Twilight
discussion
What age is too young to read this series?
message 101:
by
Rebekka
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Nov 19, 2014 06:21AM
I started reading this series when I was 11. I would not recommend them to anyone younger than that.
reply
|
flag
Okay, for the record, I am under 16 and have read these, I think it depends on maturity. Here's a piece of my Breaking Dawn review. Minor spoilers. (view spoiler) With this all in mind, consider if you think you or your kid is mature enough.
Age doesn't matter. Maturity does. If the person is mature enough to read this book, then they should read it.
Alicia wrote: "Unless the child is relatively mature and level headed or has a parent who will read and discuss the books with the child so they can gain a more realistic perspective, I would wait until high scho..."Yep. I agree with you, "the series is incredibly, unhealthily, obsessive."
Not a book that I would want my daughter to read, not that I would stop them. But I would definitely offer other books with a better perspective on dating and human nature. The I love him and even though he is a vampire and his nature is to kill, he would never hurt me" theme is worrisome.
Gwen wrote: "The I love him and even though he is a vampire and his nature is to kill, he would never hurt me" theme is worrisome.""
Well to be fair, that's a very common theme in any book with a human and vampire. Regardless of intended age demographic. So it would have been hard for SMeyer to write a paranormal romance without that particular theme in mind. Having said that Edward gives me the creeps. And not the "oh you're a vampire" creeps. But actual creeps.
I think the question is what age is too *old*.
I read these books to see if they were appropriate for my kids. I thought they would be fine for my (then) 16-year old. But not for my 12-year old.The problem isn't the first three books. They seemed to be rather typical angsty YA fare (minus the vamps and werewolves). The problem was the last book. SM basically took what was a PG-rated series, and tacked a PG-16 book to the end of it. I don't think that was appropriate, considering some of the readers were supposedly aged nine. Maybe some of it would go over their heads. Maybe there wouldn't have been any issues, depending on the maturity of the reader. But I think SM had a responsibility to keep to her original audience.
Take, for example, The Gateway Chronicles, by K.B. Hoyle. This six book series follows a 13-year old girl and her five friends through a series of adventures in a parallel universe. In the last book, she's 18, marries the king and they consummate their marriage. The thing is, it's completely tastefully done, and absolutely appropriate for the initial target audience of the series. The situation is left to the imagination of the reader, and is very skillfully done. No bruises, no broken beds, no feathers.
SM COULD have done it this way. Instead, she let it all hang out. In fact, I recall in an interview, SM was rather proud of herself that she'd written a horror scene that freaked her publisher out. So just because of the last book, I would bump up the appropriate age of this series to 14 or 15.
Rel8tivity wrote: "I read these books to see if they were appropriate for my kids. I thought they would be fine for my (then) 16-year old. But not for my 12-year old.The problem isn't the first three books. They se..."
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't her original audience around 14 - 17 anyway? I mean, yeah some kids are reading her books at aged 9, but that's not on SMeyer, that's on their parent/s or guardian/s.
Oh god, why am I defending SMeyer?
Wow...3 years and this topic is still going on.....I'm pretty sure the kid has read the book by now :P
Somerandom wrote: "Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't her original audience around 14 - 17 anyway? I mean, yeah some kids are reading her books at aged 9, but that's not on SMeyer, that's on their parent/s or guardian/s."I believe the target age for YA is 13 and above. Given that, obviously once the publisher puts it out there they have no control as to who's reading it. However, they do have a choice as to how the product is marketed. I recall a 4th grade teacher mentioning that the Twilight books were being offered through the Scholastic Book Club. Not appropriate for 4th graders in my opinion.
I think my issue is just that it didn't maintain the same level of maturity throughout. What was the worst that went on in the first three books? A little snogging, some heavy breathing, and some vampire dismemberments that happened off-screen for the most part. I'd consider that PG, maybe PG-13. Maybe I'm a little more conservative, but BD seemed to reach the standard that R-rated movies used to be in the late 70s. Just doesn't seem right to me.
Rel8tivity wrote: "Somerandom wrote: "Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't her original audience around 14 - 17 anyway? I mean, yeah some kids are reading her books at aged 9, but that's not on SMeyer, that's on ..."That's more the publisher, not necessarily the author. An author typically writes for a specific age range. Their publisher then decides who to market the book for. Sometimes they outright ignore what the original audience the author was writing for (for example the Book Thief was written for an adult audience but Americans decided to give it to a YA audience because..... marketing I guess?)
I'm not saying you're wrong, just that it's not all on SMeyer or any author to make sure their books are suitable for kids. And yeah I'm including children's authors in that too. Parents decide what content to allow their children to absorb, not authors. I mean yeah Publishers do. But the marketing is usually out of the author's hands. And before you say that I'm not holding children's authors accountable. Allow me to explain. I think since writing is an art form, an author ought to be allowed to breach any topic they like, without being constrained by their target audience. Well their parental concerns anyway. An author should be allowed to have, for example, homosexual characters in their books, regardless of parental "concerns." They need that freedom to explore those taboo areas in a book specifically for kids, without fear of reprisal from parents wishing to shelter their own kids and everyone else's. Granted I'm not grouping SMeyer in that statement. But I digress.
The Schoolastic Book Club is.....odd tbh. I don't know what their deal is. Some of their books are fantastic, some are clearly chosen for the reading level only (reading level =/= target audience.)
I am 19 and I am sure that at my age the age should be 16 or 17.
Somerandom wrote: "That's more the publisher, not necessarily the author. An author typically writes for a specific age range. Their publisher then decides who to market the book for. Sometimes they outright ignore what the original audience the author was writing for (for example the Book Thief was written for an adult audience but Americans decided to give it to a YA audience because..... marketing I guess?)"I agree with some of your points. You're right, the publisher is going to do what they think will make the most money, not necessarily what the author intended. And yes, an author should be able to write what is best for the story. At the same time, once their market has been established as YA or younger, the author has a responsibility to stay within the bounds of that market.
I believe it was in an Entertainment Weekly interview, where SM said that she wouldn't have allowed her own children to read BD, and wouldn't have been against some kind of warning label. The publisher asked her to tone it down, and she didn't. A little hypocritical, don't you think? And think about it this way. If you have a 9- or 10-year old who's been reading the first three books, how do you think it's going to go over for the parent to say "nope, you can't finish the story, wait until you're older?" I put that responsibility on SM. Once she knew what audience her books were being marketed to, since she hadn't finished the story yet, she should have been mindful of her audience and kept the last book in the same bounds as the first three.
I think the situation with Scholastic Book Club is the same as Little-Brown. They're going to market the way they think will make the most money, even if it means stretching the bounds of the recommended age range. It's a popular book series, they're going to milk it all they can.
Rel8tivity wrote: "Somerandom wrote: "That's more the publisher, not necessarily the author. An author typically writes for a specific age range. Their publisher then decides who to market the book for. Sometimes the..."I don't know. If authors/writers were obligated to abide their younger audience, even though it wasn't their intended market or because of what the publishers/marketers wanted, we wouldn't have got Invader Zim. (Seriously, who thought the author of Johnny the Homicidal Maniac would actually be able to write for very young kids on purpose without pushing the boundaries?!)
Granted I hold much more respect for Jhonen than I do SMeyer. Make of that what you will.
I honestly wouldn't let a 9 or 10 year old even read the first 3 Twilight books. And I'm generally pretty relaxed when it comes to age appropriateness. But then that might be my own prejudice seeping through.
Who's Little Brown?
Eh, I suppose that's true. Sad, but still true.
I think 11 is an okay age for these books. They're not that graphic, I mean it's about "good" vampires and good werewolves who fight the evil ones. Really no sex to speak of except for when Edward and Bella get married and even that's not what you want to call graphic. I know a lot of kids who have read this book and just loved them.
My daughter is 9 and currently a book junky. Her reading (completing several major book series like Harry Potter and The Last Dragon Chronicles). So, I have taken her to the library (better on the pocket book), for children's books ages 7-12. Even though, I think she is mature enough, I still wouldn't let her read the "Twilight Series" until she is well over her 14/15-ish age (minimum). The movie is even rated PG-13, a guideline I will take into consideration when trying to gade the content material.So for now, I'll just pack them up with my "X-men" comic books until then.
Probably not until they are 13 or older. Maybe 12 if they are mature enough.
I think that the appropriate age for someone to read twilight will be 13
Somerandom wrote: "I don't know. If authors/writers were obligated to abide their younger audience, even though it wasn't their intended market or because of what the publishers/marketers wanted, we wouldn't have got Invader Zim. (Seriously, who thought the author of Johnny the Homicidal Maniac would actually be able to write for very young kids on purpose without pushing the boundaries?!)Granted I hold much more respect for Jhonen than I do SMeyer. Make of that what you will..."
I'm afraid I don't know that book, so can't comment.
I think it depends on the writer. I'm of the opinion that if SM had listened to her editor and publisher more, she wouldn't have had quite the mess that Breaking Dawn turned into, let alone something that wasn't suitable for 9 & 10-year olds. She listened to them through the first three books, and they were much tighter, with fewer errors and a better story (in my opinion). They culled out a number of scenes that, while interesting, were fairly extraneous. I'd be willing to bet that the J. Jenks field trip would have been the first to hit the cutting room floor, if SM had been listening to anybody while working on BD. I don't know if they'd have been able to rein her in on the impossibaby thing, but maybe the pedo-imprinting would have given way to some conflict resolution and character development. Fairly certain that if she wanted to keep the demon child storyline, they'd have muted the graphic descriptions and horrific childbirth.
I think artistic freedom is great if the author is experienced in their art form. But this was SM's first rodeo, and I think the inexperience showed in the last book.
Little-Brown is SM's publisher. They're the one's that advised her to keep the story YA and in high school for three books, instead of jumping straight from Twilight to Forever Dawn (precursor to BD) which was her original intent.
Rel8tivity wrote: "Somerandom wrote: "I don't know. If authors/writers were obligated to abide their younger audience, even though it wasn't their intended market or because of what the publishers/marketers wanted, w..."Oh whoops, I often take for granted that internet "common knowledge" always translates to real life common knowledge. My apologies.
Invader Zim (written by Johnny the Homicidal Maniac author Jhonen Vasquez) was a cartoon TV show about an inept and obnoxious alien, who was sent to take over the world (in reality his commanders just sent him on a fool's errand to get him out of the way.) It was aimed, for whatever reason, at a fairly young audience.
However it picked up an older audience. Mainly consisting of older teenagers and even some adults. Most likely because of it's rather dark, subversive and surreal sense of humor and the occasional philosophical reference/musings. Conversely it did somewhat poorly with it's original demographic. So it was therefore cancelled a few years ago, only after a season or two. But it still maintains a rather strong cult following even to this day. And yes, I am an Invader Zim fan lol.
I used it as an example because of it's history of poor marketing decisions, which imo chose the wrong demographic to market to (which I blame on the people who thought Vasquez could write for young children without his signature dark artistic choices!)
I look at it like a talented writer being constrained by the intended demographic with the result being wasted potential.
Maybe I'm remembering it incorrectly, or perhaps I was alarmingly desensitized as a youngster, but I didn't even bat an eyelid at the childbirth scene. But then I grew up on an unhealthy diet of Beavis and Butthead and Ren and Stimpy, so that's probably why.
"I think artistic freedom is great if the author is experienced in their art form. But this was SM's first rodeo, and I think the inexperience showed in the last book."
IMO her inexperience reared it's head in all the books, particularly the first. Which was understandable, to be sure. Having said that, I did look up Midnight Sun out of curiosity surrounding the "leaking controversy." I thought she improved a lot and I kind of liked it. I thought Shiny Ed's perspective was a hell of lot more interesting (if still a little cliche) than Jelly Belly's.
But I ultimately agree with you. An experienced author can use their artistic freedom to great effect. Whereas SMeyer, despite her BA in English, is not experienced enough to be given that freedom.
Oh! For some reason my brain instantly went to thoughts of Charlie Brown from Peanuts. Haha!
Yeah she should have listened to them. But eh. What are you gonna do?
i guess 10... I have read them when i was 12 and I loved them!
Somerandom wrote: "Oh whoops, I often take for granted that internet "common knowledge" always translates to real life common knowledge. My apologies.Invader Zim (written by Johnny the Homicidal Maniac author Jhonen Vasquez) was a cartoon TV show about an inept and obnoxious alien, ..."
Ah, thanks I see what you mean. The author shouldn't suffer or be constrained for the poor marketing decisions of their publisher. I do agree with that, but it's a slightly different situation between Vasquez and SMeyer. He created his work, and stayed within the audience for which he originally intended. SMeyer started her work, continued it for the audience for whom her publisher wanted to target, but then changed the level of the subject matter, higher than that of her original target audience.
"Maybe I'm remembering it incorrectly, or perhaps I was alarmingly desensitized as a youngster, but I didn't even bat an eyelid at the childbirth scene. But then I grew up on an unhealthy diet of Beavis and Butthead and Ren and Stimpy, so that's probably why."
It could also be that I'm overly sensitive. My family watches lots of those cop shows and I always have to leave the room when the serial killer starts torturing their victim. I have some distinct mental images from BD: one is a sickening crunch as the demonbaby severs Bella's spine and her legs go limp as a marionette. The second is the metallic ripping sound as Edward performs the C-section with his teeth. Bella screaming in agony. Sounds of blood dripping on the floor. Pretty graphic stuff, even for an audience of 12 or 13.
"IMO her inexperience reared it's head in all the books, particularly the first. Which was understandable, to be sure."
LOL, true, I didn't mean that the first three books were great lit, but they were entertaining enough I could let slide some of the crappiness. SMeyer definitely could have used the guidance of her editor, and it seems fairly obvious that she didn't take their advice on the last book. She fought for the right to exercise her artistic freedom, but what a crapfest she made with that freedom.
Rel8tivity wrote: "Somerandom wrote: "Oh whoops, I often take for granted that internet "common knowledge" always translates to real life common knowledge. My apologies.Invader Zim (written by Johnny the Homicidal ..."
"He created his work, and stayed within the audience for which he originally intended."
Well that's.......debatable. Although personally I would allow my little nephew to watch it, it can be rather.........dark. Especially the episode, "Dark Harvest" which has risen to infamy levels due to it's content. In essence Zim quite literally steals the organs of all the other children at his school (his cover) only to replace them with zany products (like radiators and game boy like devices) because he is sent to the school nurse and must replace his alien organs before he's discovered. It's wacky and silly, but....I don't know how a 5 year old would react to that. Maybe they'd be fine, maybe it would freak them out. *shrugs*
"It could also be that I'm overly sensitive. My family watches lots of those cop shows and I always have to leave the room when the serial killer starts torturing their victim. I have some distinct mental images from BD: one is a sickening crunch as the demonbaby severs Bella's spine and her legs go limp as a marionette. The second is the metallic ripping sound as Edward performs the C-section with his teeth. Bella screaming in agony. Sounds of blood dripping on the floor. Pretty graphic stuff, even for an audience of 12 or 13."
It's official, I was thoroughly desensitized as a kid (from kids programming no less lol) Sounds like the stuff I used to watch as a small kid. Like this episode of Animals of Farthing Woods, this scene starts out with blood dripping off a spikey shrub, the camera slowly pans up and we realize that three baby mice are impaled on said shrub (and we see EVERYTHING) then the camera cuts to their mother sobbing hysterically over her loss. I was about 6 when I watched this and though I will never forget it, I didn't so much as bat an eyelid. Another was this random cartoon adaptation of the Steadfast Tin Soldier on TV. Normally, when the couple is in the fire, the camera stays on them for about 30 seconds if that. This particular one decided to show us in exquisite detail them burning to death, as they agonizingly inched closer and closer to one and other until they embraced and the flames engulfed them.
Again I saw this at aged 6 since both aired on our Free To Air Children's Channel.
So by the time I reached 12 or 13, I don't think Bella's birth scene would have made me even flinch. Not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing, though. Hmmmmm. =/
"LOL, true, I didn't mean that the first three books were great lit, but they were entertaining enough I could let slide some of the crappiness. SMeyer definitely could have used the guidance of her editor, and it seems fairly obvious that she didn't take their advice on the last book. She fought for the right to exercise her artistic freedom, but what a crapfest she made with that freedom."
I can agree to that. I think my cousin, who happens to be an English Teacher really made me dislike Twilight from the beginning. His constant albeit playful criticism of SMeyer's writing in agonizing detail was the only thing I could think of when I finally did read the book. =(
i let my daughter read it at age 10 and let her watch it at age 11. she absolutely loved it and is totally team Jacob!
Qliver wrote: "i let my daughter read it at age 10 and let her watch it at age 11. she absolutely loved it and is totally team Jacob!"LOL. I couldn't decide which ones I liked the most. This isn't a slam to parents, but I think a lot of parents underestimate their kids,in they think they can't handle things. I think if a kid can handle school twilight is nothing. Lol.
I read the series at nine hahah! I'm twelve now btw
Yep! I totally don't believe in "AGE" appropriate crap when it comes to books and kids. I read a lot of stuff when I was 9 or 10 or whatever. As long as I understood it, I was allowed to read it. I mean yeah, I couldn't read graphic sex stuff, but I could read like easy eye gothics, basically mysteries, and I was reading like 8th or 9th grade level in 3rd grade.
Same! Honestly I couldn't have said that better myself!!!!
I would have to say at least 13, 14 is probably better. My 10 year old daughter wants to read it and I told her not yet
Somerandom wrote: "Well that's.......debatable. Although personally I would allow my little nephew to watch it, it can be rather.........dark. Especially the episode, "Dark Harvest" which has risen to infamy levels due to it's content."I think it all comes down to presentation. How graphic were the scenes, when Zim stole the organs?
Take two video games, for example: Super Mario Smash Brothers and Mortal Kombat. In both games, players go head-to-head, punching, kicking and performing special attacks on each other's character. Yet one game is rated T (for teen) and one is M (for mature). What's the difference? Mortal Kombat shows everything and then some: blood spurting, spines and entrails being ripped out, you name it. What's the worst thing that happens in Smash Brothers? Player gets knocked a little loopy or gets ejected from the stadium.
Not saying that the first three books of Twilight were grade school level, but I saw nothing nearly as graphic in them as I saw in the last book.
Of course, everybody's experience is different, and some people will have a different level of tolerance than others. I may be oversensitive and you may be desensitized. That's why films have a rating system, so parents have a gauge of what they can reasonably expect to see in a film, and make an appropriate judgement. Books don't have the same kind of rating system as films, but since the films were rated PG-13, I figure the books fall within that scope as well. I think it was telling of the last book's maturity level, that they had to edit out a lot of material to keep the last film from getting an R-rating.
Sorry your cousin tainted the story for you. I actually did enjoy the Midnight Sun offering, and found the first three books fairly entertaining after that.
Rel8tivity wrote: "Somerandom wrote: "Well that's.......debatable. Although personally I would allow my little nephew to watch it, it can be rather.........dark. Especially the episode, "Dark Harvest" which has risen..."How graphic? Idk, about as graphic as the violence in PowerPuff Girls lol. Which was actually pretty violent in hindsight.
Super Smash is rated teen? Is that like a PG-13?
Sorry, it's just that we don't have that rating where I'm from, in any medium. So I'm just trying to understand. Anyway, it's rated PG where I live, so we still give it to kids, just with a bit of a "perhaps you should watch the tykes?" message for parents.
So I guess our level of acceptable violence in most mediums are slightly more lenient than America's. Which is odd because our game rating system is far more strict than America's but far more lenient in other mediums. Weird.
But I see what you're getting at. The concept of Dark Harvest sort of plays out like it would in an average Grimm adventures of Billy and Mandy episode. I mean it's not outright gruesome or anything, it's more like crazy violent shenanigans. So, I guess in both our rating systems it would be on the milder side. Not sure what America would rate it but we wouldn't exactly give it higher than a PG rating.
"I think it was telling of the last book's maturity level, that they had to edit out a lot of material to keep the last film from getting an R-rating."
Fair enough. To be honest though, the American R rating is a little confusing for me. See the majority of your R rated movies often fall into M and MA 15+ rated movies here. Sometimes even PG rated movies would get an R rating in America. And it's actually not that common to have an American R rated movie be rated what we call an R in Australia. For example we rate the Move Planes Trains and Automobiles as an M (PG 13) because of what we call "moderate course language" but in America, as is my understanding, it's rated R because of a few "fucks" so to speak.
So I'm not entirely sure I can fully contextualize your editing comment properly. Because to an outsider like myself, your movie and TV ratings seem far more harsh. Sorry.
Eh it's okay. My cousin ultimately helped me to understand like Shakespeare, Oscar Wilde and Chaucer better, if only for their dirty jokes. So I'd say it wasn't a bad compromise.
Midnight Sun was likable, but that could be because Eddikins kind of reminded me of Spike from Buffy or even a slightly less intimidating Eric from True Blood (damn both them blokes are gorgeous big hunks of spunk. Lol!)
Somerandom wrote: "Rel8tivity wrote: "Somerandom wrote: "Well that's.......debatable. Although personally I would allow my little nephew to watch it, it can be rather.........dark. Especially the episode, "Dark Harve..."Okay, so while conceptually violent, in execution pretty inocuous. That's what I see of the violence in Smash Brothers. Hence my thought that, if she wanted to, SMeyer could have presented the concepts without going into the gory detail (pun intended).
Yeah, I think Teen would be about PG-13. And you're right, it all still comes down to the parents paying attention to what the kids are doing. If the kids are doing something I don't approve of, it's on me to do something about that.
That's one thing I hadn't thought of: the cultural influence everybody brings to the experience. I've often thought the values that sway American cinema ratings is rather skewed. They allow killings and violence galore in PG-13 movies. But show a little skin? A couple in bed together? Whoop, rated R. Maybe that's indicative of the gun culture we have here. Guns are okay (they make youth models, for god's sake) but sex is not.
Re: the editing. That was more of a comment on SMeyer going off the reservation in the last book. There seem to be more errors in the last book, which make me think she either didn't work with an editor or didn't listen to them. If she had listened to one, maybe the last book would have been presented more in-line with the first three. I'd still probably hate it, but there'd be less to point fingers at.
Yes, every rating system is whack here. I mean young men and women can go to war, face unspeakable things, do things that remain with them for the rest of their lives at 18 years of age, yet.....they can't buy a drink until they are 21 years old. Is it just me, or does this make no sense at all.I also agree with you, show a little skin in a movie, or have a love scene or two in a book, etc. and people go ballistic. It makes no sense to me, well frankly, none of it makes any sense.
Bonnie wrote: "Yes, every rating system is whack here. I mean young men and women can go to war, face unspeakable things, do things that remain with them for the rest of their lives at 18 years of age, yet.....th..."yes there was this article about a high school who had a class that was reading Nineteen Minutes, by Jodi Picoult and it has an intimate page and parents went ballistic. Those kids are in High School, and they should have already had the health talk, and know better than to take an example from a book. Some kids make rash decisions but this book is a great learning lesson about school massacres. I was mortified by the parents response to reading the book.
I read all the books at the age of thirteen and didn't find anything inappropriate(maybe that's just because I was too young to understand certain things but it's ok...)
13, ever heard of PG-13 movies? yeah you have.... so there ya go
Rel8tivity wrote: "Somerandom wrote: "Rel8tivity wrote: "Somerandom wrote: "Well that's.......debatable. Although personally I would allow my little nephew to watch it, it can be rather.........dark. Especially the e..."Ehh well again depends on the kid. I mean I could watch characters burning or bleeding to death as a little one. But my nephew, such a gentle little soul, probably would be freaked out by the Smash Brothers lol. Could SMeyer tone down her baby scenes? Yes.
But you're right cultural influence does make an impact. I was used to the European stuff by the age of 9 and watching Adult Swim by age 10 or 11 (so I'm probably not a good barometer of what's appropriate for the rugrats lol) so the scene wasn't graphic for me. Like at all. Can't speak for all teenagers but I never heard any sort of uproar or collective "eww" over it. And I know a lot of girls who read it very young.
Idk, maybe they were all just distracted by Eddie's sparklyness? lol
Yeah, I don't get your Cinema's priorities. American media and TV/Movies seem to be almost indifferent to depictions of violence, but highly sensitive (certainly more so than Europe and even Australia) to sex and swear words. I don't get it.
Ahh I see now. To me it seemed like she never listened to him in the first place. Her word choice, for example, was at best clumsy and at worse unimaginative. But that's just my opinion. I agree with you, she should have heeded the editor's advice a lot more.
Lisa wrote: "I think that 10 and 11 is too young, but each kid needs to be viewed individualy in determining if they are ready to read Twilight. I would not be letting my children read these books until they w..."
I read it when I was 11, and personally I think it depends on how mature the child is.
I read it when I was 11, and personally I think it depends on how mature the child is.
I'm 11 I read them. They were great, but it does matter on maturity.
Olivia wrote: "Benie wrote: "I'm 11 I read them. They were great, but it does matter on maturity."i think that all twi books, is made for older kids, and not for any other younger kids to read from. cause they ..."
I understand what you mean..
{S}~ {I} ~{E} ~{R}~ {R}~{A} wrote: "It depends on the maturity level"Sierra, is absolutely right. :D
I think if a kid is mature enough and intelligent enough its fine to read, heck I've read stuff that was deemed "inappropriate" for my age group all the time and it was fine. If it was something I couldn't understand either my mom or sister would help me out with it. If it was really too "deep" for me, my mom would say well put it up till you're a little older. No problem. And as for twilight, good grief! theres like one sex scene and it wasn't even much of a one at that, and the violence was very mild. If a 10 year old can understand it I say go for it
yeah or if like a 16 year old is the emotional level of say an 8 year old, then how can a person say let a 16 year old read it, if you get my meaning. it does depend on the maturity level.
Olivia wrote: "yeah that would be kind of true there. here is something I am wondering about. if SM made those books there, for all the older kids and other people, to read from how does younger kids, find a book like Twilight to read from?" Benie wrote: My sister read the series but she borrowed it from the library, I bought the whole series. Maybe "children" get it because it's something they want to read.
Yes, I think its the parents that are uptight about stuff. The kids don't get affected or upset or good lord, traumatized by these books. they get all upset and stuff when the parents start making a scene. I thank God everyday for my mom. She let me read books for older people cuz she knew the ones for my age bored the heck out of me.
Of course she wouldnt have let me read something like fifty shades of gray but I feel she would have let me read twilight. I used to read easy eye gothics when I was young.
I haven't read fifty shades either. Almost everyone I know has but that kind of stuff doesnt interest me at all. sm, bondage and all that stuff is just nasty.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Twilight (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
Twilight (other topics)Twilight (other topics)
