Printable View
have you read her other book(that's not part of the series) yet?
now that's my favorite book. you might say the same thing about this one too, but the first time i read that one, i was surprised in some parts, mad in others, and cried tears of joy and sadness for the last part of the book.
you should read it if you haven't, it's called "the Host"
i couldn't put it down.
well, i gotta go, but i hope to talk with you again, and discuss...topics.
I got a chance to read the first two chapters of Twilight,and I should say it attracks my eyeball.:)
I read some of it but I wasn't very interested. Maybe it's just me...
Is the movie "Twilight" just about the first book,or is it the whole thing?In the library here I have found only "Breaking Dawn" but I'm not really sure if it's any good.I also found "The Host" but I'm not sure for that either.Since my finances are a bit low for the moment and I'm trying to save,I'm thinking about making some arrangements like reading classics online and buyng only what really catches my eye...
I see:) It was still an interesting point to make.Quote:
Originally Posted by limajean
Maybe me, as I generally esteem Austen as the mother of all English novelists, and the best one of the lot. In truth though, Austen is often misunderstood, or simply not understood, and in truth, many only read Pride and Prejudice, and skip her other works.Quote:
Originally Posted by limajean
Austen relies primarily on Irony as her trope of choice for conveying meanings, and many people, especially now when our society has been so desensitized to irony, easily miss this. There are those that read the books purely for their plot, and see what romance authors see - a love story. But when it comes down to it, and you read Northanger Abbey, you may notice that Austen may say they get married and live happily ever after, but the ending itself can easily be interpreted, and with some cause, as a large irony, mocking the reader herself, and meaning no such thing.
On that notion, to what extent does Twilight bend. If we were to try and analyze it, we would need first to consider its major devices. First, the book seems reliant on allegory. We must question what the vampire represents, what it represents in relation to our culture, and what it represents in relation to the tradition. From there we must see how Meyer handles the concept, and how original its execution is. The notion of the vegetarian vampire, though I cannot verify it, I believe originates with the terribly repetitive Anne Rice, in Interview with a Vampire. On that level, that concept isn't new, but what of the romance of the vampire?
I think that to is established, though generally not at a teen level, which I think is what is the appeal. Perhaps that is the most significant feature of the work, but on the whole it is a cliché allegory for the sexual prowess of the vampire to his victim, the innocent girl.
But don't worry kids, they get married first, so despite the indulgence, it's all legal. If that isn't typically American - and I mean that in the sense of the religiousness and in the teenage culture sense - I don't know what is. You wonder why it sells - all that is repressed sexually within primitive society justified within a legal Christian frame to allow the pregnant teenager to become a heroine, and the attractive jock a knight in shining armor, with oh you guessed it! Wings! - oh, how wonderful - I see why it is so much fun.
Seriously I'm kind of fooling around here, as I have only read reviews, and seen the chimerical commercials, and read the Wikipedia articles quickly, as well as talked to some friends (mind the polysyndeton), so I guess I cannot comment, other than say the first 3 or so pages that I read had detestable prose.
The movie, I believe, is based on the first book.Quote:
Originally Posted by Remarkable
The Movie is based on the first book of the same title. Breaking Dawn is the fourth book and The Host is a seperate one altogether, completely unrelated.
Yeah,I know about "Breaking Dawn" and "The Host",I simply cannot make up my mind on which to get...
JBI wins thread.
well.. you dont get breaking dawn unless you read the three that come before that.
Why because he is commenting on something that he hasn't read?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mopey Droney
:lol: JBI pwns. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mopey Droney
Personally, I'd rather not waste the time in reading this book...I have some Dostoevsky yet to read (perhaps some Austen :lol:).
Dori there is nothing wrong with that if you don't feel that Twilight would be to your liking. But how can you review or critise something that you have not fully read or only read three pages or reviews on. You are right it is not a master piece and will it still be read in 50 years time probably not but that does not mean that some of us can not read the book now, enjoy it and take something away from it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dori
If people are going to dump on the book and those of us that have read it and liked it at least read it first so you have some basis for doing so.
Now I am getting down of my soap box and packing it away.:lol:
I merely said I didn't want to waste my time---my precious time. Life is too short to read outside of my interests. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Joreads
(Edit: Okay, I did make other remarks, but I was just having little fun. :D)
That is OK you are still one of my favorites. Is this our first Lit Nit fight my friend?;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dori