[PUG] why i hate twilight

invisible

invisible

On Holiday
MBTI
none
i'm sure posting this will do nothing for my image as a crazy art zealot, but it doesn't matter, as i am a crazy art zealot.

one of the most boring regurgitated arguments i have heard in recent times is that twilight is a failure in terms of writing style, but has a great story. well actually the writing style of twilight isn
 
Anyone who has surpassed the mental age of 'little girl' dislikes Twilight.

I don't think it should go away, it's a nice way of telling which people have low IQ's and ridiculous concepts concerning romance and love.
I mean, when you see a Twilight badge, it's like a "I'M A MORON, DON'T EVEN THINK OF CHECKING ME OUT" badge.
 
iH0w68dP7qowww2s0XYs6Qh0o1_500.jpg
 
I can stand the bad writing, I can stand the shitty vampires, I can stand the teenage lovey-doveyness. What I can't stand is Bella. She has no single good quality about her.
 
You must harbour a lot of resentment towards Twilight.
 
88chaz88 said:
I can stand the bad writing, I can stand the shitty vampires, I can stand the teenage lovey-doveyness. What I can't stand is Bella. She has no single good quality about her.
Click to expand...

Do any of the characters have enough dimension to have qualities at all, much less redeeming ones?
 
DevilDoll said:
Do any of the characters have enough dimension to have qualities at all, much less redeeming ones?
Click to expand...

Well Bella stands out as she's meant to be the main protagonist.
 
invisible said:
i must admit, i'm explosively jealous of stefanie mayer and her genius authoressing.
Click to expand...

Come now, let me comfort you with a hug.
Perhaps if you stoop low enough you can
rest your head against my breast like I am
your mother and you're nothing but a small
child again.


"Sh. It will be alright"



I should look up her publishing company and start
sending in shit things.
 
88chaz88 said:
I can stand the bad writing, I can stand the shitty vampires, I can stand the teenage lovey-doveyness. What I can't stand is Bella. She has no single good quality about her.
Click to expand...

i agree with you totally, but i have a lot of trouble apprehending her as a character at all, as she doesn't seem real to me. a real girl is not really like that, there is no real actual girl like bella, who flicks through difficult literature with complete understanding in a matter of hours and simultaneously succumbs to a vacuous and dangerous infatuation. she's just like this distorted grotesque figment of meyer's bizarre sick agenda.

EDIT, maybe i'm wrong. in which case i'm down with chaz's sentiments.
 
Last edited:
Alright, what contemporary love story would you recommend?

In my view art in general is in agony. It turns to extremes and clings to classics. Most success comes from amateur fanart and third world countries. Where real struggle and innocence are still meaningful. But even then, there's no shortage of western cynics, who essentially say "if there's no bread, why don't they eat cake, those low IQ peasants".

Also, I don't agree with your view of Bella as subordinate, and that this story is misogynic. On the contrary, she is the most powerful character there, who turns around the lives of everyone involved. And she does it with care.
 
Last edited:
enfp can be shy said:
Alright, what contemporary love story would you recommend?

In my view art in general is in agony. It turns to extremes and clings to classics. Most success comes from amateur fanart and third world countries. Where real struggle and innocence are still meaningful. But even then, there's no shortage of western cynics, who essentially say "if there's no bread, why don't they eat cake, those low IQ peasants".
Click to expand...

what about stardust? i don't give a toss for stardust personally but for peasant fare as you put it i don't think there's anything particularly ugly in it. why not read charlaine harris?

i don't believe that struggle or innocence stop being meaningful in developed nations. people continue to be treated unjustly and innocence continues to be destroyed. just because someone always has it worse doesn't mean you don't have it bad too.

i don't look down on anyone for the sophistication of their art interests, they can like what they want, but i do think it is condescending not to argue about the value of it. that attitude says: yes, let the trash have their vile bankrupt art, don't bother to let them know that you think it's crappy or something else bigger or more worthwhile is out there! don't encourage the reading of books, let them stay in their peasant intellectual prisons!

i don't agree with your view that meaningful art is not being produced. i've had my head in modern classics for the past few years and i'm not totally up with current trends but i feel aware that authors like a s byatt and margaret atwood are in the process of writing canonical literature. if i go to the gallery i see something new and beautiful that intrigues me and makes me think. looking back over art history it is easy to see as a succession of greats or whatever but surely just as now the greater part of art ventures were not successful and have not survived history.

i feel confused about what you're saying like as though i'm not understanding it\.
 
if i could suggest a brilliant love story that has just hit the shelves, would that be enough to make twilight a bad product? if nothing better is available, does that mean that what is available is good?
 
I am proud that I have never read the books or seen the Twilight movies.
Oh wait, is this the wrong thread??
 
invisible said:
if i could suggest a brilliant love story that has just hit the shelves, would that be enough to make twilight a bad product? if nothing better is available, does that mean that what is available is good?
Click to expand...
Certainly not. Twilight is complete trash, compared to real literature. But that's been the trend for a long time. If we look at three of the best selling authors of consecutive recent generations: King, Rowling, Meyer; it clearly gets worse, and it wasn't that good to begin with. The trouble is, higher critically acclaimed status usually doesn't mean meaningful work either. Even journalism and politics play important role, rather than some true mastery.

p.s. By the way, note that those successful authors have this trick in common - at the time they first published, people would say such material doesn't even belong in a book, and that they aren't even real writers. And this makes it exciting. Like supporting a penguin trying to fly.
 
Last edited:
enfp can be shy said:
Certainly not. Twilight is complete trash, compared to real literature. But that's been the trend for a long time. If we look at three of the best selling authors of consecutive recent generations: King, Rowling, Meyer; it clearly gets worse, and it wasn't that good to begin with. The trouble is, higher critically acclaimed status usally doesn't mean meaningful work either. Even journalism and politics play important role, rather than some true mastery.
Click to expand...

While I wouldn't call JK Rowling's work literature, I certainly wouldn't compare it to Stephanie Meyer. She has much more skill as does Stephen King, though his work is getting progressively worse.
 
sorry but i believe that capitalising first letters of sentences in type is a tradition of overkill that should die in the way that previous english capitalisation of Every Important Word died. i think punctuation is enough to indicate where one structure ends and another begins. i accept that this tradition won't die and i'm prepared to conform in business or academic settings but i reserve my personal liberties to express my feelings about it in my personal life. i usually try to remember to capitalise first letters of the names of people i am writing to because i don't think it's my right to take their capitalisation away but apart from that it doesn't matter to me. i save caps for when i actually NEED to emphasise something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top