Twilight
discussion
Do you think the whole Twilight series would be better if...?
If Edward didn't sparkle I mean the plot was nice but I was like....okayyyy then.
I don't know if anybody has read these Books:
,
,
,
,&
, but the girl in these Books, Sophia, IS NOT a Whiny, Mopey girl like Bella. If Stephanie had made Bella stronger and not so whiny and mopey it would've, could've been a BETTER BOOK.
I see everyones point and agree to some degree. However we do have to remember, she never started the book intending on publishing it, and she had the first three done and the fourth almost done, for the first draft that is, by the time the first book came out. She was finishing the editing process for the fourth book I do believe when the first movie came out, which is why in her cameo she did not want her laptop screen shown because that is what she was working on. Or so that is what she said in an interview. I believe that the writing did get better as the books came out. And if you watch some of her interviews she does state that being a writer was never very high on her list of jobs, it took number three or four I think she said. Also I never saw Bella as whiny and mopey, to me she was just a shy, quite girl who liked to be alone, take care of herself and others. She didn't want to show any kind of weakness, However when you add that kind of person with being clumsy and then add some supernatural beings wanting to kill her than yeah I can see how her personality can seem a bit different. Plus don't forget, if you read the partial draft of Midnight sun that Stephenie put on her website, then you get a better feeling for the other characters around her and even Edward, because you are reading it with his POV, but get the "hear" the thoughts of everyone he is around and focuses on, since he normally tries to tune them all out.
I mean when Edward left her in New Moon or Eclipse and months went by and she didn't associate with anyone until her Dad requested her to get out the house.Bella did seem mopey there. And the fact she NEVER seemed happy, didn't smile much. She was happy when she was with people that made her happy.
She acted whiny when Edward confronted her that he had to go away.
She was shy and quiet, too, but still......
Teresa wrote: "I mean when Edward left her in New Moon or Eclipse and months went by and she didn't associate with anyone until her Dad requested her to get out the house.Bella did seem mopey there. And the fact..."
I see what you mean, I never really think about that part. I can understand the whole not really smiling unless around someone that makes them smile because that is how I have always been, even before reading these books. But you are right though, she could have done more during the months that Edward was gone.
Christina wrote: "Paige wrote: "I see everyones point and agree to some degree. However we do have to remember, she never started the book intending on publishing it, and she had the first three done and the fourth ..."Emily is her older sister
I think part of the reason for this is that many critics of Twilight are probably not fans of it's genre in the first place. Many of them are not genuine romance readers in general. @Christina, I took the liberty of looking at some of the titles on your "romance shelf".....many of them are not actually romances. The Hunger Games and Divergent are dystopian literature novels w/ a romance subplot.
@Michaela Saying that Twilight would have been better if Bella's existence didn't revolve around one boy takes Twilight out of it's paranormal romance genre. Typical romances don't usually have 6 subplots going on at once. The only paranormal romance author who I've seen that successfully does this (..so far as I'm relatively new to the genre myself...) is JR Ward with her "Black Dagger Brotherhood" series. The interesting thing is that while I happen to think that she juggles all of the different story lines quite successfully, many genuine ROMANCE GENRE readers also criticize her for having so many side stories. They don't like leaving the main characters for a non-romance subplot. Many actually hate it.
If it had demigod and wizards and factions and a storyline and some thought and action and better acting ........................... I could go on forever. Oh and less annoying fans, No offense guys but stop obsessing. And better acting in the movie is what I meant. NO I DID NOT SEE THE MOVIE!!!!!!!! I wouldn't want to either.
Stephenie Meyer was not writing Twilight for all of the writing Nazi's out there. She did it for people who love a fun story. She wasn't planning on having her work torn to pieces by haters just to be re-taped and re-torn.Hating is way out of control right now. If you don't like something then just don't like it and move on with your life (like, I don't know, find something you do like. That sort of makes sense.)
Hating is not constructive nor attractive. In fact it makes us all look a bit like jealous two year olds. that's how attractive it is.
And I just have to ask something; Since when did we rate books off of the movies? like seriously. If I did this for everything I've read, I would go back in time and never have read Percy Jackson because the movie stank like moldy poo.
Now I could keep on going because there is so much more I could say but, like I said, hating is overrated and loved way to hard.
#Twihard
molly wrote: "I just want to throw something out there then leave this topic completely so any arguments coming from my comment will be ignored by me. Argue amongst yourselves.Stephenie Meyer was not writing T..."
So you hate on haters, but say that it's overrated and that haters should grow up. Hypocrite much?
Melodic_May wrote: "molly wrote: "I just want to throw something out there then leave this topic completely so any arguments coming from my comment will be ignored by me. Argue amongst yourselves.Stephenie Meyer was..."
I didn't hate on anyone.
molly wrote: "Melodic_May wrote: "molly wrote: "I just want to throw something out there then leave this topic completely so any arguments coming from my comment will be ignored by me. Argue amongst yourselves...."
It is very strongly implied because you state how you don't like people 'hating' on the series/this book/hating in general. Reality check, if no one hated anything then the world would be imbalanced and a worse place than it is now. Hate/dislike exists for a reason. It is more overrated to want people to 'move on' from the issue they hate than the hatred itself. Let people hate what they want to (in this case, this series/book) and you move on. You don't have to be here and complain about people's differing opinions if you don't like them and wish they don't exist. Be ignorant of it and only go where there's praising and mirroring opinions. Why waste your time trying to tell people to stop hating/disliking a thing that they hate/dislike when people have the right to do what they want? It is still hypocritical. And it certainly doesn't make you out to be the 'bigger person'.
Melodic_May wrote: "molly wrote: "Melodic_May wrote: "molly wrote: "I just want to throw something out there then leave this topic completely so any arguments coming from my comment will be ignored by me. Argue amongs..."I'm not against hating when it comes to important things and everyone is welcome to their own opinion but I'm just tired of reading about twilight in a negative way.
I'm not trying to be 'the bigger person' I'm trying to make it to where people who actually like twilight can click on a topic about twilight and not read about why everyone else hates twilight.
It's obvious we don't agree and that's fine because people are allowed to disagree. I'm done with this argument so whatever you say next, expect no reply. so go ahead and keep calling me a hypocrite because honestly I don't care.
molly wrote: "I'm not against hating when it comes to important things and everyone is welcome to their own opinion but I'm just tired of reading about twilight in a negative way."Then don't come to discussion boards? I don't get why you have to say how you wish people stopped so you'd see less of it, that's rude and an unrealistic want.
"I'm not trying to be 'the bigger person' I'm trying to make it to where people who actually like twilight can click on a topic about twilight and not read about why everyone else hates twilight."
That is still unrealistic and won't happen. Try going into a thread/somewhere else where you know there won't be opposing opinions? It's unfair to those who like to talk about it but have differing opinions because they deserve to be heard and respected, not put down upon because you don't like that they're talking bad about a thing you like, that's childish.
"It's obvious we don't agree and that's fine because people are allowed to disagree. I'm done with this argument so whatever you say next, expect no reply. so go ahead and keep calling me a hypocrite because honestly I don't care. "
Then hopefully you won't go elsewhere and want people to stop posting because you don't like their opposing opinions.
I think the series as a whole would be far better if perhaps the "vampires" could have been more vulnerable, like actually having weaknesses... perhaps bursting into flames when exposed to the sun.Another one would be if Edward had flaws and was not the perfect gentleman or chivalrous knight in shining armour, albeit it is rather known that he was very controlling of the main protagonist. However I do not know how apparent that is for most people, especially young women.
Finally; if only the norms from centuries ago would be eradicated, such as Bella not having sex before marriage and not aborting the fetus. But perhaps that was just a reaction to the more liberal norms of today.
The storyline and character development was pretty good. But it did get quite tedious after reading endless descriptions of how beautiful and flawless EACH vampire Bella came across was. -_-
But there is a lot to learn from these books even if they are badly written. I felt so comfortable at many points reading these books.
Curious to know how many of the commenters who bashed this woman's work have ever experienced creating, finishing, and publishing their own? Isn't it enough to say, "this isn't to my taste..." and explain why, without blasting someone and calling them talentless? Just curious why we all feel we've earned the right to sit so highly in judgment of others' accomplishments? More of a rhetorial question, really, as this tends to happen on every comment/discussion forum I see.
I did really love the series. I got stuck on some of the writing, but I can see a lot of myself as a teenager in Bella. The awkwardness, the feeling undeserving of good things, etc. As an adult, I have some concerns with the portrayal of the relationship between Bella and Edward, but that can lead to some really good conversations between parents and teen girls, both of whom were reading the book-TOGETHER. As far as I'm concerned, any author who gets people, en masse, reading and talking, has done her job.
molly wrote: "Stephenie Meyer was not writing Twilight for all of the writing Nazi's out there. She did it for people who love a fun story. She wasn't planning on having her work torn to pieces by haters just to..."Just my 2 cents, since you won't be back to see this.
You say that SM never wrote Twilight for the writing Nazis. To that I say that's fine, but then she - and her fans - should be prepared for the criticism that comes from putting out work that has errors in it - grammatical as well as logical. Any writer should be prepared for that, as it comes with the territory of being published. If she can't handle it, she shouldn't publish her work.
I wanted a fun story too, but the last book ruined that experience. People need an outlet for their opinions, whether positive or negative. For people like me, who enjoyed the first 3 books and hated the last, the disappointment is so great we need to vent. What I consider thoughtful discussion, you consider hate. Who's to make the distinction?
Wendy wrote: "Curious to know how many of the commenters who bashed this woman's work have ever experienced creating, finishing, and publishing their own? Isn't it enough to say, "this isn't to my taste..." and ..."Really? Really? Your whole way of trying to invalidate criticism is saying that if none of us completed and published a work of fiction then we have no right to critique her?? Why do you come here, because it seems the point of GoodReads was lost on you.
I'm kind of scared to comment on this, but here goes...My biggest problem with the Twilight series was that Meyer, in my opinion, took way too many liberties with the whole vampire thing. I mean I understand she has the right to make changes, but if you're going to completely change all the rules about a supernatural being that people know a lot about, then you need to justify it. If you can't then make up your own supernatural, or just give it up. Meyer changes everything we think we know about vampires and it was too much for me.
Also, I didn't know anything about her saying it was meant to actually be a supernatural thriller. If that's true then I'm sorry, but she failed miserably. This is nothing more than a glorified romance novel. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with romance and I didn't hate the Twilight books, but let's be honest with ourselves and call this what it is. In the end Bella got everything she wanted. Perfect love, a VAMPIRE BABY (another sore spot for me) and no one dies in that epic....battle? at the end.
Like I said I'm really not hating because Twilight isn't the worst thing I've ever read and I enjoyed it, but it's definitely a romance and being classified as such I think Meyer did a fine job of writing a ROMANCE.
Melodic_May wrote: "Wendy wrote: "Curious to know how many of the commenters who bashed this woman's work have ever experienced creating, finishing, and publishing their own? Isn't it enough to say, "this isn't to my ..."I love this reply!
I say the same thing I always say when people make this argument. I'm writing a series, I have been for a couple of years. I invite anyone willing to read and critique, because you know what? It takes years of effort to get to the point of publishing. Those who want well-crafted work will wait. I'm also hesitating over whether to trad publish or ebook publish. The publishing world can be a murky place for the inexperienced, because it's not a tangible system, like it is when you, say, sell jewellery.
But for the people who say Stephenie only wrote twilight for herself? It's naive. Yes, first and foremost you write the story you want, but it's what happens after. Stephenie took her book to agents, to publishers, she made the approach to be commercialised and broke that argument before it could be considered. She then chose to ignore her editors advice and do what she wanted with the work. Editors are not bad people, their job is to make the story a marketable product that the publishers would want to invest money in. But Stephenie was too invested in her story being a certain way, and that's where the poorly written arguments come in, because her editor had no real chance to improve upon the manuscript. That's where the arguments for her poor work come from.
Personally, I think she had a great concept. But very shoddy execution.
I personally didn't like the story or the way it was written. I am not a fan of Stephanie Meyers at all. But the fact remains that everyone here on this forum has read her book; therefore each person critic or otherwise has feed her pockets. I think Stephanie Meyer's didn't set out to have her work torn apart by nonsupporters. I think she wrote them for young adults to get them to read. I personally have a tremendous respect for that- not the characters or the plot of the series just the author's ability to get young adults reading again. The idea of a vampire sparkling in the sun instead of turning to dust really disturbed me that was possibly the scariest thing that happened the whole series in my opinion. I am also not a huge fan of other vampire books that have self-loathing vamps. I think vamps by nature should be vicious reborn and baptised into darkness upon partaking in the blood of the damned. But again what do I know? If it got teens and young adults reading instead of watching the boob tube or cyber stalking each other it deserves some admiration.
Josh wrote: "If it got teens and young adults reading instead of watching the boob tube or cyber stalking each other it deserves some admiration. "I'm a very avid reader, don't know what I'd do with myself if I wasn't reading. But not reading or not liking/wanting to read isn't a bad thing either. It's not admirable that a story got people reading again, all books do that. Not just this series. It's not special in this regard and deserves no admiration when the contents are toxic. That's like saying Beautiful Disaster and its sequel deserves admiration. Fuck. No. Meyer will get admiration when she can take criticism and not feel like it's a personal attack. If one can't handle criticism then one shouldn't be an author, especially if they decide to take it personally and not professionally. And Meyer fails at that.
Although she didn't impressed me with Twilight, I think she still is a good Author that can do better then that, I don't think that twilight can get better if she changes it or re-writes it because I already formed an opinion about it, which is not very good.I think she tried to make a different view over vampire Lore by thinking out of the box but she didn't worked good enough with it. The twilight mistake had been done now and even if it's not a book for my taste apparently it's accepted by little 14 or 15 girls, maybe even older,that can't accept the view over real night walkers so they dream for Emo Hollywood, sparkling Vampires.
Twilight can't be changed anymore now that all of us had already made a view over it, other good while other bad or just acceptable, all we can do it's to hope that she will come up with something grater. With the same "outside the box" thinking but this time hoping she knows how to use it.
Olivia wrote: "Melodic_May wrote: "Josh wrote: "If it got teens and young adults reading instead of watching the boob tube or cyber stalking each other it deserves some admiration. "I'm a very avid reader, don'..."
Ok have you ever tried to write a novel? If so were you on the bestseller list? I think not, or you probably wouldn't be on a website rating the work of others. And I figured more avid readers would not be so critical of someone else's work especially when it inspired so many to read. You obviously read the books. If you didn't like them why didn't you move on to another? I mean if something does inspire your mind then why read it or criticize it in such a harsh way. What the world needs to understand is everything doesn't revolve around them or their little opinions, and no one is hold a gun to your head forcing you to read something you don't like. As I said before I am not a fan; however, so many are her fans she must have gave them something. And as far as not being able to take criticism is concerned every writer in their own way doesn't enjoy their work being picked over and torn apart by critics. Writers spend a good portion of time on their work. So what if they take it a little personal when people are belligerently criticizing and belittling their work. But on the other hand if you're going to write then you need thick skin to be in the business. There will always be at least one person who has to be rather vocal about their opinions especially the bad ones.
Josh wrote: "Olivia wrote: "Melodic_May wrote: "Josh wrote: "If it got teens and young adults reading instead of watching the boob tube or cyber stalking each other it deserves some admiration. "I'm a very av..."
First dude, check my post above, you have an answer from an aspiring writer which contradicts your assumptions. Secondly, many writers want to be critiqued, because they want to improve. Someone explaining their opinion, whichever way it goes, is usually an insight into something you hadn't considered in your work. Only a hack would get upset if the response was less than 100% positive. The smart writer knows you can't please everyone, but you can learn from the points made. It's called constructive criticism for a reason. It's analysis.
And I find, personally, that the more books I read, the more discerning I am. This book doesn't work because of this subplot, that book would be better with a more compassionate main character - it's all the things that flow through your mind when reading because the books you have read that were done well are shaping your opinion for all other books. And that's a sign that a reader is going to become a writer, because they're unsatisfied with how certain books have approached topics, or there's an issue they really care about, and that's the trigger for a storyline.
It's not about getting personal, it's about wanting to disappear into another world, by whatever means. And if a writer isn't careful, they can bring a reader out of the story. And writing is tough, of course it is, it's like lasagne or house-building or something. You go through many drafts hoping to be satisfied with your work, but each draft is another layer of pasta, or filling, and it's only when you've done so many that the lasagne's finished. But all too often nowadays? People are releasing the first draft, the bare bones of the book (the tomato sauce?) and trying to convince readers that they've done all the layers. And the well-read person will notice if they're just getting the sauce instead of the whole lasagne.
This metaphor has left me hungry. Also, your post was a little confusing in it's message (as if the lasagne analogy isn't), I wasn't completely clear if you were for or against any of this stuff, but I thought I'd clear it up for you, at least from a writer's perspective.
Josh wrote: "Ok have you ever tried to write a novel? If so were you on the bestseller list? I think not, or you probably wouldn't be on a website rating the work of others."You posted this to Oliva but I think you mean to direct it to me.
Um, of fuckin course I wouldn't be on a book site geared towards avid readers who like to read/review/recommend/talk about books and be a best seller reviewing other author's work. Seeing as I'm not, I'm free to read and review what I want. Problem?
" And I figured more avid readers would not be so critical of someone else's work especially when it inspired so many to read. "
Avid readers are the opposite of what you think. Just because a book inspired people to read doesn't mean that it's a special book. All books do this.
"If you didn't like them why didn't you move on to another?"
Because I can do whatever the fuck I want. And what I wanted to do was read and review this series. And would you look at that, my rating is gone and GoodReads ate up my review of Twilight. So I will read it all over again to post my review! And that is because I want to and because fuck you, that's why.
"What the world needs to understand is everything doesn't revolve around them or their little opinions, and no one is hold a gun to your head forcing you to read something you don't like."
Why the world? This isn't at all as serious as you put it.
"As I said before I am not a fan; however, so many are her fans she must have gave them something."
She gave them a book. And? Meyer has done nothing that another author hasn't done better.
". And as far as not being able to take criticism is concerned every writer in their own way doesn't enjoy their work being picked over and torn apart by critics."
Cry me a river, build a bridge, and get over it. If they didn't want their work criticized then they should never have published it. She cannot take criticism professionally so she gets no respect nor handled with kid gloves.
"But on the other hand if you're going to write then you need thick skin to be in the business. There will always be at least one person who has to be rather vocal about their opinions especially the bad ones. "
No opinion is a bad one. There's only ignorant and misinformed ones when you talk about 'bad' opinions. So I'll continue to share my opinionated opinion because I have the right to and because I feel that my opinion is right.
Melodic_May wrote: "I'm a very avid reader, don't know what I'd do with myself if I wasn't reading. But not reading or not liking/wanting to read isn't a bad thing either. It's not admirable that a story got people reading again, all books do that. Not just this series. It's not special in this regard and deserves no admiration when the contents are toxic. That's like saying Beautiful Disaster and its sequel deserves admiration. Fuck. No. Meyer will get admiration when she can take criticism and not feel like it's a personal attack. If one can't handle criticism then one shouldn't be an author, especially if they decide to take it personally and not professionally. And Meyer fails at that. Beautiful Disaster's success and popularity kick-started a trend in literature that eventually led to the creation of a new genre (NA).
Mochaspresso wrote: "Melodic_May wrote: "Josh wrote: "If it got teens and young adults reading instead of watching the boob tube or cyber stalking each other it deserves some admiration. "I'm a very avid reader, don'..."
Pardon me if I'm not enthused. NA isn't anything new to me because it's just always been called adult to me *shrugs*.
Melodic_May wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Melodic_May wrote: "Josh wrote: "If it got teens and young adults reading instead of watching the boob tube or cyber stalking each other it deserves some admiration. "I'm a ..."
I'm not enthused by reality television. I'm old enough to remember "Candid Camera" and "That's Incredible" and I'm sure that there are probably shows that pre-date those. It doesn't mean that the more recent incarnations of it haven't had an impact.
Mochaspresso wrote: "I'm not enthused by reality television. I'm old enough to remember "Candid Camera" and "That's Incredible" and I'm sure that there are probably shows that pre-date those. It doesn't mean that the more recent incarnations of it haven't had an impact. "I never said it didn't? It's obvious by the comments on here that it did. BD and this series deserves no admiration just because people read it when previously the last thing they read was mandated. That's my point though. That these books aren't special just because people read them and thus deserves some admiration, some slack because it 'did good'. I don't understand your point.
Melodic_May wrote: "I never said it didn't? It's obvious by the comments on here that it did. BD and this series deserves no admiration just because people read it when previously the last thing they read was mandated. That's my point though. That these books aren't special just because people read them and thus deserves some admiration, some slack because it 'did good'. I don't understand your point. "You said that all books can inspire people to read. This is true and not true at the same time. Any book has the potential to do that but not all books actually do it. Also, not every book sells as many copies as Twilight has. Not every book influences it's genre and jumpstarts trends. Like it or not, Twilight managed to do this. Sales don't equal quality. Everyone knows this. I'm not arguing that at all. However, I am inclined to think that when something manages to sell on that level, maybe one should be willing to reflect on their perceived parameters for what "quality" might entail. You should be willing to consider the possibility that quality may mean different things to different people. Like it or not, self-published books like Beautiful Disaster have impacted the publishing industry in several ways. An aspiring writer may believe that they can write circles around Jamie McGuire but that doesn't mean that you can't learn anything else from her success story. The "quality" in that book may not be in the actual writing. It might be in the story and how it was published and marketed. Maybe others have different values when it comes to how they perceive quality. Some people want luxury when it comes to a quality car. Another person may want fuel economy and not care at all about luxury. Another person may value proven track records and reliability. Another person wants speed and performance. Another person may value size and price.
Would Twilight have been better had......(insert whatever you want here)? I don't think there is a "right answer" to a question like that.
Mochaspresso wrote: "Any book has the potential to do that but not all books actually do it."But that doesn't make it untrue that a book can inspire someone to read. Just because it didn't inspire Joe doesn't mean the same book won't inspire Katie.
"However, I am inclined to think that when something manages to sell on that level, maybe one should be willing to reflect on their perceived parameters for what "quality" might entail."
So quantity doesn't mean quality but when it sells a lot then it does?
"You should be willing to consider the possibility that quality may mean different things to different people."
This was never in question. I'm aware of this as I'm not a willfully ignorant narrow-minded person. This is completely different from what was actually being talked about before you added your thoughts.
" Like it or not, self-published books like Beautiful Disaster have impacted the publishing industry in several ways. "
"Melodic_May wrote:" I never said it didn't?"
"that doesn't mean that you can't learn anything else from her success story. "
I can learn a lot from it. Don't do anything that she did because she did it wrong. (and no, I'm not talking about the book. the book is 10% included in this statement.)
"Would Twilight have been better had......(insert whatever you want here)? I don't think there is a "right answer" to a question like that. "
That's why it's called a discussion, which involved people's opinions on what they would've interjected or taken away that would've made it better to them.
My main point still stands with me, a book can inspire people to read. Toxic books like Beautiful Disaster and mediocre books like this series aren't special and thus don't deserve admiration because people read them and they liked it. All books can inspire people to read after a long time of not reading.
Tell me, do you know of anyone who haven't read in a long while/had no interest in reading till they picked up Twilight? What do you think is the possibility that they'll feed into this new want to read and start reading more than just this series over and over again?
I don't think I would have enjoyed Twilight if I hadn't read it as a sixth grader. At that time, it was one of the most interesting things I had ever read, the first vampire book that ever caught my eye, and what I knew to turn out as a "taboo" at the end (some parents in my small town wouldn't let their kids read Breaking Dawn because sex). If I had read it after reading better writing, like the classics I favor so much or just any of my favorite books now, the experience would have been tainted. Especially after my discovery of the Vampire Chronicles by Anne Rice. I mean, I absolutely adore Interview With a Vampire and The Vampire Lestat.
In a nutshell, I didn't know any better than to just soak up Stephanie Meyer. I read the entire series, as well as The Host, which again, I loved when I read it at age 11. I'm almost scared to go back and read these books, it has potential to ruin all the nostalgia I have towards Meyer's books apparently. Most critical readers have sufficiently discredited her writing...
To get to the point, I'm glad these books get to go down as the guilty pleasure of my late childhood, because getting some good experience is better than missing the opportunity while it lasts.
The only problem I remember having was the obvious fact that if Edward wasn't still prancing around immortal, Jake still would've been born and naturally, Bella would have been with him. I thought Edward was pretentious and empty as a character, and the love between them was completely unrealistic. But the high from finishing the book so fast kept me going.
Oh my gawd! Im fed up wiz TWILIGHT...why are people still after this book? It's reeeally gettin' annoying! :(
Melodic_May wrote: But that doesn't make it untrue that a book can inspire someone to read. Just because it didn't inspire Joe doesn't mean the same book won't inspire Katie. I know that. However, if one particular book reaches a much larger number of people than so many currently others out there, I think it's something to take notice of. I've never been able to sit through a full episode of American Idol or the Jersey Shore but millions apparently can. I can't stand to watch either show but there clearly is something there that attracts millions of others to watch.
It seemed like you are also saying that this can potentially happen with any book and I don't think that is true. If it were, they'd all be "bestsellers". There are reasons why some books sell more than others.
"Tell me, do you know of anyone who haven't read in a long while/had no interest in reading till they picked up Twilight? What do you think is the possibility that they'll feed into this new want to read and start reading more than just this series over and over again?"
Of course! Tons of people on goodreads have posted that such and such popular book is the one that grabbed them and started them reading again after many years. I've also seen it happen first hand among kids with Twilight and many other popular series. The possibility that some will become obsessed and only read the same series over and over again and nothing else is not specific to Twilight at all. In fact, I've encountered far more kids who were that obsessive about Harry Potter and the LOTR books than those obsessed specifically with Twilight. The very behavior that you are attributing to Twilight, I have actually witnessed in far more frequency and intensity with Harry Potter and LOTR than I have with Twilight.
Shikha wrote: "Oh my gawd! Im fed up wiz TWILIGHT...why are people still after this book? It's reeeally gettin' annoying! :("
No one is forcing you to read the posts. You control whatever device you are using to view goodreads and you control your goodreads experience from start to finish. You can unsubscribe from the twilight threads if you are fed up. You can also just choose to ignore them and not click the links for those threads.
That's what I do when I get bored with the games that go on forever and ever.
Mochaspresso wrote: "I know that. However, if one particular book reaches a much larger number of people than so many currently others out there, I think it's something to take notice of. "If a book inspires people to read then it inspires them, the amount of people it inspires does not to me make it any more special than any other inspiring book and thus does not deserve admiration or to be pointed out of a crowd of books, especially when the substance of the book isn't good.
" I've never been able to sit through a full episode of American Idol or the Jersey Shore but millions apparently can. I can't stand to watch either show but there clearly is something there that attracts millions of others to watch"
That doesn't make those shows admirable or good just on the fact that a lot of people enjoy it. A lot of people enjoy cocaine but it's still a bad thing.
"It seemed like you are also saying that this can potentially happen with any book and I don't think that is true. "
really? It seems like it? What gave it away?
"But that doesn't make it untrue that a book can inspire someone to read. Just because it didn't inspire Joe doesn't mean the same book won't inspire Katie. "
"Just because a book inspired people to read doesn't mean that it's a special book. All books do this. "
"It's not admirable that a story got people reading again, all books do that."
" If it were, they'd all be "bestsellers". There are reasons why some books sell more than others."
All books can inspire someone to start reading, to become a avid or casual reader instead of not reading at all. I don't understand your logic that unless it's a best seller or sells a lot of books that it takes a particular book to inspire someone to read, that reading is fun. This isn't a special power only bestseller's have, all books do this. I don't understand how you see it otherwise. It doesn't have to be popular to get someone inspired to start reading, to have a newborn passion for reading, they just have to find it interesting. Which is why this series deserves no admiration for making people read it. Regardless of how I feel on the series, it is a fact that any book can inspire any person to start reading, be it a bestseller or not. Also, not all bestsellers are popular or good. your logic, I don't understand it at all.
Adam wrote: "The only problem I remember having was the obvious fact that if Edward wasn't still prancing around immortal, Jake still would've been born and naturally, Bella would have been with him."If you think about it, that's not exactly true. If Edward did not exist, Bella would be dead, because Edward wouldn't have been there to save her from the van of death. Read the fic Wish Granted by KzintiKiller. It explores that exact scenario. :)
If there was a big fight in the end of Breaking Dawn and a bunch of people/vampires/werewolves died.
Angeline wrote: "If there was a big fight in the end of Breaking Dawn and a bunch of people/vampires/werewolves died."I wish that happened. That was the biggest let down of the series. Its the most important thing in Breaking Dawn and she back out and gives Alice an impossible vision which will continue to infuriate me.
Mochaspresso wrote: "I think part of the reason for this is that many critics of Twilight are probably not fans of it's genre in the first place. Many of them are not genuine romance readers in general. "Why is this another thing you have to be rudely ignorant about?
Melodic_May wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "I think part of the reason for this is that many critics of Twilight are probably not fans of it's genre in the first place. Many of them are not genuine romance readers in ge..."You don't have a lot of "general" romance on your romance shelf either. The vast majority of them are fantasy and paranormals.
Then again, my shelf probably doesn't either. I know that I am rather lazy about adding, shelving, categorizing and documenting things on goodreads. I know that my shelves are not truly reflective or all encompassing of everything that I read, so that is probably true of others on goodreads as well. I shouldn't automatically assume that most other people are much more diligent and organized than I am.
If you thought that comment was rude or ignorant, my apologies.
Mmm maybe it would've been better that it stopped after one book. I mean when I first read it, I really loved it. It was a good book. (Yes I understand Molly on page one. People just seem to go on and on about Twilight. You don't like it? Than don't like it, but there are some really nasty comments out there. Suck them up I say :P )The books after the first one were less interesting for me. I did like the third one, but I can't really remember why. Haha. I know I didn't like the second one because of the Jacob Edward discicion. Bella seems to miss Edward a lot! (Sometimes waay to much) But still she feels sort of attracted to Jacob.
Maybe I would've been more interesting if the vampires had more flaws indeed. And it annoyed me to no end that Bella in the last book is the perfect of the perfect vampires. She can resist the smell of humans and is the strongest vampire yet. While Jasper still has problems with human blood and he has been walking around for some years now.
All in all the series aren't that bad. That's my opinion. :)
Mochaspresso wrote: "You don't have a lot of "general" romance on your romance shelf either. The vast majority of them are fantasy and paranormals."Everything I read has romance in it. Everything. I don't care what other genres are in the book as well, unlike you, but it all has romance in it. In my time on GR I've labeled 135 stories as read. That is practically the only thing I read. If there's no romance in it I'm not interested.
"Then again, my shelf probably doesn't either. I know that I am rather lazy about adding, shelving, categorizing and documenting things on goodreads. I know that my shelves are not truly reflective or all encompassing of everything that I read, so that is probably true of others on goodreads as well. I shouldn't automatically assume that most other people are much more diligent and organized than I am.
If you thought that comment was rude or ignorant, my apologies. "
I don't think you realize how angry that statement made me, or what I had to rewrite because you apologized. The important part of this, however, is not that you didn't think it rude or ignorant, but that you don't see this statement you made as wrong. So it's very hard to accept your apology when you aren't sorry for the right thing. Especially when you don't see it as rude or ignorant, but are sorry that I see it as that way.
It had never been written.
I do like the books, however I do judge a book when a movie is made poorly and the fact of the matter is, the movies themselves were made poorly, that said I think less of Stephenie Meyer for the fact that she had some say in how the movies were made, and I just don't like how they came out. It is a true romance with that vampire / werewolf / triangle of love and I did enjoy reading them, when I read them over though, I see the movie going through my mind and It just makes them mean so much less to me. I don't think the books were poorly written at all, Twilight Saga to me is either a love or hate, you either love it, or you hate it. To me, I loved it until the movies, now, i'm not so sure. I know I did just contradict myself a little bit so please excuse that, honestly if the movies were never made, there is a good chance this franchise could have been better.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
This Man (other topics)
Beautiful Disaster (other topics)
A Shade of Vampire (other topics)
A Shade of Blood (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
Pete's Chicken (other topics)This Man (other topics)
Beautiful Disaster (other topics)
A Shade of Vampire (other topics)
A Shade of Blood (other topics)
More...
The host is better written. Probably helps that it is only one novel, instead of three.