Here, take Paper Towns, it's way better than Twilight.

I'm only on page 136 of *Twilight* but I was beginning to wonder when some kind of a plot was going to kick in. *Paper Towns* does seem more interesting, "guy" book or not. (I suppose the Harry Potter books are "guy" books, and tons of stuff has happened by page 136 in a HP book.)

thanks Erin. I really do urge you to try Paper Towns- you don't have to be male to enjoy it.

Thanks for posting your content to the Group: We comment back

Neither one is really my kind of book, but it's true that the less-commercially-successful book is often the better written one.

Although I don't read YA books, the second one sounds infinitely better. I don't get the whole interest in vampires. Isn't life interesting enough without having to add other dimensions? Just my two cents.

Thanks for posting your review to the Gather group Bookin'.

Never heard of Paper Towns, but sounds like a pretty good read. However, I'm more into fantasy and sci-fi genre so I don't read much of those types. Either that or a good Biography or something.

I have not read either but Paper Towns sounds interesting. I think I'm just going to catch Twilight on DVD.

Read Twilight but couldn't figure out what the fuss is about. The Harry Potter books were more interesting if you're looking at adolescent/young adult fiction versus real 'adult' fiction. Fictional vampire stories like the Tanya Huff "Blood" books or Laurel K. Hamilton, Charlaine Harris even were a lot more interesting reading at least I thought so. Then again I'm a Sci Fi Fantasy reader.
Paper Towns sounds like a variation on the classic Quest myth common to the coming of age stories of so many differing cultures kind of like a teen Ulysses or maybe White Buffalo woman.

The problem with these sorts of comparisons is that they don't mean anything. If your description is any indication, we are merely comparing a YA character novel to a YA plot novel. If you are a plot person (of either gender), you'll favor the latter. Perhaps, if Harry Potter counts as a plot novels (do they? - I didn't think they were a character novels, but I don't remember being blown away by plots either.), the same folks that favored HP would favor Paper Towns. I don't think it's strictly a gender issue, as I'm fond of many traditionally male-oriented novels, but what aspect you favor as a reader.

In general, I'm a character reader (and writer). So I have to have a character that compels me in order to really enjoy a novel. More than one is better. If I find someone I like, I forgive many a plot issue. I did not find the Twilight series meritless. I read them last weekend but my daughter has long been a fan, though they were also not without flaw. I did find the characters compelling despite some aspects that were over the top.

I have not read Paper Towns and can give no insight into it's comparitive benefits. I also read a lot of science fiction and fantasy and I do appreciate books that make me think.

But that does not mean that escapist literature doesn't have its place. I have both books on my shelves, but I'll admit, I pull the latter down more frequently than the former.

I haven't read either, but I would agree that the second one sounds more interesting. (I have heard of the first one before, of course.) I don't really read romance, so vampire romance is even less likely. In any case, as I have a male "young adult" reader here, I'll take your description of Paper Town as a recommendation. :-)

Stephanie, which of those two do you think is escapist?

I haven't read the Paper Town, so I can't say. I would say, unequivocally, that the entire *Twilight* series is escapist.

I don't consider that an insult; as I at least tried to say, escapist literature has its uses. I often like escapist literature as long as it appeals to me. I like thinking literature too, as long as it appeals to me.

My point, and I rambled so much it could readily be lost, is that trying to decide which book is "better," if something is written effectively, won't mean much to the general public. The kind of popularity *Twilight* (and, having read it, I can see where that comes from) means that it is touching people, that they find something in it that appeals to them (strongly, in fact). It is not without flaw nor will it appeal to everyone, but it accomplishes what, I believe, it was intended to do.

I have never understood the hoopla over Harry Potter, but my sister is a huge fan and I know several others who feel very strongly. However much it hasn't appealed to me, I can admit that it does appeal to a number of people, that it affects them and touches them at some level. I can't say they're bad books, just that they don't appeal to me.

That doesn't mean that Chris' assessment is wrong - just that what appeals in *Twilight* will get lost if discussing plot. The same could be said for any number of classic character novels, from Wuthering Heights to The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. Many character novels can be condensed, plotwise, into one or two sentences, but then, that's not why one reads them any more than plot is why one watches Lethal Weapon.

At least, that's how I see it.

Stephanie- you have some good points about escapist fiction. And no, I really would not wish to see the end of that particular brand of writing, which I had a great fondness for as a young adult. Okay to some extent I compare an apple to an orange. But I did perceive that Paper Towns was a good bit "fresher" in the sense of originality than the other piece of fruit was.

Okay, I was confused as to which one the "escapist" label referred to. I haven't read Twilight, but from what I've read about it, it sounds like a perfect example. :-)

I think it's a fine thing to point out an undervalued book has merit, even explaining why it's fresh or appeals to those who like a tasty complex plot. Sometimes, it's hard to find those. Many people, I know, appreciate hearing about a book, especially if it hasn't had the same exposure as other, more popular, books.

But I'm also of the opinion that something isn't made better by something else being painted as "worse". I have room for all kinds of books on my shelves.

There is, of course, nothing wrong with being left unimpressed with the Twilight series. If I was a plot driven reader, I would have been underwhelmed myself. I think it's cool that the world of fiction provides so much diversity and that different people get so many different things from the same works. It keeps it interesting.

Stephanie- yes, you are right. It is better to describe fiction as good, better, best, rather than just good and bad. I sometimes have trouble with that concept. Danielle Steel for example- I just can't say anything good about her!

I tend to dwell in the middle ground between popular and literary fiction. If something is too formulaic, I rebel. At times I can rebel on the other end of things- too literary- but less often.

As regards young adult fantasy, my favorite stuff is still probably Ursula leGuin, because I think she never condescends. She has plot and character and craftsmanship to equal any adult novelist, and yet the life lessons and coming of age themes are always there too. I would rather read her than Tolkien or Rowling, though I probably would not have felt that way when I was 14.

It just goes to show that I'm not like regular people. The only thing I read by leGuin I really got into was "A Wrinkle in Time" - not sure why I didn't get sucked into her other work - perhaps I should revisit. When I was a young adult, though, it was Heinlein, McCaffrey, Herbert, Ludlum, Clavell, Michener and--don't laugh--Georgette Heyer. Know what? They're all still on my "favorites" shelves.

I liked The Hobbit, but I never got an interest in the Ring series. When I read it out loud to my husband as an adult, I still couldn't get into it. I think that it was largely because Frodo seemed like a whiner (same problem with Luke Skywalker).

And that's what cool. Every opportunity to hear about a new writer with something to say opens up a possibility you'll find another favorite. I've given up predicting which books will snag me (though I have a friend who's batting average introducing me to new authors is fantastic - she's also a Heyer fan). If I didn't make it clear, I appreciate you bringing a book I hadn't heard of to my attention.

I have found books I never expected to touch me to do so, including MANGA, for heaven's sake (Fruits Basket - did not see that coming) and mystery/romance authors like Dorothy Sayers and Nora Roberts. And I've found a handful more science fiction authors I like.

We should get flit involved in this discussion. She has a distinct interest in what appeals to young adults and why. I wonder if children in oppressive or destructive atmospheres tend more toward escapism.

What I do know is that I have grown to appreciate humor in a novel; I'd certainly like to see more of that. And characters, good suck-you-in characters make me a life-long fan.

You know, Chris, this is really an very interesting discussion. I wish I saw this kind of discussion more often.

Stephanie- I like this discussion too. You are thinking of Madeleine L'Engle with a Wrinkle in Time. I liked that book alot, though I did not end up reading the rest of that series, which incorporates a degree of Christian thought, sort of like the Narnia books. Ursula LeGuin wrote the Earthsea series, as well as the recent adult novel, Lavinia.

I think that it is actually great fun as an adult to try to read some young adult fiction from time to time. For one thing it helps you to say to your children or grandkids, you should try this book, I really liked it.

The Hobbit was probably better than the Rings trilogy in the sense of being more accessible, and more funny in a dry way. Rings took itself too seriously. I did notice you mention heinlein, I did enjoy Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Stranger in a Strange Land, and his novella about alien parasites, The Puppet Masters. He was very imaginative and not afraid to explore human nature, good parts and bad. Sometimes got hung up on gender roles, but there have been worse examples of that.

You're right. I'm terrible with names. I'm lucky I remember my own. I didn't read any but A Wrinkle in Time; I readily lost interest, but I can't remember why.

I know I read something for class in high school by leGuin, something with "Darkness" in the title, I think. I wish I could remember it better. It was an interesting class and is the reason the only poem I have memorized is "Jabberwocky".

I love Heinlein, though more his adult novels and short stories than his young adult novels (though my husband loved the latter). I first met him in Friday though The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress is my favorite and I have another favorite in the little noticed Doorway into Summer. I also liked Puppet Masters. On the other hand, many of his later novels started out good enough and then sort of swirled around into a mindless orgy. So, I like the beginning of five or six other novels without really being thrilled at the whole thing.

I love dry humor.

Even though I'm a scientist and like good science (and can appreciate it in a book), I never much cared for the writing of Asimov (though he was a great editor of anthologies) or Clarke. Too dry for me.

For silliness, I like Douglas Adams and Asprin and even Stasheff and Piers Anthony (in small doses). I've really enjoyed the Artemis Fowl books which, aside from Twilgiht and Fruits Baske, is the only YA stuff I've enjoyed for some time. But I didn't really read YA when I was one.

I've fallen completely in love with the novels on the Liaden universe by Sharon Lee and Steve Miller and I've read them to my husband (the entire series) 8-10 times.

I think my tastes must be very eclectic.

hmmmmmmm

The lure of best seller books - they magically become better and better the higher they rise on the charts !!!

Aha! It was Left Hand of Darkness I read in junior high for class.

Chris, would you say Paper Towers is plot-driven? I'm wondering if this is a valid classification--if plot and character are a zero-sum thing. I think some novels have much better characters and a better plot than some others.

I think you're right, Aniko, that's it's not a zero sum thing.

It's probably because I'm such a character-oriented person that I focus on one rather than the other. I'm undoubtedly a poor example of a balanced reader.

But what I remember, the reason I pick a book up time after time is character, so I tend to focus on it. I loved Hawaii, Shogun and The Count of Monte Cristo, all arguably books that showcased plot, but the characters draw me back. I've read brilliantly plotted books with uninteresting or shallow characters, or worse, inconsistent characters, and even appreciated their strengths, but I rarely reread those. Tom Clancy comes to mind.

I'm just saying not to confuse the way I look at things as a reflection or reality. I'm biased.

ha, Aniko and Stephanie, even moe to think about and to discuss! I would describe Paper Towns as really more character driven than plot driven. The Road Trip portion of the plot is really just a short bit near the end, sort of a "vacation" for the reader from the heavy duty worrying about this young woman that the lead character is sort of in love with, but who is going through a family crisis and is feared to be in danger of suicide. And when the end finally arrives, it is very nuanced, neither a conventional happy ending nor a totally dark thing.

Stephanie, totally agree with you about Tom Clancy. He made a big splash in his day, but hardly anyone reads him now because there is not much going on with character in his novels. The characters are all cardboard cut outs.

I think that there is much to admire in a writer who can really do a plot. But bottom line, without characters who are fully human, no deal for me, I do not want to read it.

As to" Left Hand of Darkess" by LeGuin. Very unusual science fiction novel that takes place on a planet of hermaphrodites who live in perpetual winter. The diplomat who visits them from a sort of federation of planets, hoping to welcome them as a new member planet, is viewed as a freak because he is male. Permanently male- unlike them, who can become sexual once a month either as male or female depending on how their partner enters the state. Weird stuff that enables LeGuin to explore areas of human nature and identity.

What is the left hand of darkness, according to the residents of the ice planet? Well, Light is the left hand of darkness, of course.

I don't think I cared for it at the time and it's probably why I didn't go back and check out some of her other work. I should probably do so.

I agree with you on characters. I appreciate a good plot, but people I really like, when I care what happens to them, that's when I know I've got a keeper. I think that's why I really haven't read many mysteries except for the Peter Wimsey stories and JD Robb.

Thanks for your response, Chris. From your description, I felt that Paper Towers was quite a bit about the development of characters.

Hmmm. Each has it's own lure. I've read Twilight and based on how you described Paper Towns, it does sound good and I'd also read it once I get my hands on a copy of it.

I guess it depends on my mood which would interest me first. Like, since now I'm really in a good mood I'm more interested in reading Paper Towns. But maybe when I'm not in a good state, I'd rather get my hand on a 'feel good' book.

And thanks to this post, at least now I know which book is next on my reading list :)