Okay, firstly, I’ve no intention of hurting the Twilight fans here. I’m just a fiercely opinionated person, and some of the things I say might end up sounding rude. So please keep in mind that I really don’t mean anything rude that I might say in the article. Read on :)
Many people say that Twilight is well written. When I ask the sinabi people why they think so, most of them invariably refer to the “big words” in Twilight.
Now, if using big words makes a book good, an ape with a thesaurus can write a completely fabulous novel. Sadly, this isn’t the case: the poor apes are doomed for eternity if they think they can write a good piece of literature. Let’s leave out the monkey details and get to the book.
When you look closely into Twilight, this is what you observe:
Big words: many
Adjectives: way too many
Similes: Few; repeated very often.
Metaphors: None
Details: Bella’s many admirers, Edward, the Cullens and Bella’s truck are described meticulously. And as for the rest of it... Hold on; was there anything else in the book?
Let me deal with the big words and adjectives. They are extremely catchy and make a book seem “intelligent”. Now, let’s look at these two sentences:
1. I wondered if the exhausted girl would collapse any moment.
2. The girl was slouched and could barely keep her eyes open. I was almost sure that she’d drop down any moment.
Doesn’t the segundo sentence sound madami expressive? Why is that, do you think?
Adjectives and big words may sound smarter, but descriptions and metaphors bring life to a sentence. Mark Twain said, “When you catch an adjective, kill it. No, I don't mean utterly, but kill most of them--then the rest will be valuable.”
Golden Rule no.1: Ditch the adjective/adverb. Bring in some madami words.
The similes in Twilight are annoyingly repetitive (bronze-hair, marble-skin, topaz-eyes) and the metaphors are non-existent.
Golden Rule no.2: Use a variety of similes and metaphors to make your story interesting.
Also, when you look at the two sentences, you find that the one with madami adjectives explains while the other one describes. paglalarawan is always better than explanation, at least in fiction novels. This is because paglalarawan is madami personal. Explanation, on the other hand, makes you feel like the writer is trying to outsmart you.
Golden Rule no.3: Quit trying to sound smarter than your readers.
Moving on, you needn’t, rather mustn’t write exactly what the reader wants you to. But that doesn’t mean that you are free to disappoint your reader. Why was there so much build-up in Breaking Dawn for a freaking fight that didn’t even happen?
I positively hated the abysmal ending of Breaking Dawn.
Some things happened in Harry Potter that I didn’t particularly like, as well (Fred/Dobby/Anybody’s death). But that didn’t make me hate the book at all; in fact, it made me pag-ibig it more. Even though I hated those parts, I wouldn’t ever omit them, because that’d kill the essence of the book.
Golden Rule no. 4: Your readers mustn’t control your decisions, but they are quite important. Give them something they can appreciate.
Next, I’d like to discuss unnecessary details. Both HP and Twilight contain them. But, What’s the difference?
Harry Potter:
Green Eyes: First insignificant, later significant
Locket in Grimmauld Place: First highly insignificant, later extremely important.
Snape’s nature: We all thought it just added spice to the books. Boy, were we wrong.
Harry almost swallowed his first snitch: Similar scenario.
Riddle’s diary: I’m getting tired of typing the same things.
Twilight:
Edward’s hair: Insignificant
Edward’s Eyes: Insignificant
Edward’s Jaw line: EXTREMELY insignificant
Should I go on, or do get what I’m saying?
Golden Rule no. 5: When you write, make sure you write meaningful things. Commercial nonsense annoys the crap out of me.
Well, those are the reasons why I dislike Meyer's writing. Her style of Pagsulat doesn't follow even one of my so-called Golden Rules.
Rant over.
Please feel free to disagree; I’d pag-ibig some healthy (keyword: healthy) arguments! :)
Many people say that Twilight is well written. When I ask the sinabi people why they think so, most of them invariably refer to the “big words” in Twilight.
Now, if using big words makes a book good, an ape with a thesaurus can write a completely fabulous novel. Sadly, this isn’t the case: the poor apes are doomed for eternity if they think they can write a good piece of literature. Let’s leave out the monkey details and get to the book.
When you look closely into Twilight, this is what you observe:
Big words: many
Adjectives: way too many
Similes: Few; repeated very often.
Metaphors: None
Details: Bella’s many admirers, Edward, the Cullens and Bella’s truck are described meticulously. And as for the rest of it... Hold on; was there anything else in the book?
Let me deal with the big words and adjectives. They are extremely catchy and make a book seem “intelligent”. Now, let’s look at these two sentences:
1. I wondered if the exhausted girl would collapse any moment.
2. The girl was slouched and could barely keep her eyes open. I was almost sure that she’d drop down any moment.
Doesn’t the segundo sentence sound madami expressive? Why is that, do you think?
Adjectives and big words may sound smarter, but descriptions and metaphors bring life to a sentence. Mark Twain said, “When you catch an adjective, kill it. No, I don't mean utterly, but kill most of them--then the rest will be valuable.”
Golden Rule no.1: Ditch the adjective/adverb. Bring in some madami words.
The similes in Twilight are annoyingly repetitive (bronze-hair, marble-skin, topaz-eyes) and the metaphors are non-existent.
Golden Rule no.2: Use a variety of similes and metaphors to make your story interesting.
Also, when you look at the two sentences, you find that the one with madami adjectives explains while the other one describes. paglalarawan is always better than explanation, at least in fiction novels. This is because paglalarawan is madami personal. Explanation, on the other hand, makes you feel like the writer is trying to outsmart you.
Golden Rule no.3: Quit trying to sound smarter than your readers.
Moving on, you needn’t, rather mustn’t write exactly what the reader wants you to. But that doesn’t mean that you are free to disappoint your reader. Why was there so much build-up in Breaking Dawn for a freaking fight that didn’t even happen?
I positively hated the abysmal ending of Breaking Dawn.
Some things happened in Harry Potter that I didn’t particularly like, as well (Fred/Dobby/Anybody’s death). But that didn’t make me hate the book at all; in fact, it made me pag-ibig it more. Even though I hated those parts, I wouldn’t ever omit them, because that’d kill the essence of the book.
Golden Rule no. 4: Your readers mustn’t control your decisions, but they are quite important. Give them something they can appreciate.
Next, I’d like to discuss unnecessary details. Both HP and Twilight contain them. But, What’s the difference?
Harry Potter:
Green Eyes: First insignificant, later significant
Locket in Grimmauld Place: First highly insignificant, later extremely important.
Snape’s nature: We all thought it just added spice to the books. Boy, were we wrong.
Harry almost swallowed his first snitch: Similar scenario.
Riddle’s diary: I’m getting tired of typing the same things.
Twilight:
Edward’s hair: Insignificant
Edward’s Eyes: Insignificant
Edward’s Jaw line: EXTREMELY insignificant
Should I go on, or do get what I’m saying?
Golden Rule no. 5: When you write, make sure you write meaningful things. Commercial nonsense annoys the crap out of me.
Well, those are the reasons why I dislike Meyer's writing. Her style of Pagsulat doesn't follow even one of my so-called Golden Rules.
Rant over.
Please feel free to disagree; I’d pag-ibig some healthy (keyword: healthy) arguments! :)
