Reading; Twilight

[shadydave]

So, during the copious free time that accounts for much of my working day, I stumbled across the following articles on the reading habits of young wimmins, which set me a-ponderin' (and apparently turned me into a grizzled old prospector).

Article the first has some fairly appalling generalizations and stereotypes about pre/adolescent girls (despite being written by a woman), but it does contain a very interesting critical analysis about why Twilight appeals to so many women, both old and young (and all shrill -- I know; I was there). Everyone knows vampires are (not so) secretly about sex, and the Twilight has an actually appealing theme of abstinence (no, seriously), but this article, amidst the gender fail, laid out exactly what its take on it seems to be, and why this is so relevant to teenage girls these days (with their iPods and their Myspaces and their text messaging -- in my day, we had to call our friends on the phone! And there was none of this speed-dialing phonebook entry stuff -- we had to look up the numbers, or memorize them, and dial them by hand! Uphill both ways! In a snowstorm!).

One thing the author is entirely uncritical of, or possibly didn't even register, is Twilight's infamous setting-feminism-back-100-years attitude, which I rather suspect ties in to her gender fail in the article. However, I did find one statement rather interesting:

The salient fact of an adolescent girl’s existence is her need for a secret emotional life—one that she slips into during her sulks and silences, during her endless hours alone in her room, or even just when she’s gazing out the classroom window while all of Modern European History, or the niceties of the passé composé, sluice past her. This means that she is a creature designed for reading in a way no boy or man, or even grown woman, could ever be so exactly designed, because she is a creature whose most elemental psychological needs—to be undisturbed while she works out the big questions of her life, to be hidden from view while still in plain sight, to enter profoundly into the emotional lives of others—are met precisely by the act of reading.

Basically, this did not describe my adolescent reading experience AT ALL, but I suspect it does describe a lot of other people's. One of the commenters on article the second stated that "it doesn’t describe teen female mentality - it describes being an introvert." I dunno if introvert is quite the right word, but I agree that it's the category of readers given to personal introspection and tending to express their strong emotions, which of course crosses gender and age lines, and I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that love/romance is as popular with these readers as it is with, you know, pretty much everyone.
Stephanie Meyer, intentionally or no, seems to have produced books that appeal directly to all of these traits, hence their popularity with all sorts of random people in addition to the target of teenage girls, many of whom fall smack dab in this category.

Article the second responds to article the first, as do its commenters, and bring up the very good point that girls are also social readers, and have been for hundreds of years. I suspect this will only be surprising to someone who has never been on the internet or has no idea what the word "fandom" means -- after all, Team Edward/Team Jacob aren't exactly the result of millions of readers sitting in their rooms and quietly squeeing to themselves. Teenage girls are fairly notorious for thoroughly dissecting their every thought and emotion with their friends, and this applies to those about fictional characters presented to your local chapter of the Team Edward fanclub or your flist. But, again, this isn't just limited to teenage girls -- see "the internet" for more examples, or those parts of Academia that deal with the unseemly beast Literature, or any time you've gone "THIS IS THE BEST BOOK EVAR" and force everyone you know to read it.

(Mostly unrelated: there are also some good comments about the pernicious rumor that guys don't read -- turns out that many of them just aren't reading fictional novels.)

However, the most important thing about these articles is, of course, how they relate to MY reading habits. :D To aid in the discussion, I've thoughtfully included a list of my formative reading experiences: these are all the books I read obsessively over and over when I was younger, in the approximate year I started reading them (I couldn't really remember some of them, so I took my best guess). The + means I read them for several years after, and the ++ means I still read them (and that you should, too). I started rather young, because in my experience reading levels are something that happens to other people.

Dave's Favorite Books Throughout the Ages: A Comprehensive and Somewhat Embarrassing List

(NB: I was still getting used to the whole reading thing when I was in first grade.)

SECOND GRADE:
+Babysitters' Club -- Ann M. Martin
+Daulaire's Mythology
+The Collective Works of Roald Dahl

THIRD GRADE:
+Little House on the Prairie (series) -- Laura Ingalls Wilder
++The Enchanted Forest Chronicles -- Patricia C. Wrede
Ida Early Comes over the Mountains/Christmas with Ida Early -- Robert Burch
+Caddie Woodlawn -- Carol Ryrie Brink

FOURTH GRADE:
Soup (series) -- Robert Newton Peck
Spooksville -- Christopher Pike

FIFTH GRADE:
+Catherine, Called Birdy -- Karen Cushman
Gemini Game -- Michael Scott
++The Blue Sword -- Robin McKinley
++The Belgariad/The Mallorean -- David Eddings

SIXTH GRADE:
+The Immortals/The Lioness Quartet -- Tamora Pierce
+Redwall (series) -- Brian Jacques
++Sabriel -- Garth Nix
+Hero's Song -- Edith Pattou

SEVENTH GRADE:
+The Elenium -- David Eddings
++Harry Potter -- some British chick

EIGHTH GRADE:
+The Golden Compass -- Philip Pullman

NINTH GRADE:
++Discworld (series) -- Terry Pratchett

ELEVENTH GRADE:
++The Lord of the Rings -- some British dude

CONCLUSIONS:
- This explains a lot (up to and including why I occasionally sound like a grizzled old prospector)
- Why yes, I am a huge dork
- I had fairly gender-balanced reading habits (based on authors and main characters)
- If I was "enter[ing] profoundly into the emotional lives of others", they had better been in the middle of some awesome adventure

Basically, I probably would have finished the Twilight series by 6th grade, and scorned the lack of action and Bella's complete inability to kick ass.

Also, while I've always been a reader, I didn't really become a social reader until I was basically a teenager. However, it's hard to tell if this was because I hit puberty, or because my grade-school friends and I didn't really read the same stuff until Harry Potter came out, and I bonded with my own dorky kind in high school and made them all read Terry Pratchett books. Now, of course, I've graduated with a degree in English, blab at length on LJ and gchat about random things I'm reading, and routinely fling books at people while shouting "READ THIS NOW! BEST BOOK EVAR!" so I think it's safe to say I still tend to read socially.

So, how did the whole reading thing turn out for you guys? Comments? Thoughts? Bueller?

Comments

[failing-light.livejournal.com]

I was looking at your list, being all 'no way did she read that earlier than me!!1!' when I realized that the *reason* you read things earlier than I did was that I had already read them. . .and then I hit myself repeatedly in the head, because I'm an idiot.

In conclusion, 1) you are awesome, 2) I am awesome, and 3) generalizations about the reading habits of girls always strike me as suspect. Also, you were a social reader before you were in high school! We were a society of two!

. . . Damn, now I have think-y thoughts about how I *wasn't* actually a social reader in high school. But I do not have time to think them properly, for I must to bed!

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

It's almost like you would sit there snickering over various books, occasionally reading me the funny bits, and I would steal them as soon as you were done :D

Also, you were a social reader before you were in high school! We were a society of two!

Except I don't really remember discussing books, apart from conversations consisting of "Read this, it is awesome!" and "DAVE! GIVE ME MY BOOK BACK!"

[perivates.livejournal.com]

Aside from Babysitters Club, just about everything I read in elementary school was sci-fi/fantasy, more heavy on the sci-fi than anything. (Examples: Animorphs, Everworld, Secret World of Alex Mack, Sabrina the Teenage Witch, Mindwarp, Replica, Goosebumps, 2001, those side-novels that came along with the Roswell series, Harry Potter...) And I'll still watch just about any show with aliens involved. (Why yes, Doctor Who and Torchwood, I am looking at you!) I'm not sure what this says about me, aside from the fact that I find the "secret world" theme to be generally interesting. But it's not a secret emotional life, just the idea of REALLY IMPORTANT SECRETS in general. Maybe it's the outlet for my inner conspiracy nut?

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

I totally forgot I read Animorphs and The Secret World of Alex Mack! :D Animorphs should probably be on the list, actually, because I read a ton of those. Goosebumps were really popular in grade school, so I read several of them, but I preferred Spooksville (also a horror series) because it had a consistent cast of characters who were pretty cool, and I'm definitely a character-over-plot reader.

For some reason, I've always preferred watching sci-fi over reading it, so this list doesn't reflect my total geekitude (Empire Strikes Back is literally the first movie I ever remember seeing). I did read 2001 in high school, though, because I was curious about my namesake :D

Maybe it's the outlet for my inner conspiracy nut?

Mine appear to be the outlet for my inner adventurer :D

I'm getting the impression that girl readers with active imaginations tend to glomp on whatever aspect of growing up/life in general (secrets/privacy, adventure/agency, romance/emotional life) most strikes their fancy. Which is not to say they don't read or contemplate the other issues (I certainly read tons and tons of books, and lots of them did address these other aspects) but that they might have an affinity for one in particular, and that's the one they'll prefer in sticking with a genre or re-reading.

[naturalblue208.livejournal.com]

"she is a creature" is always a phrase that bodes ill.

i have not read twilight, but i tend to blame its success on the fact that the snippets that i *have* read are the sort of melodrama i used to write when i was a preteen/early teen. you know, the sort of things i go back and read now that had potential, but the style makes me cringe.

i know that people our age read it, but they tend to be more cognizant of the fact that the writing style is overly dramatic. sometimes it makes me wonder if there is some sort of hormonal thing going on in puberty and heading along toward menopause that makes that sort of writing attractive.

at the same time, i was one of the few people that wanted to hurl regularly while in the pit orchestra for The Most Happy Fella, which is a romance of soapoperatic proportions. Also with "modern" chords aka cat banging on the piano. Don't let the composer's fame fool you, it's pretty much crap. There's three good songs, though, and a cute side character.

as far as my reading, i did the hobbit in second grade, the white company in third, various novella-type-things, lotr in fifth, i dont even know what in middle school, arry pottah in hs, and patrick o'brian in late hs/college. i came to the conclusion fairly early on that the sort of books i liked best were the ones written more or less for young boys in the 19th century- basically character-driven adventure novels, generally illustrated by NC Wyeth. (Treasure Island, Robinson Crusoe, &c. I found my copy of The White Company in the boys' section of a gift shop.)

so basically i did not read the same things as most of my female peers did, and i didn't really have the same interests. my taste for romantic melodrama runs basically to the relationship between Alleyne and Maude in the white company, which is cute and Technicolor. many of the books i enjoy the most are obscure enough that most people haven't even heard of them, let alone read them, but i like socially reading Terry P, cos he is full of win.

Now i'm not saying that biologically i am an unusual girl for reading things that arent mushy, but there are cultural trends at work too. For one, Harry Potter really did a lot in the generations of the new millenium for making reading fashionable, and E-ragon continued it, and i bet you Twilight follows in that trend. Not that they are bad books, necessarily, but it is fashionable to read them and fan(girl/boy) them, and if you haven't read them you get ZOMG WHAT?? from all directions. Also check the merchandising. Also, HP is pretty much awesome, but there's pretty much consensus that E-ragon was what we all wrote in middle school, and Twilight as well. I wonder if part of their charm is the feeling of "dude, I could have done this!"

who knows.

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

"she is a creature" is always a phrase that bodes ill.

I am a human being, I tell you! A HUMAN BEING!

i know that people our age read it, but they tend to be more cognizant of the fact that the writing style is overly dramatic. sometimes it makes me wonder if there is some sort of hormonal thing going on in puberty and heading along toward menopause that makes that sort of writing attractive.

I don't think we can blame hormones for this one :D While they're not the main audience, there are many women our age, and guys of all ages, who also enjoy the books. My friend Mallory, for example, freely admits that she is addicted to them like crack. I think that like J.K. Rowling, SMeyer is a very compelling storyteller, and if you are the sort of person who enjoys melodrama than these books are very attractive.

I think that teenage girls are much more tolerant of melodrama, and maybe there's something about not internalizing or developing certain standards of entertainment, but there are many otherwise intelligent people who also still enjoy it, which is why so many shows end up with very soap-operaticy elements, or people watch shows like Dawson's Creek, the OC, and Gossip Girls ironically. (In case you couldn't tell, melodrama is not and was never my thing, unless I'm allowed to point and laugh at it :D)

Also, I am deeply suspicious of anything entitled "The Most Happy Fella" :D

as far as my reading, i did the hobbit in second grade, the white company in third, various novella-type-things, lotr in fifth, i dont even know what in middle school, arry pottah in hs, and patrick o'brian in late hs/college. i came to the conclusion fairly early on that the sort of books i liked best were the ones written more or less for young boys in the 19th century- basically character-driven adventure novels, generally illustrated by NC Wyeth.

I'm gonna take a stab at it and say you were also more concerned with adventuring than emotional development :D Also, it's cool because most of your faves aren't just about older time periods, they were written in them. It's almost like you like history or something :D

so basically i did not read the same things as most of my female peers did, and i didn't really have the same interests.

Yeah, until high school there was a pretty wide divide in what I enjoyed with my friends, and what I enjoyed on my own.

For one, Harry Potter really did a lot in the generations of the new millenium for making reading fashionable, and E-ragon continued it, and i bet you Twilight follows in that trend.

I totally agree with you about HP -- there were definite non-readers in my class in grade school who loved them -- but I don't know if E-ragon and Twilight occupy quite the same role. HP is pretty much universally popular, and got that way initially by word of mouth -- the news only picked up on it because there was such a demand for them, especially in the times when it was released in England before the US. Whereas I think E-ragon gained popularity because it was media-friendly (zomg written by a teenager!), able to ride HP's coattails (I know a TON of boys who were given it after they finished HP, because hey, all fantasy's the same, right?), and because it obviously appealed to a group who are noteworthy when they enjoy reading, i.e. boys (probably because it is essentially Star Wars with dragons). There's not nearly as many adult readers of E-ragon, for example. Twilight operated more like HP, where it became a media hit only after it got huge by word of mouth, but it was much more specifically popular (i.e. teenage girls and housewives), and still kind of is.

I wonder if part of their charm is the feeling of "dude, I could have done this!"

To be fair, SMeyer is a better writer than Christopher Paolini. She's still not an AWESOME writer, but she only has the occasional foray into the purplest of prose. I think her forte is taking the PLOT of things we wrote in middle school, and polishing it up a bit.

[naturalblue208.livejournal.com]

en re E-ragon &c-- i mean fashionable at the late elem/middle school age level, like high school musical, hannah montana, and the jonas brothers. and the whole team whoozeymawhatsit has kind of become a fashion statement-- if you do a search on etsy there is all KINDS of stylin twilight jewelry, &c, for supporting your fav char. it's that sort of fashionable where you just aint cool if you havent done it-- kind of like what Pogs enjoyed briefly in 3rd grade, and Pokemon after that. I guess trend is a better word, except that so much of the merchandising for twilight is in clothing/accessories fashion.

Whereas there is one seller that makes my inner fangirl very happy:
http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=21421384
http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=21421115


In terms of our age group, both Avatar and Twilight appeal to people in their 20s. There are 16 results for Avatar stuff on etsy (searched "airbender" because "avatar" has so many alternate meanings) and 10,981 results for "twilight", most of which are accessories and clothing. I recognize that Avatar isn't as popular as Twilight by any means, but the discrepancy is pretty astounding, especially considering how artsy Avatar is. I choose etsy because it's stuff that's made for and by the fans, and is more of a depiction of how the fans themselves express their fandom-- and Nickelodeon has been totally faily about Avatar merchandising (i want a dang soundtrack!! XD )

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

Oh, you meant "making reading fashionable" to mean reading specific books to be cool and fit in, as opposed to it being cool to read in general :D

There's more Avatar stuff on cafepress.com, but the disparity with Twilight is still just as bad. (However, there's way more Avatar stuff than Eragon stuff! Dragon of the West > Dragon of the FAIL)

Google fights are biased because Twilight's titles are all common nouns, curse them.

both Avatar and Twilight appeal to people in their 20s

But Twilight's target audience is teenage girls, whereas Avatar's is pre-teens. Twilight thus gets the happy cross-section of a population with a lot of disposable income AND creative ability, so they can make their own sparkly shirts, whereas Avatar's is more limited to official merchandise your parents get for you. Avatar totally has an older fanbase who do produce stuff you can buy, but the target audience is less likely to buy them because fewer of them do their own shopping, and much of the peripheral audience is going to want to keep their real life dedication to the show on the down low.

Also, it's really easy to design a shirt that says TEAM EDWARD, which is a sufficiently meaningful statement in Twilight fandom, but it's a lot harder to make something with an equally cool impact for Avatar.

In conclusion: I am buying you a "TEAM ZUTARA" shirt for your birthday. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

[naturalblue208.livejournal.com]

dude somebody should totally do a parody of the TEAM ____ tshirts with TEAM AVATAR and a pictar of sokka on :D or possibly toph's wanted poster. :D

tru dat on the age groups-- and there is a decent amount of avatar flair for people our age. i personally and probably unsurprisingly have Iroh on my flair board being awesome and Iroh-ey ^^

anyway i am totally not team zutara :P i am all for team kataang BUT when they get older because Aang is WAY TOO YOUNG for serious romantic commitment. also mei is totally hardcore and i heart her and zuko's weird relationship ^^

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

Dude, the TEAM __________ shirts are for SHIPS. o.O

tru dat on the age groups-- and there is a decent amount of avatar flair for people our age. i personally and probably unsurprisingly have Iroh on my flair board being awesome and Iroh-ey ^^

The internet doesn't count as the down low, really. Also, we are geeks who WOULD wear Avatar t-shirts, so we are the exception :D

anyway i am totally not team zutara :P

That's why I'm getting it for you! It will have ~*~sparkles~*~

[naturalblue208.livejournal.com]

ZOMG SPARKLES :D
i do actually love sparkles. saddest moment of my life was when i found out i couldnt wear rainbows anymore without being misunderstood. i had this really cute little top with rainbow sparkles all on it and luuuuuurved it :(

well sokka totally calls them team avatar, so it could be a pune, or play on words :D

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

When fandoms collide! You can have a sparkly TEAM AVATAR shirt and horrify everyone. :D

[naturalblue208.livejournal.com]

YAY :D

but it would have to have uncle iroh on it and that would confuse the issue! XD

Iroh/tea :D

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

Sparkly TEAM IROH? With a sequined cup of tea on the back? :D

[dracis.livejournal.com]

"the niceties of the passé composé, sluice past her." THE PURPLENESS KILLS ME.

"see "the internet" for more examples" And examples of yuri fanboys illustrate how different fandom can be ;)

"++The Belgariad/The Mallorean -- David Eddings" Read the first three-fifths of the Belgariad and stalled over International Tour (The Second). I don't remember why.

"+The Immortals/The Lioness Quartet -- Tamora Pierce" I never got around to this, but I did read the Circle of Magic set... and would call that a ++ myself.

"+The Golden Compass -- Philip Pullman" You read the rest, right?

"Basically, I probably would have finished the Twilight series by 6th grade, and scorned the lack of action and Bella's complete inability to kick ass." :D

I must say that several times suring this post I was reminded why we're friends. As for male reading... I think part of it's the stigma that we shouldn't read socially that we don't. Then the Internet happened and we can be part of internet fandoms without specifically revealing who we are and that we are complete dorks. I was an exception. I read in class constantly; I was a fast test taker and it was the one thing we were allowed to do for pleasure if we finished a test early. As I liked reading in class a lot, this encouraged me to become even faster, and by college I was used to the envious stares boring holes in my backside as I turned in the first final about fifty minutes into the three hour period.

*forcefully returns thought train to tracks* The concept that 'boys don't read' is bullshit. Even the concept that 'boys don't read fiction' is bullshit, but you can find exceptions to that (I find every exception I have ever met boring). I'm probably not the one to ask about such a thing, as I find my sustenance in stories, but I honestly doubt that there are any interesting men who didn't read any sort of fiction as boys.

I'm not sure I'd buy that boys are not social readers at all, but the idea that girls are more social readers is probably true.

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

I don't even know what the passé composé IS. And it's not because I was slipping into my secret emotional life :D

Read the first three-fifths of the Belgariad and stalled over International Tour (The Second). I don't remember why.

I love them both dearly, but the Mallorean is basically a remix of the Belgariad. David Eddings is very much a fan of the phrase "winning formula".

Yay, Circle of Magic! I preferred her other books, but I enjoyed those too.

"+The Golden Compass -- Philip Pullman" You read the rest, right?

Yeeeeaaaaaaaahhhh. The first one was definitely my favorite, but I liked the second one as well, in a "middle-part-of-the-trilogy" kind of way. (I read a bunch of his other books, too.) I eagerly awaited the third one, and when it came out in 9th grade, I read it immediately and was really dissatisfied. And then, after I thought about it for a while, I came to the conclusion that I kind of wanted to set Philip Pullman on fire. (Mentioning "The Amber Spyglass" is definitely one of my berserk buttons. Just ask poor Natasha, she had to live with me for two years :D)

I think part of it's the stigma that we shouldn't read socially that we don't. Then the Internet happened and we can be part of internet fandoms without specifically revealing who we are and that we are complete dorks.

Yeah, I definitely agree. There were a bunch of guys in my class who I knew enjoyed reading (we had SSR, and it was pretty easy to tell who didn't mind, and who wanted to stab themselves with their pencils), but it wasn't something that they ever talked about. My brother, too -- he'll devour certain books, but if he does discuss them, it's only with me and my sister. (If that -- last summer, he tried to sneakily read the Temeraire books without letting me know, because he didn't want to deal with my gloating. Even more hilariously, I hadn't even been trying to get him to read them -- I made my sister do it, and she gave them to him :D)

(Aside: you should totally read the Temeraire books! They are excellent.)

I read in class constantly; I was a fast test taker and it was the one thing we were allowed to do for pleasure if we finished a test early. As I liked reading in class a lot, this encouraged me to become even faster, and by college I was used to the envious stares boring holes in my backside as I turned in the first final about fifty minutes into the three hour period.

Heh, this is exactly what happened to me, too.

The concept that 'boys don't read' is bullshit. Even the concept that 'boys don't read fiction' is bullshit, but you can find exceptions to that (I find every exception I have ever met boring).

Yeah, I agree. Someone in the second article pointed out that there's a lot of "underground" reading, like comic books or book series with little-to-no educational content, like Goosebumps, which will at least give you an appreciation of certain kinds of stories, even if you don't move on to anything "good".

My favorite anecdote about this is the most-loved book in my sister's 7th and 8th grade English classroom in Brooklyn -- the space-dinosaur manga version of MacBeth. I for one am greatly in favor of spreading space-dinosaur Shakespeare among the youth of today :D

I'm not sure I'd buy that boys are not social readers at all, but the idea that girls are more social readers is probably true.

HP is a really good example of this -- tons of readers in both genders, but guys are definitely outnumbered in fandom, even though they do form a significant proportion of it. I think that everyone will become a social reader if they love a book enough, but women are more inclined to do it for books they feel less passionately about as well.

[dracis.livejournal.com]

I liked Amber Spyglass... but that's probably because I decided to interpret it only on its merits as a story and ignore its Aesops. Not the best ending to the trilogy possible, but I enjoyed it and still do.

...Temeraire...?

Who the hell pays attention to 'educational content'? I just like a good story... which often has messages and themes. You know. Good writing.

I for one am greatly in favor of spreading space-dinosaur Shakespeare among the youth of today As am I.

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

I liked Amber Spyglass... but that's probably because I decided to interpret it only on its merits as a story and ignore its Aesops. Not the best ending to the trilogy possible, but I enjoyed it and still do.

I was more annoyed at first because he left a couple of plot threads dangling, and because Iorek Byrnison got to do nothing cool, and because I kind of hated Lord Asriel and Mrs. Coulter and looked askance at their heroic and redemptive sacrifice, and because I thought the end was the most outrageous diabolus ex machina to have ever diabolus ex machina'd... Basically, I was really disappointed, and then realizing later that I had kinda been personally insulted was pretty much the icing on the FAIL cake.

Temeraire, Book 1: His Majesty's Dragon (http://www.amazon.com/His-Majestys-Dragon-Temeraire-Book/dp/0345481283/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241535842&sr=1-1). It's the Napoleonic war on AU Earth with DRAGONS! AND it's really well written.

AUs with dragons are almost as awesome as space-dinosaur Shakespeare.

[dracis.livejournal.com]

You make good points, madam. I will say no more.

as for Temeraire... I will read it mostly due to the opening sentences of the Post review.

Is there anything more to say about dragons? Stalwart presences in myth and fantasy, they've hoarded gold, incinerated villages, been slain by countless heroes and (sing it with me) "frolicked in the autumn mist in a land called Honah Lee."

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

It's really a shame, because I liked the first two a lot, and the whole exercise is a pretty awesome concept.

Hee, Puff the Magic Dragon. Yay Temeraire! I eagerly await your opinion :D

[arku.livejournal.com]

Yeah. Both articles are gender-faily. But really the first one. I love how apparently guys don't have or need secret emotional lives. Like they are creatures without emotion. Just walking machines which eat and sometimes smell.

The second article I find having a more viable argument, but I do agree that it is not limited only to women. I think humans tend to be social readers and social people tend to be social readers. I think it is possible (though no studies to back me up or anything) that women tend to be more often be social people, and I think the typical female / female relationship is one more open to sharing books (because women will share their emotions more and books tend to be about emotions)

However, I really like the comment on guys and nonfiction. That is is still reading and personal betterment and all that jazz.

I think TWilight has such appeal because it speaks to a small personal fantasy shared by millions of angsty teenagers of all genders: Some hot, powerful, mysterious person will realize how cool I am and then we will proceed to have an epic and dramatic love affair which no one understands but we know in our hearts to be the epitome of love. *swoon*

Also, I LOVED Katherine, Called Birdy.

[arku.livejournal.com]

Continuing some thoughts on Twilight's success: I think that many novels become popular because they play out a reader's secret fantasy (Harry Potter : I want to be a wizard! ; LotR: I want to be a returning king!) But the good thing about those novels is that they go deeper. You may start reading because it fulfills a personal fantasy, but the author uses the world/characters to examine deeper themes and ideas and concepts and emotions and characters and such. Twilight DOES NOT do that. It is just a fantasy on page.

[dracis.livejournal.com]

You wanted to be the Hobbits on the adventure. Admit it ;).

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

You may start reading because it fulfills a personal fantasy, but the author uses the world/characters to examine deeper themes and ideas and concepts and emotions and characters and such. Twilight DOES NOT do that. It is just a fantasy on page.

Which quickly becomes a VERY DISTURBING personal fantasy. I'm a bit scared of SMeyer.

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

I love how apparently guys don't have or need secret emotional lives. Like they are creatures without emotion. Just walking machines which eat and sometimes smell.

Unrelated to the current discussion, but someone described Sam's arc in this season of SPooN as him being a Scary Buddhist Robot because he's repressing all his emotions, and I thought of you.

If anything, guys' emotional lives are MORE secret, because they are REALLY not encouraged to share.

I think it is possible (though no studies to back me up or anything) that women tend to be more often be social people, and I think the typical female / female relationship is one more open to sharing books

Yeah, totally agree, though I think it's a specific kind of being social, the kind where you seek out someone else's opinion instead of imposing your own. I'm pretty sure studies have shown that women tend to do this more often than guys, which means that more women readers are social ones.

books tend to be about emotions

Meh, I think that's a big overgeneralization (though I do think the best books must address them).

I think TWilight has such appeal because it speaks to a small personal fantasy shared by millions of angsty teenagers of all genders: Some hot, powerful, mysterious person will realize how cool I am and then we will proceed to have an epic and dramatic love affair which no one understands but we know in our hearts to be the epitome of love. *swoon*

::coughcough::TARGET AUDIENCE::coughcough:: :D

Seriously, though, I think you're totally right.

Also, I LOVED Katherine, Called Birdy.

I know! I haven't read it in forever, but I still remember it being awesome.

[imweirdlikethat.livejournal.com]

lol, I read Babysitter's Club and Little House on the Prairie too. "The Long Winter" went on foreverrrrrrr. Guess the title should've warned me.

But besides that the only "social" reader things I ever got involved with were Harry Potter, and I actually was just bored by Sorcerer's Stone the first time around, and Goosebumps. That was when I was a lot younger, lol.

I think I was out of the social reading thing by high school for the same reason I was out of every other social thing... I recognized that it wasn't based on actual likes/interests, just that everyone else loves it so you better love it too. And usually what everybody else loves is really, really stupid.

[shadydave.livejournal.com]

And usually what everybody else loves is really, really stupid.

I feel compelled to add "...except for Harry Potter!" :D

The nice thing about the internet is that because you can be much more exclusive about your social networks, it's a lot easier to be a social reader because you genuinely enjoy something, and not because there's pressure from everyone around you to read and squee.