/lit/ - Literature

Twilight itself is already readable... Accessibility has never been the issue; quality has.

God I just want to kick the shit out of you.

You are combining the two worst things in the world: manga and Twilight.
Good job.

>>526214
But the thing is, this actually ups the quality by putting it in a different format.

I would argue that, from my standpoint, Twilight itself was not readable. This, surprisingly, was.

>>526215
Whyfor, gentle anon? I'm just expressing an opinion.

>>526218
Oh, I didn't combine them. That was done for me by the faceless mass marketing machine behind Twilight industries co, ltd. I just found a copy of it on the Twilight shrine at my local Borders and decided to read it for laughs.

>>526218
>Manga
>Bad

I can see your point. It makes sense, given the subject matter, but you really are a gigantic faggot.

I honesty do want to sympathize with your discovery, but it's a categorical imperative that I hate you forever, and completely disregard anything that will ever come out of your mouth as nothing more sophisticated than simian screeches.

Are you ready, /lit/?

>>526227
So the crux of the matter is that the Twilight franchise is so hated, any association with it mandates being buried alive under a mountain of hate and shit? Sounds about right.

I also forgot to mention the characters in my original post.

Romantic manga has cookiecutter characters. You have the mostly silent male lead who either ignores or is somehow adverse to the female at first, and you have the bland characterless female who is the female reader's self-insertion fantasy persona.

I think you see where I'm going with this. Bella and Edward are already these things, and it makes it more palatable to have them presented in a medium in which bad and cliche characterization is to be expected.

>>526224

Because you are a huge faggot.


and I hate FAGGOTS!!!!

>>526245

>>526226
>JoJo's Bizarre Adventure
Fuck yes this is now a JoJo thread.

DEM VILLAINS!

>>526240
That's an actual book?!

>>526245

Don't hate the faggots, hate the fagging.

>>526274
Unfortunately yes, I seen the poster at Barns and Noble and quickly faced palmed. Then I turned around and was extremely disappointed when I seen a Twilight table.

>>526274
I hope not. It, it shames me to say this but my 17 year old little brother has not only bought all the Twilight books but read the other book, forgot its name, made by the Twilight author.

>>526284
Every Barnes& Noble in my state has a table for "Young Adults", and is stacked high with tacky vampire romances. It's like the American 16 year old girls version of "Am I kawaii? Uguu~".

>>526287
Host?

The one where the main character is "Stephanie Meyer" with a few letters switched around?

>>526242
>>I think you see where I'm going with this. Bella and Edward are already these things, and it makes it more palatable to have them presented in a medium in which bad and cliche characterization is to be expected.

So, just because something is “expected” to be bad it is now acceptable? That is the worst logic I’ve heard in a long, long time. I don’t necessarily hate all manga (or anime), because there are genuinely some good stories that have been told in both genres. However, I agree with your statement about manga usually containing “cookie-cutter characters,” which is why criticism directed towards a particularly bad series is appropriate and deserved. But, again, why does that make Twilight, in manga-form, acceptable? Why should any terribly told story be acceptable?

>>526291
Really? Oh God, where are you?

>>526291
That's the name.
>>526299
Springfield Illinois. We don't have good taste out here in the midwest.

>>526242
>and it makes it more palatable to have them presented in a medium in which bad and cliche characterization is to be expected.

>>526294
I'm not talking manga in general, I'm talking specifically about romantic shoujo crap.

Like I said, it puts itself on an even playing field with what it is. It is by no means outstanding, but it definitely falls well within the bounds of so-bad-it's-good.

Really, the only thing I'd claim was exceptional was the art. They really used color dynamically, and the action was drawn top-notch.

>>526311
> I'm talking specifically about romantic shoujo crap.
Don't forget Moe, and yes before anyone says anything I know it's an art style. But it's always used for uguu~ anime.

>>526310
Calling Japanese graphic romantic novels almost intentionally bad makes me pretentious now?

Shit, dog. Pick what needs defending a little more carefully.

If you're over age 13 and you read manga you're a faggot, end of thread.

This is good troll material for /a/.

>>526321
Yes, I know. I was treating that as established fact when I came in here.

Can we move on?

>>526326
he said end of thread, and he meant it.

>>526321
>>526327
Sure is samefag all of a sudden.

>>526316
What the fuck, Melancholy isn't moe.

>>526324
But [a/ is actually smart when they aren't fapping to children and ladyboys.

>>526335

0/10

>>526340
I was being serious

>>526335
>Go to /a/ to confirm
>First thread descends into pedophilla
haha oh wow

>>526341

0/10

>>526330
>What the fuck, Melancholy isn't moe.
Oh yes she is. Enjoy your generic waifu moeblob.

It's my first time here. Is manga always considered rage material or is it just this thread?

>>526358
Cartoons are for children. If you want to read them as an adult, fine, but don't post about them here.

>>526311
I’m sorry, but again I ask, why should the “expected” bad now be acceptable? You said it “works” and that you “actually like it.” I’m not here to criticize your opinion, because tastes are tastes, and you’re free to like what you want, but to accept something for what it is based on low expectations is frightening. Why should anyone squander their intellect like that?

The art doesn’t change anything about the awful storyline. In fact, it only adds to how completely vain the entire series is and its cast of characters. Maybe the art is nice to look at, but the story is a disaster, and to favor appearance over depth is just as superficial as those who claim not to like Twilight but read and watch the movies because Edward and Jacob are “eye candy” or whatever it is females say these days.

>>526347
Hi, non-/a/ fag here. What you said sounds pretty gay, so I'm going to go watch whatever I want and not care about your opinions. Bye, then.

>>526365
Books are for children. If you want to read them as an adult, fine, but don't post about them here. I DON'T GIVE A SHIT IF THIS IS A LIT BOARD OUT

>>526365
see
>>526310

>>526369
There's a place for furry manchildren like you to discuss your doe-eyed loli cartoon perversions. It's not /lit/.

>>526365
>Cartoons are for children. If you want to read them as an adult, fine, but don't post about them here.
Sup

>>526382
I remember posting in some other thread forever ago about how manga/comics could have literary merit, and I hope you're the same person who got sand in their vagina then, because that would make you officially the saddest person ever, and it would fill my heart with such joy.

>>526383
Like I said, that's a child's book. It has a big naked blue dude and people in capes and tights, and it's not the Victorian era so there's no reason they should be wearing a cape. Get it out of /lit/ it's Captain Planet level trash.

>>526390
Oh_you.png

>>526390
Bad fucking defense.

>>526383

>>526390
>Victorian era
Don't know why people have such a hard one for this era, every book I've read from it has been shit.

>>526407
He's a video game designer with famous author parents who wanted to write a book. That doesn't mean it's good.

>>526417
I don't know either. The poster was referencing the tights and capes though - popular clothing the Victorian era.

>>526417
He was talking about capes, not books.
Capes.

Also it is important to wear a cape when stealing jewels. Also mustache.

>>526388
If you're filled with joy because you pissed off a greasy high school wannabe-snob, you're the saddest guy ever. Sorry to be the first to tell you.

>>526430
No it doesn't. But it was still good.

>>526451
I don't think you have reading comprehension. BACK TO SADNESS MODE

>>526316
That's what moefags want to believe.

If Twilight is going into manga form, D needs to kill every mother fucker in the series while looking sexy.

>>527065
Unrelated, but bottom right is my favorite manga

>>527067

D is an overpowered boring character.

>>527065
None of that is shounen.

>>527074
He's got exactly as much character to him as Edward from Twilight.

They'd go well together.

I wish Twilight was a manga. Seriously, the cancer would be stuck inside the weeaboo and not spread like it did.

>>526383

Why is Watchmen considered a good comic book anyways? No seriously, could someone briefly explain what's so good about it or point to an in depth analysis or something. I'm saying this to troll, I really want to know why people lose their collective shit over it.

I liked Twilight. It was good masturbation material. The kind of story I wouldn't mind reading as a fanfiction, but it was pure crap as a published book.

Where did you get it, OP?

>>528923
>I'm saying this to troll,
that's not really a strong incentive to answer you.

>>528923

The structure of the comic IS very "literary", in a way. There's a lot of "rhyme", or recall, in the narrative (seeing the same groups of people on the sidewalk discussing what's going on in the world, as a kind of background to the action itself), and at the end of each issue, or "chapter" if you will, there's a different kind of alternate narrative content: an old newspaper article chronicling the rise of a certain hero, a published journal article by another character on his favorite animal, a slick interview with a current superhero feeling like something out of a trade magazine. These vignettes are not appendices, but are spaced out to reveal a bit more about certain characters at certain times when you read the whole thing in order. It's this jumping back and forth between various kinds of narrative that made it untranslatable into a movie, in much the same way that The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has never really worked as a movie: the joy of the latter is in reading the glib, philosophical asides that are not central to the plot, or only advance the main plot a little bit. It's too non-linear, and movies are linear.

>>528923
It was the first real deconstruction of your typical hero book. It was pretty cutting edge when it came out and it's a fairly decent book either way. Also it is really really overrated.

>>529044

I see why that might make it more interesting structurewise but I don't think simply adding meta-content to the end of every chapter makes a comic book better.

>>529080
it does in watchmen.

>>528923

>Why