# Who Enjoyed The Twilight Series Books



## padowd (Jan 14, 2010)

My husband and I watched New Moon last night and really liked it. Has anyone read the books and were they different from the movies. I am thinking about getting them. I have read alot of people did not like the final book and the way it ended.


----------



## RangerXenos (Mar 18, 2009)

I enjoyed the books much more than the movies, in fact I have been really disappointed with both movies.


----------



## pawsplus (Mar 31, 2009)

Yeah, the books are far from great art but they're MILES better than the movies.  I got embarassingly addicted to the books and pretty much read all 4 in 2 weeks, LOL.  Again, NOT great art, but a good story.


----------



## J Bee (May 17, 2010)

The book is _always_ better!  I'm not a huge Twilight fan, but they are very readable. Like many people, I feel like the fourth book took a wrong turn. Bella in particular loses everything that made her charming.


----------



## 4Katie (Jun 27, 2009)

The books are much better than the movie. But the movies/actors are growing on me.



> Like many people, I feel like the fourth book took a wrong turn. Bella in particular loses everything that made her charming.


I definitely liked the fourth book the least. And I can't imagine how they'll be able to make it into a movie.


----------



## Aravis60 (Feb 18, 2009)

pawsplus said:


> Yeah, the books are far from great art but they're MILES better than the movies. I got embarassingly addicted to the books and pretty much read all 4 in 2 weeks, LOL. Again, NOT great art, but a good story.


Ditto.


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)

Jay Bell said:


> Bella in particular loses everything that made her charming.


Did she have anything in the other 3 books that made her charming? I must have missed those parts.


----------



## Imogen Rose (Mar 22, 2010)

I loved the books and the movies!


----------



## Tracey (Mar 18, 2010)

I loved the books.  Devoured them in about a week.  Saw the first movie and hated it.  Thought it left so much out and it just didn't do the book justice.  I also think that they didn't cast the parts very well.  They were definitely not what I had imagined.

Haven't seen the second movie yet, but not holding my breath that it will be any good but will reserve my judgment until I see it.


----------



## sparrowlight (Dec 19, 2009)

luvmy4brats said:


> Did she have anything in the other 3 books that made her charming? I must have missed those parts.


QFT!

I'm in the "violently dislike" camp when it comes to Twilight. It mostly comes down to the fact that vampire/human relationships have been written about in much better style by other authors and creators (Robin McKinley's_ Sunshine_, Anne Rice's works, and the TV show_ Buffy the Vampire Slayer _all come to mind).


----------



## RavenclawPrefect (May 4, 2009)

For those book fans, I am sure you know the novella, The Short Second Life of Bree Tanner, is available free to read online at breetanner.com 


Since it is less than 200 pages, it is a quick read.  I just finished it.  I was surprised at how much I liked it.  We all know how Bree's story ends but this makes me wish it had not been cut short.

I would recommend checking it out.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

RangerXenos said:


> I enjoyed the books much more than the movies, in fact I have been really disappointed with both movies.


Same here, they left out so much and some of the actors/actresses are just so wrong for the part.

I think these books are really the type that you either love them or you hate them. I actually really liked them, not a crazy fan girl type love but I did really like them enough to read them twice.

RCP, I also just finished the Short Life of Bree Tanner, I really liked it as well and do wish it would have ended differently for her. I actually thought she was a pretty lovable character. 
I don't think I liked it enough to spend $9.99 for the Kindle version but if it went down in price I would definitely add it to my collection.


----------



## OliverCrommer (May 17, 2010)

I'm not a big fan of vampire stories in general, and I find Stephenie Meyer's writing style to be amateurish and unreadable, but I certainly admire her success.


----------



## Joel Arnold (May 3, 2010)

This is one of those series that I want to read (at least the first book) just to see what all the fuss is about. I've heard such mixed reactions, from how wonderful it is to how terrible it is, but whatever your opinion, you gotta admit, it's become quite a phenomena!

Joel Arnold


----------



## Tracey (Mar 18, 2010)

> I find Stephenie Meyer's writing style to be amateurish and unreadable


But you have to remember that she was aiming her writing at YA, not adults who scrutinise her style of writing. I just took the books for what they were, a good easy read and a story that, even though got a bit weird towards the end of the last book, was something that I didn't have to think about too much when I was reading.

I personally don't have a problem with her style of writing, I can't write anything creative to save myself, so anyone that can publish a book has my admiration.


----------



## OliverCrommer (May 17, 2010)

Tracey said:


> But you have to remember that she was aiming her writing at YA, not adults who scrutinise her style of writing. I just took the books for what they were, a good easy read and a story that, even though got a bit weird towards the end of the last book, was something that I didn't have to think about too much when I was reading.
> 
> I personally don't have a problem with her style of writing, I can't write anything creative to save myself, so anyone that can publish a book has my admiration.


So you're not an author then? Well, as an author myself, I really expected the level of writing to be higher. It doesn't have to be at the Nobel prize winning-level. It just has to be readable, which it wasn't.

And I knew _exactly_ that she was aiming for YA readers. Even then, the writing was bad. If you want good fantasy aimed at YA readers, I can recommend TONS of other series that trump her writing, ex. JK Rowling, Garth Nix (The Abhorsen Series).

I tried reading Twilight, but I couldn't get past the first few chapters. It was boring as hell. Then, I flipped through the rest of the novel, and then I saw something that really made me put it down.

I learned that if you don't have an "s" in a sentence, you can't use the word "hiss," as in ["I don't want to go home," she hissed.] 
I saw something like that somewhere in Twilight, and that really turned me off. It just seems like amateurish teen writing to me, something that the average 11 year old girl would write.

That being said, I still very much admire her success, because let's face it: as authors, we would not complain if we had that level of success, even if we weren't aiming for it.

Hmmm..maybe I should start writing her like now...


----------



## Tracey (Mar 18, 2010)

But what might not be readable to you might be very readable to someone else. Like I said I found them to be a very easy read and she captured my imagination. That to me is what a book should do, capture your imagination.

Excuse my ignorance too, but why cant you use the word "hiss" in a sentence without using the letter 's' somewhere in said sentence? 

And no I am not an author of books, that is just too funny to even think about -  I am the author of many a legal letter but can't write creatively to save myself. Even if I was an author I don't think my opinion of the books would change.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

I expect there's room for a lot of different viewpoints. . . .all just as valid as the rest. . . . .let's be careful not to be condemnatory toward those whose opinions differ from our own. . . . . .


----------



## Imogen Rose (Mar 22, 2010)

JasonWChan said:


> So you're not an author then? Well, as an author myself, I really expected the level of writing to be higher. It doesn't have to be at the Nobel prize winning-level. It just has to be readable, which it wasn't.
> 
> And I knew _exactly_ that she was aiming for YA readers. Even then, the writing was bad. If you want good fantasy aimed at YA readers, I can recommend TONS of other series that trump her writing, ex. JK Rowling, Garth Nix (The Abhorsen Series).
> 
> ...


Jason, I thought she was just at the perfect level for her audience (I think that's reflected in her sales!). I found her writing easy and entertaining.


----------



## austenfiend (Nov 17, 2009)

The Twilight books will always hold a special place in my heart, because the series finally got my son to read.  It goes far beyond being a reluctant reader, with learning disabilities it has been frustrating and painful.  I let him read the first three, I don't feel he's ready for the fourth one yet so he happily moved on to the Cirque du Freak series and has been willingly reading ever since.

I enjoyed the books because they reminded me of reading a teenage girl's diary.  I got a feel for the angst and it brought back a lot of teenage feelings for me, how everything was just SO BIG, you know?

The movies - when I first saw Twilight I thought the casting was REALLY bad.  They weren't how I imagined them from the book at all.  But, after we bought the movie and we saw it a few times, it grew on me.  I liked New Moon because it had a lot more humor in it.  Of course we did the midnight showing when it opened because my son thought that would be cool.

Actually, the books and the movies go on  my "guilty pleasures" list!


----------



## pawsplus (Mar 31, 2009)

JasonWChan said:


> And I knew _exactly_ that she was aiming for YA readers. Even then, the writing was bad. If you want good fantasy aimed at YA readers, I can recommend TONS of other series that trump her writing, ex. JK Rowling, Garth Nix (The Abhorsen Series).


I agree--there is NO reason why YA fiction shouldn't be well-written, and every reason that it SHOULD. I read quite a bit of YA fiction (Cynthia Voight, Robin McKinley, etc.) and re-read my old faves often. Kids can't learn what is good if they don't READ what is good.

That said, the Harry Potter/Twilight thing has caused many more kids to read than did in the past. I don't think that Rowling is THAT much better a writer than Meyer, but we can agree to disagree on that point.  The main thing is that kids who usually don't read are picking up HUGE books and actually reading them with enjoyment. That's a good thing in my book (uh, Kindle!) any day of the week!

As I've said, I'm a bit embarassed that I enjoy her books--it's like enjoying Mickey D's fries. I know they're total crap, but I can't help myself.


----------



## 4Katie (Jun 27, 2009)

luvmy4brats said:


> Did she have anything in the other 3 books that made her charming? I must have missed those parts.


I honestly don't get why everyone thinks she's such a great actress. (I remember the director of the first movie saying how surprised she was that they got an actor 'of her caliber'.) I don't thing she can act at all.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

I don't much like Kristen Stewart either.  She is always moaning about how much her life sucks, how she wishes she didn't take the Twilight gig, how much she hates fame, how much she wished she wasn't in the movie.  

To put myself through college, I worked behind the scenes in the film/tv industry, and everyone I still talk to can't stand her.  I think she will have a hard time finding a new job when this one is over.  Producers and directors don't forget this kind of stuff.

Now most recently, she's compared herself to a woman who has been violently raped because people always want to take pictures of her.  Not amusing in the least.  I work with alot of women and girls who have been violently raped and there is absolutely no excuse for a comment like that.  

The girl needs to hire a new publicist.  The one she has now is terrible.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

JasonWChan said:


> I'm not a big fan of vampire stories in general, and I find Stephenie Meyer's writing style to be amateurish and unreadable, but I certainly admire her success.


Just out of curiosity, which authors (other than the above you mentioned) do you actually like and enjoy their writing?


----------



## travelgirl (Sep 22, 2009)

I dragged my feet forever before I read the Twilight series.  

When I finally did download the first one (they were around $5 each for the Kindle at the time) I figured I'd read it, and see what all the fuss was about.  I couldn't put it down!  I downloaded the other three while I was still reading the first one.

I did hate the first movie.  New moon was a little better, but still not as good as the book.


----------



## Guest (Jun 8, 2010)

padowd said:


> My husband and I watched New Moon last night and really liked it. Has anyone read the books and were they different from the movies. I am thinking about getting them. I have read alot of people did not like the final book and the way it ended.


I read one or two chapters of the first book. It made me want to vomit. Sorry, they ain't horror. They are tween romances with vampires that friggin SPARKLE.

I guess I am obviously not the target market for these books lol


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Tracey said:


> I just took the books for what they were...something that I didn't have to think about too much when I was reading.


I think that is my biggest problem with Twilight: I read to engage my brain, not shut it off. I view Twilight kind of like reality television: stupidly popular, but not exactly high quality mental stimulation.

David Dalglish


----------



## pawsplus (Mar 31, 2009)

Half-Orc said:


> I think that is my biggest problem with Twilight: I read to engage my brain, not shut it off. I view Twilight kind of like reality television: stupidly popular, but not exactly high quality mental stimulation.


I agree. But I DO watch TV sometimes (not a lot, but sometimes), and I DO read books like _Twilight_ sometimes, too.


----------



## Mandy (Dec 27, 2009)

I thought the Twilight series was pretty enjoyable as light reading. I approached the series the same way I did the Harry Potter series - knowing it was aimed at YA, and not expecting anything more. The books could've been better if Meyer had omitted half of the lovey-dovey "I can't breathe without you" teenage angst. Breaking Dawn, the last in the series, has some pretty disturbing scenes that are not so YA. My children won't be watching this movie unless it veers way off from the book. Heck, it'll have to if the producer wants to maintain a YA rating...


----------



## joanne29 (Jun 30, 2009)

I read them all and did enjoy the story, especially more than the movies. I cannot to this day understand Kristen Stewart as Bella. All in all though I did not walk away feeling I read anything earth shattering or literary, but the books were entertaining, which is why I love to read.


----------



## J.M Pierce (May 13, 2010)

I have to admit that I very much enjoyed the books. I've read the first two and am currently midway through the third.
As for the movies, well...I ALWAYS like the books more than the movies.

Take care all,
J.M.


----------



## 4Katie (Jun 27, 2009)

> I read to engage my brain, not shut it off. I view Twilight kind of like reality television: stupidly popular, but not exactly high quality mental stimulation.


But sometimes it's just nice to escape with something light and entertaining.


----------



## Vyrl (Jun 7, 2010)

I think the Twilight books were so successful because they tapped deeply into that universal drive of ladies to find the 'perfect guy.' Even if he happens to be a vampire stalker  . The more dangerous, the more fun, right?


----------



## marianneg (Nov 4, 2008)

I liked them on the whole.  I thought as a series it was a bit uneven, though.  I liked the first, the second not so much, liked the third, and was very disappointed in the last one.


----------



## Tracey (Mar 18, 2010)

> I read to engage my brain, not shut it off. I view Twilight kind of like reality television: stupidly popular, but not exactly high quality mental stimulation.


But sometimes if you have had a hard read, you just want something that you don't have to think too hard about. And Twilight did this for me.



> But sometimes it's just nice to escape with something light and entertaining.


Yep, I totally agree.

As for Kristen Stewart, can't stand her and I think they cast Bella badly! As for Edward, don't even get me started.....anyone know what the charm with Robert Pattinson is?


----------



## Imogen Rose (Mar 22, 2010)

Tracey said:


> But sometimes if you have had a hard read, you just want something that you don't have to think too hard about. And Twilight did this for me.
> 
> Yep, I totally agree.
> 
> As for Kristen Stewart, can't stand her and I think they cast Bella badly! As for Edward, don't even get me started.....anyone know what the charm with Robert Pattinson is?


If you could have cast anyone, who would you have cast as Bella and Edward?


----------



## 4Katie (Jun 27, 2009)

Vyrl said:


> I think the Twilight books were so successful because they tapped deeply into that universal drive of ladies to find the 'perfect guy.' Even if he happens to be a vampire stalker . The more dangerous, the more fun, right?


Not to mention the fantasy of having two gorgeous guys fight over you!


----------



## Tracey (Mar 18, 2010)

> If you could have cast anyone, who would you have cast as Bella and Edward?


That is a really hard question. I will have to think about that and get back to you.


----------



## Imogen Rose (Mar 22, 2010)

Tracey said:


> That is a really hard question. I will have to think about that and get back to you.


I read somewhere that Stephanie Meyers wanted Henry Cavill (from the Tudors) cast in the movie ( but that he was too old for whatever part she had in mind for him) by the time the movie was in the works.


----------



## Tracey (Mar 18, 2010)

> I read somewhere that Stephanie Meyers wanted Henry Cavill (from the Tudors) cast in the movie ( but that he was too old for whatever part she had in mind for him) by the time the movie was in the works.


Mmmmm now that brings to mind Jonathon Reece Meyers - yum, but again too old probably.

I am a bit of a hard one to please when it comes to vampires in movies. I still think the perfect vampires were Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise but then I am of that generation.

Hmmm still thinking.


----------



## Imogen Rose (Mar 22, 2010)

Tracey said:


> Mmmmm now that brings to mind Jonathon Reece Meyers - yum, but again too old probably.
> 
> I am a bit of a hard one to please when it comes to vampires in movies. I still think the perfect vampires were Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise but then I am of that generation.
> 
> Hmmm still thinking.


Now JRM is MINE!... have reserved him to play Rupert the movie version of my book, lol! Ed Westwick is reserved as well....

It's really hard for me to come up with an alternative Bella and Edward as I watched the movie before I read the books.


----------



## Tracey (Mar 18, 2010)

> Now JRM is MINE!... have reserved him to play Rupert the movie version of my book, lol! Ed Westwick is reserved as well....


roflol....can we share? lol



> It's really hard for me to come up with an alternative Bella and Edward as I watched the movie before I read the books.


I read the books first (made sure I finished the first one before I saw the movie) and I can't really come up with a variation, probably because I like older actors (me being old an all), so it is hard for me to come up with someone younger.

In saying that I still don't get the R Pat thing.....I just don't see him as having that 'thing' that Edward has. Now someone like Jensen Ackles? He would have that 'thing' but because Supernatural is one of my favorite TV shows, I would have a hard time seeing him as anyone but Dean.


----------



## Lyndl (Apr 2, 2010)

I enjoyed them, the first three were light and easy to read. The last was a bit different but I still liked it.  

The movies were OK, something to watch on a rainy afternoon.  I agree that the casting was a bit off... I think they got it right with Alice, Charlie & Carlisle.  Forget the rest.


----------



## J Bee (May 17, 2010)

luvmy4brats said:


> Did she have anything in the other 3 books that made her charming? I must have missed those parts.


At least young, insecure girls could relate to her, which is the secret of the series' success. Making her a perfect porcelain doll alienated the reader. Plus it was a missed opportunity. A clumsy vampire would have been cute.


----------



## Asphodel (Jul 19, 2009)

When I first started hearing about the Twilight books, I discounted them because I'm not usually interested in YA lit (with the notable exception of Harry Potter). But, a librarian friend who specialized in YA lit recommended them, so I bought the first book and I admit that I couldn't put it (or the rest of the series) down. It was like sweet, sugary candy with absolutely no nutritional value (and you know it's terrible for you as you're eating it) but you can't stop. Or at least that was my experience. 

I have qualms about young, impressionable girls reading some of the themes in the books - Edward is often possessive and controlling, and while it might seem flattering to have two attractive guys fighting over you, they were really kind of objectifying her and usually didn't respect her choices. 

But on the other hand, it encouraged a lot of young people to read when they might not have otherwise, so does the good and bad balance out? It's hard to tell.


----------



## Mandy (Dec 27, 2009)

Jay Bell said:


> At least young, insecure girls could relate to her, which is the secret of the series' success. Making her a perfect porcelain doll alienated the reader. Plus it was a missed opportunity. A clumsy vampire would have been cute.


Eh...I dunno about the "perfect porcelain doll." IMO, Bella comes off as a weak, spineless character who allows herself to be controlled by her boyfriend and verbally abused by her best friend. She alienates her friends, goes against her parents' wishes and makes dangerous decisions, and spirlas into a severe depression and refuses to "live" when her boyfriend disappears. That's not even getting into book 4, which is a whole 'nother topic!

Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy the books, but Bella is definitely not a character I want my three daughters to look up to.

Robert Pattinson plays a decent Edward, but Kristen Stewart just dulls Bella down even more.


----------



## Labrynth (Dec 31, 2009)

First let me say I read all four and wasn't impressed. Her writing improved with each book, as does Rowling's in the HP series. They were obvious both first time writers and I don't have a problem with that. I actually LIKE watching authors grow... look at the difference between Dean Koontz's old stuff compared to his new. He has certainly improved. Her style didn't bother me so much as a lot of the other stuff. And I actually found some of her mythos to be interesting. The wolves and the vamps being in a type of cycle was interesting to me. The sparkling vampires totally lost me.



Mandy said:


> Eh...I dunno about the "perfect porcelain doll." IMO, Bella comes off as a weak, spineless character who allows herself to be controlled by her boyfriend and verbally abused by her best friend. She alienates her friends, goes against her parents' wishes and makes dangerous decisions, and spirals into a severe depression and refuses to "live" when her boyfriend disappears. That's not even getting into book 4, which is a whole 'nother topic!


I think this was my biggest issue with the books. HOW is this a romantic relationship? Edward is abusing, controlling and tries to cut her off from her family. Uh, this is pretty much the definition of an abusive relationship. Pretty sure that most partners who abuse like this also use the "It's for your own good" speech as well. That is not love IMO.

I had high hopes for Jacob initially. Then they were dashed. Over and over again. *sigh* That doesn't stop me from drooling over Taylor Lautner even tho he's half my age. I'm still trying to convince a friend to suffer thru New Moon long enough to piece together all his half nekkid scene for me to drool over. Wait... where was I again?

Ahem... sorry got distracted.

I am in the minority in that I thought the 4th book was the strongest of the series. Bella grows a pair, and right or wrong, holds fast to her desire to be changed. She's a bit manipulative in getting it, but she knew what she wanted and she went for it. I can appreciate that. Now she has to deal with the choices she made. Now... the rest of book 4 made me roll my eyes. The name alone made me want to throttle Meyers. And the Jacob thing I saw coming from a mile away and it "Makes me want to heave" to quote a better vampire. (Gold star for the person who knows who and where that came from)

As others have said, I'm happy the series has gotten many people to read. I always appreciate that. And I can respect her success with it, even if it boggles my mind as to WHY it's so successful.


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)

Mandy said:


> Eh...I dunno about the "perfect porcelain doll." IMO, Bella comes off as a weak, spineless character who allows herself to be controlled by her boyfriend and verbally abused by her best friend. She alienates her friends, goes against her parents' wishes and makes dangerous decisions, and spirlas into a severe depression and refuses to "live" when her boyfriend disappears. That's not even getting into book 4, which is a whole 'nother topic!
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy the books, but Bella is definitely not a character I want my three daughters to look up to.


This was my issue with the books.


----------



## Crystalmes (Jan 28, 2010)

I really loved the books, not Bella so much but I enjoyed them. The movies, the 2nd was better then the 1st, but neither beat the books and the movie in your mind..

I am reading Short Life now.


----------



## J Bee (May 17, 2010)

Mandy said:


> She alienates her friends, goes against her parents' wishes and makes dangerous decisions, and spirlas into a severe depression and refuses to "live" when her boyfriend disappears.


Leave my past out of this! Oh wait, you're talking about Bella. I agree that the way Edward treated her was disturbing, if not abusive. Jacob was so sweet in comparison until he turned into a two dimensional hate machine. If I were Bella, I would have left them both behind and found someone sane to be with. Actually, I would have left Edward to die in Italy and taken Jacob as my were-husband. 

Do any girls look up to Bella? All my nieces talk about is how hot Taylor Lautner and Robert Patterson are. I doubt they even know who Bella Swan is.


----------



## travelgirl (Sep 22, 2009)

Jay Bell said:


> Do any girls look up to Bella? All my nieces talk about is how hot Taylor Lautner and Robert Patterson are. I doubt they even know who Bella Swan is.


You're right, they don't know who Bella Swan is, because when they (or we, can't help myself) read the books or watch the movies, they insert themselves (ourselves) into her role and eject her like so much garbage.


----------



## 4Katie (Jun 27, 2009)

> IMO, Bella comes off as a weak, spineless character who allows herself to be controlled by her boyfriend and verbally abused by her best friend. She alienates her friends, goes against her parents' wishes and makes dangerous decisions, and spirlas into a severe depression and refuses to "live" when her boyfriend disappears.


Well, when you put it that way... 

Maybe it's because I only have boys, but I never thought much about the negative side of Bella's personality until people started talking about it.

Actually, I never really thought she HAD a personality.


----------



## Labrynth (Dec 31, 2009)

The other thing that worries me is that teenage girls (And heck some grown women) seem to think this is an ideal relationship.  But, IMO, it's so obviously abusive it's not even funny.  If I had daughters, I'd be good and worried that THIS was the relationship they could be aspiring to.


----------



## Concrete Queen (Oct 19, 2009)

4Katie said:


> Well, when you put it that way...
> 
> Maybe it's because I only have boys, but I never thought much about the negative side of Bella's personality until people started talking about it.
> 
> Actually, I never reall though she HAD a personality.


Someone did a parody/mockery of Twilight in which they called Bella "Pants" because she's so personality-less that she's like an empty pair of pants that anyone can put on. Basically, because she's so lacking in any strong characteristics, it's easy for girls to pretend they're Bella.

I liked the books until the last one, though. I mean, they weren't the best books I'd ever read, but they were fun popcorn reads.

Then Breaking Dawn ruined them all for me. Bella finally grew a pair, to be sure, but too abruptly. It was like she was a totally different person, but nothing happened to change her.

And then the whole theme of the series was that this was a Great Romance, and Great Romances have serious consequences. And then there were no consequences. Bella got everything she wanted _and_ a cute little cottage in the woods to boot. It was a major let down.


----------



## Labrynth (Dec 31, 2009)

concrete_queen said:


> And then the whole theme of the series was that this was a Great Romance, and Great Romances have serious consequences. And then there were no consequences. Bella got everything she wanted _and_ a cute little cottage in the woods to boot. It was a major let down.


Someone else, in another discussion, brought this up and I have to agree. She really didn't have any repercussions for the choices she made and that's too bad.

But, if you want a good giggle (Here's hoping I'm not breaking the rules here) this has GOT to be one of the funniest Twilight spoofs I've seen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dompotjTeIA


----------



## Stormy (May 24, 2010)

Tracey said:


> But you have to remember that she was aiming her writing at YA, not adults who scrutinise her style of writing. I just took the books for what they were, a good easy read and a story that, even though got a bit weird towards the end of the last book, was something that I didn't have to think about too much when I was reading.
> 
> I personally don't have a problem with her style of writing, I can't write anything creative to save myself, so anyone that can publish a book has my admiration.


Actually she was not writing for YA that's just the audience it ended up being for. At least that is the case of twilight.


----------



## Stormy (May 24, 2010)

Imogen Rose said:


> If you could have cast anyone, who would you have cast as Bella and Edward?


Alexis Bledel (Rory from Gilmore girls) for Bella hands down. In fact I'm kinda irked because she was considered for the part and was turned down for being "too old" for the part. I say if she looks 17 she can play 17 and would be a perfect Bella. Edward....I don't know to be honest Robert Pattinson has grown on me but I don't like him in anything outside of Twilight.


----------



## Stormy (May 24, 2010)

Labrynth said:


> First let me say I read all four and wasn't impressed. Her writing improved with each book, as does Rowling's in the HP series. They were obvious both first time writers and I don't have a problem with that. I actually LIKE watching authors grow... look at the difference between Dean Koontz's old stuff compared to his new. He has certainly improved. Her style didn't bother me so much as a lot of the other stuff. And I actually found some of her mythos to be interesting. The wolves and the vamps being in a type of cycle was interesting to me. The sparkling vampires totally lost me.
> 
> I think this was my biggest issue with the books. HOW is this a romantic relationship? Edward is abusing, controlling and tries to cut her off from her family. Uh, this is pretty much the definition of an abusive relationship. Pretty sure that most partners who abuse like this also use the "It's for your own good" speech as well. That is not love IMO.
> 
> ...


Not to be rude but.....Edward actually fights very hard NOT to remove her from her family and friends and is one of his reasons for NOT wanting to change her. Bella is Stubborn though and holds fast to wanting to be a vampire and Edward does give in but did not have desire to remove her from those who love her.


----------



## Stormy (May 24, 2010)

Based on my other comments obviously I am a fan. I was reluctant though. So often i had twilight and harry potter lumped together for me and I detest Harry Potter so I was reluctant to read twilight. That and I don't like most vampire books and shows. I did like Buffy though and part of that I think was that it's set in modern times. When I learned twilight was as well I decided to give it a shot and I LOVED it. I feel that her reaction in new moon wasn't that off course. I mean her true love I mean this was not just some puppy dog crush but real love and he up and left.  Also everyone always goes off that it's abusive of Edward to monopolize all her time but when Jacob did it no one says a thing? Sorry just my little rant. I wasn't as impressed with the movies as the books but how often is the movie ever as good.


----------



## Labrynth (Dec 31, 2009)

Stormy said:


> Not to be rude but.....Edward actually fights very hard NOT to remove her from her family and friends and is one of his reasons for NOT wanting to change her. Bella is Stubborn though and holds fast to wanting to be a vampire and Edward does give in but did not have desire to remove her from those who love her.


I'm glad the way that's how you read it, it is not how I read it.


----------



## 4Katie (Jun 27, 2009)

> Edward actually fights very hard NOT to remove her from her family and friends and is one of his reasons for NOT wanting to change her. Bella is Stubborn though and holds fast to wanting to be a vampire and Edward does give in but did not have desire to remove her from those who love her.


Quite true. Practically everything he ever did was to keep her human and with her family. I love that he worked so hard to have her experience human rituals, like going to the prom.


----------



## Tracey (Mar 18, 2010)

> Alexis Bledel (Rory from Gilmore girls) for Bella hands down


I was actually going to suggest her, but again I thought maybe too old. But she was great playing a teenage Rory Gilmore, so I don't see why she would have been deemed too old.



> Actually she was not writing for YA that's just the audience it ended up being for. At least that is the case of twilight.


Really I had always read that she aimed it at YA. Well ya learn something new every day! 

As for the abusive relationships in the book, I agree that Edward did try to do everything he could to persuade her to stay human, but in saying that he was very possessive and controlling at the same time. As for Jacob OMG I hated that character and wanted to punch him out during every word of the second book!!!! I thought he was even more possessive than Edward and in the end I was glad she ended up with Edward.

As for the little cottage in the woods, well that was just sucky and really didn't fit in with the story IMO. But I wasn't a huge fan of the last book, the only thing I liked about the last book was that she finally turned and became a bit more ballsy. Otherwise I think she was weak and bland.


----------



## Stormy (May 24, 2010)

Tracey said:


> I was actually going to suggest her, but again I thought maybe too old. But she was great playing a teenage Rory Gilmore, so I don't see why she would have been deemed too old.
> 
> Really I had always read that she aimed it at YA. Well ya learn something new every day!
> 
> ...


If you go to Stephanie Meyer's website she mentions that she never intended twilight to be for a YA audience. It's possible after that since that was her fan base she did but that wasn't her intention in the beginning.


----------



## Imogen Rose (Mar 22, 2010)

Stormy said:


> Alexis Bledel (Rory from Gilmore girls) for Bella hands down. In fact I'm kinda irked because she was considered for the part and was turned down for being "too old" for the part. I say if she looks 17 she can play 17 and would be a perfect Bella. Edward....I don't know to be honest Robert Pattinson has grown on me but I don't like him in anything outside of Twilight.


Nice choice!


----------



## Vyrl (Jun 7, 2010)

4Katie said:


> Not to mention the fantasy of having two gorgeous guys fight over you!


Ah yes! Too true!

Twilight did tap into something pretty primal, didn't it? Not that I liked Bella's cliche passive damsel in distress, nor the objectified sparkly vampires or werewolf six-pack Casanovas.

But hey, I think the gals get their revenge here. Hasn't pop culture been objectifying women for years? Airbrushed models anyone? Now the girls get their fantasy vampires to toy with.

As for sophistication, at least it takes more than pictures to tickle the feminine funny-bone


----------



## blackbelt (May 4, 2010)

I tried because my wife loves 'em and I always read what she asks me to (secret No. 1 to marriage: do what the wife says).  But though I'm not a "hater," I didn't really think too much of the first book.  It was okay, but I thought Edward was way too high-and-mighty, plus if any real guy ever treated a girl like he treated Bella, he'd be attacked by feminists, the PC Police, and anyone who wasn't born in the Victorian Era.  So I couldn't suspend disbelief because I kept expecting Bella to slap him.


----------



## luvmyBOB (Jan 7, 2010)

I loved the whole series so much so that I have read them all but #4 multiple times.  I would read #4 again too but I can't find it, so I better see if I can get it on my Kindle.


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)




----------



## Sharlow (Dec 20, 2009)

JasonWChan said:


> So you're not an author then? Well, as an author myself, I really expected the level of writing to be higher. It doesn't have to be at the Nobel prize winning-level. It just has to be readable, which it wasn't.
> 
> And I knew _exactly_ that she was aiming for YA readers. Even then, the writing was bad. If you want good fantasy aimed at YA readers, I can recommend TONS of other series that trump her writing, ex. JK Rowling, Garth Nix (The Abhorsen Series).
> 
> ...


Jason, with all due respect to you, but I think your being a little nutty here. I myself haven't read the series yet. A friend of mine dropped the entire series into my lap so I could, and once I finish Amanda's books I will.

The problem I have with your statement, is by what measurement are you counting her ability to write? I constantly see other so called authors constantly putting down very successful writers, and I have a hard time understanding that. There is no greater measurement of your writing ability then how many people your work touches and affects. 
People are always trying to use there college or high school standards to quantify writing, when none of that junk will ever hit it's mark. If you could write as well as her, then I think you have a right to judge her writing. It wasn't luck that made Twilight or Harry Potter or any other series great. It was something that author had that they were able to reach out and share with enough people that they just got it, and it changed them.

So many people are hung up on the technical side of things and some how think that is whats important to make a great story. If it was, then all the professor's in all the great literary schools would be the best selling authors of all time. I see the same thing in chess. People who haven't had the same level of success at the board trying to analyze top grandmaster players, and show why their play is all wrong, and yet, they aren't the ones sitting at the table with those grandmasters playing for the world title. Makes me wonder about these people.

Anyways if you hadn't noticed, it's one of my pet peeves. So sorry for the long winded comment.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Yes, sometimes people can be arrogant and dismissive of work just because they don't like what it's about. But there is still an elusive but universal standard of writing ability. There's also many factors that distinguish a work as strong writing. Many times people aren't aware of a lot of these "rules" until they try to better their own writing, and just like a "Where's Waldo", once you see them, you can't stop seeing them.

I don't see a problem in expecting writers to perform at a high standard. I think readers should expect effort and skill from their writers, and I think writers should expect the utmost effort and skill on their own part. Sloppy writing should not be excused for any reason, not for sales, or popularity, or prestige by the author.

Perhaps Jason should have given examples of why he thought the writing was poor. I believe everyone should always be willing to discuss such things when they make statements of why something is good or bad, and through that, maybe you'd see why many people dismiss her writing.

One thing I will argue with though, is this:


> If you could write as well as her, then I think you have a right to judge her writing.


How do you know I don't already? How do you know Jason doesn't already? And since when does one need to be an expert writer to know when someone else isn't good at it? I don't need to be an expert chef to know if my hamburger tastes like crap. I don't need to be an expert filmmaker to tell you that Battlefield Earth is a terribly made movie. I don't need to be a professional football player to know whether or not certain NFL teams are poorly coached.

If your argument boils down to "it was so popular it must be well-written," then you've left room for a whole ton of fallacies. What is good isn't always popular, and what is popular isn't always good. Sales are irrelevant for the most part. Competition, marketing, pitch, timing, covers, word of mouth, momentum, movie deals, author personality, and book tours all have massive effect on the success of a book, and every single one of those is completely irrelevant to the actual skill of the writer.

David Dalglish


----------



## Stormy (May 24, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> I don't see a problem in expecting writers to perform at a high standard. I think readers should expect effort and skill from their writers, and I think writers should expect the utmost effort and skill on their own part. Sloppy writing should not be excused for any reason, not for sales, or popularity, or prestige by the author.


What makes sloppy writing? I mean for technical writing that's pretty cut and dry. Use good grammar and punctuation among a few other things. With fiction however that's not always the case. I mean you want proper punctuation but grammar not necessarily. Sometimes with fiction you need to have a certain voice and use grammar that is improper. That's my opinion though.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Stormy said:


> With fiction however that's not always the case. I mean you want proper punctuation but grammar not necessarily. Sometimes with fiction you need to have a certain voice and use grammar that is improper. That's my opinion though.


Welllll. . . . . .I guess it does depend on the fiction. I have no problem with a character using improper grammar, etc. because it's part of his character. The spelling of it all should be correct however.

And I still feel like the grammar in the narration and exposition should be correct if it's a 3rd person thing.

If it's first person, the language of the 'teller' should inform the character of the teller, of course. . .but it better be Extremely well done. I see a difference between 'slang' or a 'dialect' and just bad grammar. But it's a fine line, and if the story isn't gripping in the first place, non-standard usage is going to be might annoying.

Oh, and I have no opinion on the Twilight books. . .I only ever read the sample of the first one -- it didn't seem like my sort of book -- and never went further. I only got the sample 'cause I was showing my niece how the Kindle works and when I asked "what book should I look for?" she said "Twilight". I read the sample 'cause it was there.  But I will say this: my niece is So NOT a reader. . . .but she's read all of these. . . .so, to some extent. . . .that's got to be a good thing.


----------



## Sharlow (Dec 20, 2009)

Half-Orc said:


> Yes, sometimes people can be arrogant and dismissive of work just because they don't like what it's about. But there is still an elusive but universal standard of writing ability. There's also many factors that distinguish a work as strong writing. Many times people aren't aware of a lot of these "rules" until they try to better their own writing, and just like a "Where's Waldo", once you see them, you can't stop seeing them.
> 
> I don't see a problem in expecting writers to perform at a high standard. I think readers should expect effort and skill from their writers, and I think writers should expect the utmost effort and skill on their own part. Sloppy writing should not be excused for any reason, not for sales, or popularity, or prestige by the author.
> 
> ...


I guess I'm trying to say her writing transcended something,(as metaphysical as that sounds) because of the subculture that sprung up around her books. She didn't just get a hit. She didn't just get some movies made. She affected a whole generation. I guess I don't like how so many people just jump on the band wagon and say...(She has to many typos, grammar structure sucks etc, etc, etc.) I would think it's every writers dream to touch the worlds mind's and hearts like she did, or Rowlings did.

To me thats the true essence of a story. Not it's technical aspects. If we were bards, so what if she couldn't get the dance right, or maybe she messed up on the characters names, but when she tells the story, it just enraptures the people and takes them away to another world for a time. I'm sure all the bards would hate that. Grumbling about why is she getting the jobs when she can't even keep the bloody names right. Yet she hit something in a lot of people. It surprises me how rabid some of her fans are.

So Jason forgive me if I came on to strong, but I see things in a lot of absolutes, being a chess player and all. Success always over comes theory.


----------



## Sharlow (Dec 20, 2009)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Welllll. . . . . .I guess it does depend on the fiction. I have no problem with a character using improper grammar, etc. because it's part of his character. The spelling of it all should be correct however.
> 
> And I still feel like the grammar in the narration and exposition should be correct if it's a 3rd person thing.
> 
> ...


This is what i'm trying to make a point of. Your niece is not a reader, and yet she read these books that people say are here today and gone tomorrow.

I don't think so. It would take magic or some sort of miracle to get some of the people I know to ever read a book, and yet some of them are reading Twilight. Whats that say? I wish i could tap into what she's got and have her touch.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

I have to agree with Sharlow, a good story/book to me is something that I can read that pulls me in. Something I think about long after I have put the book down. Something that may change how I look or think about something. It doesn't have to change me or my world but if it can capture my attention and not want me to put it down or to be sad when it is all over, I feel is good writing and was well worth the money and time I put into it.

I am pretty well read, I read all kinds of things from all kinds of authors. Some I like more than others. Heck, I have read Indie authors here on the boards that I have liked way more than published writers that are making bank. 

Does someone's popularity make them a good writer? Absolutely not!
Does a good author make people read that normally wouldn't or their writing change someone's life or views? To me, yes. 

I guess it is all in how you perceive it. I think this might be one of those situations where we all have to agree to disagree.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

I, personally, feel her success to be a combination of solid marketing, hitting a subgroup of readers that wasn't normally reading (girl teens) and basically writing a sappy, unoriginal love story whose undercurrents of sex and abstinence got gobbled up by the target audience. I don't think she's a bad writer. I also don't think she's a good writer. I don't think she's a particularly imaginative storyteller, either. I think she's one of those "right book, right place, right time," type of things.

A friend of mine (40 year old mom of 4 kids) read one, bought the other three, and then devoured the rest. When I asked her about them, she seemed almost embarrassed and likened them to sugar. She knew they weren't good, and they left her with no impression at all afterward, but she still wanted to read and finish them while she had them.

David Dalglish


----------



## Sharlow (Dec 20, 2009)

Half-Orc said:


> I, personally, feel her success to be a combination of solid marketing, hitting a subgroup of readers that wasn't normally reading (girl teens) and basically writing a sappy, unoriginal love story whose undercurrents of sex and abstinence got gobbled up by the target audience. I don't think she's a bad writer. I also don't think she's a good writer. I don't think she's a particularly imaginative storyteller, either. I think she's one of those "right book, right place, right time," type of things.
> 
> A friend of mine (40 year old mom of 4 kids) read one, bought the other three, and then devoured the rest. When I asked her about them, she seemed almost embarrassed and likened them to sugar. She knew they weren't good, and they left her with no impression at all afterward, but she still wanted to read and finish them while she had them.
> 
> David Dalglish


I don't know David. I see the logic your using here, but I would have to disagree. If the books had been a success, then I could agree with you. great marketing can make a good fad. But fad's wane quickly. This "fad" is still running strong as an example her new novella is selling great from what I'm seeing. Also, her book wasn't successful. It's so successful it's like the thing of legends. I see the same stuff being said about JK's Harry Potter. Yet her success is phenomenal. The levels of success by these two are incredible. Harry's got his own theme park for God's sake. But all the same crap is spouted about her by authors all the time in the past when I was first starting to write.

As to your 40 year old friend's answer. Thats common response from people to a subject that a lot of people are making fun of. People are never willing to say what they really think if it will make them look uncool, or just unpopular. I've watched this happen all the way back with Disco. It happens all the time. A counter culture pops up and attacks something that is super popular at the time in an attempt to make themselves look cool by supposedly standing apart from all the sheep that are running to the popular thing.

I've always thought that was sad, and personally never let others brow beat me down from my opinions. Since you were a special ED teacher, I'm sure you have witnessed this effect first hand in schools.


----------



## Dawn McCullough White (Feb 24, 2010)

I admit to devouring all four like candy just a few weeks ago, all the while knowing that Bella was the biggest Mary Sue I've ever run across.  They are sort of a comfort read I suppose.  Everything good always happens for Bella.  It was nice to be transported somewhere else for a while- into her world.  

I will caution though that in my opinion the first book is the best, with New Moon, Eclipse, and Breaking Dawn growing progressively worse. By the time I read Breaking Dawn... well, I had to power through to the end just to see what happened.  It sort of lost me as it lost all touch with reality.

I also found Edward to be emotionally abusive toward Bella especially in Eclipse and Breaking Dawn.  If I was Bella I would've staked him.


Dawn


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Except with Harry Potter, the vast bulk of literary critics say that Rowling IS a good writer. I've read enough of both to know that Rowling, at least when it comes to command of language, is much superior, her story far more original, and characters far, far more endearing. There's more fun in the Weasley twins than the entire cast of Twilight. Rowling's success has also lasted what, ten plus years now? That's not a fad. That's endurance. I'm curious to see if Harry Potter will last as long as say, Tolkien or C. S. Lewis.

There's other things. Once someone because amazingly famous as a writer, they'll still continue to sell. Of course her new book sold like crazy; she's made a legion of fans who will gobble up anything she puts out. Don't forget they are also still pumping movies. If anything sells a book, it's a movie. I think time will tell just how solid she is. Once a craze fades, once something is no longer the "big" thing, it has to stand on its own merit. Disco faded because, well, disco was terrible. You can find plenty still listening to music from the 50s, 60s, etc, and there are older songs from amazingly respected bands like the Beatles that aficionados of music still enjoy (take a look at Rock Band: Beatles). I still feel Twilight is just a mediocre book with nothing truly original within. Things outside the author's control, things like marketing, pushed it out from standard sales to phenomenal sales, and once a ball of snow starts rolling downhill...

I liken Twilight to the Snuggie. It seems everyone in the world will tell you they're laughably stupid, yet somehow they're still selling millions...

David Dalglish

p.s.

Dawn posted while I was writing this. Your opinion I think is shared by many, many Twilight fans. So many feel the first is the best, and the rest get progressively worse. Why? Most skilled authors get better with time, and their characters more developed. Twilight series stagnated. Once the allure of the premise wears out, you're left with the writing and the personalities of the characters...both of which I think are lacking.


----------



## Dawn McCullough White (Feb 24, 2010)

I think she took more time crafting the first book.  Once Stephanie Meyer had a contract they probably had crazy deadlines to get the last three finished, so her writing was quick and sloppy.  I suspect that's why they lack a stronger story.

Just a guess.

Dawn


----------



## marianneg (Nov 4, 2008)

I think she must have been panicking at the end to wrap up the story, because I thought the ending of _Breaking Dawn_ was an incredibly weak deus ex machina.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

marianner said:


> I think she must have been panicking at the end to wrap up the story, because I thought the ending of _Breaking Dawn_ was an incredibly weak deus ex machina.


I don't know about that. Her original deal was for three books only, then she stretched it to four and got about as much for the fourth as she did for the three if I remember right.

I did just read my first L.J. Smith vampire story yesterday. I did like it but I can tell it is very young adult, or at least the one I read was.


----------



## Labrynth (Dec 31, 2009)

I WANNA BE A WEASLEY!!!!

Sorry, had to throw that in!!!  

You can watch Rowling grow as an author thru all 7 books.  Meyers did some improving, but I'm not sure it was nearly enough.

I've got to agree with David here.  While the movies are still fueling it, the books will continue to sell.  Now, I could be wrong, but weren't these books published for a while before anyone noticed them?  At least the first couple?  I remember I kept seeing shirts and such around Dragon*Con a few years ago and got curious.  I actually hadn't read much in the way of reviews to even know what the story was about when I picked them up.

Still hated them.  *shrug*


----------



## Lyndl (Apr 2, 2010)

The books were a light, fun read. But "*Renesmee*" ? Really? _Surely_ she could have come up with something better than that?


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

Labrynth said:


> I WANNA BE A WEASLEY!!!!
> 
> Sorry, had to throw that in!!!
> 
> ...


I really don't know but I do know that until someone recommended them to me, I had never even heard of the Twilight series. In fact, I just got into them when the last one in the series was released.

As for HP, I knew about it, heard about it and saw lots of merchandise but I didn't start reading them until the year the sixth one was released. Which was good for me since then I didn't have to wait as long to read the whole series. I feel sort of bad for those that started reading them as soon as the first was out. That was a long time to wait!


----------



## Stormy (May 24, 2010)

Lyndl said:


> The books were a light, fun read. But "*Renesmee*" ? Really? _Surely_ she could have come up with something better than that?


It's unique cause a human name wouldn't do personally I like it.


----------



## J.M Pierce (May 13, 2010)

I just finished Eclipse on Sunday. I really enjoyed it and actually thought it was the best one of the first three. I'm not saying it was perfect, but I was able to get lost and take a break from reality for a while and that is my ultimate goal when I read!


----------



## Labrynth (Dec 31, 2009)

MLPMom said:


> As for HP, I knew about it, heard about it and saw lots of merchandise but I didn't start reading them until the year the sixth one was released. Which was good for me since then I didn't have to wait as long to read the whole series. I feel sort of bad for those that started reading them as soon as the first was out. That was a long time to wait!


I actually didn't read any of the HP books until the fall when the last one came out. LOL I'm the same way... I'd have died if I'd had to wait for all the books each time. The only thing I was upset about by doing it that way was that I got spoiled for the big death at the end. At the same time I had time to brace myself for it since


Spoiler



the Weasley twins were probably in the top 3 of fav characters for me.


----------



## izzy (Jun 12, 2010)

I love reading twilight when i just want to really escape with something super light and fluffy. 
If i was still 13 or 14 i know i would be a crazy fan like i was with harry potter when it came out.

I am put myself into Bella as i read. In some ways she was a way for me to relate back to high school days i was in some ways a lot like her. I think that Bella was left kind of empty so that when reading the book you could put yourself into her as much as you wanted to.

I can't hate any book that gets kids reading though personally. I wish there were more series that got kids reading a lot more.


----------



## AlexJouJou (May 16, 2010)

I only read a bit of Twilight. Although it should be my cup of tea at the time I didn't think it was (I read a lot of paranormal stuff like this). I also read a lot of YA. I may pick up the first one on my shelf and have another go. 

However my daughter tried it (she is 13) and hated it. She thought it was "drible" (I'm not even sure how to write that word correctly..basically she meant dung from what she says). She is very pick about books though and will not touch any regular YA or Childrens book that are "like Oh my God he's so cute" or similar..with a 10 ft pole she wouldn't go near them. 

Kind of funny because when her friends come over they are always asking to borrow our books - though they think the books are hers they are really mine. She doesn't always say much but if they ask she will tell them why she either didn't like it, stopped reading it, or won't touch it. 

She's not really fond of light and fluffy. She has read some YA books though - she loved "The Hunger Games" and she's currently reading the "Theodosia" series which she is really enjoying. She liked "The Lightning Thief" series and Patricia Wrede's Dragon series. Also the Gilda Joyce Mystery series. Other than that she tends to read more adult stuff like "The Power of One" and the Flavia de Luce mystery series by Bradley. Since she is part Egyptian (my ex was Egyptian) she also has a nice collection of non fiction Egyptology books. She loves those. And the American Girl non fiction books she very much adores...but that's pretty much it. Unfortunately alot of adult books I read have sex (she does not want to read about that..yet anywy LOL) or too much violence. 

*sigh* for every 20 books I try to introduce she might read 1 if I'm lucky.


----------

