that was provide the reader a point of view rather than provide an intake of personality.
As for Edward Cullen, that statement I made about his unconditional love wasn't meant to support my notion on him being a Mary Sue. And I'd have to disagree with you on him not being written as perfect at all. I am aware there are others that claim Edward not to be perfect but if the main focus does than what other evidence do I need? I mean if Stephanie Meyer didn't want him to be perfect than why portray him that way at all?! And I'm ONE HUNDRED PERCENT certain that she didn't intend Bella on being an unreliable narrator as the entire series is written from her point of view so that leaves for an unsettled disclosure. Edward Cullen was being carved as a perfect character from the moment he was introduced in the novel. Yes Bella is indeed in love but when he speaks, acts or even appears he bares no flaws (and don't tell me his vampirism is a flaw.)
When I say she sugarcoats everything, I mean there is nothing about the relationship that offered any realistic complexities such as the difference of opinion or an awkward sense of indirection. Rather, he's a vampire and she's not. What I mean by that is that the only thing that comes out of the relationship that is negative is her dilemma of becoming a vampire and her relationship with another attractive male presence. The relationship is built from pure lust rather than emotional connection. Bella was obsessed with Edward the first time they caught a glimpse of one another. From there, the relationship skyrockets. This book only offered the complexities of circumstance and plot (which is so much easier to write about) rather than delve into real relationship issues like the difference of opinion or the awkwardness of inactivity. Another thing I forgot to mention is the lack of realistic relationship qualities. Examples: like go on a date (Florida doesn't count), banter with one another, or even TALK ABOUT THEIR INTERESTS! So when I say she sugarcoats everything, I mean it in a few ways. The first being their lack of character difference. Being teenagers, relationships are always awkward in many aspects. With Bella and Edward? Their relationship seems to be built off nothing but lust. The story doesn't challenge itself or the readers to delve into their relationship psychologically at all.
"What insecure teen girl wouldn't want to have an Edward Cullen"
With that statement, I apologize if I offended you and I was a bit reluctant to even say it because I knew it was a little offensive.
But I have to say now that you are mixing up my review when you say, "I'm not sure how a favorable reaction to a male lead is a valid criticism"
Okay first off I NEVER said that statement in the context of it being a criticism as my entire argument really only focused on why Twilight was so popular. It was only an ALIBI for the book's popularity among young teen girls. I made that very clear. Mickey, I can see that you aren't stupid AT ALL and are pretty intelligent, so I don't see why you have to manipulate that fact in an attempt to devalue my argument. Perhaps I'm misunderstood and you misread my review?
I'm not taking sides, but I don't think it's fair for some of you to be jumping on Mickey while cutting Zoran some slack when they both made basically the same mistake, whether or not Zoran was being "civil" when he made his.
Uncommon Sellsword wrote: "I never said there was anything wrong with being young. I did however say that it is very easy for these young audiences to grow attracted to characters like the ones portrayed in the book whether or not they are well written."Why is it easier for young females to be attracted to characters than older males? I can't help but think you are putting down young female readers (although I disagree that Twilight's fandom is predominately young) or books that are marketed towards young females.
Uncommon Sellsword wrote: "On Bella Swan. Well i never said she was an everyman character and you're right that there is nothing wrong with being one. But unfortunately, she's not an everyman character. I said she was a frame. The only thing she did for the story and that was provide the reader a point of view rather than provide an intake of personality."
I'm saying she's an everyman character. What you're calling a frame would be something like the main character ("you") in the Choose Your Own Adventure stories. She expresses all sorts of preferences and makes all sorts of decisions. One example would be her continued reluctance to accept gifts from Edward or her problem with marriage. These are not universal girl characteristics.
Uncommon Sellsword wrote: "I am aware there are others that claim Edward not to be perfect but if the main focus does than what other evidence do I need? I mean if Stephanie Meyer didn't want him to be perfect than why portray him that way at all?! And I'm ONE HUNDRED PERCENT certain that she didn't intend Bella on being an unreliable narrator as the entire series is written from her point of view so that leaves for an unsettled disclosure. "
First person point of view is obviously going to come into play when discussing other characters. For instance, in Nabokov's Lolita, is Lolita as mesmerizing to every other person in the story as she is to Humbert? Is Charlotte so repulsive? Bree's not captivated by Edward as Bella is. Rosalie was not pining for Edward, nor was Alice. The girls at school thought he was cute, but were not taken with him like Bella is. I don't think Edward is presented as perfect, because his perfection rests entirely in gushy, lovestruck Bella (like you'd expect). We hear about it because it is her POV (much like we hear Humbert gushing over Lolita), but he is not considered perfect by any other character.
Uncommon Sellsword wrote: "there is nothing about the relationship that offered any realistic complexities such as the difference of opinion or an awkward sense of indirection."
I disagree strongly over this issue, because I was impressed with how Meyer dealt with their relationship differences. The on-going vampire debate between the two of them was at a stalemate for a while and then was finally negotiated on. There was an awkwardness when they were discussing sex and trying to figure out how each felt. I thought it was very realistic that they talked about it, as opposed to everything being perfect and cinematic.
Uncommon Sellsword wrote: "The relationship is built from pure lust rather than emotional connection."
Edward was prepared to never have sex with her and commit suicide when she died as a human in his preferred scenario. I don't know how you can call that lust. Bella's chance at quick physical satisfaction was always something that Jacob could offer, not Edward. If she were simply looking to have sex, Jacob would've been a bigger temptation for her.
I think what you might have meant might have been that it was based on physical attraction instead of love? That only works for Bella, though, because Edward wouldn't age like she was going to.
Uncommon Sellsword wrote: "But I have to say now that you are mixing up my review when you say, "I'm not sure how a favorable reaction to a male lead is a valid criticism"
Okay first off I NEVER said that was a criticism. It was only an ALIBI for the book's popularity among young teen girls. I made that very clear. Mickey,...so I don't see why you have to manipulate that fact in an attempt to devalue my argument. Perhaps I'm misunderstood and you misread my review?"
Your whole post is a criticism. Of course I'm going to think you meant it as a criticism, it follows a string of them. Why would it be considered a sign of bad writing that a writer creates a male lead in a romance novel that many women would be attracted to? I'm not manipulating your words. What exactly does an alibi mean in this instance? I notice again the young teen girl distinction and it again seems to me that you may be using this distinction as making some sort of general statement about the readership based on your perception that we are young teen girls. I'm 37. There are a lot of grown women here who are fans.
Haley wrote: "I'm not taking sides, but I don't think it's fair for some of you to be jumping on Mickey while cutting Zoran some slack when they both made basically the same mistake, whether or not Zoran was being "civil" when he made his."Thanks, Haley. Although I don't feel jumped on. Jocelyn is just a ranter. I think everyone can see that. And I don't read Alex's posts.
Although I do find it strange that you can insult a group of people "civilly".
Jocelyn wrote: "Yes, he was. It was pretty clear that it was what he imagined while reading.I agree that Zoran's behavior is insulting. I think he did it more out of ignorance than from a desire to insult fans, though. He even complimented you once, didn't he? The way you responded to him was rather harsh, too harsh IMO for what he really deserved.
"
I'm just gonna jump in here and say, no he most definitely did NOT make that clear (at least to me). His statement came off as insulting. I don't think ignorance is a good excuse (though ignorance is just an assumption of course, who knows? maybe he did want to insult the fans). And I certainly wouldn't try to not hurt his feelings by "being harsh" just because of a compliment.
I can see how Mickey's comments are harsh. But I don't see how Zoran should be excused while Mickey vilified.
No, I don't think that Zoran can be totally excused. I don't think I ever said that.
Maybe I jumped to conclusions too quickly. I thought it was obvious. I didn't think his post carried any hint of malicious intent. It looked to me like he was stating his honest opinion, and he was getting scolded for it.
What I felt was that Mickey was belittling him...to me it didn't look like she was treating him as an equal. Or viewing him as one. A lot of the time it looked like Mickey was trying to "educate" him, which annoyed me. Almost like she was taunting him, by "challenging" him (she actually used that word in one of her posts). The only times when Mickey did not do that was when Zoran finally acknowledged her arguments. I don't think it's fair to treat people who disagree differently from people who agree. That's just my cup of tea.
Maybe I jumped to conclusions too quickly. I thought it was obvious. I didn't think his post carried any hint of malicious intent. It looked to me like he was stating his honest opinion, and he was getting scolded for it.
What I felt was that Mickey was belittling him...to me it didn't look like she was treating him as an equal. Or viewing him as one. A lot of the time it looked like Mickey was trying to "educate" him, which annoyed me. Almost like she was taunting him, by "challenging" him (she actually used that word in one of her posts). The only times when Mickey did not do that was when Zoran finally acknowledged her arguments. I don't think it's fair to treat people who disagree differently from people who agree. That's just my cup of tea.
Jocelyn is just a ranter. I think everyone can see that. And I don't read Alex's posts.
Mickey is someone who thinks everyone who disagrees deserves to be mocked. I think everyone can see that.
TBH Mickey, am I right in this? You view me as someone who is delusional. Someone so caught up and angry and passionate she fails to see anything else. Am I right in that?
And hey, who says ranters can't learn? If I'm a dumbass now, perhaps I won't be one later on, eh?
Mickey is someone who thinks everyone who disagrees deserves to be mocked. I think everyone can see that.
TBH Mickey, am I right in this? You view me as someone who is delusional. Someone so caught up and angry and passionate she fails to see anything else. Am I right in that?
And hey, who says ranters can't learn? If I'm a dumbass now, perhaps I won't be one later on, eh?
Jocelyn wrote: "You view me as someone who is delusional. Someone so caught up and angry and passionate she fails to see anything else. Am I right in that?"It seems I've had this conversation, haven't I? Hmmm. Does Jocelyn have the bad habit of "jumping to conclusions", calling names, and trying to paint a very black version of every conversation I have with others? I think you must be obsessed with me.
Jocelyn, I'm interested in having a conversation with others about bad writing, good writing and Twilight. It's actually slightly interesting because we're approaching it in an Anti defense. I'm not interested in your ranting. It's a waste of my time.
It seems I've had this conversation, haven't I? Hmmm. Does Jocelyn have the bad habit of "jumping to conclusions", calling names, and trying to paint a very black version of every conversation I have with others?
Honestly Mickey, it was just a question. I wasn't jumping to conclusions. That's why I asked.....? Did you interpret it as an accusation? If you took it as another sarcastic joke, no, I did not mean it that way. It was really just a question.
And you called me names as well. You called me a ranter. In another thread you told me that you saw me as someone who was nasty to others, and who made careless mistakes over and over again. You implied that I was an idiot several times by your open disdain of my opinions.
I think you must be obsessed with me.
Perhaps I am, perhaps I am. I'm not sure if simply putting my personal thoughts in response to your comments is really obsessive...but whatever.
Jocelyn, I'm interested in having a conversation with others about bad writing, good writing and Twilight.
Actually, you seem more interested in converting everyone who doesn't like Meyer's writing into someone who does. Maybe that's why you seem to mock and belittle almost every person who disagrees with you. Because that's the problem I have...you've been a major participant in this discussion, and I felt like you were putting down other's opinions instead of acknowledging them. Is that really such a bad thing?
I'm not interested in your ranting. It's a waste of my time.
Yes, it is a waste of your time. That's why you should ignore me, right? (This is not sarcastic, btw.) Honestly Mickey, just block me, okay? Neither of us like having to deal with each other. I won't step into any of your conversations again, I'll concede that it was a bit bold of me to do so. In fact, if you want, I'll delete my old comment responding to your response to Zoran. All right? But I am allowed to respond to your comments if I want, and hopefully I'll be able to do it without being scolded for it. Is that a good deal?
Honestly Mickey, it was just a question. I wasn't jumping to conclusions. That's why I asked.....? Did you interpret it as an accusation? If you took it as another sarcastic joke, no, I did not mean it that way. It was really just a question.
And you called me names as well. You called me a ranter. In another thread you told me that you saw me as someone who was nasty to others, and who made careless mistakes over and over again. You implied that I was an idiot several times by your open disdain of my opinions.
I think you must be obsessed with me.
Perhaps I am, perhaps I am. I'm not sure if simply putting my personal thoughts in response to your comments is really obsessive...but whatever.
Jocelyn, I'm interested in having a conversation with others about bad writing, good writing and Twilight.
Actually, you seem more interested in converting everyone who doesn't like Meyer's writing into someone who does. Maybe that's why you seem to mock and belittle almost every person who disagrees with you. Because that's the problem I have...you've been a major participant in this discussion, and I felt like you were putting down other's opinions instead of acknowledging them. Is that really such a bad thing?
I'm not interested in your ranting. It's a waste of my time.
Yes, it is a waste of your time. That's why you should ignore me, right? (This is not sarcastic, btw.) Honestly Mickey, just block me, okay? Neither of us like having to deal with each other. I won't step into any of your conversations again, I'll concede that it was a bit bold of me to do so. In fact, if you want, I'll delete my old comment responding to your response to Zoran. All right? But I am allowed to respond to your comments if I want, and hopefully I'll be able to do it without being scolded for it. Is that a good deal?
Honestly, she did have some grammatical errors, that should have been caught by her editor. However, what author doesn't. I think for her first book she did well. Look at every author out there, and their first work. It will be a little off in the writing, but the farther they went in the world of novels the better they got. I think she was unfairly judged, and people expected her to be as great a writer as someone like James Patterson.
Jocelyn wrote: " Angie wrote: "I feel about The Hunger Games they way many people feel about Twilight. One man's trash and all that."Oh, good. I despised that book with a passion. Glad I'm not the only one who's..."
You aren't alone. That plagiaristic piece of crap wasn't worth the paper it was printed on. (Hunger Games not Twilight)
Jocelyn wrote: "It seems I've had this conversation, haven't I? Hmmm. Does Jocelyn have the bad habit of "jumping to conclusions", calling names, and trying to paint a very black version of every conversation I ha..."
Jocelyn is the only one acting mature here. I was fooled, with the way Mickey is acting I thought she was at least under twenty. She completely disregards civility and respect for the people she debates with (including myself who I try to show some respect but receive the opposite in return).
I for one find it appalling that Mickey has accused you of being a ranter when you are the only person on this page making valid arguments.
There is far too much drama here. I can go on and on but this forum is just too depressing for me. To be accused of ageism, prejudice and misogyny for calling Twilight badly written is just ludicrous. This is my last post on a Twilight page, it's just too damn exhausting.
Oh yes, and I too disliked The Hunger Games. I thought it was simple-minded, mundane, syrupy and ultimately derivative.
Jocelyn is the only one acting mature here. I was fooled, with the way Mickey is acting I thought she was at least under twenty. She completely disregards civility and respect for the people she debates with (including myself who I try to show some respect but receive the opposite in return).
I for one find it appalling that Mickey has accused you of being a ranter when you are the only person on this page making valid arguments.
There is far too much drama here. I can go on and on but this forum is just too depressing for me. To be accused of ageism, prejudice and misogyny for calling Twilight badly written is just ludicrous. This is my last post on a Twilight page, it's just too damn exhausting.
Oh yes, and I too disliked The Hunger Games. I thought it was simple-minded, mundane, syrupy and ultimately derivative.
Dawn wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: " Angie wrote: "I feel about The Hunger Games they way many people feel about Twilight. One man's trash and all that."
Oh, good. I despised that book with a passion. Glad I'm not th..."
Yay, I feel less lonely now :)
Oh, good. I despised that book with a passion. Glad I'm not th..."
Yay, I feel less lonely now :)
Dawn wrote: "Look at every author out there, and their first work."
Yeah, I guess so. Tolkien's debut novel was The Hobbit, though, and I thought it to be close to perfect. But he's Tolkien, after all.
Yeah, I guess so. Tolkien's debut novel was The Hobbit, though, and I thought it to be close to perfect. But he's Tolkien, after all.
Uncommon Sellsword wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "It seems I've had this conversation, haven't I? Hmmm. Does Jocelyn have the bad habit of "jumping to conclusions", calling names, and trying to paint a very black version of every c..."
Thanks Uncommon Sellsword. :D
Thanks Uncommon Sellsword. :D
Jocelyn wrote: "No, I don't think that Zoran can be totally excused."I just did that because I didn't want to be a Mary Sue :-p
Wow Zoran, you have an impressively calm demeanor after we've been discussing the level of offense right in front of you! I'd be uncomfortable at best.
Hey, if you ARE uncomfortable, sorry for that. If not, good for you. You chill out pretty fast, huh?
Hey, if you ARE uncomfortable, sorry for that. If not, good for you. You chill out pretty fast, huh?
Zoran wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "No, I don't think that Zoran can be totally excused."I just did that because I didn't want to be a Mary Sue :-p"
Nope, that's a minor flaw. You could still be a Mary-Sue/Gary Stu. We need something serious. xD
So, I'm never going to find out why George Eliot's grammar is bad then?
Zoran wrote: "Mickey wrote: "Zoran wrote: "If you have Mary Sue characters"There aren't any Mary Sue characters in Twilight."
Mary Sue is a character that doesn't have major flaws. Edward has no major flaws. ..."
that was hilarious!
Uncommon Sellsword wrote: "There is far too much drama here. I can go on and on but this forum is just too depressing for me. To be accused of ageism, prejudice and misogyny for calling Twilight badly written is just ludicrous. This is my last post on a Twilight page, it's just too damn exhausting."This reminds me a lot of Angie's post on the previous page when she was trying to discuss what she liked about Twilight and her experience with it and people were accusing her of all sorts of things or twisting it so the conclusion was that she was a bad reader. How does it feel to be put on the defensive?
Although I didn't accuse you of ageism, prejudice or misogyny for disliking Twilight, it was your reasons why (and I didn't actually accuse you). You kept mentioning the fan base as young and female as if this proved a point. Zoran did the same thing when he discussed the fan base as being predominantly female as if this were the result of some failing of Twilight, if that makes you feel any better.
All in all, it's too bad you've decided to leave. You were the only one who would actually offer up points for discussion. That's very unusual in an anti.
Jocelyn wrote: "Wow Zoran, you have an impressively calm demeanor after we've been discussing the level of offense right in front of you!"I'll tell you my three secrets of calmness:
- I breathe deaply
- I drink a lot of tea
- I haven't read those posts :-p
Diane wrote: "Zoran wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "No, I don't think that Zoran can be totally excused."I just did that because I didn't want to be a Mary Sue :-p"
Nope, that's a minor flaw. You could still be a Mar..."
Damn. I'll have to troll harder :-p
Dreams don't often have a solid narrative and Twilight came from one of SM's dreams so it's not surprising that the story ended up the way it did.
Compared to most of the authors in the YA genre, she is a bad writer, and I found that she rambled on, giving us unnecessary information such as what Bella had for breakfast. Also, Bella is a rubbish character, I just couldn't like her.
You know what's hilarious? - Mickey's probably actually pretty cool in real life.These internet arguments, they're all such stupid larks!
Zoran wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "Wow Zoran, you have an impressively calm demeanor after we've been discussing the level of offense right in front of you!"
I'll tell you my three secrets of calmness:
- I breathe ..."
LOL Zoran.
Perhaps I'll try them one day! (drinking lots of tea, breathe deeply...)
I'll tell you my three secrets of calmness:
- I breathe ..."
LOL Zoran.
Perhaps I'll try them one day! (drinking lots of tea, breathe deeply...)
Alex wrote: "You know what's hilarious? - Mickey's probably actually pretty cool in real life.
These internet arguments, they're all such stupid larks!"
Yes, Alex! All of humanity who disagree with Mickey are such idiots. We're so unworthy of her attention, aren't we. All arguments who do not agree with Mickey's are all invalid and stupid. /end sarcasm
One who claims to be a book lover, yet refuses to acknowledge that her fellow book lovers have opinions.
(/enter sarcasm again) Amazing. *sighs in awe*
These internet arguments, they're all such stupid larks!"
Yes, Alex! All of humanity who disagree with Mickey are such idiots. We're so unworthy of her attention, aren't we. All arguments who do not agree with Mickey's are all invalid and stupid. /end sarcasm
One who claims to be a book lover, yet refuses to acknowledge that her fellow book lovers have opinions.
(/enter sarcasm again) Amazing. *sighs in awe*
No, I thought that Stephenie Meyer wrote very well, and had a very interesting and well developed idea. I liked the books, but the movies kind of ruined them for me.
Mickey wrote: "This reminds me a lot of Angie's post on the previous page when she was trying to discuss what she liked about Twilight and her experience with it and people were accusing her of all sorts of things or twisting it so the conclusion was that she was a bad reader. How does it feel to be put on the defensive? "
LOL, ikr?
I've seen plenty of anti-fans come and go, a lot of them try to make the fans feel bad or stupid for liking twilight. And hardly anyone bats an eyelash anymore, may it be rudeness or condescension. It's almost as if being rude to a twilight fan or to the fanbase is accepted, normal behavior.
Even though the drama in the thread is getting ridic; it's sort of refreshing to see the tables turned. Though I feel a bit bad for having schadenfreude-feels.
Jocelyn wrote: "To be fair, though, wasn't there a time in which fans tried to make anti-fans feel bad for disliking Twilight?I've been called a retard for disliking Twilight as well.
Whatever, I guess."
Maybe. I recall something like that but I'm not 100% sure that it was here in goodreads. Comments like that have died down though, comments that insult fans haven't at all.
If you compare you'll see lots of outright insults and implied insults to fans, usually as a generalization. That fans don't care about quality, or are stupid, or are "teenage girls who are waiting for their prince" (just the fact that last one is used as an insult angers me).
You hardly see people go "oh so you hate twilight, there must be something wrong with you". If someone does that, you can bet someone will call him/her out on that comment.
Oops, I accidentally deleted my comment.
Ah, whatever.
I think the tide is constantly changing. A while ago it was the anti-Twilighters who were insulted and called names. It's true that it has died down, while the insults to fans haven't died down much, like you said.
Well, looking on the positive side, the accepted behavior of insulting fans/antis will die down sometime in the future. It can't last forever, right? (Dumb thought, I know, I couldn't help but think it.)
Ah, whatever.
I think the tide is constantly changing. A while ago it was the anti-Twilighters who were insulted and called names. It's true that it has died down, while the insults to fans haven't died down much, like you said.
Well, looking on the positive side, the accepted behavior of insulting fans/antis will die down sometime in the future. It can't last forever, right? (Dumb thought, I know, I couldn't help but think it.)
Peace wrote: "just a thought here. why does some ppl dont like her writing of her books that she wrote? without the books that SM wrote, the movie woulnt have been out."You don't know how much of a good thing that is...
Just sayin'.
I think The Twilight series were poorly written, but, no, she's not a bad writer. I read The Host and quite enjoyed it. What makes Twilight bad is the story, character development, and plot. And just like 50 Shades, just because something is popular, doesn't mean it is good. We that in pop culture all the time.
Diane wrote: "I've seen plenty of anti-fans come and go, a lot of them try to make the fans feel bad or stupid for liking twilight. And hardly anyone bats an eyelash anymore, may it be rudeness or condescension. It's almost as if being rude to a twilight fan or to the fanbase is accepted, normal behavior."I've frequently found fan response to outright rudeness mystifying. Do you remember the thread "Assumptions about Twilight Fans" when an anti broke in and asked you to tell him "using literary terms" what you liked about Twilight? The conversation that followed was one of the strangest I've ever seen in terms of fan response. You'd think the thread was intended to be a meeting of his fan club. The only thing that seemed to cause any momentary rift between him and a couple of Twi-fans (and he was actively trying to be insulting to the book and fans) was when he personally called them "superficial b*tches" one night. I remember he even brought the thread back briefly to tell everyone about his e-book.
Usually, no one responds to obvious digs and insults and sometimes you can even tell that the anti is looking for a response and is frustrated at not getting one. It goes back to why people would come to a thread looking to snark on others. Any discussion of the book is definitely not the focus. That's why so many come here that have never read the book, and, in the same vein, why their objections are so similar.
I do think fans need to carve out space for themselves and to shake themselves from this stupor they're in as far as accepting the status quo.
Jocelyn wrote: "I think the tide is constantly changing. A while ago it was the anti-Twilighters who were insulted and called names. It's true that it has died down, while the insults to fans haven't died down much, like you said."I bet you can't name ten threads where there's been an ongoing problem with antis being insulted and called names. In what alternate universe does this version of Goodreads exist? Share some of these examples, because I haven't seen them.
Does anyone else find this statement particularly ridiculous?
Jocelyn wrote: "Yes, Alex! All of humanity who disagree with Mickey are such idiots. We're so unworthy of her attention, aren't we. All arguments who do not agree with Mickey's are all invalid and stupid. /end sarcasmOne who claims to be a book lover, yet refuses to acknowledge that her fellow book lovers have opinions.
(/enter sarcasm again) Amazing. *sighs in awe*"
I wonder what Uncommon Sellsword, who finds Jocelyn so mature, would think about such posts.
S.L.J. wrote: "Dreams don't often have a solid narrative and Twilight came from one of SM's dreams so it's not surprising that the story ended up the way it did."A lot of literature is inspired from dreams. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Stephen King's Misery, Coleridge's Kubla Khan are some that come to mind. What do you think is a more respectable way to get ideas? This is the first that I've heard of someone saying that inspiration from dreams isn't up to par with other ways.
Mickey wrote: "I bet you can't name ten threads where there's been an ongoing problem with antis being insulted and called names. In what alternate universe does this version of Goodreads exist? Share some of these examples, because I haven't seen them.
Does anyone else find this statement particularly ridiculous?"
Oh, seriously Mickey. That statement was civil enough, wasn't it? I don't want to be rude, but this is why I find your behavior offensive. People try to be respectful, and you act like their opinions are complete shit. Ah, whatever.
I'm afraid you misread my post. I never said that there were any ongoing threads with problems of antis being insulted. I said the opposite:
It's true that it has died down, while the insults to fans haven't died down much, like you said."
Should I break it apart? The first part: "It's true that it has died down." By "it" I mean the antis being insulted. The antis being insulted, having died down. Then I went on to say: "while the insults to fans haven't died down much." See, I agree with you. I have no idea what I wrote that provoked such a heavily disdainful response from you, and I'm really curious.
Did you by any chance skim my post, Mickey, instead of actually reading it? If you're actually 37 like you claim, I think you should be mature enough to actually listen to what people have to say, instead of raging on them and twisting their statements to something unrecognizable.
I wonder what Uncommon Sellsword, who finds Jocelyn so mature, would think about such posts.
Obviously, you're trying to make me feel ashamed of that post by implying that Uncommon Sellsword would not think too well of it. The problem is that I never give a shit to what anyone thinks of me, as I've made obvious a thousand times already. I appreciated Uncommon Sellsword's compliment, but that doesn't mean I think "what would he think of me if I wrote this?" every time I post. Please keep that in mind, Mickey--and please stop acting like I give a damn to what anyone thinks of me.
Does anyone else find this statement particularly ridiculous?"
Oh, seriously Mickey. That statement was civil enough, wasn't it? I don't want to be rude, but this is why I find your behavior offensive. People try to be respectful, and you act like their opinions are complete shit. Ah, whatever.
I'm afraid you misread my post. I never said that there were any ongoing threads with problems of antis being insulted. I said the opposite:
It's true that it has died down, while the insults to fans haven't died down much, like you said."
Should I break it apart? The first part: "It's true that it has died down." By "it" I mean the antis being insulted. The antis being insulted, having died down. Then I went on to say: "while the insults to fans haven't died down much." See, I agree with you. I have no idea what I wrote that provoked such a heavily disdainful response from you, and I'm really curious.
Did you by any chance skim my post, Mickey, instead of actually reading it? If you're actually 37 like you claim, I think you should be mature enough to actually listen to what people have to say, instead of raging on them and twisting their statements to something unrecognizable.
I wonder what Uncommon Sellsword, who finds Jocelyn so mature, would think about such posts.
Obviously, you're trying to make me feel ashamed of that post by implying that Uncommon Sellsword would not think too well of it. The problem is that I never give a shit to what anyone thinks of me, as I've made obvious a thousand times already. I appreciated Uncommon Sellsword's compliment, but that doesn't mean I think "what would he think of me if I wrote this?" every time I post. Please keep that in mind, Mickey--and please stop acting like I give a damn to what anyone thinks of me.
Jocelyn wrote: "Oh, seriously Mickey."Maybe Mickey is SM undercover?
Zoran wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "Oh, seriously Mickey."Maybe Mickey is SM undercover?"
No Mickey writes to well to be SM. :)
(It's just a joke. Please don't attack me)
Mickey wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Dreams don't often have a solid narrative and Twilight came from one of SM's dreams so it's not surprising that the story ended up the way it did."A lot of literature is inspired f..."
Those sound more like nightmares. I don't think I've ever had a dream with a beginning middle and end.
Mickey wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Dreams don't often have a solid narrative and Twilight came from one of SM's dreams so it's not surprising that the story ended up the way it did."A lot of literature is inspired f..."
I don't get why you'd have to "dream up" a vampire romance. I mean... there are a lot of those on numerous writing websites. The only thing different Meyer did was slap on a layer of sparkles and pass an abusive relationship as a perfectly normal one. How original... >_>
Dorima wrote: "Mickey wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Dreams don't often have a solid narrative and Twilight came from one of SM's dreams so it's not surprising that the story ended up the way it did."A lot of literatur..."
She was indulging a sexual fantasy. Much the same way that E.L. James did Fifty Shades.
S.L.J. wrote: "Dorima wrote: "Mickey wrote: "S.L.J. wrote: "Dreams don't often have a solid narrative and Twilight came from one of SM's dreams so it's not surprising that the story ended up the way it did."A l..."
And it gets even more original. Yawn.
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...
His overprotectiveness had a lot to do with the story. It's not minor. According to your rules, all of Austen's male leads would be Mary Sues. (If only Darcy had beat Lizzy instead of snub her and be repulsed by her family! If only Wentworth had been a pervert instead of resentful and spiteful over Anne's rejection to flirt with another woman!)