“The series never tried to put up a literary facade. It is a chick flick. I didn’t read the series to hone my grammar, it is not an English textbook anyway. I know my grammar, and I believe I know it well. From the point of view of literature, yes, it is a miserable failure.”
Answer for me?
Since all the cool kids are doing it….
For what it’s worth, Bella does go out of her way to reference classical literature and assert her familiarity with lofty prose so it’s not unreasonable to expect more out of her as a narrator. This point is subjective, though.
Actual answer:
Twilight does too have a literary façade, and it’s called a front cover. Twilight is not an email, a blog post, a text message, or a grocery list. It may not be a textbook, but it is a book. Regardless of whether it’s Machiavelli’s The Prince or Meg Cabot’s The Princess Diaries, the storytelling should be supported by quality construction and content. The way Stephenie Meyer writes is the equivalent of an actor mumbling all her lines, that is to say that the problem is the delivery not the plot.
I’m not staging a protest against Twilight replacing the CMS or Strunk & Whitebecause I know it’s not a grammar guide. Criticism of the writing is not simultaneous criticism of the reader so there’s no need to defend how well So-and-so knows his/her grammar.
I’m not sure what point So-and-so is trying to make. Twilight is a miserable failure of literature, eh? Ohmigawd, that’s what I think too! I’m… glad… we had this talk?
