What do you think of Stephanie Meyer? Some say her writing is better than JK Rowling's. Your opinions?

God, JK Rowling's style is not of a ten year-old. I think she's a talented writer. SMeyer, maybe a ten year-old. Breaking Dawn was pretty bad, but after New Moon (emo Bella) and Eclipse (in which nothing happened), I didn't expect much. I agree: It's only popular because of Sparkly Edward.

No competition. Rowling wins, hands down.

Purple prose and thesaurus abuse probably appear to be pretty impressive to inexperienced readers and writers, hence why many young girls and teens think that Meyer is a better writer than Rowling. In the end however, it's the simplistic beauty of Rowling's writing that makes her superior. When reading Harry Potter, one does not get caught up on unnecessary words or flowery prose, both of which are a huge issue with Meyer's writing. Instead, what Rowling writes flows and is simple without being too elementary. Harry Potter is best in terms of plot as well. My dad brought up a great point during a discussion concerning the two authors. "J.K. Rowling created a beautiful, detailed world, completely different from anything people have seen or imagined before," he said, "Stephenie Meyer just tacked some lazy fantasy onto a boring, already existing world."

Some people also said the world was flat and that the universe revolved around earth. They came to their senses and so will those who think S.M. has anything on J.K.

Wow, nice rant. Anyway, my fav quote, "Stephenie's writing ain't worth a darn." And that is so true. You go and read Twilight and then go read HP (or in the other order don't matter) and you can immediately tell who is a better writer. JK is much more descriptive, the plot much more intricate, the characters expanded beyond mortals, werewolves and vampires, and contains much more writing genres than just romance. (there really aren't that many fighting scenes in the Twilight books to say it's adventure) Here's a way to test what reading level the books are at. Get a little sibling or someone small, like nine or ten, and get them to read the different books and see which ones they understand more hahaha. My little sis's read only the Twilight books because.... THEY ARE EASIER READS. JK is a better writer, Steph should have taken a bit more time to add more detail to her writing and having a dozen words that no one has heard of before in her writings does not make her writing more mature. Making the plot more intricate and difficult to follow shows just how much JK worked on her books to make sure that she could get the best out of her book and her writing just drew me in and everytime I read it I understand more, in Twilight I just feel like I'm back in that dream romance. Intricate plot wins.

If J.K. Rowling's writing standard was of a 10-year-old (which it is the FARTHEST thing from), Stephenie Meyer's would be the standard of the egg in the womb.

I HATE Twilight, I think Stephanie Meyer created too perfect of a character with Bella and put in way too much mushy romance. I prefer JK Rowling much more, because even though she didn't use great literary devices in her work, she has an amazing imagination and her books are entertaining for all age groups, not just teenage girls. Plus I found myself getting angry at the characters in Twilight quite frequently. Not a good sign... I guess I can kind of understand why people would like Twilight, but honestly I think classic romances are better.

Wow if Rowling's writing is that of a 10 year old it must have been Mattie Stephanek (great poet, died at the age of 14). Okay the face value of Rowling's writing wasn't the greatest in the beginning of the series; it was definantly written by an amature. I read the book in only a few hours. However even from the beginning she was drawing in details you didn't expect. Minor clues from midway through the book hit you in the face at the end. Her writing continued to improve throughout the series. Meyer on the other hand, well I have 8th grade papers that could compare to her writing (that was the year I discovered the thesaurus tool in Word, went a bit crazy with it). There's something about her descriptions that seem like they are just there, not really contuting to the text. I can't really name it, but I've heard her writing discribed as "purple prose"; i guess that's the closest to what I find off. There was absolutely no dept or undercurrent to the writting. All that kept the plot flowing was romantic tensions and even those wear thin in places. Twilight was okay for a first novel written by an amature, but there is no excuse for the other books in the series. I almost want to argue that her writing got worse. There was no attempt to correct the unbalanced nature of the plot and tensions, and the writing style remained on the same amature level it began at. I wanted to see growth from the book, both from Bella as a character and Meyer as a writer. In both cases I was dissappointed.

Ms Rowling's writing grew up with Harry. Her standards became more mature as Harry matured. I have only read the first Twilight book. I thought it was bland. I didn't find it well written; I found it predictable. I was unable to make a connection with her characters mainly because they were teens. However that is exactly the audience she is pandering too. Teens have a huge corner of the market. I think that time will tell. In 10 or 15 years while children are still delighted by Harry's journey, Twilight will be on the shelf with other less notable writers.