Actually, this has improved my opinion of King.
Sweet, another Due South fan!
I thought almost everyone with a brain was a fan of Due South?
Steven King slams Twilight
- Thread starter shanejayell
- Start date
I thought almost everyone with a brain was a fan of Due South?
Uncle Steve has a hell of a lot more badmouthing to do, if he's going to make up for the hundreds and hundreds of blurbs he's written. If puffing a book is the writer's equivalent of being easy, King is a combination of Messalina, Catherine the Great and Elizabeth Taylor.
As for prose style in general---clarity has always been underrated in my opinion. Some writers' styles may not be elegant but they're readable. And a strong story can make up for a lot of awkward prose. But my experience has been that the stories get a lot more familiar, i.e., less original. Then, sometimes, a certain kind of writing hurts.
As for prose style in general---clarity has always been underrated in my opinion. Some writers' styles may not be elegant but they're readable. And a strong story can make up for a lot of awkward prose. But my experience has been that the stories get a lot more familiar, i.e., less original. Then, sometimes, a certain kind of writing hurts.
Never even knew "Twilight" was a book series till recently. Heard of the movie, but wrot it off as tweeny-bopper emo-vamp Buffy-Angel fanfic with the serial numbers filed off from the way people were describing it.
Just looked the series up on the ole' wiki...wow, I was pretty close to the mark
But, hey if it pays it plays.
What I find actually interesting-- since I find the way other writers think interesting-- is this: Wiki Link
She really doesn't get how the game works, does she? After all, that's the "Lost Novel" now. That's the book that's going to devolve into cult status and be around no matter what. Everytime she talks about writing it, someone is going to pop up with original draft.
Just looked the series up on the ole' wiki...wow, I was pretty close to the mark
But, hey if it pays it plays.What I find actually interesting-- since I find the way other writers think interesting-- is this: Wiki Link
She really doesn't get how the game works, does she? After all, that's the "Lost Novel" now. That's the book that's going to devolve into cult status and be around no matter what. Everytime she talks about writing it, someone is going to pop up with original draft.
I have not read Twilight--and never plan to--and have no opinion of the quality of writing, but it strikes me as unprofessional of King to slam another writer like that. It's not like he's a just a guy who read the book and hated it, I see it more as a guy publicly lambasting a colleague. A bit like a doctor writing to to the editorial section of a newspaper telling everybody how shitty he thinks another doctor is. He's certainly entitled to his opinion, but I think the way he expressed it wasn't in good taste.
I think, based on my experiences and opinion from from those, that writers are typically more blunt than most people would think they should; more so the longer they've been in the industry. Remember, the veterans and those that have been playing the game for a while, are used to criticism from editors, publishers, newspaper critics, readers, etc., it's part of the "job" and part of their day to day lives. There's a bit of a "Can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen" mentality that you have to have to be able to survive in the industry.
Why pick on Erle Stanley Gardner? He's been dead for almost 40 years. His writing is a different genre from a different era. Still, it doesn't surprise me that King doesn't like his writing since ESG could write a complete story in less than 1,141 pages.
King has written some good stuff, but he tends to really fluff up the page count.
(And personally, I think Koontz is a better writer, although I don't share his obsession with his Odd Thomas character and wish he would do something fresh.)
King has written some good stuff, but he tends to really fluff up the page count.
(And personally, I think Koontz is a better writer, although I don't share his obsession with his Odd Thomas character and wish he would do something fresh.)
For what it's worth, I have a 50+ female supervisor who is reading through the series for the second time. She is enjoying the books. I'm also 50+ and am planning on reading the series, starting tonight.
My question for Twilight fangirls is a simple one. Why is it that a 200 year old man dating a teenage girl is romantic, but a 30 year old man dating a teenage girl is perverse?
There is a great deal that King could have taken issue with regarding Twilight, blithely glossing over the actual effects such a huge difference would have on a relationship being just one of many. That he simply looked at it from a technical point of view shows extreme professionalism. A less restrained writer would have ripped Meyer a new one on philosophical and thematic grounds.
There is a great deal that King could have taken issue with regarding Twilight, blithely glossing over the actual effects such a huge difference would have on a relationship being just one of many. That he simply looked at it from a technical point of view shows extreme professionalism. A less restrained writer would have ripped Meyer a new one on philosophical and thematic grounds.
Why do so many Buffy fans think Angel a 250 year old Vampire dating a 17 year old girl is romantic? This isn't exclusive to Twilight. People that read Vampire romances know it's complete fantasy so there is no reason to be outraged at stuff like that.
While I pretty much agree with King I hafta say... The screenwriter of Sleepwalkers, Rose Red, the awful Mick Garriss remake the Shining and Maximum Overdrive probably shouldn't be too hard on the prowess of other writers in the press. Sure he was a good novelist once upon a time but when it came to writing for the screen his work is amatuerish at best and completely abominable in general.
at "The Twilight Saga".
There's nothing wrong with that exactly. We all love cotton candy every now and then, you just wouldn't want it to be your dinner. What else have you read recently?
That's a good way of putting it.I certainly wouldn't look down upon someone who read Twilight and enjoyed it, I mean, it's just mindless, harmless fluff. It's when you start getting into "OMG I WISH ROBERT PATTERSON WOULD BITE MY NECK" territory that things are going too far.
He looses me there, as Rowling is in no way a "terrific" writer.
I don't think I'll touch Twilight (my 12 year old daughter borrowed the books from a classmate and told me they weren't worth reading) but I'm enjoying the Septimus Heap series right now, which is on the 9-12 year olds' shelf.