I just came across this article. I thought I would take the time to comment on what I thought about it and Colton Harris-Moore, this modern "folk legend."
So basically, this boy is a criminal (and I do admire his agility, you don't see that many subtle giants - he is 6'5.). I am not putting any kind of negative connotation on that word here, but by American standards, yes, he is a criminal. He has committed multiple felonies, hunts without a permit (I'm assuming on this one), and has possibly even shot at a police officer. However, after reading the comment section, I see that he is gathering quite the following of fans. After all, the article reports that pictures of him have sold online for 300 dollars, and there are movie deals and merchandise already involved.
I'm not going to lie, when I read the article I felt a little excited because the kid seems like the real smooth criminal type, just like all men want to someday be involved in a heist (but most are just too afraid of getting caught to actually follow through). For a second I wanted to be him. And I suspect that that is what is so attractive about this guy. He is a total badass, and men everywhere are bound to envy him.
This really got me thinking. We set laws in our country to protect the people, and when those laws are violated the violators are arrested and sentenced accordingly. Don't get me wrong, I know police brutality can be an issue and sometimes the law just doesn't seem fair. But everyone has to be treated the same in order to maintain justice in our society. In theory, what this teenage boy has been doing for years should be frowned upon, not celebrated. However, throughout the history of the United States, we have been celebrating heroes like Tony Montana, Robin Hood (I know, he is fictional), and so on. There have been countless criminals in history whom the people have admired and even come to love.
So why do we do this? I was thinking that maybe it has to do with the fact that people often feel oppressed by the government. Like it or not, politicians do indeed have a position of power, and it looks like we'll have a strong central form of government for a while. Theoretically, we should love our government, and love the protection and guidance that they provide for us. So why don't we? I am not criticizing American citizens, I am merely intrigued. And I think I may have the answer.
Since the beginning of man governments have risen and fallen, all according to what the people wanted. When it really comes down to it, the civilians have the power. That was the way that our country was designed, and even if it was a dictatorship, the people would still have the manpower to stage a successful revolt. Sure, the government is there for our convenience, but we often forget that. Some nations fear their leaders, we try and push ours around. What we really fear is losing power.
Man's basic instinct is to love power. The power to control one's own destiny, and even the destinies of others, is something that is very hard to resist. When given power, man never wants to give it up. And man, oh man, do we Americans have it. In fact, we as a whole can manipulate the federal government to do whatever we want. All it takes is a vote.
That right there is it. We hate the government. We hate the police. Deep down, every one of us hates them at least a little bit. And that is because we hate the fact that we have to share that power. Each and every one of us wants to do whatever we want, whenever we want. But we compromise our control to live up to the standards of society.
Colton Harris-Moore does not compromise anything. He lives his life the way he wants to. And we are jealous. That's all it comes down to. He can do what he wants, when he wants, whereas all of the rest of us have to be miserable (for the most part) and lead lives with economical struggles and difficult jobs.
But if we all followed Colton's example and essentially became barbarians, wouldn't it become much less admirable? I believe that it would no longer represent freedom, but chaos and insanity. Either way, we normal people will never be content with one side or the other. We all want to be powerful, and there just isn't enough power to go around.
12/08/2009
12/05/2009
On the Current Twilight Fad...
First, a disclaimer: I have never read any of the Twilight books, and I have only seen about a third of the first movie in bits and pieces. So my criticism doesn't necessarily mean anything.
That being said, I think this whole cult-like following that Stephenie Meyer is gathering has become rather ridiculous. I always poked harmless fun at Twilight, but respected it because it was literature. However, from everything I have read in reviews and discussions about the series, I can tell that the books are just not that good. I discovered yesterday that one of my favorite writers and connoisseur of the horror and thriller genre, Stephen King, stated his opinion on Meyer's writing publicly in an interview early this year. And he wasn't exactly supportive.
Here is something I just read.
Now, the article is fairly unbiased up until the last paragraph, so I will just take it as it is. Before I relay exactly what I think of Twilight and just why I think it is not quality literature, here is a comment I discovered posted on that article, which I have adequately titled "Twilight Fangirl Defense" (click the picture for the full comment):
First of all, "Edward Cullen Lover loser," when analyzing the entire vampire fiction genre, there is absolutely no conceivable way you can claim that the FICTIONAL (meaning you probably shouldn't be so attached to him) Edward Cullen is not a wimp. He was designed to be the perfect guy (at least for sweet lovin'). The original vampires of old were objects of terror and sex, intimidating creatures which gave the reader nightmares. Read any novel in this genre, for example, King's own Salem's Lot, and you will see the differences between Meyer's vampires and all of the rest. Or you should see it, anyway. I'm not going to promise that you will, because it seems like it might be something which would be hard for you to grasp. The dreams young girls have of vampires now are not exactly nightmares... but even without considering that, the only evidence you need is right here: Edward Cullen sparkles. That's right. He doesn't fry in the sunlight. He doesn't fear wooden stakes. He doesn't balk at the thought of garlic. The only similarity between Cullen and the classic vampire is this, ironically: The book written about him is absolutely dripping with sexual undertones. The reason this is ironic is because Stephenie Meyer is a devout Mormon. She is all for abstinence and absolutely against promoting sexual activity in teens. Way to go, Stephenie. You completely contradict your own beliefs. Now all the teen girls in the world are out searching for their own Edward so they can have their own awkward silences for hours on end with them, and your books definitely are making a lot of them want to engage in some naughty activity. Anyway, let's forget all that. The only thing really making Cullen a vampire, which apparently is a very loose term to Meyer, is the fact that he drinks blood, and it isn't even human blood that he goes after. There is absolutely nothing intimidating or sexy about Edward. He seemingly has no personality, he stalks the girl he is in love with (at least he's in love with the scent of her blood - I'm still trying to wrap my mind about that weird romance), and he is not at all dangerous. The only purpose his vampirism serves is to make him seem like the tough, hot hunk at high school. Really mature stuff you're writing, Meyer. Maybe you should grow up.
Next, "Lover loser," you clearly display your ignorance for the entire internet to see and laugh at. I'll try and forget the fact that you equate an author being a literary genius with having a movie made about his or her book. No, what really annoys me is your sheer and utter stupidity and lack of an argument. "Have they (I'll presume you mean Hollywood here) made a movie about this dude's books," you ask? I'm glad you asked, allow me to educate your primitive brain: There have been approximately 80 movies and TV mini series made about King's various works. Try and think about that for a second. The score is 80-1, honey. I think I know who my money's on here. And if you don't believe me, here is a list.
Your evident lack of observational skills is also present in this post. Meyer uses a LOT of sensual themes and subtext in her Twilight series. I guess it's your problem if you can't see it.
If Stephen King has a mental disorder, I definitely want to be the next person diagnosed with it. His ability to write in depth and with actual character development and plot is enviable. So I don't really know if you're wrong here, but I guess it doesn't matter much to me.
Also, I really don't care whether you liked vampire stories before Stephenie Meyer's or not. The point is that a lot of people did, and they feel like this new transition to emo, sensitive, unstable stalker idiots is really totally uncool. It's not trendy, it just sucks.
OK, I'm done picking apart your post, and I didn't even touch on the many errors in grammar you have made. It seemed unnecessary to me, maybe even overkill, although your writing skills are comparable to Meyer's, apparently.
To all the parents out there who are saying to themselves that "it's OK that all these errors exist in Meyer's books, at least my kid is reading!": No. No, no, and no. This is not real literary work. Many people have compared Stephenie Meyer's writing to fanfiction, and I believe this to be an accurate summation. Your kid shouldn't be reading this stuff. They aren't getting any of the values you are looking for out of it. In fact, it might even be harmful. Twilight teaches your little girl that it's okay to be a damsel in distress, to be a dependent immature moron for the rest of her life. After all, Edward came along and rescued Bella from a life of having to be independent and strong, so let's all envy her and want an Edward of our own! Cullen is a rare breed (at least in looks), and he is a condescending jerk to Bella throughout the series (he stalks her because he feels the need to protect her? Oh, please...). Feminists everywhere are already rallying. Why aren't you? Also, in terms of actual reading quality: Meyers is not a good writer. She reuses phrases constantly, has no character development (to you fangirls out there, a challenge: tell me why Edward and Bella love each other?), and writes like she is a preteen girl indulging in her own fantasies. Because that's all Twilight really is: one woman's wet dream. It's trash. Take your kid to the library, get them a real book.
My real point is this: maybe all of you fans of Twilight out there should try reading something else every now and then. And I don't mean J.K. Rowling, I don't mean Christopher Paolini, I don't mean Judy Blume. I mean some real literature. You might discover that reading isn't as stupid as you all thought.
Here's one last link you parents might find interesting before I go back to watching this whole fad go down with a raised eyebrow and an amused smile.
That being said, I think this whole cult-like following that Stephenie Meyer is gathering has become rather ridiculous. I always poked harmless fun at Twilight, but respected it because it was literature. However, from everything I have read in reviews and discussions about the series, I can tell that the books are just not that good. I discovered yesterday that one of my favorite writers and connoisseur of the horror and thriller genre, Stephen King, stated his opinion on Meyer's writing publicly in an interview early this year. And he wasn't exactly supportive.
Here is something I just read.
Now, the article is fairly unbiased up until the last paragraph, so I will just take it as it is. Before I relay exactly what I think of Twilight and just why I think it is not quality literature, here is a comment I discovered posted on that article, which I have adequately titled "Twilight Fangirl Defense" (click the picture for the full comment):
First of all, "Edward Cullen Lover loser," when analyzing the entire vampire fiction genre, there is absolutely no conceivable way you can claim that the FICTIONAL (meaning you probably shouldn't be so attached to him) Edward Cullen is not a wimp. He was designed to be the perfect guy (at least for sweet lovin'). The original vampires of old were objects of terror and sex, intimidating creatures which gave the reader nightmares. Read any novel in this genre, for example, King's own Salem's Lot, and you will see the differences between Meyer's vampires and all of the rest. Or you should see it, anyway. I'm not going to promise that you will, because it seems like it might be something which would be hard for you to grasp. The dreams young girls have of vampires now are not exactly nightmares... but even without considering that, the only evidence you need is right here: Edward Cullen sparkles. That's right. He doesn't fry in the sunlight. He doesn't fear wooden stakes. He doesn't balk at the thought of garlic. The only similarity between Cullen and the classic vampire is this, ironically: The book written about him is absolutely dripping with sexual undertones. The reason this is ironic is because Stephenie Meyer is a devout Mormon. She is all for abstinence and absolutely against promoting sexual activity in teens. Way to go, Stephenie. You completely contradict your own beliefs. Now all the teen girls in the world are out searching for their own Edward so they can have their own awkward silences for hours on end with them, and your books definitely are making a lot of them want to engage in some naughty activity. Anyway, let's forget all that. The only thing really making Cullen a vampire, which apparently is a very loose term to Meyer, is the fact that he drinks blood, and it isn't even human blood that he goes after. There is absolutely nothing intimidating or sexy about Edward. He seemingly has no personality, he stalks the girl he is in love with (at least he's in love with the scent of her blood - I'm still trying to wrap my mind about that weird romance), and he is not at all dangerous. The only purpose his vampirism serves is to make him seem like the tough, hot hunk at high school. Really mature stuff you're writing, Meyer. Maybe you should grow up.
Next, "Lover loser," you clearly display your ignorance for the entire internet to see and laugh at. I'll try and forget the fact that you equate an author being a literary genius with having a movie made about his or her book. No, what really annoys me is your sheer and utter stupidity and lack of an argument. "Have they (I'll presume you mean Hollywood here) made a movie about this dude's books," you ask? I'm glad you asked, allow me to educate your primitive brain: There have been approximately 80 movies and TV mini series made about King's various works. Try and think about that for a second. The score is 80-1, honey. I think I know who my money's on here. And if you don't believe me, here is a list.
Your evident lack of observational skills is also present in this post. Meyer uses a LOT of sensual themes and subtext in her Twilight series. I guess it's your problem if you can't see it.
If Stephen King has a mental disorder, I definitely want to be the next person diagnosed with it. His ability to write in depth and with actual character development and plot is enviable. So I don't really know if you're wrong here, but I guess it doesn't matter much to me.
Also, I really don't care whether you liked vampire stories before Stephenie Meyer's or not. The point is that a lot of people did, and they feel like this new transition to emo, sensitive, unstable stalker idiots is really totally uncool. It's not trendy, it just sucks.
OK, I'm done picking apart your post, and I didn't even touch on the many errors in grammar you have made. It seemed unnecessary to me, maybe even overkill, although your writing skills are comparable to Meyer's, apparently.
To all the parents out there who are saying to themselves that "it's OK that all these errors exist in Meyer's books, at least my kid is reading!": No. No, no, and no. This is not real literary work. Many people have compared Stephenie Meyer's writing to fanfiction, and I believe this to be an accurate summation. Your kid shouldn't be reading this stuff. They aren't getting any of the values you are looking for out of it. In fact, it might even be harmful. Twilight teaches your little girl that it's okay to be a damsel in distress, to be a dependent immature moron for the rest of her life. After all, Edward came along and rescued Bella from a life of having to be independent and strong, so let's all envy her and want an Edward of our own! Cullen is a rare breed (at least in looks), and he is a condescending jerk to Bella throughout the series (he stalks her because he feels the need to protect her? Oh, please...). Feminists everywhere are already rallying. Why aren't you? Also, in terms of actual reading quality: Meyers is not a good writer. She reuses phrases constantly, has no character development (to you fangirls out there, a challenge: tell me why Edward and Bella love each other?), and writes like she is a preteen girl indulging in her own fantasies. Because that's all Twilight really is: one woman's wet dream. It's trash. Take your kid to the library, get them a real book.
My real point is this: maybe all of you fans of Twilight out there should try reading something else every now and then. And I don't mean J.K. Rowling, I don't mean Christopher Paolini, I don't mean Judy Blume. I mean some real literature. You might discover that reading isn't as stupid as you all thought.
Here's one last link you parents might find interesting before I go back to watching this whole fad go down with a raised eyebrow and an amused smile.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)