I just read this review of Breaking Dawn on Jezebel and have to note that even though I am half asleep, this paragraph rocked my world:
Breaking Dawn does seem to be promoting a fundamentally conservative ideology. But then so does The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, and they will pry that book from my cold, dead, godless fingers. I think ultimately we shouldn’t worry too much about what ideas young adult books promulgate. We should worry about whether the books themselves are awesome. Because awesomeness promotes thinking, and thinking promotes becoming the kind of adult we all want more of in the world: the kind who can understand the message of a book — or a movie, or a blog post, or a presidential candidate — and decide for herself whether she agrees.
If I had a penis, I’d have a boner right now, is all I’m sayin’.
Haven’t read the books, don’t intend to. Did want to posit that maybe the pedophilia accusation be replaced with an accusation of ephebophilia instead.
Oh, please. I’ve never read this series and I occasionally read YA. But your worried about an abusive relationship between a vampire and a mortal? Most teens I teach know the difference between reality and fiction- well-written or not.
However, I have just finished a Romance novel by an author I have always liked where the hero, which I should put in quotes, tries to get even with his former girlfriend by getting her to fall in love with him again and then attempts to have her child taken away! And the lucky young woman gets to marry this bozo in the end. Unfortunately I’ve seen way too much of this type of garbage lately. This is an HEA?Sadly, there is far more reality to this type of plot than the YA book mentioned, and I might mention I think mental abuse is just as sad as physical abuse.
HDU compare Bella/Edward to Darcy/Elizabeth. And HDU compare Harry Potter to Smeyer. HDU both indeed.
Word to that.
Regarding the comparison of Bella/Edward to Lizzie/Darcy… there is no comparison. The relationships could not be more different. Bella and Edward fall in love with each other for shallow reasons (looks and smell—ew). Lizzie and Darcy initially reject each other for shallow reasons, but come to love one another when they get to know each other better.
Bella adores Edward even when he is a jerk to her. Lizzie does not fall in love with Darcy until he stops being a jerk.
I think “Pride and Prejudice” is one of the best romances ever written—if not the best—and “Twilight” is drivel. I never made it past the first book, so I can’t comment on “Breaking Dawn.” But I read everything Austen ever wrote. It’s funny that the 200-year-old novel pleases my inner feminist, and the modern-day novel offends it.
HDU compare Bella/Edward to Darcy/Elizabeth. And HDU compare Harry Potter to Smeyer. HDU both indeed.
I’m appalled by these questions, appalled! Clearly, someone is not reading her Austen very carefully. I cite the following examples for your enlightenment.
“… but his friend Mr. Darcy soon drew the attention of the room by his fine, marble pale person, totally hawt features, all that and a bag of chips attitude and the report which was spoken in the ladies room within five minutes after his entrance, of his being all OMG sparkly like a gansta’s diamond studs in the sun.”
AND
“Which do you mean?’’ and turning round, Darcy looked for a moment at Elizabeth, till catching scent of maple syrup smelling hair, he coldly said, “She’s awright; but not smoking enough to tempt me; and I am totally not in a mood at present to give consequence to any chicks who are not worth a dollar lap dance to other men.’‘
My favorite comment on the entire thing to date is
“I can’t say much. At that age, I loved Flowers in the Attic.”
Truer words. We didn’t have the Net, but we all read it feverishly.
…and into every generation, a crack-fiction book that sucks mightily but is adored above all others must fall….
Password: were98. Were not! Were only 13!
I am deeply ashamed and I have now realised the error of my ways. Austen and Rowling could never live up to the genius that is Meyer, after all she knows that twu love = stalkery/abusiveness
Ephebophilia: attraction to adolescent sex partner
Perhaps everyone else knew…
Gotcha. I was thinking of OSSSUM in the Bill & Ted sense, which is really the only way I think of it.
I totally agree, and I have said everywhere that I liked Twilight. It is, indeed, cracktastic. At the same time, I have issues with the book and its message—
Yes!—and the fact that I fully believe that it was unintended (which, to me, is HEWWWWJJJ).
Yeah, me too. But at least the author knew what she was writing and she wasn’t writing it to YA.
And I must cop to my 15-yo self having a huge cracktastic crush on The Hoff. And Knight Rider’s being reincarnated this fall! Yes!
If Mr. Collins isn’t a manipulative stalker, no one is. I can just imagine the walls in his cottage near Rosings just covered in crazed imaginings, not unlike those he penned to Mr. Bennet, and splattered with his own blood and body secretions and dead bees from the hives he kept.
If Austen had written a sequel to P&P;, Collins would have no doubt eliminated Mr. Darcy with much flying though the trees at Rosings Park. Then he would have taken over Pemberly, where upon he’d marry either bereaved Elizabeth or more Meyerish, the untouched teen sister. Monster babies would be born faster than you could say, “It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a hundred year old virgin vampire in possession of a good fortune must be jonesing for a jailbait shortie.”
Be careful, you might give Meyer ideas. Don’t you know she stalks the internetz looking for her worshipers and her enemies alike.
However your comments FTW! And that sequel needs to be written, if only for the lulz. You should contact Meyer’s publishers after all they’re pretty much used to publishing misogynistic crap.
… Cough, bitter and holding a grudge…who, me? Why certainly not!
You know, I’ve already written the manuscript on the back of credit card applications and in the margins of Trader Joe receipts! I sent it to my editor, my agent, and Gerard Butler (so hawt!) telling them that it was a surefire bestseller, but oddly none of them have never responded.
However, Stephanie Meyer and I both agree that hard work and the occasional teenage fantasy wet dream are really the key to success in the literary world, so I’m currently working on a sequel to SENSE & SENSIBILITY, with Col. Brandon as a brain-eating (but totally sexy!) zombie who hearts teenage Marianne.
My code word: men49—a little on the young side for Meyer’s heroines!
and
Holy shit. I just choked on my gum. BWAHAHAHAHA.
Although, I wasn’t a Flowers in the Attic girl. Plenty of my friends were. I was more a Sweet Valley High “Whaddya MEAN he touched her breast?!” kind of girl. I inhaled those stupid things.
All this talk of vampires and Pride and Prejudice has got me thinking. J.R Ward doesn’t have nearly enough characters (snort!). She should totally create a new Brother…Dharcy! He could set lessers on fire with his smoldering gaze. Just like in P & P, he’ll act standoffish and withdrawn towards his heroine before succumbing to her charms. I know, I know; it’s a totally new direction for Ward, but I think she can pull it off. And maybe if we have a heroine based on Lizzie, she’ll actually be interesting! It could work!
Anyone got a good title? All I can think of is Lover’s Cravat.
Marta- thanks to a customer, I had already added you to my “gotta buy before i leave the bookstore and lose my awesome discount” list.
After the above comments, I think I will just bow down in total embarrassment for not finding you hiding in the fiction section before this.
Always glad to help, Sarah 🙂 Just to be clear, I am not the author of the Flowers in the Attic comment (although I certainly devoured the book along with all the other girls in 7th grade). I just thought it summed up the whole situation well.
Hi, Ev, thanks, yep, my books are considered general fiction, so you may find them there should you wander over to that section. (Since my last name starts with an A, I’m conveniently near the Anthologies – Erotic.)
Melissandre, gotta give a shout out to Colleen Gleason for an Austen-inspired vampire series, the Gardella Vampire Chronicles, which is suitable for teens. In fact, I had one of Colleen’s books on my table and a teenage friend saw it and snatched it away from me. Colleen’s young heroine is not a wallflower, a doormat, or a whiner. It’s not really relevant, but her book covers are beautiful.
I believe that all of the debate on whether or not Twilight really IS awesome, simply supports the original quote. The ability to look at the book, to think about the characters—that’s awesome. The freedom to do that for ourselves, THAT’S awesome. The book itself is what it is—some folks think awesome (my teenaged daughter, for one,) some folks think it’s good but over rated. (Stephanie Meyer is a sore point for me personally, for purely narcissistic reasons I will not go into now, but, like so many things, I blame my mother!) Either way, the paragraph gave me a literary boner myself.
Because awesomeness promotes thinking, and thinking promotes becoming the kind of adult we all want more of in the world: the kind who can understand the message of a book — or a movie, or a blog post, or a presidential candidate — and decide for herself whether she agrees.
I’m unqualified to enter the debate on whether the books are awesome or awful since I haven’t read any of them. I comment only as a shout-out for the need to encourage critical thinking in all ages. I’m always surprised at how willing many people (not all!) are to take things they hear or read at face value. It isn’t cynical to say that every message has an agenda or a bias.
I advocate endlessly for romance novels. I’m as biased as the detractor who dismisses them as mindless, formulaic trash. I’m just biased on the counter viewpoint. *g* I don’t expect anyone to listen to my passion for the genre and automatically say, “By God, she must be right.” I hope that someone who previously thought evil, negative things about romance, might listen and think, “Hey, maybe there’s something to what she says. I’ll read a romance and see what I think.”
Totally agree that every generation has its own cracktastic/craptastic literature—I was a Nancy Drew girl myself. Oh, and Sue Barton (Student Nurse, et cetera).
Every teenage girl I’ve talked to about the Twilight books, love ‘em or hate ‘em or somewhere in between, assures me that she knows the difference between fiction and reality (“Like, Mom, he’s a vampire! Duh!”). They are not taking Bella as a role model, nor would they *really* want Edward for themselves in real life (although Robert Pattinson? Hellz yeah, they’ve wanted him since he played Cedric Diggory!). Sure there are some squeeing, even rabid, fans out there, for books that many people think are just not very good, but that’s true among adult readers as well. (Cassie Edwards, anyone?)
These are the “trashy” books, and some really are! We just can’t agree which ones. There is a wide range, to suit a range of taste in readers, and I agree with SB Sarah that it is awesome to give teenage readers the same thing. To trust them to read these books, even enjoy them, without warping their minds—just like we managed to read books where heroines FORGAVE, EMBRACED AND MARRIED THEIR RAPISTS without foolishly thinking that was meant as a behavioral model we should follow.
Young Adults, that’s what they are. They don’t need their pleasure reading censored, or screened, much more than we do.
[That said, I was VERY pleased why my own Young Adult Woman, with a Borders gift card to spend, chose Wicked Lovely over Breaking Dawn. She will finish the series eventually, but she’s in no hurry.]
I have been truly horrified by some of these comments. There were far too many willing to pass judgement when it is obvious they have never read the books. Pedophilia?!? Yes Bella was young, but she was old enough to make her own decisions before the marriage. Yes Jacob imprinted on the baby. But if you had bothered to read the book (or paid attention when you did so) you would have noticed that Meyers explained how imprinting on a child worked. Until maturity the relationship/feelings/emotions felt by the wolf are those of brother/father/friend (how this will change at maturity, I don’t know nor do I really want to). But so many posters are willing to judge something they have never read based solely on the opinions of others. I have read and enjoyed all four books. Were they well written? No. Did I particularly like Bella? No. While reading the books, I’d notice the plot gaps and extreme leaps in logic (even for a world filled with vampires and werewolves). If you cannot separate reality from fiction, you have no business reading fiction.
But I felt the books served their purpose. They provided a temporary escape and at least mild enjoyment. They got millions of teenage girls to read something other that the latest issue of Seventeen. I usually enjoy reading the responses on this site, but I found more than half the posts/reviews/etc. to be about as applicable and reliable as the teen fangirls.
I’m in agreement with Miranda C. You really do have to keep in mind the context which this is all written in. It may seem like a good idea to apply it to reality, but this is a world that Stephenie Meyer created. It’s not the real world, but fantasy. If the YA readers aren’t clued into the fact simply by its shelf location (YA Sci-Fi) then hopefully the youth of this day and age are able to realize that a book about vampires and werewolves (shape-shifters, technically) is going to require a step aware from reality.
Yes, the book involves human teenagers and some real life experiences. But the balance is so heavily in the unreal side of the story that it shouldn’t be in anyway a guide to life. That being said, I totally am behind those parents who want to take the time to explain healthy relationships and the difference between reality and fiction to their teens.
My next comment is kind of a SPOILER so if anyone hasn’t read BD and cares do not continue…
As to the problem of Edward’s sperm and Jacob’s imprinting on the resulting child:
As much as I maintain the denial of religious connotations in this series, there is most definitely a mysticism incorporated. Its a novel about vampires so of course there will be lore, myths and superstitions. That being said, Stephenie Meyer did a pretty good job of creating a world within which these circumstances could occur. Even her characters were amazed at Bella’s pregnancy, but her world had its own myths and legends that proved that this was not an unheard of thing. Are you seriously sitting here questioning the possibility of this happening in a book about vampires? Holy crap! Its a book, for crying out loud. A science-fiction one! That’s like the best genre you could ever write within for the unrealistic.
This is the value of literature in mind: anything is possible. It allows the mind to explore the impossible and make it possible.
Tolkien made up his own damn world, why can’t Stephenie Meyer?
Sorry for the tangent. Going back the mysticism, for those who have read BD, there is clearly a subtext of destiny. All the events in all the books have been leading up to this ending.
1. Edward’s attraction to Bella. Yes, it is her smell (get over it). Why is she so profoundly attractive to him, when he’s been alive for a century without experiencing this with any other human?
2. Jacob & Bella’s attraction to each other. Jacob, being a teenage boy, is attracted to Bella in that way. She is not attracted similarly. She is attracted to the way his presence makes her feel. Despite her love of Edward there is this inexplicable pull between Jacob and Bella. He can’t stay away from her, even though he knows he can never have her. And she can’t stay away from him even though she knows it hurts him. She mentions that he completes her family.
3. Jacob imprinting on Renesme (shitty ass name btw). This explains the pull. He is attracted to the part of her that will eventuallycomplete him. Similarly for her (seeing as how her child is part of her). The whole point of imprinting in Meyer’s world is that the mate will somehow enhance the bloodline of the shape-shifters. Imprinting on a human-vampire hybrid with telepathic abilities=probably a step up in the food chain.
4. Awkward Bella—>Bad Ass Bella. She had to be that uncomfortable awkward teenager who inexplicably did not feel like she fit in, because the one place that she really did fit in was with the undead. We needed to see how uncomfortable she was as a human to understand why it is so right for her to be a vampire. She basically comes into her own. She’s good at being a vampire.
So here we have our destiny. Edward and Bella destined to be attracted to each other because of what they will create together. He finally finds someone who he can love and live forever with without having to feel guilty, because she fulfills her destiny when he turns her. Simply put, she was meant to be a vampire and have a child, who was meant to imprint with Jacob and improve the Black line. Both sides gain: the shape shifters will eventually have a vampire-wolf-human line (capable of immortality, strength, speed, amazing mental abilities) thats your bridge between the two groups, and the vampires get a new member who is a shield against any vampire power involving the mind. Edward and Bella get to be in love (and have hot rough sex every night) forever. Win-win. Its the fate of Meyer’s world. Bella was meant to be a vampire.
Clearly I ran the midnight release party at my store.
By the way, I would totally want my child to read this series as opposed to other YA books with titles like Hotlanta. Or that stupid Clique series with the really bitchy looking 13yr olds on the cover. I do not want that to be my child one day *shudders*
I love trashy books as much as the next trashy book lover, but I just can’t get into Twilight.
It’s just so badly written (normally I can let this go but: ‘scintillating arms’? That’s just wrongness) and the pacing is horrendous. There’s no plot in any of them for about three quarters of the book, at which point you (I) realise that it has not been worth the wait. I’d be willing to let Edward’s weirdness go if the author acknowledged that he was a huge freak, but she insists that he’s the perfect man. She compares him to a bunch of literary romantic heroes (and Willoughby, wtf?) and says that he’s better than them all. I bring this up because she’s released the first chapter of Midnight Sun (the first book from Edward’s POV) in PDF form at her website, and it is a) the first Twilight thingy that I have ever read all the way through! And b) really, really creepy, in that it’s Edward thinking through all the ways that he can kill Bella (and any innocent bystanders!) and get away with it. It’s unintentionally hilarious, because that is just what my mind is like, but it’s also seriously disturbing, because Edward comes across as a complete sociopath. He spends all his time reading people’s thoughts and thinking how petty and insignificant humanity is (don’t keep going to high school, then!) and how his family are supposedly superior. And then, when it comes to not killing Bella, he doesn’t do it for her sake, or for the sake of all the random high schoolers he’d have to kill to get away with her murder without revealing himself, but because Carlisle (his vegetarian vampire daddy) would be disappointed in him.
I don’t know about you, but this is not my ideal man.
And wrt not censoring what teenagers read/trusting them to see the difference between truth and fiction etc. Yes, that is important. But it’s also important that (say it with me) books are not written in a vacuum! The entirety of pop culture is sending out these messages to girls and women, that dangerous men only need the love of a good woman to tame them/Beauty and the Beast nonsense. The truth of the matter is, if you put yourself in a situation like Bella has, where you are consistently at the mercy of someone who has to practice constant self-control so as not to hurt you, you have put yourself in a constant danger, and eventually you will get hurt.
As I said before, I’m not going to fire-bomb the publishers, and this is certainly not even the worst offender in this sense. But I’m not going to say it’s ‘awesome’, or celebrate it as a piece of fiction or an example of popular culture.
I can be concise. Someday, I will practice that skill.
And you couldn’t even pry ‘The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe’ from my cold dead fingers.
Miranda, don’t tell me imprinting is not creepy. I mean, the werewolf will be brother/father for the kid and later becomes the lover?! If this doesn’t sound creepy and incestious to me, I don’t know.
And I only mentioned pedophelia because of Claire (toddler) and Quil (15 year old). The names are an allusion to Clare Quilty I’m pretty sure.
And I don’t see ephebophilia in the books, pedophelia – maybe. 26 year old Jacob impriting on Nessie…when they’re getting older it will get weirder…… Also, relationships like that never happen in real life.
shewhohashope says:
(Emphasis mine)
Thank you thank you thank you. That is exactly what I’ve been trying to say (albeit much less eloquently). Twilight perpetuates the submissive loving woman stereotype, and it bothers me to no end that a lot of people are willing to handwave the implication of it away as “we know fact from fiction,” “it’s just a trashy novel. it doesn’t mean anything” (isn’t it part of this blog’s schtick to think critically about the “trashy novels” in the world?) and “he’s a vampire, he can’t help it”.
The latter reminds me way too much of friends in abusive relationships, only substitute “a great guy” for “vampire”.
CAPTCHA: sense43. Yes, there is sense here, I hope.
Exactly, in real life. I do agree I find the idea of Quil and Jacob swithching from familial relationships to romantic ones with the children a little creepy. But, then again, I do not exist in a world where imprinting is possible. Those of you who do have experience in this magical, nonexistent world and can so willingly condemn it in absolutes, please explain.
Have you read these? This “great guy” doesn’t hit her because he can’t help controlling his temper. Bella is attacked and Edward shoves her out of the way of the charge. As a result, she falls into a punch bowl. During a night of rough sex, Edward leaves bruises on a woman who admits to being bruised just by bumping into objects. Any other harm that has occurred to Bella has been through others (NOT Edward). I don’t think that Bella fits into most people’s view of a feminist. But she was the one who chose her life and is HAPPY with it. Her parents did not raise her to believe she needed a man to complete her (in fact, both discouraged her at different times from marrying/becoming serious with someone so young). Please quit taking individual events out of context and trying to make them into something they are not.
It’s awesome that the kids love reading. It is awesome that kids are gobbling up stories. It is NOT NOT NOT awesome that they can’t or WON’T read their summer reading lists.
The summer reading lists are to give kids a basis for what’s happening in the school year. For a good foundation of fiction that pretty much has a timeless quality and FAR BETTER technical writing than most of the YA out today.
That does not mean they shouldn’t enjoy the YA. That doesn’t mean that they can read WHATEVER they want on their own free time. But SCHOOL TIME is MY TIME. I do NOT want irate parents coming at me because I went over the Twilight series and they abhor it. I do not want a school system coming down on me because I read, to horny 8th graders, about a series that has some heavy sexual overtones. My job in the classroom is to give them what they WON’T pick up for themselves. To introduce things that aren’t so sparkly and shiny that they would snap up. It’s not JUST about getting kids to read. But to get them to read in a critical thinking manner.
I promote reading. But I HATE HATE HATE it when people come down on school reading lists. There are REASONS for those lists. And they aren’t to bore kids to death! Ugh.
I’m sorry if I sound snippy. I just spent a week revising my booklist for the year. I read through a ton of YA out there and most of them take the same themes from more classical books, dress them in modern trappings, toss in some pop culture reference, product placement, and call it done. There’s more to teaching literature than that. 🙁
Lyra already said it, but shewhohashope, WORD.
Books are not written in a vacuum, or READ in a vacuum, and decisions are not made in vacuums.
Of course, the solution is 1.) more discussion and 2.) for me to get off my butt (or back ON my butt) and write my own YA novel, as well as a good deal of other people who have been annoyed by these aspects of the novels.
Or, you know, more promotion of Wicked Lovely.
captcha: always22—is that the store next to Forever 21?
To clarify my comparison btw Pride and Prejudice and the Twilight Series. It was not a comparison of quality. It was a comparison of the type of unrealistic wish fulfillment that both books hold.
Point of fact: I think it can be argued (easily) that the events in S Meyers fantasy world have more of a chance of every happening (in the fantasy world she created) than the events in Pride and Prejudice.
Please (anyone here) give me a real life example in the late 18th/early 19th century class conscious England of a super rich, well born, educated man falling in love with a fairly poor and not super hot girl from an “only ok” provincial family who is actually very ill mannered, clearly after his best friend for best friend’s money (at least that is Mrs. Bennett’s motivation) and has a slut of sister who elopes with the man who tried to seduced and elope with super hot, wealthy guy’s baby sister when she was only 15 years old for her inheritance.
Yeah, that guy would chase after the eloping pair, give Mr. Wickham mad bank and go back to plead with Elizabeth Bennett once more to make his dreams come true and marry him. I’m sure that happened all. the. freaking. time.
Not.
Twilight is cracktastic. It is wish fulfillment on a large basis. But then, much of romantic literature is.
Many of us might prefer Jane Austen’s stylistic treatment of the events in her books over S Meyers stylistic treatment of her fantasy world and chracters. But to say that Pride and Prejudice isn’t blatant wish fulfillment is to deny the events as having any relation to the time period in which they were set, the characters as described or why the book is so romantic.
Hope this clears up my original point, which was NOT that S Meyers is the next Jane Austen. That would be blasphemy.
Have you ever read Emma? Jane Austen? Emma falls in love and marries her older-brother-figure who has been a guardian and mentor to her?
There’s a long tradition of this exact sort of relationship in English fiction. It just doesn’t usually start with infants.
I never had summer reading lists in school, and I didn’t need them. I read the “classics” on my own. (I was a massive nerd.) And, keeping in mind that I say this as a person less than 30 days away (God willing) from a PhD in English literature, why ARE some of those books chosen?
Sometimes I look at summer reading lists, and I wonder why in God’s name the books have to be so depressing, misogynistic, or dull. Sometimes I can see the point (I hatehateHATE Lord of the Flies with a passion that is really quite unreasonable, but I can sort of see why it might be valuable reading). Other times, I’m just left bewildered. (The Old Man and the Sea? Sure, you can read it in 45 minutes, but dear God. That’s 45 minutes gone forever.)
So, and not asked snarkily at ALL, what do you go for in creating your lists? What are you trying to get out of them?
For me, snarkhunter, I go for fantasy. I’m a huge fan of a story taking you away. I try to steer damn clear of anything remotely depressing. If there is SORROW that is fine. But if there is a fatalistic quality, where there is no hope in humanity and no hope in God (Catholic school teacher here), then I don’t want it.
The lists the Diocese comes up with, while working with the schools, is at least 5 books in every possible genre. From mystery to fantasy to light reading. They KNOW that kids want more than just the classics and they strive to provide that. Heck they even put Harry Potter on there. Granted the list encourages the parents to read WITH their kids when providing the books.
For myself I cover stories and books that I can cross reference with all walks of life. I need music and art and history and dance and building and pretty much EVERYTHING to put into a book. I don’t just teach the story but what went into the story.
Many kids will enjoy reading. My job is to get them to THINK about what they are reading. And hopefully some of that transfers to the Twilight books. But I think not sometimes. 🙁
I think I would like your reading lists. 🙂 It’s the ones that seem determined to churn out little existentialists that annoy me.
Sasha, I think you argued two unrelated things. First, you compared Jane Austen’s world (which is a fantasy world, as are all fictional worlds) to her reality (i.e., what happened in P & P is extremely unlikely to happen in real, historical 18th or 19th century England, and OK, we’ll run with that), and then you compared Stephenie Meyer’s fantasy world to itself (what happened in Stephenie Meyer’s world makes perfect sense in Stephenie Meyer’s fantasy world, a point I’d argue, but not right now), and asked which is more realistic. That’s an apples-to-oranges comparison. If you’d compared Stephenie Meyer’s fantasy world to 21st-century small-town America, you’d come up with a different answer.
Jane Austen’s fantasy world is much closer to historical reality than Stephenie Meyer’s fantasy world (vampires what?), but that’s not a problem, since Stephenie Meyer is writing speculative fiction and Jane Austen was not. However, I disagree with your point (I think?), which was that Ms. Meyer’s fictional events are more likely to happen in her fictional world. Ms. Austen invented a world in which what happened DID happen. How is your description any more likely than a 100-year-old virgin vampire waiting for a wallflower from Phoenix to move to small-town Washington so he could fall in love with her? I won’t EVEN get into the events in book 4.
Yes, you’re right; there is an element of wish-fulfillment in P & P. But in Ms. Meyer’s world, the wish-fulfillment seems to be the end of everything. Ms. Austen uses the wish-fulfillment as a starting point to create a biting societal commentary and explore various aspects of her characters. Ms. Meyer does none of the sort.
As I said in my original post, yes I’ve read Twilight. No, I have not read New Moon, Eclipse, or Breaking Dawn, because Twilight was more than enough, though I have read detailed synopses of the others. Nothing in the synopses seem to contradict what I took away from Twilight, which is:
Girl consistently puts herself in a relationship where her boyfriend has the serious potential to hurt her, and finds nothing wrong with it.
The references to the stairs and punchbowl instances are my own disbelief at the presence of such painfully stereotypical abusive behavior responses.
Here’s a list of domestic abuse warning signs, for both the man and woman. Let’s see how many of them Edward and Bella fit.
The abusive man:
1) shows extreme jealousy and wants to keep the woman isolated.
2) has an inability to cope with stress and shows a lack of impulse control. (This may not necessarily appear outside the home)
3) has a poor self-image and blames others for problems.
4) shows severe mood swings.
5) may have a history of abuse in his own family and may have been abusive in courtship.
6) presents a history of personal and/or family discord; unemployment, cruelty to animals, abuse of alcohol or other substances, and other unexplained behavior.
1) Hell yes. Jacob? Check. Other students? Check check. Vagrant vamps? Check check check.
2) I would argue that Edward’s running away from Bella after he first meets her, as well as trying to change out of her class, constitutes an inability to cope with the situation. Your interpretation may differ.
3) Poor self image. Okay, not so much. I’ll give you that. No one has poor self image for long in this series.
4) HELLO YES. I HATE YOU! I LOVE YOU! NOM NOM NOM.
5) Abuse in family? One MIGHT argue that Carlisle dragging Edward into damnation/eternal night/constant hunger battles is abusive, but it’s probably a stretch. His obvious relish of observing what’s his face ask Bella to the prom (a painfully awkward situation for teens) borders on cruelty in courtship to me.
6) Unexplained behavior is a great big CHECK. History of family discord, yes (Abandoning the family for the Volturi, running off because of Bella’s tantalizing scent, etc).
So, Edward, we’re somewhere between 3-5 of 6. Not too good. And I didn’t even go into all the dominance overtones.
The abused woman:
1) shows guilt, ambivalence, and fear over living conditions.
2) feels isolated and untrusting of others, even though she may be involved in the community.
3) is emotionally and economically dependent.
4) has a poor self-concept (this may not have been true BEFORE the relationship).
5) has observed other women in her family being abused or may have been abused as a child.
6) feels angry, embarrassed, and ashamed.
7) is fearful of being insane.
8) has learned to feel helpless and feels powerless.
9) has unexplained injuries that may go untreated.
1) Forks sucks! Phoenix rules! Forks sucks!!! Let’s go with a “yes” on this.
2) Bella’s commentary on her new ‘friends’ in Forks? YES. Very isolated.
3) Edward wants to buy her new things constantly. She’s not getting any emotional support from her mother, and Charlie isn’t great when it comes to emotional support either. So, yes.
4) YES YES YES OH GOD YES.
5) Abused? Probably not from book 1. Flighty, yes, but abused, no.
6) Yes, Bella’s angry at life, at circumstance, at being stuck in Forks. Yes, much anger and frustration. Embarrassment too, at being already known as Charlie’s daughter before she even gets to Forks.
7) Not really, but everyone else thinks she is.
8) YES YES YES. Constantly in need of rescuing, constantly at a loss for what to do when Edward isn’t around.
9) Unexplained injuries? YES. While the reader might know how she got them, nobody in her family knows. Cue rant about punchbowl and stairs.
So, dear Bella is batting 7 of 9. We’re talking an incredible majority when you take them together.
(lists taken directly from: http://www.letswrap.com/dvinfo/warning.htm but a,lso cross-referenced from several other sites, including iVillage, HelpGuide.org, Illinois’ State Office of Women’s Health)
The argument isn’t that young adults won’t be able to distinguish between fact from fiction in that Edward is a vampire and real people aren’t (nice straw man argument though, I will admit). The argument is that young adults won’t be able to distinguish fact from fiction, that people will (continue to) believe that as long as a man loves you, any injury inflicted upon you by being around him is okay.
I’m not saying ban the books, not at all. I’m saying dismissing the argument with ‘because he’s the way he is’ isn’t good enough.
I’ve read these books. Edward is not abusive in the physical sense, but he is extremely creepy and controlling. He spent his nights hanging around her house and watching her sleep through the window before he had even been introduced to her. He also consistently believes that he knows what’s better for Bella than she does herself, even though it’s her life. He even goes so far as to disable her car to prevent her from seeing a friend of hers. He believes it’s because said friend is dangerous and bad for her, even though she’d been hanging out with said friend for months by that point and would surely know what she was getting herself into. Edward will occasionally take what she says seriously, but most of the time he will brush off what she says because, again, he is arrogant enough to believe that HE knows what’s best for her.
But Emma also is fiction. I know there was a time when people married their daughters of to man twice their age, but usually they did not grow up with them. There’s actually a psychological description for couples that grow up together and then eventually marry. It starts with h I believe. It was a typical in some Asian country I think, where future husband/wife grew up together.
But Emma fall in love with Knightley when she was 21. Knightley was 37. Knightley did not know when he was 16 he’s going to end up with Emma, but Jacob does. Even when he’s the playmate for Nessie at first, he does love her, because she’s his ~soulmate~. Also, I think there’s a difference between someone having actually a choice to become lovers and someone who doesn’t.
lol so much discussion about a fictional book xD
Stephanie
I think the point I was trying to make (and I don’t think you would disagree with me, but maybe I am wrong) is that both works are wish fulfilling FANTASY. The point I don’t think we agree on is that I do believe that Stephenie Meyer created a world in which her characters’ action in lots of way make more sense that do the characters in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Jane Austen’s books are not trying to change the rules of the world the characters are living in. The assumption throughout her novels is not that her characters are living in an ‘alternative reality’ England – the assumption is that this is a fictional story set in modern day England (at the time of writing). And Pride And Prejudice (the storyline) is a complete and total cracktastic FANTASY of what would happen at that time, in that location, with the characters described.
Now, Jane Austen is a brilliant writer, and her story works so well because her characters are complex and she makes some wonderful and biting commentary on manners and mores of the gentry. However, the events as described in her books did not happen and the likelihood of those events happening are about as likely as vampires actually existing (ok, slight hyperbole but come on).
If we are going to accept that S Meyers gets to create her fantasy world in which vampires do exist, and they do follow the rules she sets out then the interactions that follow from Bella and Edward are just as likely to have occurred (meaning not at all, of course, but workable within her framework). Even the events of Book 4 – because when you decide to throw magic in – well then arguing a half human/half vamp mutant baby is a lot less hard. Ms. Meyer brings the idea up in the first book (Twilight) when she talks about the incubus/succubus legends being associated (in her canon) with vampire legends and unexplained pregnancies.
I get the fact that a lot of people don’t like the books. I am not trying to argue that anyone should like the books. But I think this is an issue of not liking how Stephenie Meyer writes stylistically (totally reasonable complaint and very subjective for each reader) as opposed to the fact that the story is “just too fantastical”.
The plot points are not fantastical from the canon she sets out (not even the pregnancy, in my view). You might not think it works. I might think it does. I might think that she is a great storyteller because I feel compelled to read her through even with all the flaws I see in her writing and the stuff that drives me batty (eye tightening, anyone?).
There are authors I loath (Danielle Steele immediately comes to mind). But I also recognize that her storylines (on the bare bones) mimic many of the storylines that when written by other authors I love. Hot rich men and fabulous successful women just aren’t dotting the landscape the way that La Nora and others write about them. Doesn’t mean I don’t love how La Nora writes and won’t read even teh most ridiculous of her plot contrivances. I will read anything by La Nora because I love her writing, flaws and all (not that she has that many – she is wonderful).
I don’t think that good books (even when we are talking about books so bad they are good) are good or bad based upon the storyline and plot but rather in how the author writes it. How she/he treats the storyline.
I don’t expect my teenage vampire/human love stories to have plucky archetypical modern day feminist heroines who happen to fall in love with the angsty vampire guy. I expect that you basically have to be your own personal freakfest to fall in love with a 108 year old angsty vampire who every other human avoids because every one else realizes (subconsciously or not) that he is dangerous and a predator.
Bella is a freak and a half. I don’t identify with her, I don’t want to be her. But her character as written makes more sense falling in love with a vampire than say Angela’s does (who happens to be a great example of cool human girl; kind, popular, falls in love with a guy much shorter than her and doesn’t give a flip about it at all, good friend, smart, etc.).
I liked the book because I think that writing it in the first person gives the reader all sorts of stuff to think about. We hear from Bella that she is average and boring. But the reaction from all the other people in the book seems to bely her own self judgements. So, what is the actuality (we each get to decide). We see her admittedly unhealthy and obsessive love for Edward who she sees as perfect, but I don’t think anyone else agrees with her judgement on that – not even Edward himself.
I liked the idea that both of them were outcasts (and yes, every at school avoided the Cullens even with their hotness and wealth which once again makes you wonder about how everyone sees the Cullens versus how Bella does) and it is in part because neither fits in that they fall in love with one another.
I think Stephenie Meyer is a pretty smart, aware author. I don’t think she believes that Bella and Edward are the “perfect” couple. I think the whole series is basically a character study of two of the most fucked up people falling in love and the aftermath of their decisions, choices and actions. As such, I loved reading about it. I loved that Edward’s family unconditionally loved both of those freaks even throughout their most outrageous hijinks.
I thought this was a series about how absolutely far anyone can go and still be loved. And Stephenie Meyers tooks these characters well beyond where I would have stopped. But there was never a moment when I thought, “well, I could see them loving each other until there, but that just went too far.” I thought the fact that there was no place those two crazy kids wouldn’t go was the whole point.
Completely unrealistic? heck yeah. For me. But then, that’s why I read that instead of just asking all my friends about their courtships and relationships. I know what realistic relationships are like. Heck, i’ve been married almost 10 years and have 3 kids. I really know what realistic relationships are like.
Realistic for the freakfest that is Bella and Edward? Hells yes! And I loved it because it was cracktastically freak festy.
A couple more points that I have to address because lots of people have had problems with these points.
1. The fact that Bella was willing to die for her child. This was one of the most realistic parts of Book 4 for me. Having had friends who chose to continue a pregnancy after being diagnosed with cancer and postponing cancer treatments until after the delivery made that pretty realistic. Is that what everyone would/should choose? No, but it isn’t even fantastical that Bella would. And having 3 children myself – the idea of dying for my child isn’t weird at all. If it was a choice between me or any of my children dying, I would choose to die myself in a heartbeat. If you don’t have kids, maybe that wouldn’t make sense, but I think those with kids can understand the impulse even if that isn’t what they would choose.
2. The awful delivery scene. I thought Stephenie Meyer did a great job acknowledging that having this kind of mutant baby would fuck a girl up right good. It seemed to play somewhat like the scene in Alien which I thought worked, especially since it is being narrated by Jacob. And having had a pretty horrific delivery of my third child with a spontaneous hemorrage – I know first hand how bloody things can get in a ‘normal’ problem delivery.
Does everything work for me in the book? Not even close. But I still liked it. And I think arguing whether or not vampires could possibly have erections, or could possibly father a child, or if a teenage girl who would give up mortal life for her vampire boyfriend is a good role model (really, should that have ever even been thought? I don’t think anyone has ever argued Bella is a good role model or should be) misses the point. This is the story as written by the author. She created a world in which vampires could get erections and sex it up all the time. okey dokey, mutant vamp sperm isn’t on my list of impossibles at that point. I don’t know why it is on anyone’s list since I don’t know why that couldn’t be in the world that Stephenie Meyer created.
3. I really wish people would stop the YA argument of why this book is inappropriate. Ms. Meyers has said repeatedly that she didn’t write this series as a young adult series, her publisher chose to publish it in that location. Either a book isn’t good (in your opinion) or it is. Books are almost never “inappropriate”. Young adults are not constrained to one section of the bookstore or library, so why is anyone framing this discussion as this book being particularly problematic because it has been shelved in YA? I know that I was reading Clan of the Cave Bear and other examples of fantasy romantic crap when I was way younger than a teenager and I think that wannabe ‘faction’ of books like that is actually more damaging than fantastical stories of how vampires and teh rare, rare human girls who love them interact romantically.
As I said before, I am not trying to make anyone say that this is great literature. I am not trying to argue that you don’t understand the book if you didn’t like it. I enjoyed it, I think there’s lots to be discussed in what happened in all 4 books (from a literary standpoint) and I also think it is a wonderful series of trashy fiction. If it doesn’t work for people, hey – that’s why we each read slightly different books. But I think a lot of the criticism has been ridiculously over-reaching, in what people want this book to be, as opposed to what it is.
I…never argued that Emma isn’t fiction? Not sure why “but it’s fiction!” is either a defense or an offense here. It’s all fiction.
Yeah, but he’d been in love with Emma since she was in her teens. All I’m saying is, Stephenie Meyer isn’t writing out of some pedophile fantasy. She’s writing out of a long tradition of literature in which this sort of thing IS common. Furthermore, I am extremely uncomfortable with the extent to which people are applying (very important) real-world rules/guidelines to a series of books existing in a genre that is BY DEFINITION in defiance of many of those rules.
quick disclaimer: I read Twilight several years ago. Have not read any of the others. Have no real stake (no pun intended, but now that it’s there I like it) in them, but some of the protests here strike me as 1) disingenuous, 2) patronizing, and 3) silly.
The age thing (Edward/Bella, I mean). This is standard vampire fiction. STANDARD. Like others, I point to Buffy/Angel. Also Buffy/Spike, Angel/Cordelia, Xander/Anya. Basically, pick your Whedonverse pairing. I don’t read vampire fiction as a rule, but I’m pretty DAMN sure similar issues crop up in the works of, to name just a few authors, Anne Rice, JR Ward, and Laurell K. Hamilton.
The danger thing. This is a common vampire-lit trope, a common werewolf-lit trope (Willow/Oz?), a common sf/fantasy-lit trope (basically any story in which a character becomes involved with someone in a dangerous shadow world…hell, look at the Doctor and any of his various companions), AND a common theme in YA fiction. Don’t like your teens reading novels about dangerous young men or women and the people who love them? Seriously, good luck finding a book that doesn’t get into that. I mean, I don’t necessarily think it’s a GOOD thing to constantly have the girls falling for the “bad” boys, but, again, within the confines of the genre, it’s very, very standard.
Bella’s sense of isolation in the first book?
Lyra, I take it you weren’t forced to move to another, totally alien (to you) state when you were 17. I was. I was deeply isolated and deeply miserable. I hated Ohio with a passion and wanted to go back to Washington, even as I felt bound to stay in Ohio b/c of the people I loved. But it wasn’t a sign of abuse. It was a sign of confusion and unhappiness about my situation. While I don’t disagree that the Edward/Bella relationship is troubling, using Bella’s reaction to Forks (and have you ever BEEN to Forks? Believe me, you can’t blame her) as an example of her “abuse” is patently ridiculous.
This is one of those patronizing things. I don’t disagree that there are a lot of negative messages out there directed at young women, and this is one of them. But you know what? Unless you’re prepared to only let them read carefully-vetted feminist literature, young women encountering these myths is inevitable. Hell, I think I even went through a phase where I found moody, troubled, angry boys attractive. God knows why.
The better solution is simply, as many here have already said, to discuss these issues with young women and men. To read the books with them and talk about why such relationships are bad. I mean, again, let’s look at Buffy and Angel. I was in my first years of college when that relationship was hitting its steamy peak, and I don’t remember huge outcries of “OMG, young women will think this is normal! Protect the childreeeen!” I also don’t remember such discussion around Mulder and Scully, which is quite possibly the most fucked-up relationship of all time, and had a HUGE teen following. I could go on with examples, but I’ve already written a novel here.
My point is that teenagers are going to be exposed to/interested in negative relationships in everything. Constantly. Maybe especially in the classroom. (I mean, Jesus, The Taming of the Shrew? Romeo & Juliet? Wuthering freaking Heights?) Patronizing them by saying that they can’t distinguish fact from fiction is just about the surest way to further isolate them and leave them unable to discuss such issues with adults.
I hate seeing this kind of hypocrisy at Smart Bitches. How often do we protest against the stereotype that reading romance is “bad” for women? And yet here people are, making that very argument about romances and young women.
In every time, including Jane Austen’s, people have married outside their social class. This is especially true where beauty is involved and/or wit and charm. The richest men in the world have given up thrones for plain women of wit. (Mrs. Simpson, anyone? Camilla Parker-Bowles?) And princes have married beautiful women with tarnished histories (Rita Hayworth and Prince Ali Aga Khan, Grace Kelly and the Prince of Monacco).
Not that Darcy and Elizabeth or her sister and Bingley were in different social classes. The Bennet girls were daughters of a gentleman, not the daughters of a chimney-sweep or even from a prosperous family that was “in trade.” They were perfectly acceptable as wives for these men.