Twilight series

[Nicky]

I've been reading the Twilight series by Stephenie Meyer. I don't think the movie of the same name really did it justice.

I'm up to the last book called Breaking Dawn (wind).
The others were Twilight, New Moon and Eclipse.

I have to say they really go down hill after the first book. The start out pretty good, but now that I am on to the last book it is all a little bit crap and I'm struggling to finish it.

Anyone else read this series? What are your thoughts?

[Ms Jessica]

read them all, saw the movie. 

ummmm, my first thought was that estrogen makes me much more fond of crappy writing than I'd otherwise be.  Seriously.  The plot and characterizations are sooooo weak, but every time Bella puts her hands on Edwards face, fingers knotted in his hair, pulling his face closer to hers, their lips just inches apart, ummm, yeah.  I just kept reading. 

Stephanie Meyer really knows how to write her kisses.  And her talent ends there.  Not to be mean, but there are a lot of problems with the books.  She has a real problem with telling, not showing.  Good writers are good because they show, don't tell.  Edward is controlling, possessive, jealous, over-protective and selfish.  Bella is a vapid, stubborn, silly, spoiled little brat of a Mary-Sue stand-in for the author.  Their relationship is the poster child for abuse.  If I had a teenage daughter, I would make her read Twilight, and then tell her that if a guy ever treated her like that, she should kick him in the nuts and then pepper-spray his ass.  Seriously, it's like a how-to manual for identifying abusive relationships, except Meyer's not performing a public service.  She's holding this up for teenagers who are supposed to think that this is what true love is really like.  All this time, I thought True Love was a song by Angels and Airwaves. 

The characterization is all but absent.  Nothing really happens for either Bella or Edward over the course of FOUR (4!!!!) books except for their continual declarations of undying love, like saying it over and over makes it true. 

Bella is pretty and clumsy and reads Jane Austen.  Except we only see her reading once or twice, and we never know how she feels or reacts to what she reads.  She's practically perfect, except for being a little clumsy.  How she manages to cook all the time without setting the house on fire is something of a statistical impossibility.  She's a klutz, but only when it suits the author to remind us of the fact (see!!! she's not just a Mary-Sue!  She's clumsy!)  She's a feminist (See?  She's independent!) but she's willing to skip out on college and her entire life so she can become a vampire, and birth Edward Cullen's abominable vampire baby (Note: edited for bad language).  Stephanie Meyer reveals her innate heterosexism by the end of the fourth book-- what every woman really wants is a baby, no matter what else they might say or do.  The goal for every woman, feminist or not, is to get married and have children.  I see a problem with that kind of thinking, but then again, most women would. 

Edward is really good at school, drives fast, and has a lot of money.  He throws it around like a spoiled twenty-something trust fund brat in Las Vegas for the weekend.  I'd love to have someone with bottomless pockets take me shopping, but that wouldn't exactly be love.  And other than that, his primary characteristic is that he loves Bella.  Seriously, after being a vampire for 90 years, he still acts like he's 17 years old. 

Don't get me started on the rest of the Cullens. 

Don't get me started on the Edward-Bella-Jacob love triangle. 

Don't get me started on vampires not bursting into flame in the sunlight (I mean, seriously.  Is nothing sacred in vampire folklore?).  Okay, I'm started.  If legends of vampirism really did originate from stories about people afflicted with porphyrias (a type of genetic disease), sensitivity to sunlight is one of the things that you absolutely CAN'T compromise on.  Meyer doesn't address how vampire's originated, but it seems like she just discarded the aspects of vampire legends that were inconvenient for her to write around.  Instead, Edward *sparkles* in the sun.  Are you f$%*ing serious?? 

[/rant]

But yeah, I couldn't put them down.  I think I need to start reading some Nora Roberts trash or something. 

[phantom_heart]

*steps up to defend the books*

Vampires are not real. As such anyone can make them anything they want to be. I thought the books were great. These are her first books and if you look past the flaws into the heart of the book to see that its a beautiful story. i agree that Sparkling is wierd but these are her books, her vampires. Be honest who else is going to want to duplicate a  sparkling vampire? She's successfully made her characters stand out from the "standard"

The movie did not do the book Justis. But Rob pattinson is easy on the eyes so I'm enthralled. Tis only a passing faze. Anywho...if you want really REALLY good books and like to read may i suggest my fav author. Christine Feehan. Its romance so theirs graphic sex..lol but its so good. Its her Dark Series. Its best to go in Order. Start with Dark Prince. see if you like it and go from there. I love these books. Feehan's Vampires are Carpathians who have lost there soul. Who kill for fun. Her Carpathians drink blood but don't need to kill the human to do so they put them in a sort of trance, they can shift into anything even mist and cannot go out in the sun but can walk around in the early morning with there is a big enough storm to cover the sun yet it still burns them. They do not sparkle lol.

Anywho i found twilight and the rest to be good books. But its just my opinion. Everyone is intield to there own, i just thought i'd stir things up a a bit and defend Stephanie meyer.

[Lachlann]

I do find it funny when people bash on Twilight for having different vampires. Vampires are a type of zombie, and Dracula isn't the end all to be all vampire. There are several different kinds spanned about in folklore.

My issue with it is bad writing, no real plot, bad character development if any, and a bad message to young girls as if they didn't have enough already. I don't mind if someone likes the books and enjoys reading them, but I do have reasons why I dislike them.

[Ms Jessica]

Erica--

Good for you (said completely non-sarcastically).  Everyone should stick up for what they like.
 
I don't mean to imply that I hated the books, because I didn't.  Maybe I'm just a "glass half empty" kind of girl.  Anyway, your reasoning is more or less why I continued reading Twilight (and sequels).  Meyer writes (as I said) her kisses very well, and the overall story arc was interesting enough that I kept reading.  She made her own adjustments to vampire folklore, and while I didn't appreciate them all, she's at least telling her own story, and NOT a rehash of something that's been done before.  I definitely respect that. 

My major beef is the way she portrays the relationship between Bella and Edward as idealized when it's really anything but.  I definitely think that there's some valid concerns over teenage girls reading the books and thinking that Bella and Edward have an ideal relationship.*  This does NOT mean I think the stories are absolute dreck with no value at all.  I ought to say that they were fun to read, regardless of the problems I had.  However, simply because I assent to read (and suspend my disbelief) does not mean that I check my brain at the front cover.  Part of the fun with reading is deconstructing, identifying elements that don't work and identifying the parts that do.  Meyer's writing is interesting because it's a mixture of both. 

In a critique of Meyer's writing, I would say her biggest weakness is that she tells and doesn't show.  Edward talks about how much he loves Bella, and all the things he did to protect her or keep her safe, but a lot of that same behavior, when not viewed through the lens of Meyer's assertion OMG! He loves her! indicates that it's pretty unhealthy.  That's a problem with writing that tells and doesn't show.  The author is insisting that Edward's behavior was well-intentioned, but what I see of it doesn't support her assertion at all.  I've seen very good deconstructions of several books (my favorite being Fred Clark's deconstructions of the popular evangelical Christian Left Behind series), and I would identify some of the same technical flaws in Meyer's writing.  For Fred Clark's brilliant deconstructions, check out his blog


*I tend to think parents are too quick to condemn something without a.) checking it out for themselves and b.) realizing their kids will probably read it anyway.  There's always people that want books banned-- my aunt and uncle won't allow their teenage daughter (my cousin) to read Twilight because it's "trash".  Of course they've not read the book, so I have no idea where they got that from.  For all my criticism, I would definitely NOT call Meyer's work "trash".  It's anything but.  Anyway, I always feel that the best solution here is for the parents to know what the kids are reading and to have some discussion points about elements that may need clarification.  Of course, I feel the same way about sex education, too. 

I do find it funny when people bash on Twilight for having different vampires. Vampires are a type of zombie, and Dracula isn't the end all to be all vampire. There are several different kinds spanned about in folklore.

Care to elaborate on the zombie comment?  Are you trying to draw a parallel between the vampire's thirst for blood and the zombie's desire for human flesh?  Or am I just totally not getting what you're trying to say?

While your comment wasn't directed to me, I'll say that for my own part, my criticism isn't that Meyer's vampires are different, different is fine.  The "sparkles in sunlight" thing just didn't float my boat.  There were several other traits that Meyer's vampires have that are somewhat atypical, and I was fine with that (vampires with ESP, super-speed, being more or less "domesticated" such that they can live among humans without killing them). 

I would probably also disagree with your assertion about the lack of plot.  It's not that there was a lack of one, it's that it probably could have been told in one or two books with some (alright, a lot) of editing.  For example, I think approximately half of the second book was just Bella being depressed.  One of the weaknesses with a first person narrator is how to control the pacing.  Meyer ends up having Bella relate almost everything to us.  A better writer knows how to skip the parts that aren't terribly necessary to advancing the story.  While I think Bella's interaction with a lot of her high school friends added to Bella's relatability, all of that is basically a dead-end from the perspective of the plot.  None of them factor into the major arc of the story, none of them become vampires, or even learn the truth about the Cullens.  They sort of just serve to fill out the guest list at Bella's wedding.  They're details, but not particularly necessary ones. 

So I suppose all of that to say this: the books are okay.  I didn't love them and I didn't hate them.  I read them, I had fun doing it, and I like discussing them wrt what Meyer did right and what she didn't.  It's pop culture, and Twilight is one of the big things right now. 

[Lachlann]

Care to elaborate on the zombie comment?  Are you trying to draw a parallel between the vampire's thirst for blood and the zombie's desire for human flesh?  Or am I just totally not getting what you're trying to say?

While your comment wasn't directed to me, I'll say that for my own part, my criticism isn't that Meyer's vampires are different, different is fine.  The "sparkles in sunlight" thing just didn't float my boat.  There were several other traits that Meyer's vampires have that are somewhat atypical, and I was fine with that (vampires with ESP, super-speed, being more or less "domesticated" such that they can live among humans without killing them).

Zombies are things that have died and become reanimated by a variety of ways (viruses, curses, spells, biting, etc.) There are a variety of zombies and it's just another way to describe what we used to call the undead. Vampires are zombies simply because they are undead because that's basically the definition of a zombie.

To be honest, I don't mind if someone dislikes that type of vampire. I don't like sparkling vampires, but I've often heard people using Dracula as if it were some sort of canon for all vampires and that's their basis for disliking it.

It's not that there was a lack of one, it's that it probably could have been told in one or two books with some (alright, a lot) of editing.

Which is what I mean by lack of plot. Not that there wasn't any plot.

[Ms Jessica]

Zombies are things that have died and become reanimated by a variety of ways (viruses, curses, spells, biting, etc.) There are a variety of zombies and it's just another way to describe what we used to call the undead. Vampires are zombies simply because they are undead because that's basically the definition of a zombie.

To be honest, I don't mind if someone dislikes that type of vampire. I don't like sparkling vampires, but I've often heard people using Dracula as if it were some sort of canon for all vampires and that's their basis for disliking it.

Which is what I mean by lack of plot. Not that there wasn't any plot.

Ah.  Well of that makes a bit more sense. 

Regarding Dracula, I think it's a marvelous work, and it's usually under-appreciated, but I definitely don't agree with the mindset that there's no room for improvement.  I've seen very similar things relating to movie remakes--The original was so good, why would they remake it?  Sadly, a lot of those concerns are justified, but that's usually a result of (again) bad writing, bad acting, or an over-reliance on special effects/carnage/gore. 

[Kara]

I thought the first two books were sort of dull, but hard to put down at the same time. I don't know if I'd be up to reading them again. It seems like shallow fiction where the only thing you get out of it is what happens next. Bella (her full is Isabella, which is a reference to Wuthering Heights) is a confused teenager who feels attracted to something she knows is dangerous. I would say that's closer to reality, though the point of fiction isn't to be real.

I imagine that, for vampires, being around for thousands of years must necessarily bring certain kinds of evolutionary progression. If you are a five foot person from the 1600's and you are drinking the blood of a seven foot person from the 21st century, then doesn't it stand to reason that you will change somewhat as the people you are getting energy from have changed also? And maybe the changes you experience as a vampire aren't all good. The vampires in Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver are a little bit more what I imagine really happens. Although Meyer has yet to provide us with an origin story, I have a feeling that the fifth book, Midnight Sun, won't go anywhere without one. The first four books were entirely predicated on Bella and Edward trying as best they could to avoid hurting each other and yet continually hurting each other over and over. It was kind of weird, ya?

The other vampires in the world didn't seem that well thought out. The story is Bella's universe, and everyone else in it (other than Edward) is just a second fiddle. That is Meyer's biggest weakness, to me. She doesn't yet understand that each person (or vampire) considers the universe to be their own and doesn't sympathize with the viewpoints of others. Instead, she assigned characteristics to her characters and let them romp around the world within the boundaries of their own limitations as living (or undead) creatures.

One thing I will say, though. If I could figure out how to write a book that was so addicting and made me fly through it, I probably would. Big Macs are just so much grease and fat, but people buy them all the time anyways.

[Nicky]

I liked the instinctiveness of her vampires as predators, that desire to kill. But I think she let Edward off far to easily - I mean come on!, he just got used to it...oh, cause he loves her.... I would have enjoyed it more if he actually flew of the handle and killed Bellas dad or something. Now that would be a interesting "oh my god, my vampire lover just killed my dad, but I still love him!". Jerry Springer material right there. 

I loved the image of him having sex with Bella in the 4th book and biting off chunks of bed at the same time... brilliant comical stuff.

I think her 'good' vampires were just too good. I think their struggle to stay straight should have been tougher, just like tortured junkies with their fix in easy reach. Actually all of it was just too squeeky clean for my liking.

I think I prefered Poppy Z. Brites vampires or even Anne Rices.

[Miniar]

They look horribly misogynistic to me.
And full of "no sex 'till you're married" propaganda.

[Nero]

Haven't read em. Maybe i will just to see what the hype's all about. I read the Harry Potters just to please my sisters and they turned out to be awesome and hilarious.

[Ms Jessica]

Haven't read em. Maybe i will just to see what the hype's all about. I read the Harry Potters just to please my sisters and they turned out to be awesome and hilarious.

Exactly my rationale for reading them. 

The other vampires in the world didn't seem that well thought out. The story is Bella's universe, and everyone else in it (other than Edward) is just a second fiddle. That is Meyer's biggest weakness, to me. She doesn't yet understand that each person (or vampire) considers the universe to be their own and doesn't sympathize with the viewpoints of others. Instead, she assigned characteristics to her characters and let them romp around the world within the boundaries of their own limitations as living (or undead) creatures.

THIS.  Very good point. 

[Jaimey]

I didn't read all of the posts, but here's my two cents.

I actually think that even in the weakest parts of her story, Meyer writes really well.  Her writing (at least in this series) is really engaging.  I was completely engrossed.  It was one of the few times that I haven't been able to put a book down once I started.  Considering all the rubbish that gets published, this really surprised me.  I worked at Borders when they came out and I finally had to find out what all the fuss is about.  I do think that the last book was particularly weak, but you have to keep in mind that these books are for teenagers. 

I don't read much fantasy at all and I really love her ability to tell a story.  I actually thought she did a good job of drawing the reader into the story.  I did get a little annoyed with Edwards' prudishness and whining about being a monster, but again, it's a kid's book, so I think it works all right for that.  My supervisor, who was about 30 at the time and mostly read Palahnuik and nonfiction about sports/athletes and stuff like that, started reading it and used up an entire day off without realizing it reading Twilight. 

Besides, it gets teens reading!  Overall, I really liked them.  I want her ability to tell stories.

[Nate]

They look horribly misogynistic to me.
And full of "no sex 'till you're married" propaganda.

I completely, 100% agree 

[Patrick]

I was a typical fan when I first started reading the books. I would hiss whenever someone would try to touch the books, so I constantly had them in my lap. I finished all four in a week. My grades and my attention span slipped during this period. The books were all I talked about every single day, and I always managed to blurt out some random excerpt from the books.

I started to go on with my life, and found out that I thought this type of plot was too drawn out in many other vampire based stories. I didn't necessarily like her writing style, although I felt I was excited by the details. I also thought that the characters were too flat. Overall I believed the books were lacking something.

I mean, other people may like/love them, but they were a 5.3 on a scale of 1 - 10 in my book. For me they just didn't do anything once I reflected on the books a little bit.

[Shang]

I've been reading the Twilight series by Stephenie Meyer. I don't think the movie of the same name really did it justice.

I'm up to the last book called Breaking Dawn (wind).
The others were Twilight, New Moon and Eclipse.

I have to say they really go down hill after the first book. The start out pretty good, but now that I am on to the last book it is all a little bit crap and I'm struggling to finish it.

Anyone else read this series? What are your thoughts?

I read the series and I almost instantly disliked it.  I guess it would have to be because Bella was just a silly girl who couldn't wrap her head around the idea that the guy she "loved" was a psychotic manipulator and control freak.  The guy constantly threatened to leave her or kill himself, and she still stayed with him.  I was like "why the hell can't you at least go with Jake?? He was there the whole time".  I also saw Bella as a tease because she kept going from Edward to Jake and back again.

I was pretty horrified when I heard girls clamoring about how they want someone just like Edward, so that ultimately sealed the deal. 

And the writing style...Everything about it was horrible.  The characters were generally horrible and had a Mary Sue complex going on (at least, Bella was a complete Mary Sue) and the descriptions were pretty bad.

The book registered a 1 on a scale of 1 to 10 for me.

[Cameron James]

The books only became popular because Stephen King said that Stephanie Meyer's writing was some of the worst he'd ever read. Which I thought was pretty funny.

That aside, I'm not a big Twilight fan. Or vampire fan in general, so I don't even have the Edward =/= Traditional Vampire bias. I just didn't care much for the writing style and, personally, I thought the characters were pretty flat and lacked a real rounding out - but I also didn't even manage to finish the first book. It just seemed....very fanfiction to me. 

I've got friends who like Twilight - so I've learned what happens throughout the course of the whole series and if it wasn't for the fanfic-y-ness of it all, I would probably give the books another shot.

[Astarielle]

I went through them. For a first book, it's not a terrible tragedy, though I do have to wonder why first-time novels keep becoming bestsellers.

I think the big issue a lot of people have with it, and something that I agree with, is that the characters are bland and predictable. Every time they flirt with any kind of danger, or getting close to one another, Meyer pulled them back. But here's the funny thing, and why I agree that Bella Swan is a self-insert: With any other character in the driver seat, the book might have actually been good. Someone who wasn't obsessed with Edward, and capable of thinking on their own.  I do the precise same thing when I write; I put the main character on a rail towards the plot, and he/she just goes right for the ending. The other characters can be rich, but nine times out of ten, the MC will be a means to an end.

Personally, I liked Alice. I was much displeased when I saw her and did not see what I expected when the movie posters came out.

She needs to practice writing, but there's potential there.

Here's the funny thing: Meyer is a Mormon. If you look at it again, knowing that, and knowing the kind of culture there is in the Mormon church, a lot of interesting things come out. Believe it or not, Edward is the ideal mate for a Mormon girl, when you take away the stalking, stealing, and attempts to kill himself.

[Jaimey]

Believe it or not, Edward is the ideal mate for a Mormon girl, when you take away the stalking, stealing, and attempts to kill himself.

I really love this sentence. 


I think the biggest issues that most people have with the Twilight Series can be justified with one point: they were written for 13 year old girls.  If they were aimed at adults, I doubt they would even have been published.  It's all about the audience and a lot of young adult books are predictable, preachy, and safe.  For me, they were a quick, cheap adventure that required no real investment of myself...a beach read, if you will. 

[Rayalisse]

For me, they were a quick, cheap adventure that required no real investment of myself...a beach read, if you will. 

That's exactly what they were for me.  Entertaining, but forgettable, pulp beach trash.  I think 3 of the 4 books actually still have sunscreen and margarita stains on some of the pages.

That said, my 12 year old daughter is reading them and seems to be really into em.... maybe there really is a demographic for this kind of stuff.  'Course I was the one who shelled out $40 for the books and probably triple that on the movies so far.

Cheers!
Rayalisse