Stephenie Meyer

[drexl]

I picked up Twilight while in a book store and read a couple of pages. I put it down like I was on fire. I've had my fair share of conversations with the fangirls(actually fanwomen, all were over 25) and the arguments were awful. 99% of the fanwomen arguments were something like this, "Well, like, at least we're reading." That argument gets used a great deal when it comes to shit books. I got through to a couple of people and they understood my point. My point is just because you're reading doesn't mean what you're reading is good.

I realize that my point may seem subjective and/or possibly arrogant but I'm not meaning it that way. What I'm trying to say is that books like Twilight fall into, in my opinion, a strange phenomenal category. Books like Dan Brown's (as mentioned by another poster) Da Vinci Code, the Harry Potter books (also mentioned), and Twilight seem to blur certain boundaries. I would venture to say that normally when boundaries are overcome there are reasons for celebration and thoughtful reflection (I'm being a bit sarcastic here, but only a bit). The problem, for me, lies with the boundary being broken.

The boundary that has been broken with the afore mentioned books is what I call the "Oh fuck no" boundary. So named because of the response I have after being bombarded by the barrage of fans of said books. The Da Vinci Code breaks the boundary because it gets the religious all pissy and causes arguments about shit that isn't factual (the problem is they are arguing pseudo scientifically). The Potter books break the boundary by making grown men and women act like kids (which isn't bad when your doing so under different circumstances, i.e. playing with your own children). The Twilight series makes women act like teenage girls.

All this is defended by the "At least we're reading," argument which I consider to be a logical fallacy.
The truth of the conclusion of the "At least we're reading," argument may be correct. Yes, you are reading and most would agree that reading is good. The problem is that you are reading something that is not intended for you and the outcome of reading such things make me suffer because you now act like a vampire, dress like a child wizard, or think that the Knights Templar are trying to protect jesus's kin folk.

I take issue with these books for one other reason. The comparisons of good to great works are being compared to this shit. I don't like the Harry Potter is like the Lord of the Rings argument. It makes me want to punch things. That's another topic.

Wow! I just kind of went off. Sorry about that. In short, I don't like the Twilight books very much.

[skankityspence]

Haven't read it, but I'll opine anyway. I'd heard plenty enough to keep me away: the awful gender role thing (not my kink; incidentally, I've often heard it theorized that perhaps the women who really enjoy this sort of story are actually just into sexual submission and wouldn't, in reality, approve of or enjoy a relationship that abrogated their personhood, but it's more okay to sympathize with a character who says my-husband-right-or-wrong than one who says I-get-off-on-being-sexually-dominated, and wouldn't society be better off if we were more open about and tolerant of sexual kinks, really? (not that I necessarily think that's all that's going on with the phenomenon, but it's an interesting point of view)); the fact that the last book was so awful (though apparently less bland) that one of the major book chains made a special exception and started accepting returns of obviously-read books with the return-reason 'I hated it'; a conversation I heard about the movie that included the exchange "The actress who played Bella only had, like, three facial expressions!" "Well, come on, what did she actually need more than three for?"; and the clincher, the one actual line I was given from the book:

"Shh," he shushed.

Do you really need more than line that to form an opinion?

I love you.

-- Sorry for spawning rants and anger - I was just wondering if you guys and gals had the same thoughts as I do.

[Debbie]

Oh, we all love julia! lol

[julia]

About time I got some lovin for offering vehement, verbose opinions on subjects I know nothing about!

[ping2richard]

Stephen King stated, "the real difference is that J Rowling is a terrific writer, and Stephenie Meyer can't write worth a darn. She's not very good. King went on to say that "people are attracted by the stories, by the pace and in the case of Stephenie Meyer, it's very clear that she's writing to a whole generation of girls and opening up kind of a safe joining of love and sex in those books. It's exciting and it's thrilling and it's not particularly threatening because it's not overtly sexual". He further explains, “A lot of the physical side of it is conveyed in things like, the vampire will touch her forearm or run a hand over skin, and she just flushes all hot and cold. And for girls, that’s a shorthand for all the feelings that they’re not ready to deal with yet.

Well it is Stephen's opinion and my opinion is also same.