Twilight Saga

But escapism can be well-written too! And should be!

Different strokes for different folks! 

I started re-reading Eclipse a few weeks ago (to refresh my memory for the new film) and I still have about a hundred pages to finish before I see it on Wednesday... problem is, I just can't get back into it after not picking it up since the beginning of June - I keep getting distracted by the poor way it's written instead of concentrating on the story .

But escapism can be well-written too! And should be!

It can be...but should it be? Well that's a matter of opinion

If you don't like Twilight, don't read it, there's millions of other books to read and discuss!

I'm able to escape in a story no matter how poorly it's written tbh, yes I prefer better written books, but honestly, on the tube, I'll often read comforting, engaging trash
I wish she would make a bit more effort with writing them, as often it's a bit lazy or sloppy, but it is engaging!

I go through a lot of books, at least 3 a week, this week I'm reading a YA novel called "the Maze Runner", "Remains of the day" which I was supposed to start last week and "Animal farm"  I also saw "Eclipse" (not too bad!Much better than the first two!)

Escapist books like Twilight haven't ruined my brain yet

I wish she would make a bit more effort with writing them, as often it's a bit lazy or sloppy, but it is engaging!

Yes! Exactly this! Initially a good storyline that is strangely engaging, but it has so much more potential for better writing.

What REALLY gets me about her writing is that:
1. It was accepted for representation by an agent
2. It was accepted by a commissioning editor
3. It had to go through copy-editing and proofreading at multiple stages

And after all that it's still sloppy! Poor writing is one thing that simply can't be fixed without completely re-writing something, but people are paid to fix inconsistencies and poorly-worded sentences! It's like they were all too engaged in reading the story that they didn't bother editing it, or they just gave up, lol.

It can be...but should it be? Well that's a matter of opinion

If you don't like Twilight, don't read it, there's millions of other books to read and discuss!

And I do read and discuss all those other books. But it's also pretty fascinating to discuss a series of books which have been justifiably lambasted for their poor style, and to try to work out how/why they've become such a success.

Should Twilight be better-written?? Of course!! I'm not sure how that can be opinion! Better writing wouldn't change the story, so people who enjoy it would still enjoy it.

And I do read and discuss all those other books. But it's also pretty fascinating to discuss a series of books which have been justifiably lambasted for their poor style, and to try to work out how/why they've become such a success.

Should Twilight be better-written?? Of course!! I'm not sure how that can be opinion! Better writing wouldn't change the story, so people who enjoy it would still enjoy it.

Oh I think it is, I think there are millions of people who wouldn't want Twilight changed, maybe that's part of the charm of it all and why it's so successful

It's not an intimidating read by any stretch of the imagination, people can relate to the prose perhaps? They identify with the way it's written, because that's how they would write it themselves.

Who knows? Possibly it's just a good yarn

I think there are worse popular literature crimes out there, Jodi Picoult for instance is my personal bug bear, think of a  "moral dilemma", retrofit a poorly plotted, badly characterised story around it, throw in some terrible dialogue and voila! A million selling paperback machine!

I'd take Twilight over the many badly written, often exploitative, novels of Jodi Picoult any day

I was REALLY looking forward to reading Twilight in the last year (I hadn't seen any films, or read any book or film reviews). I knew for sure it was something I'd get into, as I love stuff like that.

I bought the book, brought it home, got all comfy on the couch...

I could NOT get through the first chapter. I had heard that it was poorly written, but I was not expecting it to be as bad as it is. I know people want to escape and not think about anything, however when something is poorly written, it completely takes me out of the story. I find it impossible to engage within a story that is SO horribly written.

Its the same with the films. I was really looking forward to watching the first film (I thought it'd be like True Blood - where the screenwriters totally improved upon the writing and the story from the books). I thought they looked interesting, I thought Edward was hot, AND I grew up around Forks, WA for effs sake - how could I not like it?

They are just SO BAD. The dialogue, the dead eyed acting, the CGI werewolves, the stupid contact lenses.

I really believe that this whole franchise could have been awesome. Harry Potter was written for a younger audience than Twilight, and those books are incredibly well written and engaging.

That's my mini rant. I know - all of you ladies really like it, I just seriously can't stand it. The worse part is is that it really had potential.

And last but not least -

WHY is some hundred year old vampire interested in a SEVENTEEN year old?? What could they possibly have in common?!? (aside from hanging around with their mouths open with a thousand yard stare on their face - yes, maybe that's it).

Its the same with the films. I was really looking forward to watching the first film (I thought it'd be like True Blood - where the screenwriters totally improved upon the writing and the story from the books). I thought they looked interesting, I thought Edward was hot, AND I grew up around Forks, WA for effs sake - how could I not like it?

They are just SO BAD. The dialogue, the dead eyed acting, the CGI werewolves, the stupid contact lenses.

I just loved the review of Eclipse in the Sunday Express yesterday:

"...It may seem like an obvious choice, especially after Jacob’s dorky turn in New Moon but the character has matured into a worthy rival to Edward, played with increased confidence by Lautner, all steely-eyed, manly intent. In fact, Edward seems limp by comparison, not helped by Pattinson who seems self-conscious at times, as if inhibited by the iconic weight of his character.

Or is it that he just finds the whole thing ridiculous? On a few occasions I was convinced he was stifling giggles..."

I've always kind of felt that with him - that he doesn't really take the films seriously or get why the books are so popular. It's kind of hard to take the acting seriously when it's obvious that even some of the actors find it ridiculous .

My mum's been reading the books too and she's just started on Breaking Dawn... I almost don't want her to read it because I'm actually embarrassed by how bad it is  .

And last but not least -

WHY is some hundred year old vampire interested in a SEVENTEEN year old?? What could they possibly have in common?!? (aside from hanging around with their mouths open with a thousand yard stare on their face - yes, maybe that's it).

That's what I don't get - Why on Earth does Edward love her? What exactly is it that draws him to her? There was no character development in that area and Bella just seemed so blah... she had no life goals and no ambitions, other than to become a vampire.

I mean, you had a similar thing happening in Buffy The Vampire Slayer, with Buffy being 17 and Angel being over 200 years old, but at least their stories had depth and Buffy was a strong, independent character.

That's what I don't get - Why on Earth does Edward love her? What exactly is it that draws him to her? There was no character development in that area and Bella just seemed so blah... she had no life goals and no ambitions, other than to become a vampire.

I mean, you had a similar thing happening in Buffy The Vampire Slayer, with Buffy being 17 and Angel being over 200 years old, but at least their stories had depth and Buffy was a strong, independent character.

There's quite an age difference in the Sookie Stackhouse books as well, yet it never bothers me. Reading those books, I was completely capable of believing that Bill was interested in Sookie.

Twilight, however, I just don't get. Its like you said, there is no character development, and no chemistry what so ever, and she has no life ambitions (well, except to DIE so she can be with Edward). Its beyond irritating.

Also - in Twilight, do vampires just mentally STOP when they become a vampire? I can't understand why 100 year old Edward would put up with Bella's mindless babble unless he still had the mind of a 17 year old himself...

people can relate to the prose perhaps? They identify with the way it's written, because that's how they would write it themselves.

But authors are paid to write. They're professional writers. They ought to be able to do it a bit better than your average non-writer.

I think there are worse popular literature crimes out there, Jodi Picoult for instance is my personal bug bear, think of a  "moral dilemma", retrofit a poorly plotted, badly characterised story around it, throw in some terrible dialogue and voila! A million selling paperback machine!

Amen, sister! Jodi Picoult is dreadful!

I'm just talking about Twilight because ... well, because this thread is about Twilight.

But it's certainly not the only offender. Don't get me started on Dan Brown please. 

Well, I must admit to enjoying the breathless and ridiculous nature of teenage love (where NOTHING that has EVER happened EVER is AT ALL like what you experience OMG), but "Breaking Dawn" made me feel a bit...ick. Same with "The Host" which weirded me out a bit with the whole "it's okay, I'm 16" approach to sex. Still read them all, though.
This is an interesting article, not Twilight bashing at all, just looking at it from an angle I hadn't thought of either.
http://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2010/07/whats-missing-from-eclipse/59176/

For a great vampire story, well written and amazing, try Robin McKinley's "Sunshine". It's SO GOOD.
also, hee, my dad and I call Jodi Picoult "Grief Porn" (and Twilight "Anticipation Porn" at least until the 4th novel).

There's quite an age difference in the Sookie Stackhouse books as well, yet it never bothers me. Reading those books, I was completely capable of believing that Bill was interested in Sookie.

I've only read the first SS book, but this made sense because the vampire thing seemed to be a side effect, so to speak. Sookie was interested in Bill because he was the one person who could't/wouldn't bombard her psychic ability with his thoughts. In turn, he was probably interested in her because she felt comfortable (relatively speaking) around him. Yes, this was because he was a vampire, but Sookie was still nervy about the vampire thing, not all "oooh, make me a vampire too, pretty please?!".

Speaking of good vampire stories, Tanya Huff's Blood series is fun and decently written.

There's quite an age difference in the Sookie Stackhouse books as well, yet it never bothers me. Reading those books, I was completely capable of believing that Bill was interested in Sookie.

Twilight, however, I just don't get. Its like you said, there is no character development, and no chemistry what so ever, and she has no life ambitions (well, except to DIE so she can be with Edward). Its beyond irritating.

Also - in Twilight, do vampires just mentally STOP when they become a vampire? I can't understand why 100 year old Edward would put up with Bella's mindless babble unless he still had the mind of a 17 year old himself...

I agree that the way Bella is written she is a weak/annoying/almost character-less individual - but I think the "attraction" issue has been somewhat explained by SMeyer...Bella's "sweet smelling/tasting/whatever blood" that calls to Edward and his inability to read her mind...those two things draw him to her and for whatever its worth ignited their "twoo wuv".

I think something quite similar goes on with Sookie and Bill (although Charlaine Harris is a much much much much much much MUCH better writer!!!) Sookie has special blood that I won't mention anymore about incase it spoils something for people and she has supernatural talent....these things draw Bill to her and in a similar vein to the Twilight saga Sookie can't read Bill's mind (because he's a vampire) which makes him appealing to her...

The two series are *crazy* different...but I thought the similarities in how the characters were attracted to each other were interesting...

I agree that the way Bella is written she is a weak/annoying/almost character-less individual - but I think the "attraction" issue has been somewhat explained by SMeyer...Bella's "sweet smelling/tasting/whatever blood" that calls to Edward and his inability to read her mind...those two things draw him to her and for whatever its worth ignited their "twoo wuv".

I think something quite similar goes on with Sookie and Bill (although Charlaine Harris is a much much much much much much MUCH better writer!!!) Sookie has special blood that I won't mention anymore about incase it spoils something for people and she has supernatural talent....these things draw Bill to her and in a similar vein to the Twilight saga Sookie can't read Bill's mind (because he's a vampire) which makes him appealing to her...

The two series are *crazy* different...but I thought the similarities in how the characters were attracted to each other were interesting...

I'm pretty creeped out by the way Edward has a LUST for her blood. Essentially, Edward is just interested in her blooooood and not her brains, because she doesn't have any, yet (who knows, maybe she'll go to an ivy league school if she doesn't DIE for Edward first).

And the whole "mind reading" thing in Twilight - does that EVER come back and play any sort of importance? At least its explained in the Sookie Stackhouse books.

Its funny, when I first started watching True Blood and the whole mind reading stuff came into play, I was like "crap, this is JUST like mother effing Twilight" - I'm glad I held on though, totally worth it The books have their shoddy moments, but the TV series does really well with it...

I think there are worse popular literature crimes out there, Jodi Picoult for instance is my personal bug bear, think of a  "moral dilemma", retrofit a poorly plotted, badly characterised story around it, throw in some terrible dialogue and voila! A million selling paperback machine!

I read "Keeping Faith" when it first came out on the recommendation of a librarian, and I think I've read three others.  After the last one, I decided I am not reading her any more just for this reason.  Her stuff is totally and obviously constructed to fit a controversy rather than to have a good story that may or may not involve a controversy.

I've not read the Twilight series, although I do read escapist stuff a lot.  I do sometimes find when an escapist writer makes huge mistakes, it's hard to be totally engrossed, which is the purpose of that sort of stuff.  I wish I could turn it off that critical voice, but I can't.

Oddly, I have no problems reading fan fiction if it's good fan fiction, even if it's not polished.  I think it's what elle.davis mentioned about how unbelievable it is that some things get through the publishing process.  But publishers are looking to make money, and people like this writer and Dan Brown seem to be able to make it for them, crap writing or not.

I think the vampires are supposed to retain some of the mind of the age they were "turned" at.  They seem to have a bit more wisdom in the ways of the world, but it's not like they've mentally continued to age.  I mean, how does the brain of a 200-year-old work?  They haven't develop Alzheimers or lost their memory or any other common old-age symptoms.  I'm flashing back to Interview With A Vampire...Claudia was turned as a child and she obviously matured on some level (like when she got really mad that she would never be a grown woman who could have children) but also remained very childlike in other aspects.  If you believe in that theory, it would help to explain why Edward was attracted to a non-interesting, completely dull character like Belle (because teenagers are attracted to other teenagers for the most ridiculous and completely unexplainable reasons anyway).  Maybe that's a part of him that hasn't matured over the years.