Cambridge Deems Twilight Worthy of Analysis

[robrob]

About time someone had a bright idea about educating children. For all of you who failed to read the actual article, no one is giving kids twilight to read. They're looking at why it's popular, so when it comes to figuring out what to give bored as hell kids in english classes in the future, they'll try go with something that kids will actually want to read and can get something out of the class.

If I had a choice between Twilight and Shakespeare in highschool, it would be an easy answer, Twilight. Shakespeare seems to be the default selection for study and fucked if I know why, I don't remember one word from the play, the only people who actually wanted to read it were the ones who became theatre majors (in a class that was compulsory for all) and it basically left me bored out of my skull reading something that wasn't even in English (as far as I was concerned). At least Twilight would have kept the female half the class interested, which is far more than I can say for any other book I read in highschool, and it's far from the worst book ever written. For a cambridge student, I can easily see the relevance in studying what kids actually like, whether it's good or not. I studied writing Assembler languages in university too, does that mean I should go out and write all my code in it? I think not.

Plus, why all the hate over Twilight and none over Harry Potter? They're putting that in there too, which is also useless trash aimed at moronic teenagers. It seems that time has given that one some sort of legitimacy though.

 

[Calatar]

Oh, and homosexual couples tend to affect heterosexuals. Again, known for centuries.

What the sensemake?

Males find Lesbian antics fascinating, same for women and gay men. (And those werewolves are a very unsubtle portrayal)

Okay. I was unsure of what you meant by "affect." You just meant "interest."

Well, you could. But they're discussing children's literature/media, and why certain things are popular.

I understand that, but they're popular because of hype. So by analysing things like that, they're only understanding the basis of peer pressure rather than the qualities of the literature. And for that, you don't need any text.

That is assuming that the books are popular merely because they hit a critical mass hype rather than actually appealing to anything in a young girl's psyche. I don't doubt that it did hit that critical mass, but something gave it that impetus in the first place. I'd like to learn why.

I mean seriously, if you're going to be studying pop culture, you can't just go "lol it sucks people are dumb."

Equally, you really need to be studying why people feel that way. But the above was not what I expressed, which leads me to my concerns over who is going to teach it if the only justification for it's "haters" is "lol they suck".

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying, but I think it is, "We need to understand why people dismiss pop culture as well as understand why it is popular." Maybe it's just because I'm tired but your later point is really fuzzy for me. There DO exist reasons to like Twilight, though they wouldn't be reasons that appeal to you or me. (There are also many reasons to dislike it, as we both well know.)

If the theme in there really is "pr0n for girls," then how do you get it in a medium that does not send bad messages to young girls?

Perhaps you should look at how you define "bad messages"

Perhaps you're right.

EDIT: Lawl edited your post after I replied

Unlikely, I just thought of something else to add.

I didn't mean you did it in response to my post, I just meant that you did. And managed to call me a pseudo-intellectual before you even read my reply. So I laughed.

I point out that you are not knocking Twilight alone, but the entire study of pop culture merely because it includes it.

That's a reducto ad absurdum argument. There are better studies to be made on hype phenomenons than the latest flavour. Looking at something that still sells well, while being well-written, would be a far more educational practice. Simply including certain books as they hit the best seller chart is futile because they will age far faster, and - as has already been said - children's books that have hit the charts like Pratchett's haven't been inducted. This is a case of the hype leading the hype and I believe that to be wrong despite what I feel about the books themselves.

They are studying many OTHER hype phenomena as well. Twilight is just one of the many. They are studying Harry Potter as well, which is arguably well-written. Your objection stems from the idea that they are omitting other, worthier works of literature from their study in favor of Twilight, when it's pretty clear it is just one of many. I see no reason not to include is as part of a collection of modern pop-culture explosions, and this one is somewhat unique in the heavy female appeal.

And you don't actually need a fan of a book to analyze a book. You are saying nonsense.

Ironical, isn't it?

Hmph, can't tell if that's an insult directed at me or at Twilight.

 

[erbkaiser]

Plus, why all the hate over Twilight and none over Harry Potter? They're putting that in there too, which is also useless trash aimed at moronic teenagers. It seems that time has given that one some sort of legitimacy though.

For me, the difference is that Harry Potter stays within set rules for 'magic': it does not wildly contradict hundreds of years of lecture and literature like Twilight's "sparklypires" and homo-erotic werewolves.

Also, at its core Harry Potter has a positive message, whereas Twilight is misogynistic to the core. I want to physically hurt Bella for being such an absolutely idiotic douche.

Harry Potter is average to good teen lecture, Twilight is Mary Sueish fanfiction of the worst sort.

 

[Trivun]

Now, calm down everyone. They never said that the book was good; they only said that it should be studied as a cultural phenomenon. I can't say I disagree with that.

Exactly. When I did English Literature at A-Level, I studied Shakespeare and Byron (admittedly I dropped the subject after the first year). The other group, studying Language as well, did the same, and also studied Harry Potter. It was by no means an easy course. It was apparently extremely difficult.

So i agree with the University of Cambridge on this. It's a successful series, why shouldit not be worthy of study, for whatever reasons?

 

[Queen Michael]

Shit. Fuck. Jävlar. Merde. Perkele. Sablar. There is no swear-word profane enough to express my anger at that kind of trash being given a place in Cambridge. The damn thing isn't just a bad book, it's a bad book that doesn't give the impression of not being more than a first draft. Take this sentence: "He smild at me in a friendly way". Any writer worth her salt would have realized that the smile bein friendly goes without saying and that it's pointless to point it out. If context demands that it be stated out loud, you should at least phrase it in this way: "he gave me a friendly smile". See? Just like that I came up with a better phrasing.

Maybe the teachers don't understand why I enjoy cross-dressing either, but that doesn't mean they should give it time that good literature deserves more.

 

[Dott]

Cambridge is wrong.
End of line.
Enough said.

 

[Deviluk]

I'm not surprised. Cambridge is a complete dump!

 

[aaron552]

The only analysis Twilight is worth of is to FIND ITS FUCKING WEAK POINT AND SHOOT IT!.

I thought it was ATTACK ITS WEAK POINTS FOR MASSIVE DAMAGE!!!

 

[The DSM]

This is my analysis: Sparkling emos.

Not much more to be said.

 

[davidboring]

Only reason I clicked was threat title being cut off to read "Cambridge Deems Twilight Worthy Of Anal."

 

[Bobbovski]

Meh. That's not so strange... It makes sense actually. Nothing to get upset about.

 

[davidboring]

Also.
This thread and the discourse within has sealed the final nail in the coffin of my participation on this website's forums.

Fin.

 

[oppp7]

I can see where they're coming from. This analysis is more of a psychological analysis rather than literary.

 

[rabidmidget]

I can see why they would want to study this, it made millions of girls world wide suddenly become obsessed with fictional characters, which are shallow in comparison to other literary characters so it would be interesting to dissect it to find out how such a mediocre series attracted so much attention.

They are not celebrating it, they are trying to answer the same question we all ask when confronted with its popularity, how?

 

[Premonition]

Best study ever. An in depth study in to the madness of the tween girls that massively went to see the movies.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

snipped for brevity
I don't doubt that it did hit that critical mass, but something gave it that impetus in the first place. I'd like to learn why.

Honestly? I can tell you that in one sentence.

Word of mouth and sexy bits.

What Twilight creates is the wish fulfillment novel of teenage girls. The first 200 pages or so has no plot other than "He's so beautiful and mysterious", which - as I understand - is the first feelings of love. Betty Blue does similar to teenage boys - creates an impossibly beautiful partner who "you might just have a chance with".

That's been a staple of coming-of-age novels since Jane Eyre or Wuthering Heights - and is done far better in them. Twilight even references them as if to say it belongs on the same library shelf. What it doesn't do is understand that the background (Gateshead and the Yorkshire Moors) carries as much pathos as the novel itself. Both the books and the film version of Forks is inaccurate and confusing, while Bella's character is contradicted and dictated by the author. Equally, while Heathcliffe is an entertaining, passionate and lunatic character, Edward is only defined by how Bella sees him - with no insight into his mind - which makes most of his actions seem that of a sociopath.

ANYway...

Hmph, can't tell if that's an insult directed at me or at Twilight.

I try not to insult, and I apologise if it seemed that way. Especially for my use of menopausal earlier, which I admit was unfounded.

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

Not all young people like this shite Cambridge - only tasteless and stupid young people.

I hope they're trying to find out how to stop people from being stupid by analysing this crap.

But they must be wary, for as Nietzsche said: "And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

 

[Tonimata]

The only analysis Twilight is worth of is to FIND ITS FUCKING WEAK POINT AND SHOOT IT!.

I thought it was ATTACK ITS WEAK POINTS FOR MASSIVE DAMAGE!!!

Yeah, it was implied
Also? it has been scientifically and officially proven that fire is not one of its weak points. You wouldn't believe how ridiculously hard it was to burn a copy of the book I got my hands on
And no, I'm not a Nazi