Thread: Twilight - should I keep reading??

The general readership doesn't have a clue what quality writing is, they're just attracted to good ideas. Let's look at Michael Chricton. I can't stand Michael Chricton's actual writing, cause he's a little condescending among other things, but he's got these million-dollar ideas.

What if there was this theme park on an island run by mad, rich geneticists that's secretly a dinosaur zoo, and then people have to run from the t-rex? I love that idea. What if there's this alien ship that they find in the ocean, turns out it's actually a human ship from the future - bummer - but wait! There's some kind of alien artifact in there! Wooooaaaaah, freaky.

Just like The Davinci Code. People just buy it cause it supposedly "casts doubt on the bible" not because of the quality of its story.

Twilight is a girl's fantasy. A superhero, demigod-like guy, who is oh so pretty which we're reminded of approxamitely eight times per sentance, falls in love with the plain jane clutzy outcast newgirl. These are books that should have been b-grade movies, and usually were those too. They should have skipped the book stage.

edit: scratch that. Jurassic Park was an amazing movie, way better than the book.

It's not you. Those books are written awfully and were written for the hormonal teenage girl. I read it just to finish the series and because all my friends were talking about it. The end of the last book is absolutely awful. most books have a slope that peaks and gently drops with this book you just fall off the cliff. The end was ubrupt and not something you want in a book.

Personally, I think its absolute and utter cerap. Its just really bad fanfiction....but if it makes thousands of people happy...perhaps its a good book? Who knows the definition?
My advice is... read Jane Eyre. You'll feel better for it.

If I might. Close the novel. Go pick up one of these:

American Gods (Neil Gaiman), Anansi Boys (Neil Gaiman), Crooked Little Vein (Warren Ellis), Snow Crash (Neil Stephenson), Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell (Susanna Clark)

Those are really fun reads. Or, at least, I thought they were.

Twilight is a girl's fantasy. A superhero, demigod-like guy, who is oh so pretty which we're reminded of approxamitely eight times per sentance, falls in love with the plain jane clutzy outcast newgirl. These are books that should have been b-grade movies, and usually were those too. They should have skipped the book stage.

And kudos to that.

Should I keep reading?

NO!

Well, only if you’re willing to ignore the lousy writing and skip over the dangerous tripe the author is selling to misguided teenage girls, not to mention setting female rights and laws back into the dark ages. Tell me, after all work to get laws passed, why on earth would anyone (a woman and mother, no less) tell young girls that a guy stalking them isn’t really stalking, but love? And sexual assault. And don’t even get me started about lying to your family, wanting to die, wanting to kill, suicidal tendencies, mental abuse, etc., etc., etc.

Yes, this is a very good book… for messing up a young and impressionable female mind. Just great.

It's true that the book has some negative messages, but the readers don't have to take them.
The series are directed to teenagers.
I watched the movie before reading the book. To me, the book was better.

Originally Posted by Jewells

Hey guys I just started the first Twilight book, 100 pages in, and I'm having a hard time seeing the appeal. It just seems like poorly written drivel to me. Am I missing something??? I've had several well educated professional friends (in their mid to late 20s) coerce me into starting the series but I don't think I can go on. I'm surprised they like it - it seems very immature and poorly constructed. If I hate the first 100 pages is it likely that I will hate the next 100? Or does it somehow get better?? I don't know it just seems like such crap that I am having a hard time understanding how it ever got published... My options are continue reading this or start on Jane Eyre. Thanks for the help

I'm almost done with it. I think it's great.

Admittedly, the author throws around those ... I forget the term ... ways the character says something with an action verb instead of simply 'said' or 'replied' ...

("What?" she blinked.)
("Get outta here," he hissed.)

... but her style is nice and consistent, so I got used to it. It really is a cool story, with GREAT characterization, and truly conveys what it would be like to have a relationship with a real vampire. (Reality meshed very well with impossible fantasy.)

I avoided it in the beginning (the movie, too) because of the hype and mainstream sensationalism. But it really surprised me.

The book is marketed at Young Adult readers but it has the ability to cross
age barriers and will satisfy both teenagers and adults alike.

Twilight is simply and yet beautifully written. The descriptions of Forks leave
you feeling like you can almost smell the damp air and hear the rain falling on
the roof.

There is a melancholic feel to their impossible love, yet at the same time they
both are unwilling to give up hope that their relationship is not doomed.

All I know is that I love Twilight, and I think you should finish the book before you decide if you like it or not.

Originally Posted by ooghost1oo

I'm almost done with it. I think it's great.

Admittedly, the author throws around those ... I forget the term ... ways the character says something with an action verb instead of simply 'said' or 'replied' ...

("What?" she blinked.)
("Get outta here," he hissed.)

... but her style is nice and consistent, so I got used to it. It really is a cool story, with GREAT characterization, and truly conveys what it would be like to have a relationship with a real vampire. (Reality meshed very well with impossible fantasy.)

I avoided it in the beginning (the movie, too) because of the hype and mainstream sensationalism. But it really surprised me.

*Engaging Rant mode, please standby...*

*sigh* Okay. I'll admit my hatred for this series is irrational and based solely on conjecture, as I've never read the books and probably never will. So whether or not it's good overal is something I'll leave to those with legitimate opinions.

That being said, I know enough about the series to know that Twilight has no real vampires in it. Call me a purist, but I have too much respect for the occult to accept a vampire story that disregards the main themes and mythos of a vampire story.

Vampires are bloodsucking creatures of the night. They entrance with their mysterious seductiveness or shock us with their monstrous appearance. They knock us humans off the top of the food chain, hiding from us as if they come from another world entirely. They struggle to maintain their former humanity as they are compelled by hunger to sate their horrible appetites.

Yes they brood, but they also indulge in their 'true' nature on occasion (if not often) and forego relationships with humans, burdened with the inescapable truth of their situation. After all, one can hardly maintain a healthy, loving relationship with their food. Not to mention the risks of being in vampire society with a blood source on your arm, for both you and yours (something which I believe Twilight does illustrate).

For me, a vampire story is all about showing what makes a human human by taking what was once an ordinary man or woman and changing them into a blood-sucking monster. It's about showing us the darkness that lies in the heart of man, unleashed only when the chains of a normal life are removed. The question of a vampire should be, "Can a man claimed by this evil still be human?", not, "Can a vampire and a human know true love?" At best, the latter would be used as a supplementary plot to the former, but Twilight switches the two around, squandering the potential depth of a vampire story for what could be considered a pre-teen romance novel.

Oh, and one last note: the only time a vampire should sparkle in the sunlight is right before it bursts into flames. I don't care what anyone says, there is no way anyone can convince me of that concept's legitimacy. I mean, again, vampires are creatures of the night, often considered superior to humans in every way. The fact that they couldn't walk around during the day is the only thing that gave normal people a shot at survival and/or freedom against them. That one little edge changed vampires from horrible, unredeemable, fearsome monsters to something that could be scary but also intriguing, strong but not invincible, inhuman yet sympathetic.

Apologies if I've upset anyone, but far as I can tell Twilight has either abused or ignored the entire point of having vampires in a story and simply used them to make this YA romance story into a highly marketable phenomenon. It does not have real vampires, and I shudder to think how many people could be getting the wrong idea about them and what they can represent.

Between that and the quantity and degree of hate I've seen this series get, I cannot believe anything besides personal taste will make this thing bearable. Which is not to say people that like it are wrong - Lord knows I enjoy some pretty wretched stuff from time to time - but toughing out this series solely in the hopes of seeing it improve is a fool's endeavor. It's kinda like the Star Wars prequels in that sense, but that's another debate.

*Pressure stabilizing, disengaging Rant mode...*

Very well put Leneth. Hit the nail on the head.

Danke.

I tried reading Twilight, but it was frankly boring and too predictable. The titles of the chapters pretty much told you exactly what was going to happen.

By the way, when I read the line about Edward sparkling, I imagine he woke up in the morning and doused himself in body glitter.

I'm not bothered by Meyer's supposed abuse of vampires. After all, they are fictional creatures, subject to change. Witches and wizards weren't always these heroes that a lot of novels make them out to be. In fact, when people first wrote about them, they were evil beings who did dark spells and turned you into some lesser life form, like a rat. But that's changed over time. Same with vampires.

I just hate the story structure and character development in general. Bella's this two-dimensional whiny weakling who doesn't change at all throughout the series, learns absolutely nothing (read excerpts and people's opinions in general, mind you. So, everything I say is going based off excerpts and word of mouth from rabid fans), and gets everything she wants in the end, this sappy, happily-ever-after fairy tale, and all of a sudden finds herself fit to be a mother. Let me not rant anymore, because I will get vicious.

and all of a sudden finds herself fit to be a mother.

Yeah that was just too weird. I did like the first three books, but the last one seriously put me off.