ばか！バカ！　馬鹿ー月！

AuraTwilight wrote:Are you people insinuating that anything about Stephanie Meyer's book series is GREAT?

nope, just making a point at how some notable 'big names' in the literary industry seem to lack literary value.

@quigonkenny: by your standards, i'm pretty much a very mundane reader; the 'weirdest' titles i have under my belt are The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail and Foucault's Pendulum. the rest of my 'collection' is a smattering of Robin Cook, John J. Nance, James Patterson, and John Grisham.

I've noticed that the most "popular" books in the past few years are written by whores who have little literary skill, namely J.K. Rowling and Stephanie Meyer.

Whatever happened to classics like Lord of the Flies, The Illiad and the Odyssey, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, etc.?

Or for that matter what about contemporary landmarks like the Wheel of Time, Lord of the Rings, Rainbow Six and others?

Literary skill in plot structure, symbolism, or social commentary is pushed aside for what amounts to fanboy or fangirl lite (mainstreamed fanboy and fangirl material) for the masses.

Unfortunately, I fell victim to the Harry Potter virus, a series that amounts to a bucket of literary pigshit that somehow sold millions of copies.

[Rant]
These atrocities to language seem to have something in common. They begin with a somewhat plausible story that shows promise, nothing too extreme or boring, but manages to keep the reader interested in seeing what happens. After reading a book or two (a larger investment in time than watching six typical movies), the readers have become "attached" to the series. In essence, they have become infected by the story's potential rather than the story itself. They're so short-sighted while reading that they get excited about the ending rather than examining the meat and bones of the novels themselves. And like most writers, when you see so much positive feedback, $$$, you want to continue giving the readers what they want rather than what the story needs to be written correctly. This involves a cycle of the author moving between writing crap for fans while trying to assert their own minor view (small as it was to begin with) in the novel. Finally when the author becomes tired of money (lol @ Rowling/Meyer) or writing, they decide to end the story. Unfortunately, they end up trying to tie a golden ribbon on a horse turd and piss off any fans that realize how much the author hoodwinked them. Hundreds of dollars in hardcover novels and hundreds of hours spent on reading something that amounted to an overlong fanfiction written by an inexperienced nincompoop.
[/Rant]

I think the problem is you're expecting literature.

People don't want literature--they want casual entertainment.

At the same time, most of the light novels we read here are not literature--they are entertainment novels. In fact, the only books on here I'd feel comfortable calling literature are the SHnY books and Kino no Tabi--the rest are just books. And there's nothing wrong with that.

i don't think there's anything wrong with expecting literature every time you go to a book store and think of buying a title; most everyone wants a GOOD READ, hoping that their time and money will be worth it. and pardon for being high and mighty, but recent 'literary successes' can be seen as nothing more than intellectual pimping.

whatever happened to the thought of writing for social commentary, hope of a change for the better? sure, the situations that nursed the authors of classical literature are very different from this period - transition phase of 20th and 21st centuries. but that doesn't mean million-dollar titles can be considered as decent literature.

i'm not entirely against entertainment lit; i can enjoy both thought-provoking and mind-relaxing reads. just that period-relative, its hard to find those GOOD READS, add to that the generation between today and respected literary experts.

But most of what is called literature is extrem boring...

Hey now, it's not really fair to compare JK Rowling and Stephanie Meyer. Atleast JK Rowling can write. She's no Shakespeare or Mark Twain, but Harry Potter, for all of it's faults, is a worthy series of literature.

JK Rowling's problem is that she can't write realistic romance. And that Book 7 relied on time skips a wee bit too much.

Otherwise I really enjoyed the series, though, as I said, it fell apart a bit at the end.

Are you for real? Her writing ability and her actions show that she doesn't deserve any respect from the literary community and from honest human beings.

http://www.linearpublishing.com/RhinoStory.html
^ Case in Point

ohnonotthatoneagain

So, following that reasoning, someone could collect all information about the Ender Universe he can find, and then publish an "Ender's World Lexicon" with this information? After all, the readers have already bought the Ender books, so Orson Scott Card won't be harmed, right?

As for what is originality, that is an interesting question in itself.

Lets say I present two books, both inspired by the success of Haruhi Suzumiya.

Book A is called "The loneliness of Harriet Sussmeyer". It's written from the perspective of one John Smith, who gets dragged in when Harriet starts opening a club. Other club members follow American rather than Japanese tropes, and they belong to organisations which also follow American rather than Japanese tropes. The stories start from this still relatively familiar beginning and get increasingly different from SHnY.

Book B is called "The world is three years old". The book basically follows Itsuki Koizumi through middle school, from the day his powers awaken. Over time, he gets drafted into the Organisation and learns more about the world around him, and about the other factions like aliens and time travellers. At the end of the book, Itsuki graduates to High School and soon after that gets transfered to a different school.

Which of the books is more original?

Rectifier wrote: http://www.linearpublishing.com/RhinoStory.html
^ Case in Point

Man, he's awesome.

I really did like the books though, even if Rowling is an ugly whore.

Ambi Valent wrote: Lets say I present two books, both inspired by the success of Haruhi Suzumiya.

Book A is called "The loneliness of Harriet Sussmeyer". It's written from the perspective of one John Smith, who gets dragged in when Harriet starts opening a club. Other club members follow American rather than Japanese tropes, and they belong to organisations which also follow American rather than Japanese tropes. The stories start from this still relatively familiar beginning and get increasingly different from SHnY.

Book B is called "The world is three years old". The book basically follows Itsuki Koizumi through middle school, from the day his powers awaken. Over time, he gets drafted into the Organisation and learns more about the world around him, and about the other factions like aliens and time travellers. At the end of the book, Itsuki graduates to High School and soon after that gets transfered to a different school.

Which of the books is more original?

Book B. Simply because it's a story that hasn't been told before, and it's about a character that gets very little development and backstory in the novels themselves.

Book A is simply a rip-off that goes its own route. Bleh.


Tanigawa, if you're listening, you have to write that story about Koizumi now.

Tanigawa, if you're listening, you have to write that story about Koizumi now.

The backstory of the others charakters would also be interessting if not mentioned before.

Rectifier wrote:Are you for real? Her writing ability and her actions show that she doesn't deserve any respect from the literary community and from honest human beings.

http://www.linearpublishing.com/RhinoStory.html
^ Case in Point

I don't see what JK Rowling's character as a person has to do with the quality of her writing. Even if he did, it's kind've hypocritical for Orson Scott Card to talk. Read about anything outside of his Ender series and you'll see that pretty much everything else is just religious propaganda and nonsensical drivvel.

AuraTwilight wrote:

Rectifier wrote:Are you for real? Her writing ability and her actions show that she doesn't deserve any respect from the literary community and from honest human beings.

http://www.linearpublishing.com/RhinoStory.html
^ Case in Point

I don't see what JK Rowling's character as a person has to do with the quality of her writing. Even if he did, it's kind've hypocritical for Orson Scott Card to talk. Read about anything outside of his Ender series and you'll see that pretty much everything else is just religious propaganda and nonsensical drivvel.

Hell, anything outside Ender's Game is religious propaganda and nonsensical drivel. >_>

I disagree; although Orson Scott Card has been in a bit of a slum the last few years, but most of his books are exceptionally good.

Sure, they may have themes reflecting his personal religious views, but how is that different than any piece of literature--literature is written to reflect what the author believes.

The same dismissive sentiment could be used against any of the great Science Fiction writers of the last half-century--one could say Heinlein just wrote libertarian propaganda.
The difference for Card is he is the reactionary rather than the radical.

Irregardless, other writers, like Stephen King, outright say in JK Rowling's defense that she's one of the best writers of the modern era. Stephen King > Orson Scott Card imo.