[PUG] why i hate twilight

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

 

i must admit, i'm explosively jealous of stefanie mayer and her genius authoressing.

 

yeah, like jars of diarrhea, and boxes of turds.

 

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.

 

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?

 

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.