Rosewin, on 07 December 2009 - 05:48 AM, said:
I have noticed on a few threads some guys hating on the role of Edward. Jealousy perhaps? Never had quite the same amount of attention or girls fawn over you? Sorry, I just do not get the hate.
Seriously? You're going to put our problems with the story as a whole down as jealousy towards a single character?
That's just insulting. But then again, you meant it to be. And don't go 'I didn't mean it to be insulting,' anytime someone devalues and downplays a host of reasons given during an argument down to something so silly, it's meant to be insulting.
Yes, yes, we GET that you don't get the hate, you don't WANT to get the hate, that you REFUSE to get the hate, and quite frankly you're OFFENDED by the hate. Good for you. Here's a Twilight Cookie
tm.
Rosewin, on 07 December 2009 - 05:48 AM, said:
I also consider the church quite priggish when going on and on about how such and such book is evil or has bad morals. No difference here.
You're going to try this argument again too? Good lord, you're just trying to make us angry aren't you? Not only insulting us but doing it in ways that have already been completely trumped when you tried them in the LAST Twilight thread.
There is
every difference here. We are simply voicing opinions. We are simply talking. We have no intention of taking any kind of action against these books except by telling people
we think they're horribly written pre-teen fantasy fodder with no redeeming qualities.
We are NOT advocating the burning, the banning, or the prosecution of these books.
You know, I really do think you must live somewhere very non-religious. The way you throw around this point about church moralism in a situation like this makes me think you have absolutely no idea of what they're like. I grew up - and live in - an area where this kind of crap is COMMON. I grew up with people who'd tell me, and MEAN IT, that evolution was a load of BS, that we didn't evolve from monkeys and school shouldn't be teaching that crap. Nevermind they showed their ignorance by making such a statement. I grew up in an area where parents would literally forbid their children from playing such a satanic, demonic game as D&D. I grew up in an area where for years Harry Potter was a quick way to piss off every religious person in the room. Which was most of the people in the room.
Don't even get me STARTED on the crapstorm that started when The Golden Compass was made a movie and made the His Dark Materials trilogy more noticeable. My own SISTER would tell me about how twisted and evil and demonic the stories were, and she'd never read one of them for herself to know - She was listening to some nut-job on the radio who'd also obviously never actually read the books! I read the books, they were incredible stories, and when I started explaining why the Radio Nut-Job was wrong and there was NOTHING like any of the crap he described in the books, SHE TOLD ME TO SHUT UP. She wasn't going to listen to her own brother who'd actually READ the books, she was going to trust some Radio Whack-Job and her CHURCH. Harry Potter and Golden Compass books got BURNED around here, on the word of people who knew so little about them they couldn't even identify the main CHARACTERS.
So do NOT tell me that there's no difference between us expressing our dislike of these books, and what religion does. Anybody who's ever actually PUT UP with what religion does to books and ideas it doesn't like is not only going to laugh at you, they're likely to then get pissed off that you'd take something so DANGEROUS so LIGHTLY.
Short version: Quit using this comparison. It's idiotic on levels you obviously don't comprehend.
Rosewin, on 07 December 2009 - 05:48 AM, said:
I used to love Degrassi!
Which Anne Rice would book would you or Moon recommend as being really good? I do not necessarily have to start with the first one either.
I know it's not targeted at me, but I'll answer anyways. I dislike her and her works entirely but I HAVE read them. Her better work is definitely towards the beginning of the Vampire Chronicles. Interview With the Vampire and The Vampire Lestat. Most people also round off to a trilogy with Queen of the Damned, but I didn't like it nearly as much as the first two - it had apocalyptic overtones that just seemed kind of silly and overstated at the end of the whole mess. Rock music triggers an apocalypse - go figure.
If you don't mind seriously huge amounts of "What the F-" and "Oh God that's sickening," the Lives of the Mayfair Witches trilogy is much better written than the Vampire Chronicles, but it also suffers for it - she draws everything out to annoying lengths and she'll spend way too much time describing something that was already making your stomach churn. The books are huge because of it, and can have long stretches of boring filler. Seriously long read.
Probably the only book I read by her that I liked was
The Mummy, or Ramses the Damned. Totally standalone work. Historical horror story about a mummy, predictably enough. Immortality elixir, Cleopatra, a bunch of murders, and some really weird morality choices also figure in. And the whole thing is actually romance-driven, and has moments you'd probably like a lot Rosewin.
It's the only book out of her entire repertoire I'd use the word 'good' during the description of.
2
lolcatz FTW!
