Garren Jacobsen
Auror
She prided herself on never doing research. Which resulted in such wonderful gems as an island off the west coast of Brazil...
Wait, what? That's crazy. That's not even research. That's basic geography.
She prided herself on never doing research. Which resulted in such wonderful gems as an island off the west coast of Brazil...
Is this a recent book? My guess is that the author has daughters ages seven and under and had to go to a bunch of Frozen themed birthday parties where well-meaning dads did the research to teach the little girls how to make six-pointed snowflakes, but the "princesses" folded the paper the easy way that makes eight-pointed snowflakes.Eight-pointed snowflake.
In defense of BWFoster, I haven't read the books, but I've seen several of the Twilight movies except for the last couple and Bella didn't come off as that much of an obvious Mary Sue to me. I mean, I get the story isn't as combat-oriented as the stuff I usually prefer to write/read/watch, but... Bella can't even kick the bad vampires' butts while still a human lol. That would be one of the first abilities that comes to mind for an all-out Sue.
She prided herself on never doing research. Which resulted in such wonderful gems as an island off the west coast of Brazil( Brazil doesn't have a west coast) and a family keeping their wealth through the Great Depression by being involved in financial institutions( financial institutions were easily the hardest hit by the stock market crash). You'll never be able to convince me that that is a good approach.
I think she was trolling her fans. You don't need research to know where Brazils is on the map. And sparkling vampires, really? By the way, how is Twilight narrated. If it is narrated from Bella's perspective, maybe she is not mentioning the fact that she is a gold-digger with a drug problem and most of the books are a mix of unreliable narratives and drugs induced hallucinations. Things like the sparkling vampires, geographic nonsenses, snowflakes, the fact that her strongest character trait is that her blood is apparently tastier than that of the average person, are delivered hints left by the author for the most observant fans.
Maybe y'all approach things differently than me. When I see a highly successful author, I want to know, "What did they do to become so successful?"
I think all of you are way off base if you think that Meyer's success was solely due to some kind of magical marketing.
The fact is that she connected with her core audience in a way that few authors do. If I could connect with my readers as well as she did her, I'd no longer be an "aspiring" author.
Also, do any of you fear that dogging on a successful author like you're doing when you're trying to become an author makes you sound kinda envious?
Edit: Yes, I understand why you might not agree with all the Twilight backlash--it was never that awful, just that popular. But saying "If it was successful, it must be good"/"If you want to be successful you need to write like that" isn't necessarily true. "Awful" and "Ideal" aren't the only two choices.
But the idea that you can't criticize a book until you've written something just as successful is a bit daft. Maybe don't write it off completely, (and many people have done that with Twilight) but surely we don't have to swallow its strategy whole.
I would say if you can justify the color of their hair in the evolution of their species or cultural practices. For example if a group of people come from a warmer climate they tend to be taller, have darker skin ect... Also if a religion or other form of cultural practice dictates a specific color of hair then it makes sense. In short I would say don't give your character a specific characteristic without a reason.
Maybe y'all approach things differently than me. When I see a highly successful author, I want to know, "What did they do to become so successful?"
I think all of you are way off base if you think that Meyer's success was solely due to some kind of magical marketing.
The fact is that she connected with her core audience in a way that few authors do. If I could connect with my readers as well as she did her, I'd no longer be an "aspiring" author.
Also, do any of you fear that dogging on a successful author like you're doing when you're trying to become an author makes you sound kinda envious?
Also, do any of you fear that dogging on a successful author like you're doing when you're trying to become an author makes you sound kinda envious?
At the risk of derailing this thread even more I'm going to address this point in brief here and then open up a new topic to address this point in more detail in the writing questions forum. No, it's not envious it's good practice. By seeking flaws and learning to combat them we learn to become better writers ourselves.