The poster enters the room and states his ideas, people whisper and think, "another one?" and the answer is yes. I thought of this looking at an argument in the comments of Twilight news(I thought it funny it did the "two part" thing so I looked into it) So discuss.
I didn't read the final book, because it stopped being anything close to appealing for me after the first one, but I did read the full synopsis, and I must say the plot of Breaking Dawn sounds ridiculous. The central conflict of the story is quite frankly rather odd, a bit awkward. So I'm interested to see how they pull this off for a film. The fact that it's two parts, just screams money hungry producers. I wouldn't have thought there was enough interesting material for one part. But Harry Potter basically turned the last few chapters of a book into a whole movie. Perhaps Twilight can do the same.
My thoughts on Potter is that it is silly, shouldn't work, and is not the most unique in plot. But it is so bloody well done you can't help but enjoy it. Twilight will be gone in ten years, sorry (well at least I think so )
Hopefully. Hopefully Harry Potter will be too in favor of the next poorly-written fad. Some Potter fans seem to have this really weird superiority over Twilight, especially after what Stephen King said a few years ago by calling Mayer a 'Terrible writer'. I think Potter fans, Twilight fans and King fans should all join hands and realize that their opinions are all equally invalid. I'm getting so sick of the bigotry in books.
Except that King fans have a reason to be superior since King, while his prose is not great, can actually spin a story that is compelling if you're into his sort of stuff. I used to hate the idea of reading Stephen King because I didn't realise that most of his stuff isn't as scary as people think. Harry Potter fans also have a reason to be superior over Twilight for the reasons that King said. All of that said, I think that Twilight and Harry Potter are both pretty terrible. Twilight's just shite. Harry Potter on the other hand is a little too childish, and the movies have gone downhill. Problems with Harry Potter? I MUST BE CRAZY FOR THINKING IT. For one, the magic system doesn't make sense. So far as the magic system works, the magic is in the words, not really in the wizard. I mean, they have to be a wizard for it to work, but they don't actually even need to know what the spell does. Think of Sectumsempra. Harry asks Hermione if she knows what it does. She doesn't, and yet Harry can still use it. You'd think that the incantation would just be a focus for the wizard's will (like the Will and the Word in the Belgariad, et al), or some kind of way to limit what's available to young wizards or something. I mean, Snape invented Sectumsempra, so he'd know what the intended effect was and would then create the incantation around that. But NOOOO. Harry can use it without knowing. I think that's stupid. Spoiler I'm sick of the way that David Yates made it so wizards could turn into smoke and fly. Since they can do that, why would they need brooms? Seriously, though, they couldn't do it in the books. And I'm sick of the fact that at the end of the last movie (Part 2, I mean), Harry didn't even fix Hogwarts before destroying the wand he was supposed to fix his own with and give back to Dumbledore's rotting corpse. Twilight's dumb. It's badly written wish fulfilment, which isn't healthy for the mind. Harry Potter makes you want to BE a wizard, but it doesn't make the mistake of telling the reader they're special and that everyone wants them. Twilight basically does.
I believe my thoughts upon seeing this thread were exactly - "sigh..." I've read both series all the way through and there obviously isn't a better one! There's my personal opinion, your personal opinion and the opinion of the public. I have to say that I prefer Meyer's writing style, but that is because I just happen to prefer it to Rowling's. I'm sure I would have prefered Rowling's style over Meyer's five or so years ago. Rowling's true talent lies in her worldbuilding, her ability to so finely polish and craft her alternate universe that we cannot help but be immersed. Well, I couldn't, anyway. Breaking Dawn screamed out at me: "What!? You expect us to believe that? You really believe you can pull that off?" But it only started screaming at me after I had finished the book, and even then they couldn't penetrate me because I was so encapsulated by the atmosphere, the events, the sensations and feelings that Meyer somehow put into words, I just couldn't care less if the story was a little over the top. And that's what I think of pretty much any similar scenario. I don't care how ludicrous it is, so long as you have an author who does it right. Of course, the same can be said for Harry Potter as well. But seeing as it is aimed more at children and adults who like what children read, it wasn't so much of a surprise that Rowling suddenly told us chocolate frogs could ribbit and jump about. She didn't have to worry as much as Meyer did about making things realistic enough to be believeable. Indeed, Rowling's world was so fantastic because she put in SO MANY different fantastical aspects of her world that it worked. Meyer also put quite a plethora of fantastical ideas into her plots but she made them work too, in her darker world which had to be a little more down-to-earth than the Harry Potter world. So basically, I love them both, but I would sooner read the Twilight books again. This is not because the Twilight books are better, or that Meyer necessarily has done a better job than Rowling, but simply because the plot and the writing style appeals more to me than the world of Hogwarts at the moment. But I wouldn't go comparing them too much, lest we begin to forget that these are simply our personal opinions.
I read about half of the first twilight book before giving up. It was just so terrible. Nothing was happening, it was just constant descriptions of Edward. The books also give off a very bad message. Edward stalks bella, breaks into her house to watch her sleep and that's presented as a healthy relationship. Not to mention that Edward is 117 years old so he's also a pedophile. And I don't even need to read about the whole imprinting thing to know that's weird.
Bella is too old for Edward to be a pedophile. There are lots of books that present unhealthy relationships between fictional characters. If that was a legitimate basis of criticism, we would miss out on some classics of literature. So while Twilight is decidedly not of the calibre of great literature, this is a poor basis for rendering judgment.
I enjoyed the first three or four HP books, but she dragged them out too far for me after that. I still read the fifth book and saw the sixth movie, and I gave the last book a decent try. Who knows, I just might watch the last movie just to end the series. Though I haven't cared about it since the third book. As for Twilight, I have only seen the trailer for the first movie, and that was more than bad enough. Since when do vampires have superpower? That they are stronger than humans I understand, but so strong they can stop a speeding car with one arm? And vampires do not sparkle. Ever. All in all, I'd say Harry Potter is the best one. It's not great by any means, but it's not all bad. To quote the movie Training Day: "It's crap, but it's entertaining crap."
A 17 year old and a 117 year old is pedophilia in my book. But it's not the fact that the relationship is disturbing it's the fact that Meyer and Twilight fans present it as a good thing. And of course it's hardly the only thing wrong with it.
Your book is incorrect. Consulting DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV)): "This disorder is characterized by either intense sexually arousing fantasies, urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child (typically age 13 or younger)." As an aside, DSM is online and is a good resource for writers If only the age difference itself matters, then any romance story line with a vampire is off the table. How about Buffy and Angel, to use a popular example? I don't recall the author presenting a value judgment. It is up to the readers to make that. Again, as with many, many other work of fiction with relationships between characters that are not ideal.
Hah. Yeah, the pedophilia thing is definitely off the table as far as I'm concerned too. He's in a 17 yo's body. You want him with a 60+ yo or something? That would be even weirder. The relationship thing is crappy. Edward sucks and Bella believes that IS what love is. It's classic. But the key thing to remember is that it's what BELLA feels and believes and Meyer didn't say what she felt one way or the other. I thought Twilight was a fairly entertaining fast read (I read the whole series) and I don't see the need to take it so seriously. That's just my opinion though. I was never interested enough in HP to bother with any of it.
Lol--I didn't think of that. Funny. I never read Twilight, so I can't talk about it (though I will anyway). But I've read a feminist critique of the the female MC losing her virginity--and how she was covered in bruises and stuff and wanted to have his baby(?)--it reeked of unhealthy relationship. Granted, it would be completely unfair to come to a conclusion based on a biased feminist critique. I know we can't hold those kind of standards to literature, because we would disqualify a lot of good literature...but I always appreciate it when the modern author seems ,at least, aware of the implications of his/her storyline. As a mother, I love Harry Potter. I am debating whether or not to take my 8 yr. old son to the new movie. I've heard there are a couple scary parts, but he's read the book already. Not so sure how I would feel about my (hypothetical) teenage daughter swooning over Edward... But I haven't read the books....Who knows--maybe after I read them I'll be one out of the hoards of Twilight Moms... Edward! I love you! I really appreciate that Twilight reinvigorated the paranormal romance genre, and that the story idea came from a dream. Plus, I have a special place in my heart for mothers who become successful writers, as I am a single mother and they inspire me. I'm going to go get a Twilight book from the library!
Edward is just as messed up as Bella, too. he gets all emo and suicidal over her, just like she does over him. In any event, I like the Potter books. I thought they were fun. Didn't care for Twilight. But whatever else you say about either of these, both authors accomplished something as storytellers that 99.9% of writers will never come close to. I think the bashing of these, particularly on writers sites, comes about 1) because it is deemed cool to be against things that are popular; and 2) jealousy. Note that I'm not talking about simple dislike or criticism, but the irrational level of bashing these works receive. But I've elaborated on that elsewhere and don't need to go into detail here.
I'm not sure splitting Breaking Dawn into two movies was really necessary. I liked that they did it for Deathly Hallows because there was so much material in books 4-7 that they had to cut. But I thought the Twilight books were adapted well onto film, mostly because the stuff they cut from the books was the unnecessary crap that shouldn't have been there anyway. As far as which one I prefer, Twilight is a fun guilty pleasure/romance series. Harry Potter is a complex fantasy. I prefer the Harry Potter books, but both series serve different purposes.
"Harry Potter is about confronting fears, finding inner strength and doing what is right in the face of adversity. Twilight is about how important it is to have a boyfriend."- Stephen King I hate it when people look down on Potter as something not well-written or childish. Yes, it's YA, and yes, it's not Charles Dickens or anything like that, but people who focus on that are missing the point. Potter's not the best written thing around, but it's encouraged an entire generation of kids, as well as adults, to read and write themselves. That's an achievement that can't be undervalued. I started reading Potter when I was 6 or 7, and it's inspired me to write and read more than I might have if I hadn't read the books.
Well then ephebophilia or whatever it's called. It's still creepy nonetheless. You could argue that he's in a teenagers body but his mind his much older so he should have matured past being attracted to people that age. And Jacob definitely is a pedophile. He falls in love with a baby. And yet it's presented as such a wonderful thing that vampires and werewolves, who hate each other become best friends. If that's not sending a bad message then nothing is. And then there's the constant descriptions of Edward, the flat supporting cast, Jacob becoming a jerk so he can't contend with Edward even though his relationship with Bella would have been much healthier. I see none of these flaws in Harry Potter.
You're assuming the readers are stupid. They're not. Lots of books have bad inter-character relationships. That does not mean they are "sending a message." What are your thoughts on Vladimir Nabokov's classic, Lolita? A brilliant book. The romantic criticism applies to any vampire story, and going back to Dracula, vampire stories often have romantic elements. Edward is 100 or so, and Bella is 17. In Bram Stoker's original classic, Dracula, the count is probably around 400 years old (though his precise age is only hinted at). Meanwhile, Lucy is 19 years old, and I don't think Mina is much older. In Buffy the Vampire slayer, Buffy is a senior in high school when she meets up with Angel (the love interest and vampire) who is a few hundred years old. When you have a vampire that is hundreds of years old, does a difference in age of love interest from 17 or 18 to 22 or 23 make and difference at all? If you're talking about sheer development in terms of age, the same argument you are making could be applied against a 500 year old vampire and a 50 year old women as love interest. So maybe you just don't care for the genre as whole? And Jacob isn't a pedophile either. The hallmark of pedophilia is sexual attraction and fantasy. There is nothing whatsoever to suggest that Jacob was having sexual urges with respect to an infant. You're really stretching things here.
Agree 100%. I didn't mean to imply Edward didn't have problems. As a whole they're both pretty messed up, but to be fair I think most people are and that's part of what makes the series so appealing to so many. Can't disagree with anything else you've said. Not bashing a thing.
Yeah it probably is part of the attraction. I know both men and women from their 20s well into their 40s, and highly educated, who have loved the series of books. I don't think there is anything wrong with it. I read the first one because my teenage daughter wanted to read them. I stopped there because it isn't the sort of series that interests me. My daughter loved them, but even at 14 while she was reading the first book she said to me "Man, Bella is an idiot." So I don't like the insinuation people tend to make (not talking about you, btw) that the people reading the books are idiots who can't think about what they are reading
As you said, people like to bash things out of jealousy and a desire to go against the grain. When it's someone else's book, readers are all idiots who can't think for themselves and are going to go find the most abusive guy EVER because Bella is SO happy, heh. When it's OUR writing, well.... the readers will get us because we're brilliant and stuff. It's an easy thing to grab onto. (Not attacking anyone, not talking about anyone personally, just writers in general).
Okay, let's look at SK's first published book - "Carrie," which is about how it is important to kill people who wronged you.
I'm pretty sure that the whole imprinting thing is that the imprinter only has feelings for and can only be satisfied by the imprintee. And no one in the books is disturbed by this. Bella is more upset that Jacob gives her daughter a nickname. If Meyer wanted to portray the relationships in Twilight as creepy and unhealthy she would have had characters pointing it out. To have everyone see such things as fine suggests that she thinks it's fine. And I'm sure I've seen her saying somewhere how perfect Bella and Edwards relationship is. In any case that issue is just one of many.
