And Laurell K. Hamilton when asked her thoughts on the Twilight phenomenon: "Stephenie Meyer as come and she's taken the genre that I sort of pioneered."
...Pioneered? Really? I am not familiar enough with genre trends to factually dispute this claim.
"Jeez, Bobby, why not just compare her to the monkeys in the zoo?"
(Sorry...that KOTH was just on.)
Stephenie Meyer always comes off like she is in 13 Going on Thirty or something. Except I like Jennifer Garner and think Meyer is a moron. But that would explain a. her grasp of teens and 2. Her complete and total inability to get quoted with anything intelligent...every time she opens her mouth, Shauna dies, just a little bit more.(Because I've decided...all publicists are Jersey girls named Shauna now.) And she never gets used to how Meyer flinches when she says "Jesus Christ!"
...Pioneered? Really? I am not familiar enough with genre trends to factually dispute this claim.
Let's put it this way. Everyone's laughing at her.
Including dead people. Which seems oddly appropriate.
I could never pull this off...nobody claims to "pioneer" crime fiction cause the people that write it are so good with guns.
IJS.
OK, the fact that Stephanie Meyers is Mormon explains A LOT.
Way to set the bar looooooow.
Well, come on-- Anne did have some batshit craxy moments for a while there. These days she's coming off as thoughtful and measured in her responses.
Wrod.
I'm so embarrassed that she's from here...thank God she had Forks to dump it on.
Thanks, Calli, but there are a lot of ex-police practitioners of procedural fiction...at the very least, I'd have a lifetime of parking tickets or James Ellroy stealing my sports bras or something...would not be worth it to play "I r serius riter."
Plus, I have a lot more respect for what came before than that. I admire those people.
Anne did have some batshit craxy moments for a while there.
True, that. But while I thought she was a narcissistic loonie who undervalued the editorial process like whoa, I never really thought she was outright ignorant. Which separates her from Meyers.
But while I thought she was a narcissistic loonie who undervalued the editorial process like whoa, I never really thought she was outright ignorant.
Good point. I'll admit, I'm not overly familiar with the range and depth of vampire literature, but I did like this response that Anne had to the question of what she saw as unique about her vision of vampires:
"Their glamour. What I thought to do with Louis and Lestat was make them very beautiful and very seductive and very appealing. I thought to myself, Why should this supernatural being be repulsive? Why should he be feral like Dracula? What if he was more like a dark angel? It was kind of a radical idea. And now, 30 years later, no one would even question vampires being beautiful and magnetic."
And again, I don't claim to know a lot about the breadth of vampire literature out there, but I do recall when Interview came out and was gaining popularity, that was something that was frequently mentioned as a unique aspect of the book. And she's right-- these days, the idea of the vampire as the beautiful, tortured hero is almost de rigeur to the point where I'm almost grateful to the point of tears when I see a morally ambiguous or downright nasty vampire. It's why I loved Angelus over Angel and why Spike was so refreshing.