Twilight: Not worth hating or being jealous over

Let’s get one thing straight: I’m not arguing that “”Twilight”” is the greatest tale of all time. I wouldn’t even consider it quality literature. Even so, I have nothing against author Stephenie Meyer or her books, and I think it’s absurd of anyone to waste his or her time hating on a successful series.

As big as the following may be, there are a number of people in opposition of all things “”Twilight.”” There’s even the Anti-“”Twilight”” movement, a comprehensive Web site listing everything wrong with Meyer’s series. The site administrators have two main justifications for their anti-“”Twilight”” beliefs, “”It’s poorly written and promotes ideas that teenage girls shouldn’t be taking to heart.””

What is this really about? Are the haters just mad that an average writer like Stephenie Meyer could become a best-selling author and be considered by some as the next J.K. Rowling?

Like most instances of hatred, this seems to stem from jealousy. Plenty of poetic writers will never be as rich or famous as Meyer, who repeats most of her words and uses lots of adverbs in her text, but she’s what the majority of young Americans want to see on their bookshelves.

Other opposing individuals think that Twilight encourages young girls to have unhealthy obsessions over boys and date bad people.

The two main characters, Bella and Edward, are in an unusual relationship. He’s a vampire and she’s not, and he can be abrasive and slightly creepy. If someone is really stupid enough to date a violent guy just because Edward Cullen has dangerous tendencies, she isn’t mature enough to get involved with a man in the first place.

Yes, it’s silly for Bella to make Edward her entire world. Show me a girl who hasn’t made this mistake at least once in her life. It’s unhealthy, but it’s reality. How else can you explain the cinematic and literary success of “”He’s Just Not That into You””?

If you still want to waste your time bashing “”Twilight,”” I’ll go ahead and assume you’re envious of Meyer or sad that you couldn’t love anyone as much as Bella’s character loves Edward.

With that, who wants to join me for the “”New Moon”” (the “”Twilight”” sequel) premier next month?

— Laura Donovan is the opinions editor.

She can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.

No title needed: Twilight sucks

I have one important thing to say: “”Twilight”” sucks. Get it? That’s right, it’s a pun. A terrible, mind-numbing vampire pun. Yet it’s more clever than the entire “”Twilight”” series.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I understand why so many girls like “”Twilight.”” I mean, vampires are so trendy, right? Come on. Vampires have been kicking ass in popular culture since before Christopher Lee’s “”Dracula”” movies. Apparently, however, the hottest vampire is somehow Edward Cullen.

But let’s think about Edward for a moment. First, he doesn’t want to suck people’s blood. Well, he does, but he doesn’t follow through with it because he’s a pansy. If there were a vampire episode of “”Deadliest Warrior,”” Edward would lose in everything.

Second, there’s a special reason why he doesn’t go out in the sun, and it’s not because he’s going to spontaneously combust like a normal vampire. It’s because sunlight makes his skin sparkle like an arts and crafts project with too much glitter.

Third, Ed is beautiful, but only because Meyer says so ad nauseum over the course of 2560 pages of unrelenting crap. That’s actually his only redeeming quality, aside from the above-average intelligence he barely acquired over his 107 years walking this earth.

And that brings us to the final Eddie point: Aside from being just plain creepy, he’s a full century older than his underage object of affection. Now that’s sketchy. If he, at some point in the series, had the guts to penetrate her with his fangs or something else, it’d be statutory rape. Still, Chris Hanson should have his ass.

Now, on to the rest of the book: the writing sucks. It’s just not good whatsoever. I mean, Bella Swan literally means “”beautiful swan.”” Lame. Yes, Meyer successfully feeds her readers touchy-feely estrogen candy. Nevertheless, even Stephen King says she “”can’t write worth a darn.””

“”Twilight”” readers would be much better off picking up a copy of “”Pride and Prejudice”” — I don’t even get why Mr. Darcy is at all charming, but it would be the first of many books more worthy of being read.

I mean, “”Twilight”” isn’t just awful; It’s awful to the point of being harmful to the progress of human civilization. I would even venture to say that “”Twilight”” caused the recession. To tolerate such a blight on mankind’s dignity would surely lead to an Armageddon that only Iran would be prepared for.

— Daniel Greenberg is a senior majoring in near eastern studies. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.