Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Twilight UK cover

  • 11-07-2012 1:35pm
    #1
    Nikkio237
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 55 ✭✭


    Hey guys,

    So I have a copy of the original Twilight UK cover (Bella with the lockers), which I know is getting rarer. It is paperback, in great condition with some slight spine bending.

    My question is, do you think it'll sell well? I have no real interest in it, but I wonder if it's something I should sit on for a while. I don't know whether it'll turn classic, or just be forgotten.

    Any opinions would be great, it's just something I'm kind of tossing around as an idea. Cheers!


Comments

  • #2
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    Nikkio237 wrote: »
    Hey guys,

    So I have a copy of the original Twilight UK cover (Bella with the lockers), which I know is getting rarer. It is paperback, in great condition with some slight spine bending.

    My question is, do you think it'll sell well? I have no real interest in it, but I wonder if it's something I should sit on for a while. I don't know whether it'll turn classic, or just be forgotten.

    Any opinions would be great, it's just something I'm kind of tossing around as an idea. Cheers!

    Twilight turn classic?? Its a momentary fad like Harry Potter. In one hundred years time I doubt anyone will remember them. I would try to sell it when the market is still trending well so now may be a wise time if you get an offer.


  • #3
    ThirdMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,700 ✭✭✭ThirdMan


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Twilight turn classic?? Its a momentary fad like Harry Potter. In one hundred years time I doubt anyone will remember them. I would try to sell it when the market is still trending well so now may be a wise time if you get an offer.

    The Harry Potter series has sold 450 million copies, and has been translated into almost 70 languages. The first book was published 15 years ago, and the final film adaptation was released just last year. For a 'momentary fad' it's doing quiet well.

    That doesn't mean the books are 'classics', but its cultural impact wont be forgotten any time soon. And considering the rise of digital formats, it could possibly remain as the largest hard copy publishing phenomenon in history.


  • #4
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,647 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Twilight turn classic?? Its a momentary fad like Harry Potter. In one hundred years time I doubt anyone will remember them. I would try to sell it when the market is still trending well so now may be a wise time if you get an offer.

    Harry Potter. A fad?? Funny **** man.


  • #5
    OakeyDokey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,605 ✭✭✭OakeyDokey


    According to a few blogs it's not in print anymore and is expensive to purchase, I'd say hold onto it until the last movie comes out and that way Twilight will be at it's peak and you might find someone to purchase it.

    You could also bring it to one of those auctioneers who specifically deal with books and get a estimate on its worth. It could be worth a try.

    Also Harry Potter a fad :confused: Where have you been for the last 15 years?


  • #6
    Toby Take a Bow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,732 ✭✭✭Toby Take a Bow


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Its a momentary fad like Harry Potter. In one hundred years time I doubt anyone will remember them.

    Funnily enough, I think a lot of people thought novels themselves were just a passing fad.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    Funnily enough, I think a lot of people thought novels themselves were just a passing fad.

    Are you equating the creation of Harry Potter with the creation of the novel as a medium? Harry Potter is aimed squarely at late twentieth century/ early twenty first century children or adolescent audience and thats the main reason it has been so successful. Most great literature never had such immediate success. The series will not age well, lets not get ahead of ourselves and equate it with great literature.


  • #8
    Toby Take a Bow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,732 ✭✭✭Toby Take a Bow


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Are you equating the creation of Harry Potter with the creation of the novel as a medium? Harry Potter is aimed squarely at late twentieth century/ early twenty first century children or adolescent audience and thats the main reason it has been so successful. Most great literature never had such immediate success. The series will not age well, lets not get ahead of ourselves and equate it with great literature.

    Nope, just saying that they dismissed the novel as a passing fad, and that that 'fad' is still with us today. Related to this is how we have no idea what will last and what will become great literature in the future. Some people would be of the opinion that the 'literature' we have today does not in any way compare with the classics of yesteryear. I was not impressed with Harry Potter, and don't see its appeal beyond a fairly badly written story with lots of borrowed themes and ideas, but I'm not going to say something definitely won't be around in a hundred years.


  • #9
    Queen-Mise
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,461 ✭✭✭Queen-Mise


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Most great literature never had such immediate success. The series will not age well, lets not get ahead of ourselves and equate it with great literature.

    Of course it will age well - it is very like LOTR in this respect. Although set in 20th/21st Century - it is not particularly tied to the age period. It is classic fantasy - set in a different world (that world just happens to be within this world). The books are not filled with contemporary words, phrases, technology etc.

    I would also disagree with you on great literature not having immediate success. When literature/arts hasn't had success it is usually because it is ahead of its time & hasn't been understood.

    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    I was not impressed with Harry Potter, and don't see its appeal beyond a fairly badly written story with lots of borrowed themes and ideas, but I'm not going to say something definitely won't be around in a hundred years.

    ALL literature is borrowed themes & ideas - that is exactly what it is meant to be. Looking at something already done, using it in a different way to tell a new story. It is impossible to look at anything in the arts that does not have influences from the past.


  • #10
    emeraldstar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,383 ✭✭✭emeraldstar


    Queen-Mise wrote: »
    ALL literature is borrowed themes & ideas - that is exactly what it is meant to be. Looking at something already done, using it in a different way to tell a new story. It is impossible to look at anything in the arts that does not have influences from the past.
    Exactly. Hell, the majority (if not all?) of the works of Chaucer and Shakespeare were borrowed.


  • #11
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    Queen-Mise wrote: »
    Of course it will age well - it is very like LOTR in this respect. Although set in 20th/21st Century - it is not particularly tied to the age period. It is classic fantasy - set in a different world (that world just happens to be within this world). The books are not filled with contemporary words, phrases, technology etc.

    I would also disagree with you on great literature not having immediate success. When literature/arts hasn't had success it is usually because it is ahead of its time & hasn't been understood.




    ALL literature is borrowed themes & ideas - that is exactly what it is meant to be. Looking at something already done, using it in a different way to tell a new story. It is impossible to look at anything in the arts that does not have influences from the past.

    I think he meant it was borrowed and not much tinkering was done with it. Intertextuality is a constant in all literature because of the nature of language.

    Harry Potter fits in with our fast food culture and commodification. I t doesn't have the literary merit or the universal trends to survive (I am talking about a long long long time into the future- four or five generations).


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Toby Take a Bow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,732 ✭✭✭Toby Take a Bow


    Queen-Mise wrote: »
    ALL literature is borrowed themes & ideas - that is exactly what it is meant to be. Looking at something already done, using it in a different way to tell a new story. It is impossible to look at anything in the arts that does not have influences from the past.

    What Mardy Bum said. You have to borrow themes and ideas, but it's what you do with them in your finished product that matters.


  • #13
    Queen-Mise
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,461 ✭✭✭Queen-Mise


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    What Mardy Bum said. You have to borrow themes and ideas, but it's what you do with them in your finished product that matters.

    I like Harry Potter:p:p & I still think it will age well :p

    *stamps foot*


  • #14
    Toby Take a Bow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,732 ✭✭✭Toby Take a Bow


    Queen-Mise wrote: »
    I like Harry Potter:p:p & I still think it will age well :p

    *stamps foot*

    And you may very well be right. I was arguing earlier about how we have no idea what will last or what won't last. I think Harry Potter could very well be around in a 100 years or so, given the slow decline in literature over the centuries.


  • #15
    Queen-Mise
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,461 ✭✭✭Queen-Mise


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    And you may very well be right. I was arguing earlier about how we have no idea what will last or what won't last. I think Harry Potter could very well be around in a 100 years or so, given the slow decline in literature over the centuries.

    Slow decline of the novel over the centuries !!!! If we take Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe, or Don Quixote as the first novel - then the novel is approximately 300 years old. And there hasn't been a decline in the quality of books written - books written in the past 10 years can easily stand side by side with books written in the 20th, 19th & 18th centuries (leaving Ulysses to one side as that book is in a league of its own - nothing comes close to it).
    The novel is still producing classic works of literature.

    As for trashy novels being written - there was always trashy novels written with huge numbers reading them.


  • #16
    Toby Take a Bow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,732 ✭✭✭Toby Take a Bow


    Queen-Mise wrote: »
    books written in the past 10 years can easily stand side by side with books written in the 20th, 19th & 18th centuries

    I guess it's all subjective, and yeah, there's been some fantastic books written this century. Having said that, I can't think of anything this century that compares to (say) Fitzgerald, Steinbeck, Austen, Dickens, Orwell or anything like that. (I mean, a lot of it compares very easily to all that, but nothing seems to be as groundbreaking as any of those writers).
    Queen-Mise wrote: »
    As for trashy novels being written - there was always trashy novels written with huge numbers reading them.

    I would've thought that the ratio of trashy to literature is getting more and more disproportionate every year.


  • #17
    Queen-Mise
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,461 ✭✭✭Queen-Mise


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    I guess it's all subjective, and yeah, there's been some fantastic books written this century. Having said that, I can't think of anything this century that compares to (say) Fitzgerald, Steinbeck, Austen, Dickens, Orwell or anything like that. (I mean, a lot of it compares very easily to all that, but nothing seems to be as groundbreaking as any of those writers).



    I would've thought that the ratio of trashy to literature is getting more and more disproportionate every year.

    No its not. In the late 18th century the most popular novel was the gothic 'lady in distress' - in the dark castle type thing. Basically a trashy romance. People like Austen were the exception - not the norm.
    Continuing on from that - there was probably more stuff printed then also - do you know the way that Dickens was published in chapters - half penny stories. These were incredibly popular. Stories were swapped & libraries had huge numbers using them. There were hundreds of newspapers at the time, all with large readerships.


    I am going to throw out a few suggestions for incredible books - that I think will definitely stand test of time....

    The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time, by Mark Haddon
    The Kite Runner, by Khaled Hosseini
    Cloud Atlas, by David Mitchell
    The Suspicions of Mr Whicher, by Kate Summerscale
    Half of a Yellow Sun, by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie
    Life of Pi, by Yann Martel.


  • #18
    Toby Take a Bow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,732 ✭✭✭Toby Take a Bow


    Queen-Mise wrote: »
    No its not. In the late 18th century the most popular novel was the gothic 'lady in distress' - in the dark castle type thing. Basically a trashy romance. People like Austen were the exception - not the norm.

    I'm not saying there wasn't trash written back then, more that the ratio of trash to literature would be different to today. Obviously I don't know that ratio, so I could very well be wrong.
    Queen-Mise wrote: »
    Continuing on from that - there was probably more stuff printed then also - do you know the way that Dickens was published in chapters - half penny stories. These were incredibly popular. Stories were swapped & libraries had huge numbers using them. There were hundreds of newspapers at the time, all with large readerships.

    Literacy levels back then would be incomparable to today. The book industry is producing far, far more books than ever before, and it's increasing all the time (this may have been affected by the recession, of course).
    Queen-Mise wrote: »
    I am going to throw out a few suggestions for incredible books - that I think will definitely stand test of time....

    The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time, by Mark Haddon
    The Kite Runner, by Khaled Hosseini
    Cloud Atlas, by David Mitchell
    The Suspicions of Mr Whicher, by Kate Summerscale
    Half of a Yellow Sun, by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie
    Life of Pi, by Yann Martel.

    Again, I'm not doubting that some of these books may stand the test of time (although I'd only agree regarding David Mitchell). The majority of them can't compete with many of the classics (right up to, say, the mid point of the 20th century) in terms of what they were achieving, how they were completely altering what a novel was and what it said. A lot of them are great reads, but if The Curious Incident ... is an example of today's classic, then I really do think literature is on a declining course.


  • #19
    x_Ellie_x
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 513 ✭✭✭x_Ellie_x


    On http://www.abebooks.co.uk there is someone selling their 1st edition copy of it for £ 695.00 GBP.

    http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=5331171835&searchurl=an%3Dstephenie%2Bmeyer%26bi%3D0%26bsi%3D0%26bx%3Doff%26ds%3D30%26sortby%3D1%26tn%3Dtwilight%26x%3D0%26y%3D0


    I'd say sell now before Twilight's 15 minutes of fame is over.


Advertisement