White Rose Discussion Question: How would you respond to the opinions Ms. Grigoriadis's expressed in the magazine "Rolling Stone?"
Extra Credit Question. Do you think that "Twilight" has been a "MEME!" (pronounced like cream) And that vampire stories by other authors (and their characters) AS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN for works such as: IE "Vampire diaries," "True Blood," etc, have been changed (Because of "Twilight") so that the characters and their stories are more "Twilight-like" in nature?
Your friend, Doc B
In 70 BC when Julius Caesar subdued Gaul (present day France) one thing that he found repugnant about the Gauls was their religious beliefs. Their priests were called Druids. And some of the specific things that Caesar found particularly offensively about Druids were, their practices of human sacrifice, and their practice of religious cannibalism. And even more offensive, to him, was their tradition of participating in "Burning Man" ceremonies. In a "Burning Man ceremony, a hollow three or four story statues of a man is built from logs and sticks. The statue was then filled with bound humans and set ablaze.
And that has gotten me pondering about:
At first that seemed a little harsh to me, until I read a movie review in a major entertainment magazine, of the movie "Twilight." The reviewer said "This 'vampire' movie was doomed from the start, BECAUSE THROUGH OUT, ALMOST THE ENTIRE MOVIE, the heroine, one Miss Bella Swan, was never in any danger of being injured."
What does that tell us? First, that this popular culture guru hadn't bothered to read the lead novel, of a book series that was currently selling 16% of all the books being sold in America. And second that he somehow missed the entire premise of the movie, which was that from the first moment Edward caught sent of Bella's aroma, she was in constant mortal danger. And not in danger of loosing her chastity, as Ms. G seems to imply.
(Spending her life as a ruined woman) Not that Bella didn't work hard, and possibly deserved a scarlet A just for her effort alone.
The reviewer had done his very best. He was being paid to stay proficient on both popular literature and cinema. But he had been "grossly negligent." And so it seems only fair that he be sentenced to serve five years in the Massachusetts's Sate Penitentiary.
But you might ask: Is five years in prison REALLY adequate, for a review that was THAT negligent?"?