Eliza: @Elysa: I’m really appreciate your post. Thank you.I think “Approachability” is an extremely “kind” word for what has been and is happening that simply isn’t kind at all–and I don’t necessarily mean this book in particular either. There also are non-fiction books written in recent decades covering similar themes and issues. Have you read any of them?

Yes, I have read many of those. However, I do not think this is a new trend. You can find threads of common themes re-trod throughout history – some done better than others.
I hate to keep harping at The Hunger Games but it is one that sticks out the most for me right now. One of its major themes involves our Reality TV obsession (i.e. . . our voyeuristic penchant to watch peoples live unrail on television). This is not a novel theme explored in literature, nor is it a new societal development. One only had to remember Roman Gladiators and their forebears, Boxing, MMA, Scandal Sheets . . . etc. As a society we have always been voyeuristic. We also tend to prefer destruction over glorification . . . particularly when we tear down that which we have built up. I could list ad nauseum the books that have explored this phenomenon. The Hunger Games just seems to present it in a way that is approachable and resonates today. Is it great literature? Not by my standards, but there are worse books out there.
I try to be philosophical about these current trends (Twilight, Fifty Shades, Hunger Games, Harry Potter . . . etc.). On the plus side, they seem to get people reading. If these readers aren’t as discerning as I would like them to be, well, such is life.

Yes, it does belong there. I also had to read that one in high school and I hated it. It kind of proves my point because at the time the stye annoyed me and the violence was off-putting (I was a freshman still exploring my love for all things Austen). As I have continued to read and expand my experience with various forms of literature I have become better equipped to engage with different writing styles. Had it been written in a less subtle style (a la Hunger Games) I may have found it more approachable at the time.

I think “Approachability” is an extremely “kind” word for what has been and is happening that simply isn’t kind at all–and I don’t necessarily mean this book in particular either. There also are non-fiction books written in recent decades covering similar themes and issues. Have you read any of them?

Elysa:As for it being “fresh”, the only thing in it I hadn’t read before was a particular intimate act in the first one that I wish I hadn’t read.I agree with those positing that it was the readers who have made this a success and the great degree of discussion surrounding the books.And, I’m sorry if this offends, but I do think that part of the mass appeal is the less-than-stellar writing – someone here called it high school level.That level of writing simply makes things more approachable.I thought the same think about the Hunger Games when a friend finally convinced me to read it – and I enjoyed it in spite of what I saw as flaws.The themes Hunger Games explores are by no means new – crack open Fahrenheit 451, 1984, The Once and Future King . . . etc if you don’t believe me.I read all of those in high school and I know many of my friends who hated those but loved the Hunger Games.Why? . . . Approachability.The toned down writing makes these newer books more approachable to more people. – It’s not a jab, just my observation.

Approachability? I don’t know of the popularity of this series is that simple, but that is your opinion. as for The Hunger Games, you left out the novel that most resembles the theme and that is Lord Of The Flies. Would you agree?

All true. Readers that would have never picked up a ‘romance/erotica’ are reading it. Doesn’t hurt the genre to have a few more readers.

I didn’t really like the first one . . . I hate first person narrative, and frankly Ana irritated the hell out of me. Also, her inner goddess and subconscious pissed me off – But I absolutely loved the e-mail exchanges.

I moved on to the other two because I am obsessive and if I start a series I can’t quit until I get to an ending I can live with. The last two books drug me into the story. Ana finally grew on me, but then Christian started pissing me off.

So, the upshot for me was: I’ve read better and I’ve read worse; the writing was sub-par, but the story was good and the characters at times compelling. As for it being “fresh”, the only thing in it I hadn’t read before was a particular intimate act in the first one that I wish I hadn’t read.

I agree with those positing that it was the readers who have made this a success and the great degree of discussion surrounding the books. And, I’m sorry if this offends, but I do think that part of the mass appeal is the less-than-stellar writing – someone here called it high school level. That level of writing simply makes things more approachable. I thought the same think about the Hunger Games when a friend finally convinced me to read it – and I enjoyed it in spite of what I saw as flaws. The themes Hunger Games explores are by no means new – crack open Fahrenheit 451, 1984, The Once and Future King . . . etc if you don’t believe me. I read all of those in high school and I know many of my friends who hated those but loved the Hunger Games. Why? . . . Approachability. The toned down writing makes these newer books more approachable to more people. – It’s not a jab, just my observation.