Twilight
discussion
"Well, at least it gets kids reading."
It's not the best excuse, and it does and doesn't apply to people. Now, say if someone REALLY liked Twilight when they're younger, they would probably look up more paranormal books. If someone really liked The Hunger Games, they would look up more dystopian books, right? That would lead them onto roads of better books than Twilight, and maybe a year latter, after reading a lot of better books, they could've realized Twilight was crap, and realize all of the books they read were so much better.
Mochaspresso wrote: "I'd be interested in hearing from more people who have talked to kids about Twilight and what they actually took away from it? Are kids actually emulating the more negative traits and more importa..."Excellent. I agree. Teens really are not trying to be Bella and find an Edward. I have taught high school for 10 years and have had countless Twilight fans but none of them changed their behavior, goals, or values because of this series. People need to have a bit more faith in teens having some sense, because they do for the most part. Have I seen Twilight turn non-readers into readers? You bet. It absolutely was a gateway book to getting them to read more books.
Jocelyn, I am very concerned with your statement that it would be better if kids didn't read at all then read this crappy book. As a teacher, I could not disagree with you more. Any reading is better than none. Even lower Lexile books are better than nothing. You will not find any decent teacher say they would rather kids not read at all than read low quality.
Naiya wrote: "Jeni wrote: "I'm a huge proponent of anything that gets kids reading. Reading opens the mind and flexes the imagination muscles. It causes people to question and explore and search for answers...."
If what you propose is true, then would children ever go against their parents (religious beliefs, political affiliations, etc.)? I don't think you can say that reading a book's perspective on a subject limits you to thinking about that perspective alone. I think when a book examines a subject, it offers both one side and it's opposite. For example, the Hunger Games examines the role of violence in media. Don't you think that Collins's writing has sparked lots of discussions regarding this subject, involving lots of different perspectives?
When I read, I don't just accept the perspective of the author. That's the beauty of books. Within characters and plot, there are questions that we ask ourselves, and we shape our outlook and opinion from those questions.
Catherine 캐서린 wrote: "There are plenty of better options when it comes to encouraging good reading habits. If nothing else, bribe/beat the little brat into submission. Brainwashing works too - I'd know, being Korean a..."clearly your not a parent.
Twilight is my first English novel( I am Chinese), It was so much in hype that I decided to read it, I really thought it was addictive BACK THEN, but after reading more quality books, like the Brontes, Austens.I have come to see this book is really shallow and the writing anemic. I do not read YA paranormal romances anymore. But, this book does gets kids to read.
Twilight was a gateway book for me in terms of reading books about vampires. The fact that it was a love story appealed to me. But when I heard vampire, my interest stopped. Had it not been for Twilight, I wouldnt have read The Sookie Stackhouse novels. Which I LOVE. I've changed my perspective on childrens books since Harry Potter. Because I had given Harry Potter a try, I discovered The Golden Compass. Now, I can't generalize my findings in terms of "just because I've had a positive experience with Twlight everyone will." I find it hard to think of first case senario with reading Twilight. I am an optimist though. Its hard for me personally to draw a negative spin on a story I consider, FINALLY seen thru the eyes of a "Lois Lane" type character. Maybe thats beacuse I relate more to comic book characters when I think of someone with "super human strength and speed".
If you think this is a good read, I feel sorry for you. First off, Stephanie is not a good author in the least, not like David Clement-Davies,Michael Crichton, or Erin Hunter. Secondly, you haven't yet experienced good books, like Origin, the Warriors and Seekers series, Fire Bringer, and LOTS of others that are way better than this. So what if it "gets people reading"? You're saying that as long as they read, they're fine. It's all dandy and good! No. Not at all. This book is teaching girls that they need a man to complete them, and they can not do anything without him. But in Warriors, there are plenty of strong female characters! Pia is a great female protagonist in Origin.
My point is, the content and writing style DOES matter, not the fact that kids are actually reading. It's what they're reading, and then in turn living out.
I think good reading really depends on the reader. I personally loved twilight and harry potter but I have friends who love twilight and hate harry potter and vice versa.
I wonder if anyone has ever conducted a poll of young Twilight saga fans and specifically asked them what messages they got from the novels?
I read books constantly as a kid and then stopped when I got to high school. I read Twilight after I graduated when I was 18 and from there I rediscovered my love for books and haven't stopped since. At first I read similar books but it didn't take me long to branch out.I guess I was older than the 'impressionable' teens we are talking about here but from my personal experience I just find it strange how seriously people take this.
Twilight was easy to read and kept me turning the pages. I wanted to know how it would end. That's pretty much it. 5 years on it just seems like such a non-event. I read a book, and then I read another book. And another book. Some were good, some were bad. Do my reading habits really matter to anyone else?
Mochaspresso wrote: "I wonder if anyone has ever conducted a poll of young Twilight saga fans and specifically asked them what messages they got from the novels?"
That is a BRILLIANT idea.
That is a BRILLIANT idea.
No, I have to disagree with "at least it has children reading". While reading is great, if they are reading something that doesn't do what reading should, well then it is pointless. They can set a standard by what is read, and then only choose from that point forward to read things that don't challenge them. I think children should be challenged.
Not all books spark and hold interest, so the "it gets people reading" is actually a good point. I lost interest in reading after high school. My university campus didn't have a lot of fiction books (in that specific branch) so I just stopped reading (got into TV shows instead).
Twilight reignited my love for reading. I went on to read more paranormal romance and YA. I went on to read classics like Wuthering Heights, Romeo and Juliet, Pride and Prejudice.
The appeal of twilight also extends to wanting to discuss it. Though not all discussion are places of learning, I've been fortunate enough to read a lot of good discussion about the book. I've read a lot of thoughtful analyses and sharing of interpretations.
Mochaspresso wrote: "I wonder if anyone has ever conducted a poll of young Twilight saga fans and specifically asked them what messages they got from the novels?"
Somebody should do this!
Turtle wrote: "If you think this is a good read, I feel sorry for you. First off, Stephanie is not a good author in the least, not like David Clement-Davies,Michael Crichton, or Erin Hunter. Secondly, you haven'..."
I love Michael Crichton, but I know that a lot of people think he's a terrible writer...
I read twilight when I was 19 in the middle of a mid-term examination! Wasn't a fan of the writing style but I just had to know how they'd resolve a human-vampire love story. Spent most of the day I had to study for a paper, in reading it! Didn't take too long before i bought and read the entire saga.Before reading twilight, though, I had already enjoyed classics like, David Copperfield, Oliver Twist, Pride & Prejudice, Robinson Crusoe, The Scarlet Pimpernel, Julius Caesar to name a few.
Like all the wonderful literature mentioned above, I started reading 'Twilight' with an open mind, no judgement, just pure imagination letting me build the story in my head. Although most of the detailed imagery had to be filled up without any descriptions from the author, I quite enjoyed the peek into the vampire world.
Reading for me is like a buffet of wonderful literature laid out for the whole world to enjoy. A multitude of flavours, titillating appetizers, convalescent soups, tantalizing entrees, wholesome goodness, sumptuous desserts....
Not everyone is going to like everything. Who is to say one is better than the other. Sometimes the classics do get heavy. I remember being depressed for ages after reading David Copperfield. It is great to go towards lighter, more predictable literature to perk one's mood.
In fact after a particularly disturbing thriller or fiction ending in child abuse or excessive gore, I like reading Nancy Drew or Enid Blyton (cringe!) to get the sunshine back in my head!
Twilight for me was like chocolate therapy, it calmed my terror before the examination & helped me study better, ended up getting AA on the test!
I fully support the "Well, at least it gets kids reading." view, as it is important to cultivate the habit of reading for any individual. One can travel the world without moving an inch, lounging in pajamas with a lovely book in hand. I truly believe in the power of books to call to the children to experiment for themselves. I know of many young adults who have read "Dracula" after reading twilight, I think that sums it up!
No matter what content a book consists of, it's just a book. People who get upset over books are just weak minded.
Julia wrote: "No matter what content a book consists of, it's just a book. People who get upset over books are just weak minded."I think you're wrong. Books are powerful. They can change a person's view upon the world. A book can be used as a kind of propaganda. It can stir people to fight, or to unite. It can be a large influence upon the world. Have you ever heard of the Communist Manifesto?
Naturally, Twilight will probably not effect society too much. Or at least not nearly to the extent that the Manifesto did.
Anyways, a book is more than just a book. It is an idea, and that is something people should get upset over.
Julia wrote: "No matter what content a book consists of, it's just a book. People who get upset over books are just weak minded."
Hmm... use your powers on me, Ms Jedi?
In any case, I agree with Shae: BOOKS ARE POWERFUL.
And there is such a thing as poor writing. No matter that people say, "Everything's unique. Nothing creative is 'bad' or 'wrong'." everyone sees something they don't like, that they think 'oh god, why does this exist?'
Many people don't like twilight, because in the books, Stephanie Meyers tells instead of shows. Open it up to a random page and start reading. It will probably be a physical description of someone or somewhere.
Then there's the fact that many people either dislike the characters, or think they come off flat.
However back to my original point, people who get upset over books are not weak-minded. They're no less 'minded' than people who get upset over movies, or politics, or fashion, or cars. Getting upset over something shows that you care.
So perhaps you are saying that people should manage their emotions better, and stop whining and throwing a fit like children.
Still, we are humans. If we didn't get upset over some things, then how else can we express our love, hate and frustration? Emotions are part of being a person, and I hope you realize that 'getting upset' is part of that.
Hmm... use your powers on me, Ms Jedi?
In any case, I agree with Shae: BOOKS ARE POWERFUL.
And there is such a thing as poor writing. No matter that people say, "Everything's unique. Nothing creative is 'bad' or 'wrong'." everyone sees something they don't like, that they think 'oh god, why does this exist?'
Many people don't like twilight, because in the books, Stephanie Meyers tells instead of shows. Open it up to a random page and start reading. It will probably be a physical description of someone or somewhere.
Then there's the fact that many people either dislike the characters, or think they come off flat.
However back to my original point, people who get upset over books are not weak-minded. They're no less 'minded' than people who get upset over movies, or politics, or fashion, or cars. Getting upset over something shows that you care.
So perhaps you are saying that people should manage their emotions better, and stop whining and throwing a fit like children.
Still, we are humans. If we didn't get upset over some things, then how else can we express our love, hate and frustration? Emotions are part of being a person, and I hope you realize that 'getting upset' is part of that.
Naiya wrote: "Gerd wrote: "Books are not the problem, the society in which they are written and/or being read is..."
But to play the devil's advocate a bit further, isn't that a bit like saying "guns aren't the problem, but the people shooting them are."
Is the gun Hitler shot himself with good or evil?
I'd like to point out that the gun is a tool. So is a nuclear bomb. And a coffee. And a spoon.
Tools cannot be good or bad. They can be used for one or the other, their intended use can lean one way, but the tools themselves are not good nor evil. They have no thought, and therefore no emotion or intention, and intention above all else makes someone evil.
If a coffee spills on and burns the messiah, is the coffee evil? If a spoon is used to gag and murder someone, do you blame the spoon or the murderer?
Exactly. The murderer. You can't blame the things used by the people. You can blame the people who used them irresponsibly, or wrongly, or with negative intentions.
But to play the devil's advocate a bit further, isn't that a bit like saying "guns aren't the problem, but the people shooting them are."
Is the gun Hitler shot himself with good or evil?
I'd like to point out that the gun is a tool. So is a nuclear bomb. And a coffee. And a spoon.
Tools cannot be good or bad. They can be used for one or the other, their intended use can lean one way, but the tools themselves are not good nor evil. They have no thought, and therefore no emotion or intention, and intention above all else makes someone evil.
If a coffee spills on and burns the messiah, is the coffee evil? If a spoon is used to gag and murder someone, do you blame the spoon or the murderer?
Exactly. The murderer. You can't blame the things used by the people. You can blame the people who used them irresponsibly, or wrongly, or with negative intentions.
Dominique wrote: "Julia wrote: "No matter what content a book consists of, it's just a book. People who get upset over books are just weak minded."Hmm... use your powers on me, Ms Jedi?
In any case, I agree with ..."
I agree with you in that there are unskilled writers that get published and their work is not as challenging, satisfying, moving, or inspiring as others. The problem I think comes when we pass judgement on the people that have written those sub-par books and the people that enjoy them. The point I think Julia was making is that when we condemn or mock those who read and enjoy books written on a lower comprehension level than our own, we are missing the point. In my opinion, all books are good for us. The act of reading in itself is beneficial to our brains, and on top of that the contents can educate, persuade, transport, entertain, move and challenge us. But even if they are trashy and stupid and the author is a twit, so what? Not all books need to be the Communist Manifesto, or Pride & Prejudice, or the Bible. The Twilight series may not be your cup of tea, but they are still worthwhile books that got millions of people reading, some who may not have been too keen on reading before those books. I don't think that's something to scoff at.
Nuran wrote: "That'd be hilarious, their own kids sneaking off to get a copy of twilight, hiding it like it's some kind of drug. I have this image of them wearing black gear and large hoodies, nervously sneaking a copy into their bag, being all secretive and sweating. You think the worst but all it is, is a YA book. Sneaking to read twilight, that's just made my day. "I can see kids doing that to read Harry Potter. I knew of at least one co-worker that thought reading about witches was evil. She didn't allow her kids to read or watch Harry Potter. You can't tell me that it would be easy for a kid to get a book from their school library, keep it in their locker and read it in downtimes at school?
Actually in many cases Twilight is like a gateway book. Most of my relatives have never touched a book after they left high school, and when they saw the movies they gave the book a chance. Most of them still haven't read that many books, but they are at least trying to find books they like.
Unfortunately it didn't work on me since I've been reading a lot of books since I was a child. But it did get me re-interested in writing more stories. I may not like the books, but even I say that the books are good at getting non-readers to read.
Unfortunately it didn't work on me since I've been reading a lot of books since I was a child. But it did get me re-interested in writing more stories. I may not like the books, but even I say that the books are good at getting non-readers to read.
Heidi wrote: " I can see kids doing that to read Harry Potter. I knew of at least one co-worker that thought reading about witches was evil. She didn't allow her kids to read or watch Harry Potter. You can't tell me that it would be easy for a kid to get a book from their school library, keep it in their locker and read it in downtimes at school? "Yeah, but reading it at school isn’t as funny as imagining kids running up to their room and acting all sly, sweating and nervous when they’re at home and making the parents think they’re hiding drugs.”Oh no, mum’s coming hide it under the bed/underwear draw/back of the cupboard/under some floorboard quick!”
Yeah, I heard about the Harry Potter banning, they also tried it with Buffy, and wouldn’t be surprised if they dislike twilight too for religious purposes rather than quality. A few radical churches and ministers or priests were publicly criticising the book when the first HP movie came out. You just know extreme Christians would have really severe punishment, and any child that had an extreme Christian parent will have some balls if they went against them. Locked up in their room, saying Hail Mary Grace, only living on bread and water for a week for just reading either Harry potter or twilight. Not sure if the kids will think it’s worth it.
Yeah. When I had heard that she wouldn't let her kids read or watch the HP books/movies, is it bad my internal dialogue was "OMG, you're one of those crazies!"? The frightening thing was, she seemed so normal. (Or the frightening thing is I am that judgemental) You pick.
It isn’t bad to think she is one of the crazies, but I’m bias on that opinion because I think that too.
IMHO if reading trash novels helps increase reading speed and understanding to the point that someone can understand the contract that they must sign to buy a car, then reading is a good thing.Like all good things, there are some aspects of that good thing that are detrimental. There are works that are dangerous and destructive. Others have offered examples above which I see no sense in repeating. To repeat the wine analogy cited above, one glass of wine at dinner is not the same thing as a bottle of scotch before lunch.
Julia wrote: "No matter what content a book consists of, it's just a book. People who get upset over books are just weak minded."Dunno, I remember a protest about an eBook on Amazon(?) about how to groom children - I would venture as far and say those protests where justified and didn't just come from people who are "weak minded"
Dominique wrote: "Tools cannot be good or bad."
Really?
I'd say if we declare guns to be mere tools, you'd have to show me the good that's to be done with some of them?
I'd say anything that gets people reading is a good thing, IF it then means that these people also move on to other types of books. If they only stay in the same genre and never challenge themselves with harder books, books that broaden their horizon (I don't think I've ever heard anyone claim that Twilight broadened their horizon) then it hasn't really made much difference, in my opinion.
I think "broadening" can happen in a variety of ways that people may be failing to recognize. I know of kids who read "Gilgamesh" because of hip-hop lyrics. "Broadening" can come from anywhere and it's evidenced in an infinite number of ways.I know of kids and adults who went on to read and/or re-read some of the classics that Bella read in the novels. I re-read Wuthering Heights because of Twilight and some discussions of it in Goodreads' Twilight forums. I hated that book but through re-reading and discussing it, I did gain some insightful perspectives on why people regard Heathcliff as a romantic hero. Even if I don't agree with everything that came out of it, I can't say that I'm sorry for re-reading it or discussing it and it was something that came about from reading Twilight.
I know of kids who developed an interest in dystopian literature through Twilight. (They read Twilight and developed a desire to read and then went on to read The Hunger Games and Divergent because they were all popular YA series around the same time.)
Like it or not, I really do think that there is an entire generation of young people who are going to look back on their youth and when asked which book was it that truly sparked their love of reading, they will probably say Harry Potter or Twilight.
What percentage of Twilight readers go on to read War and Peace, Remembrance of Things Past, Ulysses and Gravity's Rainbow? Surely you haven't developed a love of reading until you've read these things? Proper real man's books.
^Proper real man's books^? That sounds a bit elitist to me.I can't imagine anyone jumping straight from Twilight to some of the so-called classics, but some of them might end up there, given time. And if that happens, then Twilight wasn't a complete waste of time.
"Proper real man's books"? I don't know what you're talking about. Everybody knows that all of the TRUE alphas read "The Art of War". hoo-rah. :)
Naiya wrote: "I hear this time to time when people defend popular books against criticism. Think Harry Potter, Twilight, Eragon, etc.Sure, people say, Twilight might have story/content/message/quality issues, ..."
You can't give a novice reader War And Peace or The Republic and expect them to understand it perfectly. Reading is first and foremost a skill and you have to start somewhere.
So yes, I think young adults reading these books is a great start. Eventually I would think that these readers would move towards more difficult books as they mature and develop their skills.
www.puffcritique.blogspot.com
Alex wrote: "Surely you haven't developed a love of reading until you've read these ..."From what I hear regarding Ulysses I can live without a love of reading then. :)
"Well, at least it gets kids reading." - is this and apologise or what? Is this a great novel that will remain many years after? Does it contains methaphysical questions or things connected to our consciouness? Hah, or leave them. Let's talk like they aren't important .. but what's the message of this book? Perhaps we must be proud about the generations we are going to rise and the way we talk about them, we should be the ones to feel miserable about.
My opinion is that anything that gets people reading is good. A book is a medium we use to transfer ideas, or stories, from one place and time to another. There are bad ideas, and bad stories, but once you have READ an idea, you are more open to READ its oposite. Or other ideas. You become accustomed to the fact that books are links through which ideas (and stories) pass. The alternative is what, TV? So, no matter how bad a book is, either in its form or its content, the fact that someone discovers that he/she can access an idea/story by reading, is worth it by itself.
It can't be any worse than letting kids read the bible.
Beth wrote: "Dominique wrote: "Julia wrote: "No matter what content a book consists of, it's just a book. People who get upset over books are just weak minded."
Hmm... use your powers on me, Ms Jedi?
In any c..."
No, not all books need to be memorials to human history, however they don't need to be crap either.
In any case, yes, reading is beneficial to brains. However, like tattoos, its cool in the beginning, not good later. That wasn't a good comparison.
I think you are confusing sub-par books with books written at a different reading level. A book written for a fifth-grader can still be good, however that does not mean it is a poorly written book.
I admit whether they are worthwhile is an opinion, however I wonder how many people read after that?
Hmm... use your powers on me, Ms Jedi?
In any c..."
No, not all books need to be memorials to human history, however they don't need to be crap either.
In any case, yes, reading is beneficial to brains. However, like tattoos, its cool in the beginning, not good later. That wasn't a good comparison.
I think you are confusing sub-par books with books written at a different reading level. A book written for a fifth-grader can still be good, however that does not mean it is a poorly written book.
I admit whether they are worthwhile is an opinion, however I wonder how many people read after that?
Gerd wrote: "Julia wrote: "No matter what content a book consists of, it's just a book. People who get upset over books are just weak minded."
Dunno, I remember a protest about an eBook on Amazon(?) about how ..."
Hello? Hitler committed suicide. Or self-defense. Intimidation of potential predators. A history exhibit. Historical re-enactments, therefore learning. Executing mass-murderers. Fighting bad guys.
Dunno, I remember a protest about an eBook on Amazon(?) about how ..."
Hello? Hitler committed suicide. Or self-defense. Intimidation of potential predators. A history exhibit. Historical re-enactments, therefore learning. Executing mass-murderers. Fighting bad guys.
Paul wrote: "It can't be any worse than letting kids read the bible."If you don't wanna read it as a religion book, read it for your culture, damn .. like you read Lao Tse, Tagore, Siddhartha, Gandhi.
Eirene wrote: "Paul wrote: "It can't be any worse than letting kids read the bible."
If you don't wanna read it as a religion book, read it for your culture, damn .. like you read Lao Tse, Tagore, Siddhartha, Ga..."
I was referring to the violence and the condoning of rape and murder. But yeah, I don't think I want my kid reading about guy circumcising himself... call me kooky.
If you don't wanna read it as a religion book, read it for your culture, damn .. like you read Lao Tse, Tagore, Siddhartha, Ga..."
I was referring to the violence and the condoning of rape and murder. But yeah, I don't think I want my kid reading about guy circumcising himself... call me kooky.
Paul wrote: "Eirene wrote: "Paul wrote: "It can't be any worse than letting kids read the bible."If you don't wanna read it as a religion book, read it for your culture, damn .. like you read Lao Tse, Tagore,..."
Let me call you "desperate housewife". So would you preffer to ban it? What do you think about other commercial books?
And despite this, there is so much violence in the surroundings than reading in a history book about the jewish people and the second idea of our creation - would be nothing
"Desperate housewife"? I seemed to have touched a nerve.
No, I don't believe any book should be banned, nor did hint at it. I do believe that some material is for adults, and the bible is one of them.
Are you seriously comparing our human history with the bible, a book of fables?
No, I don't believe any book should be banned, nor did hint at it. I do believe that some material is for adults, and the bible is one of them.
Are you seriously comparing our human history with the bible, a book of fables?
Let's put it another way. If you bring your child up properly to read books then why are they particularly going to be tempted to read Twilight above anything else and, eh, it's not going to convince them to read more because it will already have done that.If you haven't brought your kid up to read books reading one book with an attached movie franchise is highly unlikely to turn then into avid readers. Possible but it'll probably only happen to 5% Twilight readers at a very generous guess. I've known so many people who loved LOTR or loved Harry Potter or loved whatever and didn't go on to read much else. Even if they do, to cut back to my slightly more cynical point, how many of them are going to go on to read books that are challenging and interesting as opposed to marketed hyped up bestsellers of a similar ilk. How many are just going to search around for an attempt to recreate the Twilight experience, get bored and go do something else?
It's a lovely fantasy of twilight fans that reading Twilight can be beneficial in any way whatsoever but it's simply not the case. Give your children good books and the space to read and explore from a young age and they will grow to love reading - don't just throw hyped up marketed shit at them.
Paul wrote: ""Desperate housewife"? I seemed to have touched a nerve. No, I don't believe any book should be banned, nor did hint at it. I do believe that some material is for adults, and the bible is one of ..."
It seems that you're having some troubles with the desperate women or just the wives - like you don't wanna become one. Patience.
I'm not comparing at all .. but I'm saying - do you really know what actually had happened? Definitely no .. so why aren't you pro reading "the fables" ? Don't you know that they are the main source of the paradigms and metaphors? Otherwise, I think about this like the pro-against Hitler's supporters. The ones that liked Hitler might hid many of the things and shared other ones that the against him didn't want the people know just because for them seemed so wrong. So .. where is then the truth?
I guess it's pretty important to read everything, wherever you want .. because that's the time you can fulfill your knowledge.
Alex wrote: "Let's put it another way. If you bring your child up properly to read books then why are they particularly going to be tempted to read Twilight above anything else and, eh, it's not going to convi..."Alex wrote: "Let's put it another way. If you bring your child up properly to read books then why are they particularly going to be tempted to read Twilight above anything else and, eh, it's not going to convi..."
I must agree with you. I also know many people that have read Lord of the Rings, or The Hobbit or Harry Potter series .. and nothing else. I'm one of those who truly believe that is very important to let everybody to read anything because that's how they can find out what do they really like, what doesn't fit them or what is rising their personality - but despite this, many of them just get stuck with those books like do they mean literature and it's sad for the future generations and not only for them, it's sad for the person itself.
Eirene wrote: "Paul wrote: ""Desperate housewife"? I seemed to have touched a nerve.
No, I don't believe any book should be banned, nor did hint at it. I do believe that some material is for adults, and the bib..."
It seems you're having trouble with the name "Paul"; it's a guy's name. Guy as in a man, not a woman, or even women.
I don't think I needed to be there to know that a man has never walked on water and that snakes don't talk to people.
Fables are great. I love fiction. Once again, I wouldn't let my kid read rape fantasy books or pornographic incest novels but that doesn't mean no else should. And the bible goes way beyond metaphors and paradigms, by the way. You should read it sometime; it's pretty sick stuff.
Again, I never said no one should ever read it; I said it's not for kids. I think we are having an issue with language here.
No, I don't believe any book should be banned, nor did hint at it. I do believe that some material is for adults, and the bib..."
It seems you're having trouble with the name "Paul"; it's a guy's name. Guy as in a man, not a woman, or even women.
I don't think I needed to be there to know that a man has never walked on water and that snakes don't talk to people.
Fables are great. I love fiction. Once again, I wouldn't let my kid read rape fantasy books or pornographic incest novels but that doesn't mean no else should. And the bible goes way beyond metaphors and paradigms, by the way. You should read it sometime; it's pretty sick stuff.
Again, I never said no one should ever read it; I said it's not for kids. I think we are having an issue with language here.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Fire Bringer (other topics)
Twilight (other topics)
Michael Crichton (other topics)
Erin Hunter (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
Origin (other topics)Fire Bringer (other topics)
Twilight (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
David Clement-Davies (other topics)Michael Crichton (other topics)
Erin Hunter (other topics)
I thought so too. Nice post, Mocha! :D