Okay so Stephen King has come out and said that "Twilight" sucks... I know that is a generalization here.. but basically its true. What I want to know is why, one of the best selling authors of all time, and a god among many in his genre, is even bothering to acknowledge she exists. I mean, yes she did write an incredibly popular book that most of us only dream of achieving, but why did he pick her out? Surely he can not be jealous, he has written more than she can ever hold a candle to.


Granted, I do not think he is a god of authors by any means... but the question that bugs me the most is why did he bother? I mean shes trying, but she has a long road to cross before she ever gets into his level of accomplishment as an author.

Is there something I am missing? Does he think shes hot and he's trying to woo her with drama? any input?




Stephen King

Peggy_Butler wrote:

Granted, I do not think he is a god of authors by any means... but the question that bugs me the most is why did he bother? I mean shes trying, but she has a long road to cross before she ever gets into his level of accomplishment as an author.

Because any true artist should take offense at crap being published to appease the mass market sheep. I play original music. I cannot tell you how many times and how many people have told me I am 'wasting my time' by doing original music and that I should be doing cover songs. Cover bands make money at bars, but ya know...sometimes people want to create. There is a drive to be original and creative that trumps money.

What people fail to realize is that if there was no original music, there would be no cover bands. So I am all for truely creative people who toil over what they produce to make it the best it can be speaking out against crap that just sells books.

Our society is becoming stagnant and un-original in so many ways. We have very little to offer the future at this point. We are contributing garbage to future history.

I think there is a certain resentment to the pop authors in the same way there is in the music industry - as soon as someone writes for the purposes of the mass market they are berated by the independent press and other artists who in some ways I am sure are jealous of their progress. The cream of the crop are the Dylans, the Coldplays (though I don't put them in the same bracket) who manage to combine critical success with sales. Stephen King is one such author...I'm not sure he's wrong in saying Stephanie Myer isn't one myself!

Maybe it is just him playing hard to get though...

book wrote:I think there is a certain resentment to the pop authors in the same way there is in the music industry - as soon as someone writes for the purposes of the mass market they are berated by the independent press and other artists who in some ways I am sure are jealous of their progress. The cream of the crop are the Dylans, the Coldplays (though I don't put them in the same bracket) who manage to combine critical success with sales. Stephen King is one such author...I'm not sure he's wrong in saying Stephanie Myer isn't one myself!

I reject the jealousy angle. It is more frustration that something so banal and idiotic is what people want, and what is true is cast aside in favor of sales.

Mr. P,

I am in total agreement with you as you say.

"Because any true artist should take offense at crap being published to appease the mass market sheep. I play original music. I cannot tell you ow many times and how many people have told me I am 'wasting my time' by doing original music and that I should be doing cover songs. Cover bands make money at bars, but ya know...sometimes people want to create. There is a drive to be original and creative that trumps money.
What people fail to realize is that if there was no original music, there would be no cover bands. So I am all for truely creative people who toil over what they produce to make it the best it can be speaking out against crap that just sells books.
Our society is becoming stagnant and un-original in so many ways. We have very little to offer the future at this point. We are contributing garbage to future history."

You should be original. And credit shoud go toward that way of thinking. There are too many 'copycats' making money from 'The Originals'.

I too have been berated and rejected for my writing(s).

George Orwell once said, "All writers are vain, selfish and lazy, and at the very bottom of their motives lies a mystery. Writing a book is a long, exhausting struggle, like a long bout of some powerful illness. One would never undertake such a thing if one were not driven by some demon whom one can neither resist nor understand."

I remember when we were young the society had a lot of respect for writers. They were treated with awe, respect and looked at with wonderment. Today if the writer does not have a foreign publisher and is not making more money on one book than R.K.Narayan made in his life time, he doesn't get a second look. Even if he gets one, it is more a look of commiseration than admiration. "He is a writer," you can hear people mumble. It is almost as if they were saying, "Poor fellow, he suffers from flatulence."

Many people think writing is fun or it is easy. All they see the writer doing is scribbling in his notebook or hammering away at the key board and more often than not staring out of the window or into space. They don't realize that for a writer there are no holidays. 24 hours a day, seven days a week and 365 days a year, it is work, backbreaking, gut wrenching, soul stirring work. Red Smith hammers home this point when he says, "There is nothing to writing; all you do is sit down at a typewriter and open a vein." Gene Fowler put its even better, "Writing is easy; all you do is sit staring at a blank sheet of paper until little drops of blood form on your forehead."

My fellow writers if my words have left you feeling a trifle depressed and desolate, cheer up. Even if the world doesn't acknowledge you now, one day it will. Your words will live far longer than you.

So I say, Mr. P, don't give up it is a beautiful thing that you are doing and your work is immortal.

As far as Mr. King and his so called opinion, we all know what they say about that ... they are like A-- H----, every one has one. And, not even to mention, publicity of any kind is better than none. even bad publicity will get a person noticed.
Thank you for letting me have my say.

Thrillwriter wrote: It is almost as if they were saying, "Poor fellow, he suffers from flatulence."

:laugh2:

At my job I am just about the only one that reads regularly. Most not at all. I did lend a few books out to one coworker several months ago. About the time when the Twilight movie came out, about 50% of the staff was reading the series excluding myself. I haven't read it or seen the movie, so I can't say wether or not it sucks, but my coworkers seemed to really enjoy it. Some of them would have never taken a glance at a book that thick let alone like 5(?) of them. It's not really my taste, but I have been known to pick up something for pure brain-candy occasionally. Surely reading something is better than reading nothing? What if reading Twilight evolves into attempting to read something a little more challenging?

As for why King even paid any attention at all to Meyers. How could he not? Her books are everywhere. He's going to get asked about it by the press.

Trish wrote:What if reading Twilight evolves into attempting to read something a little more challenging?

In my experience (I work at a local library) the sheep just keep reading the silly books and never move on to anything with substance. But they really do enjoy the Twighlight series! Some of the reviews go:

Baaahh BBAAAAAAHHHH. Baa. Baaa!

So is it a crappy book because it's bad writing or is it a crappy book simply because it's popular? I really don't know, as I've said I haven't read it. I would hope they learn they like reading in general. It's got to be better than reading nothing ever. Real life is very harsh right now. I can't say I blame anyone for just wanting a little pure entertainment.