A New Dawn: Your Favorite Authors on Stephenie Meyers Twilight Series: Completely Unauthorized
Fans invest more than money into something they love - something corporations never understand and hence why fan fiction, mashups, etc. The only people likely to be interested in the draft are fans waiting for the next book. If this book is never completed, they lose the investment they've made in the characters, the work they've possibly put into spreading the word, discussing with other fans, etc.
They don't have a "right" to a new novel as such other than the fact they helped make the previous novels a success , but for their anticipation to be crushed because someone else had a look at it first. To give a slightly silly analogy - imagine you like a particular restaurant. You go there as often as you can, you love the food, the people, the ambiance. Then, someone steals the chef's best recipes. If the restaurant owner decided that since other people have their menu, they might as well shut down, you'd be disappointed, wouldn't you?
Yeah, it's a shoddy analogy but you get my point. The people who are being most hurt by this are the people who helped make Meyer a success and who were most looking forward to the novel. A mugging is nothing like the copying of a digital file. In the mugging, there is violence and intimidation used, a tangible loss of income and a psychological effect on the victim. Here, nothing has really been lost unless someone tries to publish a version of the work in which case they can be prosecuted. All Meyer needs to do is to better secure her documents preferably take them offline completely unless she has a real reason for them to be online , finish the work she started, give the fans what they want and reap the rewards.
I cannot see any reason why she can't do this. LostSailor , 3 Sep Not according to the law. At least in NY State, unauthorized copying of computer data in any form is a crime under the statutes dealing with larceny and theft. Copyright infringement is a violation of a right under Federal law and is a civil matter. I'm a little appalled that I even have to address this. Even if it were not against the law, it's morally still theft. Here's an example of the difference between copyright infringement and theft in the digital realm: If I make a copy of a digital file that I purchased and make that file available for copying, and you make a copy of that file, there is no theft involved, only potentially copyright infringement.
If I manage to gain access to your computer and copy a digital file that is otherwise not publicly available and that I was not authorized to copy, that may also be copyright infringement, but it is clearly theft according to statute which may vary state to state in the US , and may also constitute other crimes. I certainly understand why folks may not like to use the word theft, but it is accurate. There are any number of reasons why Meyer may never write another book in the Twilight series, including her anger over the leaked manuscript. But fans, while they may be wild about the characters, have made no investment in any future installments of the series.
They have made an investment in the books they purchased, and they still have those books. They don't "lose" anything if Meyer writes not another word, though their disappointment may be great. That fans may have talked to others about the series, characters and general wonderfulness of Meyer's work and spent countless hours talking about them may be a personal investment of their time, but it doesn't necessarily create an obligation on the part of the author. Meyer may be disappointing her fans, but she's not "punishing" them.
It may seem unfair that the fans' anticipation could be crushed, but how does their "helping" make the series a success imply even a passing reference to a right to more novels? Your analogy of the restaurant is telling; I may be disappointed that my favorite meals are no longer available, but I'm not being punished. Speaking of shoddy analogies Violence and intimidation aside, you say that in copying a digital file "nothing has been lost".
Well, in the next sentence you mention "tangible loss of income and a psychological effect on the victim". In this case, one could argue about the potential loss of income, but clearly there has been a profound psychological impact on the victim, Meyer. One may argue that she shouldn't feel this way, but she plainly does feel a violation. Why should that be discounted? I do not know the detail of how the manuscript was stolen and leaked.
But while I encourage good computer security, it shouldn't matter. And there are any number of reasons why she "can't do this," including the aforementioned psychological impact of the theft. Just getting on with it as if nothing had happened to give the fans the ROI they demand is kind of a flippant response. Mike profile , 3 Sep 2: You seem to have misread what you were replying to. No one was saying it wasn't against the law.
Either way, that's not the point here. The leak already happened. The question is how to deal with it, and the suggestion is that Meyer chose the wrong strategy. LostSailor , 4 Sep 8: I don't think I misread anything. What I have been replying to is the idea that copying a digital file cannot be theft because "it's only a copy. PaulT profile , 4 Sep 5: Copyright infringement is not stealing, whichever way you look at it. This infringment can fall under many other statutes industrial espionage and copyright infringment most likely, along with hacking , but not theft of property no matter which section it's place under.
They're totally different things, and I wish people would stop muddying the water with this misuse of terminology. Note that I'm not saying that copyright infringement is right, just that it's not theft. Just as a mugging and mail fraud are two totally different types of theft that are dealt with differently, so we should not confuse copying of data with a theft of a physical item. For any artist to be able to continue working, there needs to be demand for their work. So here, why was another book being written to begin with? For the author's health?jlhghfdg.co.vu/map9.php
Good Writing, Bad Writing, and Stephenie Meyer
Because she really wanted to write? Or because the previous novels were successful enough to warrant another story being written? Not to mention because there was a strong enough fanbase for her publisher to want to invest in another book. To my mind, this means that the fans were responsible for investing in a future novel. Besides, the fans have been promised another book, hence their sense of "entitlement" to it. If Meyer had said "nope, there's never going to be another book", this wouldn't be an issue.
Now, she's promised one and then removed it after writing a version of it. There's a big diffference. Maybe "punished" a strong word to be using here, but fans were anticipating a product that may never now see the light of day. A product that was only going to be created in the first place due to their actions. They have every right to be pissed, and I wish I could think of a better analogy right now.
She has lost exactly nothing. No income has been lost unless she decides not to complete the novel, which is her decision. There is no sane person on the planet who will decide not to buy a novel because they read a first draft. In fact, it's possible that the leak could have a positive effect - people who were unaware of her work until this incident was reported may now check out her previous novels and buy them.
So, apart from feeling bad for a few days, what exactly has she suffered? I can't think of anything.
On Second Thought, Perhaps Stephenie Meyer Doesn't Get Online Fans
It shouldn't matter whether you lock your house, keep your bank account details secret, leave your keys in your unlocked car's ignition or any number of things you need to do to prevent theft. However you complain about it, there are people who will steal out there. This should be a lesson in online security especially the adage that the only way to make a computer hack-proof is to take it offline, and even then it's not completely safe.
But why exacerbate the small amount damage that's been done? Carrying on as if nothing happened is a big F. It shows them that their "theft" didn't matter and they've not gained anything through their actions. By threatening not to finish the book, not only has Meyer shown the world that the theft really did matter but she's letting down thousands of people who put her in the position to be able to write the thing in the first place.
Copyright infringement is not stealing, whichever way you look at it I agree that copyright infringement is a different than theft, and I have not argued that they are legally identical I'll argue the morality of it elsewhere. But, depending on the circumstances, a single act of copying a digital file can be both copyright infringement and theft. I've already pointed out at least one state statute that specifically supports this. The other concept, that theft can only occur when a physical item is taken, is simply not a valid understanding of the law. I hope you don't work in the entertainment industry, as that's a very narrow and damaging viewpoint.
And were I Meyer's publisher, I would be hounding her to keep pumping out books in the series as often and for as long as possible. But looking at it from the author's side, there are many reasons why she might not want to write another book in this series. Her reasons are her own, and I don't pretend to know them.
But many authors are very protective of their work in draft form and apparently Meyer acutely felt violation at the leaked draft. It's not always all about money or even success; novel writing is usually a highly personal endeavor. To my mind, this means that the fans were responsible for investing in a future novel Fan were responsible for the success of the published novels because they bought many copies; there's no "investment" in future novels, no matter how highly anticipated. They may feel entitled, but that doesn't actually create any entitlement or obligation on the part of the author.
It's her work and her decision whether to release it for pubic consumption; many an author has completed a manuscript, decided for whatever reason that it's crap, and burned it. The novel may have been created even if the previous ones were not a success though it may not have been published. Fans may create market demand, but they don't create novels, writers do. Fans are clearly disappointed, and they have every right to be pissed off. They can loudly demand a new novel in the series, but the author is under no obligation to produce it.
I'm not discounting the fact that she might be upset but it's nothing compared to a physical attack. She has lost exactly nothing Generally I'd agree that it's nothing compared to a physical attack, but it's not up to you or me to decide what she's suffered or what she's lost. That's something only Meyer can tell.
Clearly she's been adversely affected by the incident. Whether you or I can think of anything she's suffered is irrelevant.
See a Problem?
It's possible, but in this case unlikely, and anyway is pure conjecture. I agree that the leak of the manuscript would be unlikely to lessen sales, but as I mentioned above, it may not be solely monetary considerations that are motivating the author. Apparently the "theft" did matter, to Meyer. And the fans didn't put her in a position to write the novel in the first place.
She could write the novel in any event. The fans have put her in a position to sell tons of copies if she decides to publish it. And I'm putting the word "theft" in quotes only because her computer wasn't actually hacked, the partial manuscript was apparently leaked by someone she trusted and had provided a copy to for advance reading.
And, just out of curiosity, if her fans do indeed have an investment in the next novel and if there is indeed any implied obligation for the writer to deliver it, is there any reciprocal obligation upon the fans to continue to buy her novels, even if they tire of them? PaulT profile , 4 Sep We're agreeing on a few points here, but a few additions to the wall o' text: But, I'm sure my reaction would be to plough on regardless and finish the thing, not go and sulk.
Is she a full-time professional writer? I believe she is. If so, how can she afford to work on the books full time and still pay rent, food, etc. Because either the publisher has paid her a sizeable advance based on existing market demand for the new novel, or because she has made enough money from the previous novels so that a "day job" isn't necessary.
Either the income or market demand will have been created by the fans. Whether or not you believe that the sense of entitlement they hold is justified, she does owe them some debt of gratitude for making her current lifestyle possible.
- Not Too Long Ago: Stories of a Traditional Way of Life?
- Consultative Selling: The Hanan Formula for High-Margin Sales at High Levels.
- A New Dawn: Your Favorite Authors on Stephenie Meyer's Twilight Series: Completely Unauthorized.
- Mobile Menu.
- The most scandalous part of 'Fifty Shades of Grey' isn’t the sex and bondage!
They're not under any obligation to do that, of course, but that's the nature of the entertainment industry. As long as the quality of her work is maintained, the fans will continue to pay for the privilege of enjoying it. LostSailor , 5 Sep 8: Well, in the interests of pushing the Wall O'Text in threaded view so far off the screen, it's in Alaska where Sarah Palin can drill it for oil! Actually, I see only a small semantic difference. To me, writing a book involves actually finishing it otherwise you're just writing some chapters. If her artistic impetus is so compromised, something only she can decide, to the extent that she can't finish the novel, it's essentially the same thing.
And absolutely your decision to make.
But the attitude of Mike's post and responses here seem to be belittling Meyer's decision as stupid, hurtful, petulant, "a tantrum" as if she is a child , and a punishment meted out to her readers. My point is that you may disagree with her decision and many may be disappointed by it, but it's not anyone's decision to make other than Meyer's.
I know this is a tech forum, where the prevailing attitude toward digital distribution is that it should be free and easy, that artists and publishing and distribution companies should embrace the new model. And that copying files, even if technically illegal, is really a minor thing and no one should get upset about it. But it's not really up to the copiers to decide whether the artist should be upset and the attitude seems just a little self-serving: Actually, she was a mom that started writing and met with success.
She's married and I believe her husband works, so monetary motives for completing the novel don't seem to be an issue and even if they were, might not have changed her mind; everyone's different. Sure she owes them a debt of gratitude and she's been quite effusively appreciative in interviews I saw earlier this summer.
She owes the fans a hearty "thank you! Whether this will make market success for other books she might write more difficult, I can't say, and that's really her business. If there is any implied obligation on the part of the author to meet the fan's demands for a new book, I was just wondering if there is any reciprocal obligation. Kind of a rhetorical questions anyway as I don't think anyone would recognize any obligation on the part of the fan. And I don't see any real obligation on the part of the author.
Please tell me your not responding to me because I never said "get over it" I am saying "EMBRACE IT" which means, fine, be all pissed off, but instead of trying to fight this problem, use it against these hackers. Thieves take things away, this guy just made a copy, she still has it. I didn't mean to imply a direct quote.
The work is a copyright mess. But it shouldn't be.
But there is really little difference between "get over it" and "embrace it" other than the latter suggests more than simply getting over it. By "embrace" I assume and please correct me if I'm wrong you mean that to foil the hackers, Meyer should just post her drafts online herself for all to read.
That hardly seems like a solution to having her manuscript stolen and posted online: That's a little like saying if my house was robbed, I should just put all my stuff out on the lawn. See my response above to this line of thinking. There is a difference between stealing something that has not yet been released publicly and distributing a copy of something obtained legally. Both may be copyright violations, but the former is also theft.
DanC , 3 Sep 5: No, neither is theft. They're both copyright violations, and the former would receive a harsher punishment because the infringing material was gained illegally. Both examples are illegal, neither is theft, morally or otherwise. Theft deprives the owner of their work.
Anonymously Chigrined Coward , 4 Sep 8: Isn't this whole argument missing the point? At this point, it's too late for the author and any of us to care whether it's theft , copyright infringement, piracy, or breach of contract assuming people she gave the manuscript to signed any contract. The manuscript is leaked, and now thrown about the intarwebs. There's no way to undo that. Responding to the leak in this manner benefited nobody but the people she's angry with for leaking the document in the first place.
Here's what Stephanie's response did for her writing career and profitability: She's now spent a large amount of time writing a manuscript that her fangirlz have been clamoring for. Assuming she sticks with her statement and decides not to finish it, she's out all of that time and energy. Here's what Stephanie's response did for her fans: They've been told of a probability that the only thing they're going to get out of her as far as this book is concerned is a leaked draft of a manuscript.
Some of them are going to wonder why they've decided to keep the existing 4 books in the series since it may not get fully fleshed out listening to my wife, there's a lot of angry people angry about what happened in Breaking Wind or whatever it's called. My guess is a lot more people end up putting her old books on Amazon as used eliminating some more profits that could be had by Stephanie. She could have responded in a very different way and actually driven sales of her next book.
Imagine she used the annoying "I haven't read what's out there so I can't verify if it is my work or not" while hiding her anger over the situation. Suppose she just chagrined and beared it, giving herself a few extra months to sulk while remaining out of the spot light and refusing to comment on the manuscript. Before her statements, there was already a debate as to whether or not this manuscript was real many thought it was "bad fan fiction". Suddenly the authoer is behaving very oddly, and she's delaying her book, it must be the real thing.
Or maybe she's angry that someone would think that piece of "bad fan fiction" was her work and it wasn't the real thing. Suddenly this leaked manuscript is a piece of promotional material for her book that's going to be released a few months late. She didn't intend it to be leaked and isn't happy about the leak, but she's found a way to take advantage of it anyway. I know artists are all about feelings. Writing is an art. Clearly she didn't have the right people helping her with responding to this, or she didn't listen to them. How you feel about a situation is irrelevant, how you react to it is crucial.
That's where she failed. LostSailor , 4 Sep 9: You are correct that they're both copyright violations, but the instance where the first copy was gained illegally would still be theft, as defined in most U. Theft is taking something that does not belong to you, and under certain circumstances copying can indeed be theft, whether the owner retains a copy or not.
I really can't fathom why this is so hard to understand. DanC , 4 Sep Mostly because it doesn't really make sense to equate copyright infringement with theft. They're two separate offenses. Theft is taking something that does not belong to you Theft is the taking of someone else's property.
Taking someone else's property would naturally result in them being deprived of it. Copying is not taking; copying is copying, and no deprivation of property occurs. And in Dowling v. United States, the majority decision drew a distinction between infringement and theft: Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple "goods, wares, [or] merchandise," interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud.
The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud. As I've pointed out above, I never said they were identical. What I have said is that in certain circumstances, copying a digital file can be both copyright infringement and theft. The argument here is that it can never be theft; I disagree, as do the statutes of many if not all U. Theft is the taking of someone else's property. Most theft statutes recognize both tangible and intangible property and, in the computer age, also recognize that, in certain circumstances, copying of digital files constitutes theft.
United States, the majority decision drew a distinction between infringement and theft I have read Dowling and I have never argued that there isn't a distinction. As with most Supreme Court decisions, the ruling is a little more nuanced that just saying copying music isn't theft.
In the section you quote, note that they are talking about theft of copyright. Also, the decision was based on an interpretation of a federal statute regarding the interstate transportation of stolen goods; theft statutes are usually state matters. I'd also point you to the dissenting opinion that makes a good argument that copying of music is indeed theft under the statute that the court considered. I'd also note that the case was decided in and both technology and law have changed quite a bit since then.
In the Guns N' Roses leak case mentioned in other posts, the statute under which the leaker was arrested specifically makes copying of digital music a felony theft and most state laws have been updated since the 80s to include theft of digital property a crime. Once again, not all copying is theft, but it certainly can be under certain circumstances.
The distinction is this: By stealing something, you not only illicitly gain the item itself, but you deprive the rightful owner of that item. Steal a car and the owner of that car loses his transportation and incurs costs finding alternatives. By copying a digital file, you deprive the rightful owner of nothing. If you only use that copy for personal enjoyment, the only affect is that the rightful owner may lose the ability to sell you another copy of that item and even that's questionable.
If you then transfer that file to others, the owner only loses something if the people obtaining the file do so instead of buying a legitimate copy. Again, yes, everyone here agrees that it's not a good thing to do and that those who get caught should be punished. But, it's a far, far more minor issue that stealing something, and so the words "theft" and "stealing" should not be used to describe it.
Forget the legal semantics most laws are woefully inadequate to describe digital activities of any type to begin with. LostSailor , 5 Sep 9: Depends on who the owner is and the nature of the file you copied. That said, and as I've noted elsewhere, I'm not saying that all copying is theft, but it can be. If I'm working on a musical masterpiece that I think will revolutionize rock music and before I'm done with it, you manage to make a copy only for personal use, it may or may not be theft depending on how you obtained the copy.
If you only listen to it yourself, I may not be deprived of any benefit of my ownership. If you distribute that copy, however, I may definitely be deprived of a major benefit of ownership, including commercial exploitation of my property. My masterpiece wasn't finished and premature distribution may sour the market for the finished property, in which case you have stolen potential commercial benefits of that property from me.
You may argue that my music sucks and there is no commercial benefit so I've lost nothing, but your theft has made the argument moot; we'll never know because your illegal actions have already altered the market. It may seem a trivial point, but it may not be trivial to the property owner. Folks who advocate freer digital distribution models may want to color illegal copying as a minor matter, since it's to their benefit to do so. They may think artists who object are ignorant and stupid, but--and again depending on the circumstances--theft and stealing may be the exactly correct words to use.
Laws may be inadequate, but they're still laws. And semantics are the lifeblood of law. I agree that infringement and theft are two separate things, but that's not the same as saying that a single act of copying cannot be both infringement and theft. BoilerBob , 3 Sep I "Get" the title.
Maybe I was unclear but my point was that having her fans excited over a leaked work and understanding that online communities can add value and excitement to her work are two different things. Finished works disturbed over the internet is a new business model. Drafts, demos, author's notebooks etc are stolen.
Note that I usually agree with TechDirt on the fact that free distribution of digital objects is a workable business model. While you are correct that tangible and digital objects are different, there still is a crime in stealing digital information. Its for the author to decide when and where she wants to release her works, not whom ever can get them from her computer. Again this is different from complete and absolute control of distribution of a final product.
Chat sites and fan fiction is a perfectly acceptable way to embrace excitement for your work. See something you aren't proud to release would make me mad. What you don't "Get" is remote access. Having data on a non-connected computer does not allow remote access. Just because someone can get to it doesn't mean it is ethically right to do so. I am not saying what they did was right, you think I am siding with the person who has all that free time to hack into their favorite author's computer? My argument is with the post in that instead of her freaking out, she should embrace it.
Let's be honest, you know you have huge devoted fans when they start hacking into your computer. I am not saying she should embrace the "free" distribution of her draft, I am saying that she should embrace this obvious display of excitement. Do something with it. I am not sure what but I am sure she has people she can talk to and learn how to turn this "theft" into a profit. As for what I don't "get. And You are correct in saying that just because people can hack it, it isn't ethical to do it.
I agree, but that doesn't mean she should still "punish" the rest of her fans, especially those who don't even know this event happened. Guitar Player , 3 Sep 6: Anyone who thinks the fans are entitled in some weird way to the leaked version, or who thinks that such a leak isn't harmful to an author or a project, have clearly never written a commercially viable novel themselves. If you do the work, this is YOUR intellectual property, and fans -- however caring and well-intentioned -- simply have no right or interest in it.
Nor is it appropriate to suggest that what amounts to criminal theft by one person is somehow validated because some fans are happy to have a bit of a preview. Meyer, whether I like her work or not, or whether I agree with her current reaction or not, is clearly entitled morally and legally to do exactly has she sees fit in this case. Moreover, her ability to protect her work legally may be compromised in some jurisdictions in which copyright arises on registration, rather than on creation, of the work. The person responsible for the leak, if apprehended, should be treated like any other thief of intellectual property and should feel the full weight of the criminal law system.
I can speak here as both a commercially published writer and a lawyer. I suggest that those of you who think that Ms.
Meyer is not entitled to feel the way she feels, that she is not professional, or that she should "get over it," ought to go out and write a novel, sell it, and gain some real commercial success and recognition before you shoot your mouths off. Then, when you've actually walked a full mile in her shoes, you might have some idea what you're talking about. Welch , 3 Sep 8: Google John Scalzi and free and you can see what a real writer thinks of free, as opposed to the flavor of the month throwing a temper tantrum up there.
Not that I think she's wrong to be upset, but why punish people who didn't do anything wrong? That's how to make yourself and your fans happy. That still makes no sense though. She might be upset about a leak, but why pull the book? Isn't she both wasting the time and effort already spent and increasing the possible damage done by the leak by acting in this way? Not to mention that this has no bearing on the final product - what exactly does the leak damage in the published book?
Any perceived deficiencies in the text can be written off as a result of it being a first draft, while she could if desired use feedback to make the end product better. Whatever she feels about the leak having happened, this is the wrong reaction and can only make things worse. Anonymous Coward , 3 Sep 7: My first thgouth was, where did the leak come from? I could understand her being upset and punishing the fans if the book was a copy after it was published, but in this case, I would be going after the person who leaked it.
How about sue the publishing company for all "lost revenue". Annie-Rae Ross , 3 Sep 8: She never said "may never be finished. I'm a huge Stephenie Meyer fan and I think she has every right to be upset. Anyone out there who thinks that she is overreacting needs to take a step back and remember a time they were cheated out of their hard work and how that made them feel. It hurts to work so hard on something for other people, only to have the rug pulled out from under you.
She isn't throwing a "Temper tantrum" She is clearly hurt and just let her fans know what was going on. Is she just supposed to be ok with what happened?! She isn't Punishing anyone, it may feel like it but she obviously needs some time and I'd rather she take the time and come back when she is ready with a kick ass book then continue writing feeling hurt. Give her a break, she's only human. People need to stop building her up and tearing her down, it's not right. Welch , 3 Sep I would question whether or not she writes books solely so other people can enjoy them.
If she did, she would publish them online and not take any profits. That way more people could enjoy them, right? In truth, it's probably a number of reasons, starting with her desire or need to write, her enjoyment of writing, her enjoyment of her fans, and her enjoyment of the money that it might bring her. Which is not to say she's getting rich. Please let's not start that argument. All in all, she does it because she enjoys it and when she stops enjoying it, she will stop doing it, which is what she's threatened to do more than once.
More power to her. Porter Causes , 8 Jan 3: SMessiah needs to come back down to Earth. She was a mediocre author at best and is now a laughing stock at worst for her continued immature behavior. She dug her own grave and just keeps heaping on the dirt. Jessi , 3 Sep 9: This series is so awful, but Meyer's reaction to her fans is even worse. She dismissed all criticism of Breaking Dawn, told attendees of a sold out signing that she hated coming to signings, and said that the reason why people didn't like BD was because their expectations were too high. Mine were exceptionally low after seeing the writing in the last three books and yet the book was still a disappointment.
Heather Faust , 3 Sep 9: I do have to take issue with this sentence though: If that's as good as it can be, and if that's "edited," her career is in big trouble. She's being ridiculous about the leak. It is absolutely a good thing. It has her fans absolutely frothing at the mouth for the book. One could possibly wonder if she or someone in her camp did it on purpose. This drama queen hissy fit just makes her look ridiculous. And punishing her fans for her mistake she also gave copies to 2 people who were on a movie set where it could have been picked up at any point and the actions of one person.
What does this woman have to do to piss her fans off? First she insults and turns her back on people who had the "audacity" to not like her book. She blames the backlash on the hype "we" put on her. Who was doing a concert series and releasing spoilers and quotes and releasing another book and announcing Midnight Sun? And now she is punishing her remaining fans for something someone else did? On the other hand, every time she opens her mouth she just keeps making it worse for herself, so I say- keep it up!
Serena , 3 Sep 9: What's interesting is that she was saying BEFORE the leak that she would be content to just never write again and stay home with her kids and her life pre-popularity. The writing was on the wall at that point in time, methinks. She makes a living "writing the stories. She's sold movie rights, released a FAQ, agreed to 4 books rather than 2 in the series. This isn't the behavior of someone who's just writing for the sake of self gratification, this is the behavior of someone who wants to be a career author, that's why this move makes no sense except as an emotional reaction that should have been left between her and her family.
Taking your statement at face value: If she was writing the story mostly for the sake of writing the story then why would she even care if the manuscript was leaked? She's writing for her own sake, right? Who cares what other people think? Why not just give the story away if she's writing just for the sake of writing?
There's no such thing as not needing the money. Even if she is the exception and really doesn't need the money, she claims to be a devout Mormon a fact I'm not calling into question or judging. I'm sure she could find some place to put that unneeded money. Lets assume that this "psychological violation", as you put it, is so awful that she has found her ability to write has been irrevocably compromised a situation I doubt There's is still no reason respond the way she did.
It doesn't prop up future sales of her existing books and it doesn't make her any money on this unreleased book. Even slapping a cover on both ends of this manuscript in its current form would be a better choice than not releasing it at all. It wouldn't reduce sales since it's already "public" having been leaked, and she'd get to reap the benefits of selling a copy to every one of her 12 year old fangirls. Alimas , 3 Sep 1: Rather than be the primary motivation for her writing, it became a secondary major one. And its not like shes losing everything. The movie spoken of will probably still get made, her previous four books will still sell and she can go on to write other stuff having nothing to do with the vampire and characters so many of her current fans are so specifically fond of.
History is littered with people who wanted to do what they loved as a career, but when reality shattered the "love" part, they abandoned it. Before and sometimes after its finished, they often only want certain or specific people reading it or specific ones not reading it. In fact, the more for fun the writing is, the more revealing and personal its probably going to be and the more major a negative situation with it will turn out.
While it simply being handed out may seem like a minor thing to many of us powerfully secure individuals, someone who's less secure with themselves might perceive a great deal personal threat via criticisms and whatnot before shes had the time to build a final release and a preparedness for the world's thoughts. If its not about the money, its not about the money.
Besides, anyone that ever says they can't think of a good place for unneeded money is an idiot of epic proportions. She didn't say she'd never write again, she'll probably write entirely different material and as another poster mentioned on here, she might be happy for that out. But if she wasn't initially in it for the money or fame, this is the kind of situation that would naturally occur.
And frankly, there's nothing wrong with that. Unless of course she promised the funds to an orphanage somewhere or something. Then it'd be different. Zinnia , 3 Sep While it may suck to have a partial draft of an unfinished book leaked, it wasn't even close to the entire manuscript and most people who read it would have bought the final book. Does she look like a drama queen? Is she ultimately going to alienate her fans by blaming them and not even the person who leaked it?
On Second Thought, Perhaps Stephenie Meyer Doesn't Get Online Fans | Techdirt
I don't think anyone is unsympathetic to her situation, but how she's handling it is quite revealing. Everything you said is dead on I feel sorry for every author, musician and artist that has had something like this happen to them. Regardless of the legal terms, you'd feel violated. At this point, though, what does it matter? She can't un-leak the manuscript and she won't be able to stop it from being plastered all over the place.
She could have taken a pragmatic approach, and found a way to capitalize on it. Hell, even doing "nothing" and pretending the leak never happened would have been better than this. Her approach to solving the leak is to sell exactly zero copies of a book that all of her "true fans" and many of those who have recently become Stephanie Meyer haters would still have purchased regardless of their protestations about Breaking Dawn being wart atop a flaming pile of crap.
I'm not an author, so I can't put myself in her shoes. But I took a math class and a philosophy class once, so I'll share my wisdom: If you don't release the book, you can't sell the book, therefore you can't make any money from the book. She's already put in a lot of work on the book, so assuming time really is money, she's actually in the hole now. I haven't read the series and frankly, I haven't met another male who has , but it takes one Google search to see that she has a massive fan base clearly compliant with the 12 year old girl theory of economics.
She could publish a bowel movement and she'd have a mob of people waiting to spend money on it. Why do people keep talking about someone "hacking" her computer? That's not how it happened I'd have more sympathy for her if that were the case She gave out copies of the manuscript to people who're working on the film version of her first book so that they would get a better understanding of the story or whatever. I'm sure there were agreements of confidentiality signed she says she actually KNOWS whose copy was the one leaked cos they were all slightly different but still, she took a BIG risk in doing so.
She's just throwing a tantrum now cos I suspect she wants to move on from this series, that's the impression I get from plenty of her interviews; people keep asking her for moar vampy action and she just wants to get on with other stuff. This leak provides her the chance to do so. This is just speculation of course, but it's what I believe. If, on the other hand, she DID have intentions of continuing with the Twilight universe but has been dissuaded to do so by this leak Personally I wouldn't mind it in the very least if she stopped writing altogether but it must suck for her followers.
Dewy , 3 Sep Please stop letting people post anonymously Those are by far the stupidest replies I have read here. I enjoy the site, the authors, their insight, and the readers comments, when they are not hiding behind a tag of anonymity. That just gives them some right to be rude. Anonymous Coward , 3 Sep Anonymous Coward , 3 Sep 2: Please stop letting people post by the pseudonym Dewy I really enjoy the site, the authors and the comments when they are not hiding behind the pseudonym of Dewy. Hey man, we're all that guy in the car honking their horns at the guy in front of them It's OK, everyone on the internet is rude.
Rachel , 3 Sep 2: Everyone is reacting to SM's reaction to the leak. She has a valid reason for being upset, and people just need to give her a break. These are rather low library circulation figures. However, the majority of Filipinos from all study areas and all socio-economic classes do not borrow from libraries. Unlike the number of readers, the number of printed editions is easier to count and track. This section talks about how the number of editions spell the success of the Twilight series. But first, there is a need to define edition.
According to the online magazine Publishers Weekly , there are five different formats of Twilight available: Little, Brown Books for Young Readers. Little, Brown Book Group. Copies of Twilight available in Amazon. The content of the novel may not have changed, but the form or format in which they were reproduced changed; hence, different editions—brought about by technological advances. With this wide range of available editions, it can be inferred that the Twilight saga is successful in this section. Parody and Influence of Twilight. Is there a parody of Twilight in the Philippines?
Strictly speaking, the researcher found no parodies authored by a Filipino, unless online fan fiction is counted. No Twilight parodies have been published in the Philippines but the following bibliographic entries of published parodies of Twilight are available in Amazon.
Both parodies are written by non-Filipinos, but one of them, Nightlight , is available in National Bookstore and Fully Booked. Therefore, one can say that even though there is not a parody whose author is Filipino, the availability of a parody in bookstores indicates that there is a market for it in the Philippines.
- Night of the Living Dud: Over 100 Zombie Movies You Probably Havent Seen.
- Social Link.
- A New Dawn: Your Favorite Authors on Stephenie Meyer's Twilight Series!
Since a parody indicates success because there is no point of having a work parodied unless the original is well known, conversely, there is no point of selling a parody unless the original is well known enough that there will be people buying them. Also, the researcher intentionally left out books that in their description seemed to have been more influenced by the film adaptation than by the novels. It is interesting to note the diversity of genres and domains the novel has influenced ranging from cookbooks to SAT reviewers. Guides to a novel normally follow the publication of novels, but it is not usual for an ordinary novel to be followed by a book on philosophical discourse, a vocabulary workbook, or a cookbook, all of which are patterned after that novel.
This explains why Twilight is not just any ordinary novel of average success. Religious Themes in the Twilight Saga. So from history, to philosophy, to religion, the series has encompassed a broad range of disciplines and fields close to humanity. This must be enough indication that in the publishing industry, the saga has been quite successful, let alone influential. An Illustrated Guide to the Real Forks are available. However, anyone in the world, including in the Philippines can purchase any of the books from Amazon. As seen in the list above, Twilight-influenced publications have taken different paths.
Since Twilight is a work of fiction if not literature , it can be safely assumed that in the University, there is a possibility of its inclusion in reading lists. From the list of course offerings of the Department of English and Comparative Literature Letters website, the plausible courses where Twilight can be included in the syllabus are enumerated below University of the Philippines College of Arts and Letters.
Time constraints and the difficulty in procuring the required reading list of these courses, as well as data on the number of students who were enrolled in these, the researcher is not able to determine the success of Twilight using this indicator. However, in an interview with Ms. Frances Abao who initially requested for the acquisition of these books. Murillo confirmed that professors who request for book acquisition normally use those books in their courses. This information indicates that there is a strong possibility of the novels being required reading in at least one course in the university.
Twilight is successful in the Philippines. Twilight has been successful in the Philippines because there were almost a million copies of it sold, the novel is present in libraries, it is printed in several editions, parodies and spin-offs of the series exist, and there is a strong possibility of the book being used as required reading in at least one course in the university. The novel is available in the University of the Philippines Library System but has low circulation figures.
Twilight is printed in several editions. Five of these editions are officially distributed by the publisher and are available in Philippine bookstores. Several parodies and spin-offs of the series are also published but only a few are available in Philippine bookstores. However, all the editions in Amazon. As all indicators are positive in the Philippines, we can conclude therefore that Twilight is successful in the country. National Book Development Board. Exposure of Population to Mass Media.
Hachette Rushing to Meet Meyer Demand. National Statistical Coordination Board. An Introduction to Research in. The Macmillan Company, Editions and Printings, How to Tell the Difference: Stephenie Meyer By the Numbers. University of the Philippines College of Arts and Letters. Below are bibliographic entries listing these books found on Amazon.
Aside from these, Amazon. Product Description Examining Twilight through a biblical lens. With 48 million copies in print and a succession of upcoming blockbuster films, now is the time to ask the important question: Touched by a Vampire is the first book to investigate the themes of the Twilight Saga from a Biblical perspective. Cautionary, thoughtful, and challenging, Touched by a Vampire is written for Twilight fans, parents, teachers, and pop culture enthusiasts.
It includes an overview of the series for those unfamiliar with the storyline and a discussion guide for small groups. The international phenomenon known as Twilight fever has ignited a fire in the kitchen. Delectable delights to satisfy the appetites of the humans found in the fictional book Twilight. Love At First Bite, The Unofficial Twilight Cookbook is meant to offer a satisfying array of warm, lovely dishes that anyone of any age can cook with ease and enjoyment.
Whether you are planning a Twilight-Themed Birthday Party, just a simple get together with friends, a Halloween party, or just what to try your creative hand to some culinary delights you are in luck. Brimming with mouthwatering recipes, brace yourselves, and bring your very best table manners, and appetites. This book is the first to explore them, drawing on the wisdom of philosophical heavyweights to answer essential questions such as: Are vampires morally absolved if they kill only animals and not people?
From a feminist perspective, is Edward a romantic hero or is he just a stalker? As absorbing as the Meyer novels themselves, Twilight and Philosophy:. Will you hunt surreptitiously and tolerate the ceaseless deluge in Forks to evade the sun and uphold the facade? Centering on the Stephenie Meyer books, the cast of the Twilight films, and the dedicated fan base, this full-color tribute showcases all the pieces of the phenomenon surrounding the epic love story between a young woman and a vampire. Bios of Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart, Taylor Lautner, and other cast members are also featured along with details on conventions, events, and Twilight crafts—this is truly a must-have companion to the supernatural saga for legions of fans everywhere.
The characters of the Twilight Saga carry a rich history that shapes their identities and actions over the course of the series. Edward, for instance, may look like a seventeen-year-old teen heartthrob, but was actually born in and died during the Spanish Influenza of His adopted sister, Alice, was imprisoned in an insane asylum in and treated so badly there that even becoming a vampire was a welcome escape.
The series follows an unlikely couple: Bella, a teenager, and her boyfriend Edward, a vampire that has sworn off human blood. The four novels that tell the paranormal romance of Bella Swan and Edward Cullen are international bestsellers that readers everywhere are discussing and re-reading again and again. But why are the books so popular? Is there more to Twilight than a love story for teen girls crossed with a cheesy vampire-werewolf drama?
John Granger, author of Unlocking Harry Potter: Seven Keys for the Serious Reader , explains in Spotlight the literary backdrop, the themes, the artistry, and the meaning of the four Bella Swan adventures. Twilight readers will learn here: Spotlight unveils layer-by-layer the meaning of the books and the artistry of their composition so Twilight lovers can see how the books work and why we love them the way we do! Spotlight is the only book that explains Twilight-mania and is the perfect gift for serious Twilight readers wanting to learn why the books they love are so good and have become as popular as they are.
Topics from young love, to abstinence, to the value of family and friends are infused in the stories. Love as an agent of change and a motivational impulse for self-sacrifice also receives significant emphasis. Could Eve and Mary be a pattern for Bella? What about Edward—could he be seen as a Christ-figure? From Twilight to Breaking Dawn assists readers in thinking about the religious themes and images found throughout the Twilight saga.
Each chapter discusses a single Twilight character or issue and concludes with questions for individual or group study. This book includes ideas from Judaism, Protestantism, Catholicism, and Mormonism. From Twilight to Breaking Dawn is perfect for parents wanting to discuss these books with their children or for Twilight lovers interested in pursuing the deeper meaning that lies at the heart of these books.
In , 10, pilgrims descended on Forks, WA, the town of 3, people that is the setting for the books. Twilight Tours is a photographic guide to this mystical place. Included are 90 photos composed by noted photographer George Beahm, who also contributes the accompanying text. The pictures range from moody scenic shots of the rain forest and nearby tribal lands described in the four novels to photographs of the actual high school, police station, saltwater beach, and a certain vintage red pickup truck.
A New Dawn gives it to them, inviting readers to join some of their favorite YA authors as they look at the series with fresh eyes and fall in love with Edward, Bella and the rest of Forks, Wash. Edited by bestselling author Ellen Hopkins, A New Dawn is packed with the same debates readers engage in with friends: Should Bella have chosen Edward or Jacob? The collection also goes further: Is Edward a romantic or a really hot sociopath? How do the Quileute werewolves compare to other Native American wolf myths?
What does the Twilight series have in common with Shakespeare? Twilight fans can walk in the footsteps of Edward and Bella. Filled with all the information you need to plan a fabulous Twilight themed day or full blown vacation. Once you get to each location you can reference the Guide for information about where scenes were filmed, where stars and crew spent their off time and other insider tips. Also includes special souvenir stamp destinations where you can stop in to get your guide book stamped. Much like Harry Potter caught the attention of millions of boys worldwide with spellbinding tales, the Twilight series is holding teenage girls captive with tempting fantasy stories that peak young impressionable minds.
Readers of The Twilight Phenomenon will be shocked with the compelling truth behind why the Twilight series is so entrancing. It answers questions including: Do vampires have souls? What is immortality how is it lost or gained? What is the nature of evil? What sacrifices should be made for love? What is the nature of temptation? Veteran authors of books exposing the good and bad reality of popular books, Kurt and Olivia Bruner successfully help parents navigate the challenges and opportunities that emerge from pop culture by leveraging teen interests to drive dialogue about Christian orthodoxy.
Concerned parents, teachers, grandparents, youth leaders, and all adults who care about children and young adults will greatly value the wisdom and intelligent conversation shared in The Twilight Phenomenon Forbidden Fruit or Thirst Quenching Fantasy? The blockbuster Twilight Saga is being read by teenager and adult alike. These powerful novels are gaining even more popularity as the movies hit theaters. But what should a Christian response be? And is there a helpful way to approach a teenager or young adult captivated with the books without alienating her?
Greetings from Forks, Washington where the weather is always rainy and cold. This is the home of police Chief Charlie Swan and his beautiful daughter Bella. Forks is a mysterious place, where magic and mystery abound. You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Je voudrais aussi faire le tour du monde. It is also limited geographically to only the Philippines. Number of editions A work published in several editions obviously enjoyed greater success than one in fewer editions.
Existence of a parody and, references, allusions, quotations and unacknowledged borrowings The existence of a parody can be used as an indication to success because there is no point of having a work parodied unless the original is well known.