Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight Series (& Poll)
I have not read any of the Twilight Series books. I’ve been sorta dilligently working through an existing pile of books and I just haven’t been that interested. My sisters, though, have been loving it, and so have a very lot of people, it seems. New York Times bestsellers, midnight book buyings, a la J.K. Rowling, and some press.
I have been “following” the press in the sense of, when I see a story, I read it. I like the idea that a young 30-something, LDS, BYU-grad, mother of 3, is making a career for herself out of what seems to be an imaginative idea. Fiction, fun, writing good enough to attract a few million readers (something I, myself, have not yet accomplished). Etc.
But with any successful enterprise–and any creative enterprise, I guess–there’ve been some objectors. I haven’t followed it closely enough to summarize all the pertinent trends or whatever, but I did read Rebecca Walsh’s column on it, Twilight Books Beget Sour Grapes. She talks about how much she likes the books, then goes into some looks at the “backlash” against them and specifically identifies Mormons (well, some, but not those like fellow author Orson Scott Card) and Feminists (well, some, but….) as being either annoyed or outraged by x, y or z in the books.
Well, as far as I know, she didn’t interview any feminist mormon housewives, so I’m curious–have you read the Twilight Books, or any part thereof? Did you like them or not like them? Why?
And, to give respectable numbers to my very scientific research here, please answer the following poll:
found it deeply distressing. on SO many levels. I’ve only blogged about it once because purty much every friggin person I know LOVES the book and I didn’t want them to throw things at me. But the book makes me worry. And the fact that so many girls love it? I find SO disturbing.
Here was a hilarious post about it, though. (I didn’t want to put it on my own blog because there was some mormon trashing in the comments and I didn’t trust some of my readers not to make us look worse! but ya’ll will probably do better. :-))
Comment by Kerry — August 24, 2008 @ 12:16 pm
I have a love-hate relationship with the books. On one level they make me want to throw bricks through windows, and on another level I’m thrilled to be reading a teenage romance story about vampires.
I think ultimately my admiration lies with Stephenie Meyer herself and not in the books. It took guts to write the Twilight series, and I’m glad she did it (regardless of the quality of her prose).
Comment by OpaqueDream — August 24, 2008 @ 12:24 pm
Kerry- That was a hilarious post. It made me think of all the women who have told me they love the books and basically they fall into three groups: Mormon, Catholic, or Born again. The common thread among the three being a strict sense of morality about sex.
I read all four books,mostly because of the whole, “Mormon breaks through the mainstream entertainment” value. The main character is a Molly in disguise! Edward, her love, is the patriarchal prototype but instead of return missionary he’s a return from death vampire, who out of the goodness of his heart only maims and kills animals instead of humans. That ’s a good thing for the main character as her blood calls to him like no other.
The main character (m.c.) agonizes about her choice to stay human or become a vampire. Her eternal life is in question. So many of the stories elements find their origin in Mormon thought and customs. No sex before marriage. Dominant patriarchal male characters. The question of her own purpose plaques the m.c. The angst of the whole book is that Bella (m.c) loves the vampire even though to do so means denying her own humanness.
Eventually she has to make a choice. What does she eventually decide? I won’t say out of respect for those who haven’t read the FOUR books.
What I will say is that the ending struck me as traitorous and the abnormally long foreplay chapter in book 4 made me want to puke. ‘His eyes, his hands, his beautiful body, his verbal skills, the way he walked’….it was worse than one of those Victorian novels that describe the look of a sitting room for five pages.
And for the record…I’ll be going to the movie in November after the lines die down. I’m a sucker for a love story even one that involves vampires and bad choices.
Comment by CC — August 24, 2008 @ 12:59 pm
I don’t see how being a feminist has anything to do with reading this book. Neither does being a mormon. Just because she is LDS doesn’t mean that she has to write an LDS perfect, Molly Mormon, book where she ends up in perfect heaven, and stuff like that. It is strictly fiction and so what if they make out. Like we haven’t seen that on the big screen… LDS or not. Some of the argument is young teenagers reading this…still, like they haven’t seen any of that on the big screen. So I won’t vote because I don’t see how it applies.
I liked the books. They peeked my curiosity and I liked to read anything that can take me away…”Take me away, to a secret place, take me away…take me away” I like books like that.
Comment by Sunshine — August 24, 2008 @ 1:04 pm
Feminism has something to do with it because Bella is such a passive character, willing to give up her life / self / personality (not that she was written with much of one) for the attentions and affections of a boy.
Blech.
I read the first book in ~3 days — which is a pretty good clip for me anymore, so I guess it was a page turner — but it left a really bad aftertaste in my mind. I may or may not read any of the rest. I answered that I’m feminist and Mormon adn didn’t like it, but it would be more accurate to say that I’m indifferent to the series. I think all the hubub over literary junkfood is silly. Good for Stephanie Meyer, I guess, but whatever.
Comment by RCH — August 24, 2008 @ 1:19 pm
I have not read the books. I read books for adults. I also do not read soft-core porn for women. Oops, I mean, romance.
(Don’t be pissed. Just joking here. It has a kernel of truth though, eh? Eh?)
I want to recommend this article which was referenced in this post because these two pages convinced me not to read the books. I almost did just to see what all the hype was about, even though they sound terrible and I have yet to read a single book by an LDS author that was worth the paper it was printed on (except Ender’s Game, of course). I have a great big stack of books to get through also and if even a shred of what Ms. Collins or Mr. Ellsworth say is true, I don’t have room for books like these.
Sue has excellent commentary, too, which also convinced me to avoid giving in to peer pressure.
Comment by Chandelle — August 24, 2008 @ 1:22 pm
Crap…too many links, right? Sorry.
Comment by Chandelle — August 24, 2008 @ 1:22 pm
Overall, I like the series. It’s not great literature, it won’t change the world, and I doubt we’ll even be talking about it ten years from now. But I understand why it’s not some people’s cup of tea. Meyer would have definitely benefitted from some more experience before writing out the rest of the story, just to give her writer’s voice more time to develop. (Most people I’ve talked to felt like the first half of Breaking Dawn was written by someone other than Meyer, and the last half was more in keeping with the tone and voice established in the first three books. I think this is because she was writing The Host, which has a much different voice than the Twilight series, at the same time as Breaking Dawn.)
Here’s the thing- so what if Bella makes her choices because of a boy?? Why is love not a valid reason upon which to base some of our life choices? I absolutely *don’t* get that backlash at all. Look, I don’t particularly like Bella as a character, but I can understand why she makes some of the choices she does.
I think it’s worth pointing out too, that it’s not Bella who has the strict morality about sex- it’s Edward. Edward is a product of his generation- he was a teenager in 1917, before the more “liberal” years of the Jazz Age and them WWII. He’s also the one who wanted to get married, not Bella.
Comment by Jennifer in GA — August 24, 2008 @ 1:33 pm
I thought the book was good for what it was - a teenage romance series.
I’ve noticed some people are upset that she isn’t the best writer, but I don’t think that is what the books are about.
I liked how RCH put it - they are “literary junkfood”. And every now and then I like pigging out on some junk. I liked them.
Comment by amanda — August 24, 2008 @ 1:37 pm
Jennifer, I just read your comments after I posted. I completely agree (especially about the love part)! You explain it much better than I ever could.
Comment by amanda — August 24, 2008 @ 1:40 pm
Just two days ago I gave this opinion on my blog.
Short version: Because I am a Buffy the Vampire Slayer fan I cannot consider liking these books.
Comment by SteveP — August 24, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
i LOVE these books. i have read the first three,(anywhere from 2-4 times)and am working on “The Host”, after this i will restart the series and end it with “Breaking Dawn”.
…BOOKS RULE… -petunia (mfranti’s girl)
Comment by mfranti — August 24, 2008 @ 2:03 pm
I didn’t want to read them, because I’m a little bit of a contrarian, and everyone kept telling me I had to read them.
This summer, I went camping and didn’t bring a book to read- someone had Twilight, so I borrowed it. I agree that they are literary junk food, but I get tired reading grown up books all the time. I’m not sure I’d want my young teenagers (if I had any) reading them, because of the sexual tension. I don’t know though, maybe it’s a bad thing, but I’ve always been able to view books differently than I would if something like that happened in real life.
I don’t think they deserve all the hubub, but I was entertained, and I’m glad a stay at home mom can make some money doing something she enjoys. I might get the movie when it’s available on netflix.
(I did think all the cheesey descriptions of Edward’s physical features were a little much.)
Comment by Alliegator — August 24, 2008 @ 2:23 pm
The first three books in the twilight series were a guilty pleasure for me. I found Stephenie’s characters endearing, and even though Stephenie isn’t the best writer ever, she has the ability to “suck me in” to her stories like few others can. I was always bugged at how anti-feminist the heroine was, but I hoped that she would come into her own in breaking dawn and become a better role model. That didn’t really happen. Not only that, but all of the moral dilemmas and things that were worth thinking about completely dissolved so we could have a perfect, sugar coated happy ending. Barf.
Comment by courtney — August 24, 2008 @ 2:25 pm
I don’t know Courtney- there was a little bit of Bella discovering strengths she didn’t know she had at the end, which was a nice change from the helplessness she exhibits throughout the other books.
Comment by Alliegator — August 24, 2008 @ 2:36 pm
This book is everything that is wrong with teenage girls. It reinforces some terrible ideas that being;
1. You don’t need to really develop yourself as a woman, you just an intelligent, interesting, handsome guy to LOVE you.
2. Getting married at the age of 19 is a GREAT idea, if he really loves you.
3. You can get what ever you want as long as you will it hard enough- the rules don’t apply to you, they apply to everyone else. You’re SPECIAL.
I have a hard time seeing how women consider them feminists love a series of books where the main character- a woman has nothing to offer the world aside from that a man loves her.
Comment by salt h2o — August 24, 2008 @ 2:42 pm
Alliegator, you are right, she did get better. I think I’m having a hard time separating my disappointment in the plot from the positive feminist developments in Bella’s character. Which is unfortunate, because that’s pretty much the point of this post…
Comment by courtney — August 24, 2008 @ 2:52 pm
“I have a hard time seeing how women consider them feminists love a series of books where the main character- a woman has nothing to offer the world aside from that a man loves her.”
Because they are entertaining, and not real.
(I almost hate to be defending them because it’s not like they are the best books in the world- they just are what they are.)
Comment by Alliegator — August 24, 2008 @ 2:57 pm
There was no option for “Meh: feminist and sorta Mormon”. I thought the storytelling was OK. I love it that she’s chasing her dream of being a writer, and coming up with inventive things, but she has some improving to do (also, she needs better editors). But I don’t think she should get so much attention just because she’s Mormon. I can understand how Mormon women love it, thought, with the “erotics of restraint” so prevalent. It’s like porn for Mormons. Or I guess, conservatives.
The books are OK. Bella is a twerp.
Comment by sarah k. — August 24, 2008 @ 3:05 pm
I read the first book and found it to be a page-turner even though I thought Bella was a drama queen. The quality of writing isn’t fantastic, but I think Stephenie Meyer is a gifted story-teller. She’s said it herself– that her writing isn’t the best, but she can tell a story. I think I’ll read the others, just because it’s entertaining, but I definitely am not in with all the hype.
Comment by courtney — August 24, 2008 @ 3:23 pm
One theme I was disturbed by in “Breaking Dawn” was the idea that sex is violent and that if you love someone you do whatever makes them happy. From a feminist prospective, these books are appalling. The main theme seems to be that money, cars, and a hot looking guy make the world go around (cause that’s what we all want, right?).
Meyer totally ripped off three-fourths of her ideas from Joss Whedon.
Comment by Ali — August 24, 2008 @ 3:29 pm
Okay, seriously, Stefanie Meyer’s last book was OVER THE TOP. I did finish it so it was entertaining, but it was really stupid, if you want to know the honest truth. Maybe it is because I never got over how annoying Bella was in the first three books and then she is the best vampire ever created, or maybe it is because she and Edward had nothing to base their relationship on except lust. Plus, everything works out for Bella…annoying. I was just disappointed in the whole thing.
I probably would NOT let my teenage daughter read this book which is sad because the first three were geared for the young adult crowd. There were parts where I was even a little uncomfortable. Is it hypocritical that I still read it, yeah probably, but I guess I am just thinking about the impression a book like this would make.
P.S. All you fans PLEASE don’t hate me! I probably will still go see the movie - yes, I am a BIG hypocrite!
Comment by Sassy Lady — August 24, 2008 @ 3:49 pm
I think being a feminist has a lot to do with it.
Comment by sare — August 24, 2008 @ 3:52 pm
uh oh, we have two courtneys! from now on I’ll call myself courtneyB, author of posts 14 and 17
Comment by courtney — August 24, 2008 @ 4:35 pm
Wow, I just don’t analize books as deeply as others do. I liked them. They were entertaining, easy reads. I didn’t read the story for anything deeper, and I don’t think they were really meant to be anything deeper. I’m a little pickier about my books when I’m trying to grow from reading them. But just for mind numbing entertainment, these books were just fine.
Comment by Tonya — August 24, 2008 @ 4:43 pm
Oh, and SaltH2O, I got married at 19 and it’s been just fine. I get really SICK of people acting like what I did was bad, not feminist, etc. Please remember that we all make our own choices, and as long as the marriage is legal it’s not for you to decide if it’s a good age or not.
Comment by Tonya — August 24, 2008 @ 4:46 pm
I read book 1 when a friend really wanted someone to discuss it with. I read it in 6 hours. I thought it was a young love romance meant for teenage girls. I liked it ok but was surprised how much press it got and the rave that adult women expressed. I kept saying to my friend, “its for teenagers!”
But as a English major, my booklist for this Fall consists of many novels. ALL of which I found in the Young Adult (teen-aged) section of the library. They are classics like “Pride and Prejudice” and “Frankenstien”. I don’t think the Twilight series will ever rank this high as classic material, but wasn’t Harry Potter at the same level of praise and rave as Twilight? Could this be a book fad? And, if it is, good for Stephanie Meyers. I would love to get so lucky(and blessed)!!!
Comment by big mama — August 24, 2008 @ 4:46 pm
Again, sorry. My friend that made me read it, is now in a book club. They, all mormon women, read it and loved it! They are obsessed in my opinion.
I am a realist! Vampires don’t exist, so therefore, I chose to not continue reading the series. I will (also a hypocrite) go to the movie. I love to analyze the differences in movies Vs. books. So far, books always win!!
Comment by big mama — August 24, 2008 @ 4:50 pm
I loved the following quote about the books:
I’m not into teen romance novels, but …
Comment by Stephen M (Ethesis) — August 24, 2008 @ 5:29 pm
I read the first 2 1/2, but frankly, got a little bored. From the Tribune article, it appears that the books are being criticized by all kinds of different people, which I think is often the mark of good books.
Don’t worry Tanya (#26), Salt h2o is just dealing with her own stuff, lol. Everybody thinks the way they view things is proper, and anything different gets slammed.
Comment by adamf — August 24, 2008 @ 5:29 pm
I have no interest in reading it. My fave vampire books are the ones by Christopher Moore.
Comment by Starienite — August 24, 2008 @ 5:48 pm
I read them all. I liked them. They aren’t fabulous works of literature, but they are a good story, with some very interesting ideas and food for thought. We discussed the fourth one (and kind of the whole series) at our book club yesterday, and getting the insight of so many intelligent women made me appreciate the stories even more. They are a bit too much romance and infatuation for my non-teenage self. I think the real contrast for me was finishing Great Expectations and then two days later starting in on Breaking Dawn. But that’s not really fair to Meyer, and I appreciate the books for what they are.
I will say, however, that even if you haven’t wanted to read the Twilight books, you might really like Meyer’s book Host. It might redeem her in your eyes, as the main character(s) of Host are NOTHING like Bella. (Bella is annoying. Edward never appealed to me–too perfect & I’m past the knight in shining armor stage of life . i personally rooted for Jacob.) The writing is much tighter and the story more cohesive. I think Meyer has learned a lot in the past few years. I expect to see even more improved books in her future.
Anyways, I think people reading is good. I think these books are fine, and I don’t understand people who get so bent out of shape about what fiction others choose to read. The neat thing about these books and Harry Potter is that they become a way for people to share a common experience. Usually we only do that anymore with TV shows and movies. Reading is good.
Comment by mindy — August 24, 2008 @ 5:55 pm
I liked the books. They were enjoyable and escapist. I thought that they could have been shorter and the characters talked way too much about feelings, but hey I’m 35 and not 15. I do have a thing for vampire books so they intrigued me that way. I really didn’t worry to much about the feminist angle of the books because I really didn’t pick them up for any deep message.
I do love the idea of kids finding books that make them so excited to read. I loved going to the Harry Potter release parties. I loved the books also, but to watch kids who were 17 or 18 and had grown up reading the series since they were around 10 be wholly into it was cool. I didn’t enjoy reading a whole lot until I found the Trixie Belden series when I was in 7th grade and it changed my relationship with books. I hope that this series does that for some if not alot of those reading them.
My daughter is young. I think I would let her read these books when she is older. Do parents have issue with the romantic angle of the book, ie too romance driven, too much sexual tension etc. Or the feminist angle? Also, the book is about as clean as you can be for teens, in regards to what is described or done. What bothers parents about this? Is it too clean, unrealistic, not showing the issues that teens are dealing with or is it that Bella and Edward actually want an intimate relationship that is upsetting.
Comment by miles — August 24, 2008 @ 6:14 pm
starienite- love Christopher Moore.
Comment by miles — August 24, 2008 @ 6:15 pm
Here is my review off of goodreads dot com
This book has been all the rage in the high school I teach at, and apparently throughout America, so I figured it would be a secret guilty pleasure that I would love and devour in an evening.
After 5 pages I knew I didn’t like the main character and that the writing was trite. But I thought it just had to get better. By page 55, I hated everyone even more and was completely bored and rolled my eyes again and the horrible writing. I just kept looking at the front cover and thought, this is on the best seller list?!!!! I do NOT get it.
I made it to page 175, then skipped to the end and read it and threw the book down again. One of the most poorly written, poorly plotted, poorly constructed books I have ever attempted to read. I am really amazed at how much I just didn’t dig this read
Comment by D'Arcy — August 24, 2008 @ 6:59 pm
I read them for what they were, teen novels. My inner 15 year old enjoyed herself for a day or two. But, my 34 year old self worried about all the “issues” going on for the main character and what it would mean for my own daughter who would read it when she gets older. Goes to show you….I am no longer a teenager. I also discovered I am no longer a good dancer….ah, age…it takes the fun out of life! Good for Mrs. Meyers. There are some people who are a little whacked out by it….dreams, naming their children Edward and Bella, t-shirts, etc….but who am I to judge. If that is what floats their boat. Read it if you want to, but don’t be so judgy of others because they like it. They probably think you are boring with all your uppity pro-woman stuff. To each her own.
Comment by Katie — August 24, 2008 @ 7:05 pm
I also wanted to add that I learned more from the REAL women in my life then any novel I read. So, I would let my 15 year and older read the first three and the last one I would wait for her to be a little older. Just a lot more adult stuff (sex, possible abortion issues, death) then prom and who should I date. Not because I am worried about her following Bella’s example. I hope I can give her a little more credit then that. Plus, we read plenty of other books so I think she has a good perspective of reality and fantasy.
Comment by Katie — August 24, 2008 @ 7:09 pm
Oh, I couldn’t fit into your poll up there. I liked them (to a point); I believe I’m a feminist by your definition; and, I am not Mormon. So, put my vote where you want!
Clarification — I loved the first book, Twilight, and quite honestly, I think they went downhill from there. I didn’t particularly care for the message to young female teens (Sure, not having sex is great, but really, marriage and baby by age 19? Not for my daughters). I thought her writing got worse with each book, especially with the last one. A rushed effort to finish, I suspect. And, (spoiler warning), I really thought that although she set up some great conflicts for the last book, all her suspense was all for naught. Girls gets everything she wants, and everyone’s happy, and no one has to sacrifice anything. If you whine enough, you too maybe can get what you want too.
I do have to say though that I met my one and only LDS friend over the Twilight book, and I consider her a dear dear friend who has brought much to my life. So, in the end, reading 2000 pages of time I wish I could get back… well, it was still worth it.
Comment by Aileen — August 24, 2008 @ 7:10 pm
I want to be a writer when I grow up. But the fact that books like these are so popular makes me worry that no one will ever want to read what I want to write about.
Comment by Tess Prior — August 24, 2008 @ 7:23 pm
Can I just say, I want that on a t-shirt
Comment by Quimby — August 24, 2008 @ 7:29 pm
I like them. They are wish-fulfillment fantasy, and as such, of /course/ they’re silly, of /course/ the protagonist gets everything she wants, etc, etc. I enjoy them, but I’m a little disturbed by how seriously so many people on both the like and dislike sides treat them.
Chandelle-no need to apologize for calling a spade a spade. As soon as I finished reading the first three last year, I started calling them girly porn. I mean, there’s nothing explicit, but it’s all about getting the blood racing and the heart pitter-pattering over first love, which is, when it comes down to it, extended foreplay.
Comment by Firebyrd — August 24, 2008 @ 7:44 pm
Hey, Stephenie Meyer was not around when I was a teenager but I still loved books about brooding, paternal and dangerous men and the women who loved, or were loved, by them:
Jane Eyre (could Rochester be more of a scoundrel? Still, Jane is an amazing character. She was strong and tough so I think she is a good role model for Y.W. But I was just as hooked on Jane Eyre as many of these girls are on Twilight).
Lady Chatterlys Lover (D.H. Lawrence is a bit violent when it comes to sex and the sexual tension was never hidden. Mellors is scary but also Connies saviour.)
Tess of the DUrbervilles (my very favorite book as a teenager-and I learned to hate “goody” hypocrite Angel Clare more than that scoundrel Alec Durberville. And talk about your passive, misguided characters! Poor Tess).
Emma (spoiled, unthinking teenager falls in love with a much older father figure who corrects and tutors her and is somewhat emotionally distant).
Okay, I have also resisted the Twilight tidal wave-not that into vampires or vampire stories-but I do not know if you could find a good, politically correct, tale from much of western literature (or non-western for that matter). The thematic struggle between innocence and experience is very tantalizing- as Blake knew very well.
Comment by A. Nonnie Mouse — August 24, 2008 @ 7:45 pm
I liked the books. Didn’t love them the way some of my friends did, but I enjoyed them enough to read the whole series. I really liked the suspenseful vampire stuff, and really didn’t like the gushy love scenes. “I love you more.” “No, I love YOU more!” “No seriously, you can never imagine how much I love you.” “No, YOU can never imagine how much I love YOU!” and so on and so on. Blech.
As others have mentioned, I find the message to young girls disturbing. That love is an irresistible force that precludes making any rational decisions. That it’s OK (even noble) to sacrifice your personal safety if you *really* love someone. That it’s sweet for a guy to stalk you and watch you while you sleep without your knowledge (because he’s really hot and has chiseled abs!)
If you want to read a well written, fantasy romance/adventure, get Princess Academy by Shannon Hale. (Horrible title, but a really wonderful book.) She presents a much better (more feminist and empowering) model of womanhood in terms of making life decisions and finding love. And she’s LDS too - not that it matters very much what her religion is, but if you know to look for them there are some cool LDS themes in her writing.
Comment by Chelsea — August 24, 2008 @ 8:08 pm
What Mindy said (#32)
Comment by Blue — August 24, 2008 @ 8:12 pm
I’ve read Book of a Thousand Days, by shannon hale- and really enjoyed it. I’ll have to get Princess Academy.
Comment by Alliegator — August 24, 2008 @ 8:27 pm
This is the point upon which my love hate relationship to these books hangs. It is wish fulfillment and as such is very enjoyable to read (love) and it also clearly illustrates what wish fulfillment looks like in our society* (hate).
I’m really torn about whether or not these books help create those desires, or just shamelessly utilize them for maximum effect.
* Just to be clear I don’t think that those desires** are latent in all women everywhere, but rather that society creates many of those desires in us and sometimes it really feels like it would be so much easier to just give in and go along with all of it.
** Desires such as a incredibly handsome, rich loving yet controlling stalker-esque boyfriend, exaggerated vulnerability, attractive boys fighting for your affection etc.
Comment by Starfoxy — August 24, 2008 @ 9:01 pm
I thought the first one was okay. The second two annoyed me terribly because of the whole theme that Hurting Yourself Equals Proof of Love. In fact, I was rooting for Jacob right up until he threatened to kill himself is Bella didn’t kiss him. Just the message you want for your young daughter.
But I have to admit to liking the fourth one. Sure, the ending was super convenient but I am kinda a sucker for happy endings. And the mother in me loved the fact that Meyer had Bella become a powerful mother, rather than just a demure wife.
Comment by tAy — August 24, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
Was I the only one who noticed how much Meyer’s description of Bella’s vampire body was a lot like how we think of resurrected bodies? (aside from the thirst for blood, which wasn’t that important, oddly)
It was very striking to me, actually.
Comment by jessawhy — August 24, 2008 @ 9:36 pm
I enjoyed the books. Fun insomnia treat, but I wouldn’t want my daughter reading them until she had experienced a few relationships.
Comment by susan — August 24, 2008 @ 9:38 pm
#26 Tonya- I knew the 19 year old comment was going to rub someone the wrong way.
I don’t pass judgement on anyone choosing to get married at a young age- everyone has their own path in life.
That being said, considering what the current divorce rate is, and the number of divorcees in my single’s wards around the world- I’d hate to advocate to young girls that the way to make all their dreams come true is to marry an accomplished male in their teen years.
The problem with teenage girls isn’t that they don’t want to fall in love- it’s that they get so focused on LOVE they don’t take time to forge any dreams beyond finding prince charming (or in this case Vampire Charming)
Which is why I hate these books. I’d be fine with Bella if she had some substance and her vampire husband was putting her through med school, or she was fufilling her dreams of becoming an artist- or flat out had a personality- but it’s the idea that a girl has to do no more than want something and be loved by a really hot guy and all of her dreams will come true.
Again, if only adults were reading this- I’d have no issue- but it’s teen age girls that LOVE these novels. Even the Disney Princesses (who all got married at 16) had more substance than this pithy protaganist.
Comment by salt h2o — August 24, 2008 @ 9:46 pm
I didn’t like Twilight. I didn’t really have a feminist or mormon oriented reason not to like the book, I just thought it was dumb, even though I’m a total romantic sap who likes fluff.
I’m embarrassed to admit that I blogged about it here and here, and um, also here.
Yeah. Something is clearly wrong with me. Possibly I’m just insanely jealous of her big pile of money.
Comment by Sue — August 24, 2008 @ 9:58 pm
I think I would have disliked them less if everyone and their brother hadn’t tole me in advance how AMAZINGLY AMAZING the books were. It was probably my high expectations that completely sealed my low opinion of the book.
Comment by Sue — August 24, 2008 @ 10:18 pm
I haven’t read the books, never will. I have never seen Titanic either. Cause I am uppity like that.
Comment by Jo in Utah — August 24, 2008 @ 10:25 pm
I listened to Twilight while I did the laundry which only made both activities slightly more bearable. I wont be reading or listening to the others. These books are just not my thing. But then again, I didn’t like Harry Potter either. I obviously don’t know a thing about making it big as a national bestselling author. What really sent me over the edge was when my ward made Breaking Dawn the book club choice. I wont be going to that either.
Comment by MayorofCrazytown — August 24, 2008 @ 11:22 pm
Jessawhy (#48), I had similar thoughts about how vampire life as Bella and the Cullens lived it was strikingly similar to how we view the afterlife (minus the bloodlust, as you said) — powerful bodies that don’t get sick or age, no need to eat or sleep, lots of time to study and learn different things, not to mention have sex. How very Mormon!
Comment by Pam W. — August 24, 2008 @ 11:25 pm
Haven’t read the comments yet but shall chime in that the protoganist becomes far less annoying in the last book, although there’s some troubling symbolism attending her burgeoning sense of self. Overall assesment: they aren’t the best written books on the planet, but the author’s prose improved over time and they are a fun read.
And, very important: IT DOESN’T RAIN THAT MUCH. I’m from Port Angeles. It’s overcast a lot, but seriously, she exagerrated the rain. And yes, I did grow up believing in werewolves on the rez. Silly me.
Comment by fmhjanet — August 24, 2008 @ 11:30 pm
Oh yeah–a bunch of the kids at the Forks high school had either “Team Edward” or “Team Jacob” written on their car windows.
Did anyone else think that Meyer’s borrowed the resolution between vamps and wolfs from the close of *Wuthering Heights*? I totally thought she did, and thought it worked as well.
Comment by fmhjanet — August 24, 2008 @ 11:32 pm
Totally in agreement with Chandelle and salth2o. I didn’t read the books, but my best friend is crazy about them and told me about them in detail. There are certain things that worry me:
A. Edward tells Bella they can’t have sex because he’s afraid he will kill her. If a boyfriend said that to me, I think I’d stay away from him. Or maybe get a restraining order.
B. When they do have sex, and Bella is a bruised all over and pregnant, Edward immediately tries to arrange an abortion for Bella. Of course, he only does this because he loves her and is concerned for her, blah blah blah, but way to not take into account the woman’s freedom of choice, Edward! Way to show ownership of her uterus!
C. Bella’s father congratulated Jacob when he made sexual advances without her consent.
Of course there is also Bella’s overall passivity and annoyingness, which even fans have mentioned. You can accuse me of “uppity pro-woman stuff” (please do accuse me, it’d be a compliment), but I’m not going to waste my free time with this kind of trash.
Comment by AYW — August 25, 2008 @ 12:01 am
I’ve read them all … enjoyed them … and now I’m getting rid of all of them. I’m feeling more annoyed at the annoying parts (Renesmee? Really?) and less enamored of the thrilling parts, the further I get from the actual experience of reading the books.
But hey, thanks for asking … I’m so glad to read/talk about something that’s not Prop 8!
Comment by Ana — August 25, 2008 @ 12:11 am
Speaking of prop 8, what about the theory that Edward is really Edwina and . . .
Nah, just kidding, just had to throw that in there for you Ana! (Feel free to cyber-kick my butt for it.)
Comment by Quimby — August 25, 2008 @ 12:13 am
I read the first one at the beginning of the summer thinking it would be a fun, guilty-pleasure type book. I had a big fat list of classics I wanted to read this summer too (it’s harder to get pleasure reading in during the school-year) but I figured Twilight would be a quick light read that might be enjoyable and let me indulge in a teenage vampire fantasy world.
Maybe I reacted so strongly because it was built up so much by crazy fangirls (most of which I met at church), but I HATED the first one. I loathed it and it made me uncomfortable that so many people I knew loved it, when I could not find many redeeming qualities.
A friend convinced me to keep reading the series by telling me I went into the first with too-high expectations. She wasn’t a rampant fangirl by any means (she read it mostly because she works at a bookstore and felt compelled to before working their big Breaking Dawn release party), but she said if I had a free weekend I might enjoy it more if I approached it for what it is–a sappy, unrealistic and poorly-written teen romance novel or literary “junk food.” Just something to indulge in.
Using that tactic and speed-reading/skimming through the pages and pages and PAGES of sappy melodramatic prose helped me to get through the second…I am unsure if I will continue. I’ve already heard summaries of the next two novels. but…it’s kind of like staring at a car-wreck. it’s so so terrible and yet I am DRAWN to it. I have to watch it burn…
Honestly, I am only 18 (right in the book’s prime target audience) but I find the popularity of this series to be alarming in so many ways. Not the least of which is that they present teenagers with unrealistic and extremely unhealthy expectations about romantic relationships. I found Bella’s mindset disturbing and severely mentally unstable. I also find the books to be pretty sexist and in some ways anti-feminist. And if people are interested I might outline why I feel that way a little later (probably should head to bed soon tonight).
One of my biggest issues: both Edward and Bella are very flat 2d characters who are defined solely and entirely by their love for one another. This “love” is never satisfactorily developed or explained (it happens suddenly, in a matter of 10 or 20 pages…)
It always sounded more like lust and unhealthy infatuation to me.
This notion was only confirmed, when in the second book Meyers seems to romanticize suicide and implies that “true love” is characterized by such an unhealthy and lacking sense of self-worth and self-preservation that without the other, one literally has no reason to continue living, no worthy contribution to the world, and opts instead to end their life. I think it’s pretty terrible that an author writing a young adult series would ever romanticize, gloss over, or present something as serious as suicide as being “acceptable” or “understandable.”
Comment by Brooke — August 25, 2008 @ 4:10 am
I haven’t read the books. I had never heard of them until bookstores started gearing up for “Breaking Dawn” and that other book—the bodysnatching, adult one. Can’t remember what it’s called. I’m not really interested in reading them. Vampires aren’t my thing.
I was talking about them last week. My friend and I are both aspiring writers and we have started a writers partnership/review group to try and spur each other on. She is a recently outed lesbian and mentioned that she was toying with the idea of setting one of her stories in a gay bar but was afraid to do so because she didn’t want to be labeled as “that lesbian author” or accused of “having an agenda.” I told her I understood how she felt because I’ve had the same struggles with Mormonism in writing. I wrote a collection of stories two years ago and my primary reader kept telling me she wanted more of my voice in them. “Where’s the Mormonism?” she asked. I knew that was part of my voice and can’t be ignored, but I also knew that inserting something like Mormonism (or you could insert a zillion other topics instead of Mormonism) would label my work. I feel sorry for Stephanie Meyer for being haunted by it all, for having her church membership hang over her head and label everything she writes.
On the one hand, I did tell my friend that I gave Meyer kudos for writing something “outside of the Mormon mold.” I can’t really think of any other LDS authors (besides Orson Scott Card) who have written something so mainstream. It seems like every other LDS author I know of (and I could just be out of the loop—I’m not really into following celebrity) writes stuff headed straight for Deseret. So I applaud Meyer for writing stuff that is accessible to everyone—even if her being a member of the church will automatically cause people to judge and/or ignore it.
Comment by Phoenix — August 25, 2008 @ 6:10 am
“uppity pro woman stuff” was meant to be a joke. I also think the analysis is getting a little out of hand, on both sides. I agree that there is much better work out there to read. Someone mentioned Jane Eyre, which I love. Now, there is woman who had a HUGE choice to make and made the right one when she could have easily just said to hell with it. So, like I said. I think there is enough quality books in the world and real life examples that I am not too worried about what Twilight will do to my teen daughter. Also, remember when you were a teen and what you felt like. I would have LOVED to have some guy watch me all night. Now, it totally freaks me out! There are other things out there that I think give worse messages to teens. Anyone check out MTV lately or any other show targeted for teens. Yuck!
Comment by Katie — August 25, 2008 @ 6:15 am
Sunshine…please forgive me…please please please forgive me…I am an old English teacher so you must forgive me…okay?
“…peeked my curiosity…” is really “…piqued my curiosity…”
Thank you thank thank you…it is a compulsion.
Comment by Fran — August 25, 2008 @ 6:25 am
I liked the first three books, but hated the last one. I never thought the books were more than mind numbing escapism. I have to agree with many of the others who have like the books: SM is a great storyteller, but a terrible writer.
My 15 yo and I read the books at about the same time. The best conversation we had about them was about how boys/men in books are different from reality. Teenage girls love Edward or Jacob. Is it much different than women who love Mr. D’Arcy?
Comment by rondell — August 25, 2008 @ 8:01 am
I’m not crazy about the books, but I can see the appeal, especially for teenaged girls.
As for book 4, it sold 1.3 million copies in one day. Stephenie Meyer must be doing something right.
Comment by Joanne — August 25, 2008 @ 8:21 am
#61, Can I adopt you? I think any woman who has any kind of self respect would be proud to have you as a daughter! Go give your mom a high five from me.
Comment by Jo in Utah — August 25, 2008 @ 8:30 am
I read the first one in a day while I was touring London. The fact that it was so ridiculously easy to read was the first thing that made me realize this wasn’t one of those books that had much depth. The real killer, though, was the fact that it was cheesy. So cheesy. Who wants three sentences about how pale and beautiful someone’s skin was and how close his icy fingers were to touching her face? I guess a lot of people. Just not me.
Comment by Michelle Glauser — August 25, 2008 @ 8:30 am
eh… i think the books are cool, there’s so much surrounding them, so much support in the many fansites, this one was the coolest i found http://www.twilightshirts.com
anyways, there is no doubt the movie will be even bigger than the books and i can’t wait to see what happens
Comment by jennifer — August 25, 2008 @ 9:15 am
I enjoyed them as a sort of ‘escapist’ fling (where I try to not pay too much attention to the critical voice chatting in the back of my head).
mostly, I like that a mormon stay at home mother wrote some books that became huge best-sellers.
Mostly what I hate, is that this sort of literary mind-rot becomes huge best-sellers.
I tried to re-read Twilight last month… and was bothered no end by it (I really can’t get over how much I DISLIKE Bella.)
It was really a one-time fling for me.
Comment by G — August 25, 2008 @ 9:48 am
I read a lot of fiction and I have a 12 year old daughter who reads a lot of fiction. She has always read very far ahead of her grade level and started reading young adult fiction when she was 10. I’m not a big believe in censoring books and I was glad when she started reading the Twilight books because I knew the sex and violence in it was nothing compared to some of the books she had read. Also, it made me very happy when she would tell me that Bella was a wimp and needed to do something with her life. You can read these books and still see the characters’ flaws which I think endears them more to the reader. Who wants to read about another perfect hero or heroine?
Stephenie Meyers is a great story teller and fans of fiction will tell you that is all it takes to write a good book that can take you to a different place and point of view.
Comment by Polly — August 25, 2008 @ 9:54 am
Miles,
He has a new book coming out in Febuary titled, Fool. In the same vein as Lamb, a retelling. His next book will be the third vamp book, no title yet but the first paragraph is on his website.
Comment by Starienite — August 25, 2008 @ 9:57 am
alright, so there’s massive quantities of swearing in this link, but it made me laugh so dang hard. (and now I don’t have to read breaking dawn!!) it’s the plot of book four told from Edward’s POV.
http://community.livejournal.com/lion_lamb/1651773.html
Comment by Kerry — August 25, 2008 @ 10:18 am
I don’t enjoy fiction. I avoid fads. I have not read this book.
Comment by 34nearlyA — August 25, 2008 @ 10:30 am
My 13-year-old daughter just started reading the first book (Twilight) yesterday afternoon. At this exact moment, she is on Chapter 26. Her evaluation:
This book is AWESOME!! I could read it over and over again. (and she doesn’t read books multiple times - not even Harry Potter, when she was devouring them.)
Otoh, she doesn’t think I would like it, because, “It’s too girly.”
Comment by Ray — August 25, 2008 @ 10:41 am
Ok, I have to chime in here.
First of all, I read all four books, mostly enjoyed them. Sure, I got tired of reading about Bella because she was clueless,and Edward really got on my nerves with the controlling and overprotective behavior. And, doesn’t it bother anybody else that this 17 year old girl is going out with this 100 and whatever year old. Still, I found the stories exciting, like a roller coaster. I don’t think that she is such a bad writer. I mean, what are we expecting?
Tess Prior - Write what you want. There are all sorts of readers.
And, I really have to say this because the Twilight books reminded me of something that happened when I was in high school. I swear it is true. You can ask her if you don’t believe me. My best friend in high school dated a guy who told her he was a werewolf and said all this stuff about wanting to date her because she was so pure and then he told her that there were “dark” powers trying to get to her at night. She did run away as fast as she could.
Comment by emily dawn — August 25, 2008 @ 10:42 am
I hope I can figure out how to do italics someday.
Comment by emily dawn — August 25, 2008 @ 10:44 am
Kerry … if I’d only had that a few weeks ago … I could have saved a whole lot of time and my family would have felt, like, way less neglected. Dying over here!
Comment by Ana — August 25, 2008 @ 10:46 am
I’ve read all 4. I found the story compelling, the writing not-so-great (tired of reading the descriptions of Edwards skin and chest and kisses), the Eward/Bella relationship completely unhealthy (he is so controlling, so many of the warning signs of physical/emotional abuse). But all of those things I can skim through or overlook myself - I did very much want to “find out what happened.” My teen-age daughters know all my objections and we’ve had some good talks, though it should not take a book to have those talks. I see it as emotional porn - gives a skewed idea of what healthy relationships are based on and how they grow. One of my major objections, and I guess this is nothing you can lay at the door of the author, is the obsession over the books. I know women who don’t read at all, but they have read these books over and over and over, and feel so great about it because she is a Mormon. I don’t much like the notion that something is of worth just because it came from a Mormon - just as wrong as the idea that something is worthless unless it comes from a Mormon. And then there’s the teenage girls who spend all spare time reading the books again and again, or on the websites about the books or the upcoming movie. There are so many other things to do and/or read! And now I’ll get off my soapbox.
Comment by TXgirl — August 25, 2008 @ 10:46 am
My overall reaction was: Meh. I read the first volume and haven’t bothered with any of the other books. Bella was boring. Edward was boring. I got bored. So if you would like to add another qualifier to your poll, my answer is, “Meh: I’m feminist & Mormon.”
Comment by Rechabite — August 25, 2008 @ 10:52 am
That’s funny, I would have said the opposite — she may be a reasonably good story-teller, but the story she’s telling is completely insane.
True, but when it comes to light entertainment, let’s face it — the commentary all over the Internet about Twilight is about a hundred times more entertaining than the book itself.
On that note, thanks to Chandelle at #6 — Sue’s commentary you linked to is the best one I’ve read so far!
Comment by C. L. Hanson — August 25, 2008 @ 11:44 am
It bugs me when people say “you’re making too big a deal of this,” or “over anaylisis,” in conjunction with media. Sure, it could be harmless. Could be. But the messages come across. And I can say that, having read some romances myself, my own schemas about love and relationships, and MEN, too, were formed at least a little bit on the basis of what I read. If I didn’t have a wry, feminist mother to talk to about them I would probably have looked for relationships like the ones i read about, or at least thought there was something wrong with the ones i had, because they weren’t like what I read about.
I don’t see how people can miss the disturbing messages that underlie these books. She may not have meant them, but she wrote them. Whether she meant them or not.
Comment by sare — August 25, 2008 @ 12:05 pm
I hated this series. the writing was terrible and the story was unoriginal. Kept reminding me of a combination of bad movies I’d seen recently. Even for a young adult reader, I’d point them in the direction of Anne Rice for a vampire fix.
Props to Meyer for making buco bucks from her work. Wish I could.
Comment by icer — August 25, 2008 @ 12:17 pm
starienite- I often wonder what my life would sound like if it was narrated by abby normal.
fhmjanet- in the some of the books they quote parts of Wurthering Heights and I think Romeo and Juliet (I am to lazy to go check). I think the story lines in the books definitely mirror the books she quotes. I thought that was actually part of the point, kind of like Clueless was a modern adaptation of Emma. Not a true adaptation, but taking classic story lines and adding fantasy and modern elements. I hoped this would bring some to actually look to the classics to see where the inspiration for the story lines came from.
A. nonnie mouse- I love the descriptions.
Comment by miles — August 25, 2008 @ 12:19 pm
[…] (hat tip to Conscious Intention for those two links, via Feminist Mormon Housewives which is discussing Twilight/Mormonism right […]
Pingback by What About Mom » Blog Archive » Eat, Drink, Vampire, Bella: a Review of The Twilight Saga by Stephenie Meyer — August 25, 2008 @ 12:21 pm
oh- i forgot to add that my 7 yr daughter finished book 1 in just 2 days. She never got into harry potter b/c she’d seen teh movies (not interested when she knows whats happening next), but at least this helped her get into reading real ‘chapter’ books.
Comment by icer — August 25, 2008 @ 12:24 pm
Well, color me shallow but I’ve stayed away from them mostly because of the raving mob that surrounds them. You know, the ones who name their children after main characters (like the parents with the four-year-old Anakin and 18 month old Leia in the store the other night). Whenever something becomes this big I shy away from it.
Then, as news of the books has grown and as I’ve heard reviews from (mostly single LDS) friends and family it’s made the distast grown in my mouth. Possibly, in ten years, when the hype has long died down and there is a new ‘it’ series I’ll notice them on a shelf and pick them up. Probably not though…
Comment by Shelly — August 25, 2008 @ 12:28 pm
miles — well, maybe that’s why I liked the end of the series in its avoidance of the usual violent fight and with its resolution of the Jacob dilemma. I loathe most of *Wuthering Heights* because true love is not exemplified by bashing one’s head against a tree, and Cathy’ and Heathcliffe’s relationship is as deeply unhealthy as is Bella and Edward’s for much of the series. But the end of WH really works. As does, to a degree, the end of SM’s books. I certainly appreciated her refusal to have it end in a war, even if her misleadings in that direction veered into territory I would’ve called her on as an editor. There’s authorial misdirection, and then there’s thoroughly mis-labeling something as a preface when it is, in fact, not anything of the sort.
So yeah, there’s some good stuff in the series and it is entertaining (the wolfies were cool). But there’s deeply troubling stuff as well, namely a relationship which is marked, at the start, for it’s potential towards violence.
But everybody covered that. here’s what peeved me most, if we’re going to have a peeved list: why is it that the vampire father figure, Carlisle, has used his immortality to accrue oodles of knowledge and life-saving skills and become this phenomenal person, whereas the mother vampire figure has used hers to no apparent ends at all. She doesn’t do volunteer work. She doesn’t play the piano like Edward. She doesn’t appear to read. She doesn’t spend her time mothering, so the title holds little meaning–her “kids” are centuries old and whatnot. Nor has she even become Martha Steward immortal–that’s Alice (a female character I quite like). All she does is hover about looking pretty and concerned. It’s almost as thought Stephanie Meyer can configure no thought of what a married woman might do with immortality besides become a figurehead—because that’s all the mom figure is. She doesn’t DO anything, maternal or otherwise. Very annoying. And, of course, Bella’s becoming a vampire only becomes OK because she sacrifices her life to become a mother. That annoyed me less than it might’ve, really, because she showed some character in the process and because her kid requires mothering. Poor Esme, she has no real purpose but to look pretty and give me an old-fashioned name to consider bestowing on a kid. It’s kinda pretty (and no, I wouldn’t be naming a child *after* the character).
Comment by Janet — August 25, 2008 @ 12:42 pm
I only read the first, and was bored. However the reviews of the fourth truly bothered me. Bruised and broken headboards and torn lingerie after sex? And then begging for more? I know they were married. I know Edward was powerful and could not control himself. I do not care. I have sat in my desk listening to men sob because they felt horrible after beating up their wives. I have seen women countless times forgive their husbands because “he couldn’t help it. I made him mad!” No good, no good. I am a very liberal person in what I read, but this is not okay by my book. I would not want my daughter thinking that this was okay, vampire or not.
Comment by Maren — August 25, 2008 @ 3:14 pm
You ladies are hilarious!
I loved the random grammar correction. Please please please correct my errors anytime
I am ssoooooooooo happy for Stephenie. Rock on. Don’t care one iota if she’s no Shakespeare. I don’t think her books are for youngish kids but I don’t think Harry Potter is either.
I am ssooooooooooo grossed out at the adult women who are obsessed with the series. It’s over the top. Get a life!!
I read the first two and, frankly, haven’t thought about the new ones much.
I’m glad for her and think that she has skillz. Should her work be reviewed critically? Absolutely. Should everything she writes be completely dissected? I don’t think so. Would I rather hear about her books than a great majority of pulp fiction? Sure.
Comment by Lupita — August 25, 2008 @ 3:26 pm
I forgot to mention that I know a lot of girls in our ward and neighborhood who have never read outside of books assigned for school, but the Twilight series has caused them to not only read Twilight books, but other books as well.
How can anything that makes people want to read more books be so bad?
Comment by Polly — August 25, 2008 @ 3:37 pm
I am so-o-o-o-o-o tired of the comment that any book phenomenon is worthwhile “if it gets kids reading”. It DOES SO matter what kids are reading. If kids are reading “literary junkfood” isn’t it essentially the written equivalent of television? Just because it’s typed doesn’t make it any more of a worthy pasttime. Yes, we need ways to “fuzz out” from time to time, but if all kids are reading is Harry Potter, the Twilight series, and books similar to these two series, this is a problem, not a solution.
Just a comment on the sidetrack of being married at 19…I married at 19. It’s going great. I still wouldn’t recommend it and I really hope my own children don’t do it. I consider my so-far successful marriage a fluke.
Comment by Chandelle — August 25, 2008 @ 4:40 pm
Katie, I figured “uppity pro-women’s stuff” was meant to be a joke, I just thought it was hilarous!
Comment by Quimby — August 25, 2008 @ 4:50 pm
hmmmm….
my kid (she commented on this thread too-proud mama) only reads stuff like that. on occasion she’s read other books, but she likes to read fiction. she likes the fantasy. she gets so into it.
and you know, it’s helped her so much in her writing, comprehension and spelling. hell, she hast better grammar than i do. she just gets so much out of reading that i can’t justify badmouthing any of the popular series’ because it’s opened a door to lifelong reading
so….you may not want your kid reading literary junkfood but i think it IS does get kids reading.
Comment by mfranti — August 25, 2008 @ 4:56 pm
nu uh. they have to use their imagination while reading. they have to pay attention to the words and descriptions. the carefully placed commas and periods.
they have to be involved in the words on the page. that’s what is great about books.
tv is passive, reading is not.
Comment by mfranti — August 25, 2008 @ 4:59 pm
oh hell….i got sucked into this discussion..
DAMN!!@!!!!
Comment by mfranti — August 25, 2008 @ 4:59 pm
Okay, I’m not the slightest bit interested in reading the Twilight books. I tend to be rather disappointed by Mormon authors (and absolutely refuse to touch any of the dreck that passes for “Mormon Literature”–get thee behind me, Gerald Lund!).
I was somewhat amused to learn about this series shortly after a co-worker had told me about the extremely explicit and trashy-sounding novels of Laurel Hamilton. Is the Twilight series Meyers’ attempt at a Cleanflix Anita Blake?
Glancing through these comments raises some broader questions in my mind. How should we deal with sexuality in literature? Is any reference to sex or the sexual desires of characters purient? Does the fact that a story acknowledges the fact that a female protagonist has a libido make it “soft-core p*rn”? Can we acknowledge the fact that sex is a big part of the human experience without “chasing away the spirit,” or should all romantic interactions in literature be about hugs, kisses, and the promise of an eternal family?
Then factor in the feminist angle. Is it antithetical to feminism to portray a female protagonist who enjoys, ah…robust sex (referring to the comment 89)? Can women have such a preference, or is that merely the cultural indoctrination of a patriarchy, and are such representations in literature merely part of that indoctrination? Should good feminist literature only have characters who enjoy gentle and tender love?
Comment by Derek — August 25, 2008 @ 5:00 pm
#90 Lupita
I agree wholeheartedly. I have no desire to jump on the Twilight bandwagon.
I recently read a trilogy written by Lois Lowry. The Giver, Gathering Blue and Messenger. Excellent thought-provoking books well worth reading, IMHO.
Comment by Kalola — August 25, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
re: 95
And the carefully chosen capital letters, M?
Comment by Derek — August 25, 2008 @ 5:03 pm
i should have added that petunia had to create/write a book as part of a school service project to read to elementary kids and her book was one of the most thoughtful, imaginative and creative books in the class.
i am positive it had to do with her years of reading “junk”
that’s all.
y’all can continue your very thoughtful discussion
Comment by mfranti — August 25, 2008 @ 5:06 pm
#92 Chandelle
I also married at 19. DH and I celebrated our 36th anniversary in June. Our secret … we make each other laugh. :O)
Comment by Kalola — August 25, 2008 @ 5:07 pm
hey? i’m a lazy typist, i admit.
when do i ever use caps?
only when i have to. i don’t have to here.
Comment by mfranti — August 25, 2008 @ 5:07 pm
m, I don’t have any arguments back at you. I just disagree that a) all books are worth reading, and b) even trashy “literature” helps kids be creative and literate, and therefore if all kids will read is trash, it’s worth promoting and supporting.
Derek, I agree - this is a hard subject. I remember beig very frustrated in the church because I felt that the pressure to avoid p*rn had much more to do with lust and sex than with the objectification of women, the rape culture of exploitation and commodification of women’s bodies, and the specific shaping of sexuality by p*rn. I agree, sex should be in books in realistic ways. It’s okay to have sex in books; it might even be a feminist proclamation to include a couple with an egalitarian sexual relationship. But there’s a difference between authentic sexuality and p*rnography. It doesn’t sound to me like sex is displayed in realistic ways in this series. Bella wants to have sex even though it will kill her? The first time she has sex, she ends up bruised and beaten? That doesn’t sound like “rough sex,” the stuff all of us enjoy from time to time. That sounds like a fetish, a disturbing and weird one for a Mormon writer to be promoting. Does Bella ever have average sex, bad sex, gentle sex, loving sex, slow sex, quickie sex, or is it just painful, bruising sex that might even kill her? Yuck.
Comment by Chandelle — August 25, 2008 @ 5:22 pm
I’m way, way late to this one, but…
I only want people to be consistent. If you hate porn for objectifying women and creating unrealistic physical and interpersonal fantasies in the minds of men, then don’t pretend the same thing isn’t going on in Twilight and a number of other books and movies.
I have no problem with Stephenie Meyer writing the books she wrote; I imagine my daughter will read them and that may lead to some important conversations about what real life is like, what real people are like, and how Bella is not what a whole, healthy, mature, stable woman sounds like.
It’s just strange that books that cause sexual arousal for women are held up as a Mormon success story. Would those same women feel okay if they noticed their husbands being sexually aroused by a book?
I agree with Gail Collins, that it’s ironic that a generation of boys raised on unrealistic ideas of women (perfectly-figured, airbrushed, always-horny women in pornography) are now going to be having relationships with girls who developed their concept of ideal manhood around the endlessly charming, sensitive, doting, protective, powerful, wealthy, and physically perfect male specimens in Twilight.
“But Dan, Edward isn’t perfect- he has a major weakness, and it’s Bella!” Right, like when John Edwards was asked in the Democratic primaries what is his greatest weakness. His response: “I just care too much.” Gag.
Comment by Dan Ellsworth — August 25, 2008 @ 6:12 pm
Dear mfranti,
Would it be possible to not use all the four letter words when you post? I’ve made a fun game out of it by switching to things like “My stars!” “Good gravy!” or “Gee whiz willakers!” and the kids love it.
Comment by sharbear — August 25, 2008 @ 7:12 pm
#98—Whoa, The Giver is a trilogy?! I did not know that! I remember reading Number the Stars and The Giver back in the day, but I didn’t know there were any sequels. I’m going to have to check that out.
And before anyone points it out, yes, I know that Number the Stars and The Giver are separate stories…I was just thinking of other Lois Lowry books that I knew. =)
Comment by Phoenix — August 25, 2008 @ 7:53 pm
Re: 105
actually, this (if only tangentally) brings up a superbig pet peeve of mine (one that actually applies to Twilight!): the tendency to equate the lack or presence of things like sex and swearing to the inherent morality or immorality of something.
people say Twilight is “moral” because there’s no sex. (until they’re married.) but I think that limiting our definitions of morality to checklists of what may be superfluous and/or inconsequential details like the presence or absence of “four letter words” blinds us to the true immorality/morality of things: the way they actually change our *thought.* (that’s what the greek word for repentence means: change the way you think.)
and that’s why Twilight disturbs me so much. people cling to it, like, “look! it’s a moral book!” and totally overlook the objectification, violence, subjugation, and generally upsetting undertones.
so my vote: swear away mfranti.
Comment by Isis — August 25, 2008 @ 8:13 pm
Hmm. How far to school our youth in courtship and then sex is a fine line. Obviously it varies by age, but I think we could do a better job. I was very naive when I was young. You will love this. I attended Ricks college and was SHOCKED! when I found BOYS using our laundry room at our all girls apartment complex. Oh, the horror! I called my landlord and promptly told them what was going on. I think I heard a chuckle on the other end. Yes, I had a lot to learn. At least I can laugh about it right? Point is, I grew up and thankfully did not get married young. I just needed to figure things out a little more. Actually, all the “bad” stuff I saw (prostitution, gay love triangle, drinking, drugs) was at Ricks. Things were much more tame for me when I went to USU, go figure. I am so glad I have a husband that can communicate with me about our sex life. I know some women where this is not the case and it is sad. Yeah, I was disturbed by Book 4’s somewhat bizarre and graphic takes on sex. Especially first time sex. She was just so lost in her post coital bliss that she didn’t “feel” anything negative? Didn’t buy it. Also, all the headboard biting and pillow feathers was weird too. But, the story is weird. Makes me wonder about Mrs. Meyers sex life?….maybe I don’t want to know. Uncomfortable….
Comment by Katie — August 25, 2008 @ 8:26 pm
I don’t think I’d call the twilight books trash. I also probably wouldn’t want my twelve-year-old reading them. They’re fluff. And if fluff gets people reading who otherwise would be watching TV, then I’m all for fluff.
It’s like how I didn’t like mushrooms when I was a kid, then as a teen I tasted some really fattening stuffed mushrooms that were REALLY good. Now I enjoy mushrooms.
The fluff books are a stepping stone to less fluffy reading material.
And, I have to point out, that while Bella does come out of the first “encounter” bruised, she didn’t notice that she was bruised until Edward saw and told her, so obviously she wasn’t in too much pain during the event.
Comment by Alliegator — August 25, 2008 @ 8:36 pm
I should have said fluff with plenty of sexual tension- which is why I think housewives like them so much.
Comment by Alliegator — August 25, 2008 @ 8:38 pm
not quite sure how to handle this. sorry. i don’t mean to offend anyone but it’s who i am.
i use words like hell, damn and shit all the time. why? because heck, darn, and shoot mean exactly the same thing.
why try to hide it? when i try, my dear sweet husband reminds me to stop being an ass….and use the real word!
so again. i’m sorry you don’t like my use of four letter words (really, i’m being totally honest) but my use of them is true to my personality. 8 years in the lds church and i haven’t been able to fake my way through it.
Comment by mfranti — August 25, 2008 @ 8:38 pm
My vote: “eh.”
I read the first one. Yes, it’s fluff. It would be one of those ‘have a conversation’ books when Woodstock is older, if she reads it. My mom did that a lot - and honestly, the conversation led me to look at things with a different eye, to form an opinion, back it up and consider other angles.
Wasn’t terribly interested in the subject matter (I much prefer historical fiction, etc.), but … I don’t think it’s the worst thing on earth - I think it opens the door to wonderful conversations.
That said, I’m not reading the rest of the series, most likely. I have too many other things I want to read.
Comment by Sara — August 25, 2008 @ 9:27 pm
I read one Stephanie Meyers’ book to find out what all the whoopla was about, ‘The Host’, supposedly more for adults, as I am far to old for the Twilight books. it was imaginative to be sure. It was fun summer reading, but Stephanie won’t be winning any literary awards. I did have a problem with her lead character, though. She was the heroine, but was so amazingly passive and compliant, and was admired and loved because of her pasivity and over- the- top self sacrifice! ICK! The powerful women characters were the bad guys. It felt very Molly Mormonish.
Comment by Wendy — August 25, 2008 @ 9:35 pm
Derek (97) — good topics for a series of posts. But Meyer’s series isn’t the mature look at human sexuality your questions look towards–seeing as how it isn’t really *human* sexuality the books concern at all, but rather superhuman sexuality, about as realistic as a Harlequin.
Wendy– I agree, a lot of Molly baggage became apparent. On the other hand, I did enjoy that Bella became the most powerful figure in the entire series because she could prevent war rather than wage it. It may play off the “women are peacemakers” stereotype, but you know what? That’s not a terrible stereotype to embody, so long as you don’t forget about justice in the process. I had plenty of issues with Bella (Alice was much, much more interesting) but she did have a better power than everyone else there at the end. Too bad the books were so unevenly written . . . although hey, not horrid for a first go at fiction. Not exactly Harper Lee, but the mythology was actually rather well put together despite the myriad other problems.
Comment by Janet — August 25, 2008 @ 10:36 pm
re: 114
Just to clarify, I wasn’t suggesting that the Twilight series was a mature look at sexuality. I was just using the fact that many of the comments referred to the sexuality in the Twilight series as a springboard for a broader conversation on sexuality in literature. If that is too much of a threadjack, I would love to see someone address the ideas in a post.
While I’m potentially threadjacking, I’d like to pose a question about another different fantasy series. I recently read the Chaos series by John C. Wright (Orphans of Chaos, etc). The series is rather innovative, and I like Wright’s prose style. The viewpoint character is an assertive teen girl, in most ways an admirable protagonist. But I was a bit disturbed by the sexual subtext of the story. The story is overtly very chaste, with nothing more physical than kissing. But when this character ends up wrestling with a very obnoxious male character, she is quickly overpowered, and finds herself very much aroused by the fact that she is completely at his mercy. Later, she is forcefully kissed against her will by another character, and she practically swoons after the initial resistance. Not to mention the fact that both the primary character and the other main female character are (discretely) described as very voluptuous, and are willing to use their physical attributes to their advantage. I found these subtle sexual cues to be very bothersome. Am I being silly, or is this another example of the sort of negative modeling?
(perhaps ironically, I’ve since discovered that Wright is a very conservative Christian author. Go figure).
Comment by Derek — August 25, 2008 @ 11:06 pm
RE
Would it be possible to not use all the four letter words when you post?
LOL
Dear mfranti, have you ever used all of the four-letter words when you’ve posted? Cuz if so, I’ve totally missed it! Now, that would be a literary masterpiece.
Comment by Lupita — August 25, 2008 @ 11:39 pm
#107 Very well said, Isis.
Comment by Lupita — August 25, 2008 @ 11:41 pm
Just for fun, I wrote up a post using all the 4 letter words I could think of.
But I decided I’d better not post it . . .
Comment by Quimby — August 25, 2008 @ 11:44 pm
ywanna see?
quimby, should i post the masterpiece?
Comment by mfranti — August 25, 2008 @ 11:46 pm
And ruin my reputation as a good girl who never swears?!?!
I mean, isn’t that how everyone sees me now?
Comment by Quimby — August 25, 2008 @ 11:48 pm
well hunny, since lisa lowered the bar and allowed mfranti to join fmh, it’s obvious that the coveted positon of most hated fmh’er is now mine.
perhaps when i leave, you can reclaim your throne.
Comment by mfranti — August 25, 2008 @ 11:54 pm
Those were so not four letters. Better luck next time
Comment by Lupita — August 26, 2008 @ 12:05 am
quimby
ALL the four letter words? Like a paragraph of just words with four letters, or do you mean all the four letter words of earthy anglosaxon origin? I’d like to see a paragraph of just words made up of four letters. Might be an entertaining exercize. (the other would have a tough time making it through the filter, I would think… but then, mfranti’s on your side so you might luck out)
Comment by sare — August 26, 2008 @ 12:15 am
sare, you missed our attempt to use all the naughty words. i just deleted it.
Comment by mfranti — August 26, 2008 @ 12:17 am
Er, no, I used all the dirty words I could think of. Mfranti posted it briefly and then removed it. Lupita saw it though and said I didn’t try hard enough so I guess my potty-mouth isn’t quite as bad as I think it is. Hmmmm, is that a worthwhile goal to add to my Pursuit of Excellence?
Comment by Quimby — August 26, 2008 @ 12:17 am
Three cheers for trying!
And for pursuing worthy pursuits!
Comment by Lupita — August 26, 2008 @ 12:28 am
Derek — No worries, I didn’t think you were suggesting we use Twilight as the paragon of sexual modeling
. And I promise to address the issue of how literature/art might deal with sexuality without being purely sensational and silly about it. It’s a pet argument of mine, as a (former) literature teacher: how can anyone sanely argue for art serving as a means of revealing/investigating human nature if we elide such a major component of the human experience? I mean, even celibates still have sex drives. To pretend otherwise is, of course, to demean their sacrifice (she says, having had way too many priests and nuns as students in her classes at a Jesuit university).True, asexual people exist. But I think they’re pretty rare. I don’t think we should get all irritating and make pretend art holds as a primary purposes the pedagogy of sexuality, because, well, ugh. Anytime we try and turn art into pure pedagogy, we run amiss. Art doesn’t match the sofa, so to speak. Or necessarily the youth lesson manual. I do think the question merits considerable other posts beyond this one. You might read Levi Petersen’s comments on the subject. In part, he argues that we will never have great “Mormon literature” if we keep omitting sexuality from our writing. Perhaps that’s why–at least in part–those LDS authors who do not are the ones who “cross over” into mainstream lit. Hmm. Levi certainly never shies from the subject! Nor, for that matter, do deeply religious authors like Flannery O’Connor. And her use of it frequently disturbs me far more than does Stephanie Meyers’ . . . but hers is better, though weirder. I think I sound stupidly pretentious so I’ll shut up now, but yeah, you’ve got a great topic! You could always submit a guest post 
.
As for swearing, since when do the (ahem, being delicate) “d” and “h” words get lumped in with the other expletives? I truly dislike the “f” word and a few others, but even my exceedingly proper parents use the “d” and “h” bombs, and my father, who uses the elongated form of “BS” defends his rhetorical choice with the following: “well, they do.”
Comment by Janet — August 26, 2008 @ 1:22 am
Hi all- I would like to withdraw the “all” word in my post. It’s a very button pushing statement, ie; “You always do…or you never do..” So, I do see why you all jumped on that correctly. :-). I’m just confused why these same words are censored on sites such as CNN News and other national blogs and not on a site where I hoped to dive into “appropiate dialog on the high road.” Which for the most part it holds up to that standard.
I also don’t mean to go off topic, but the use of the words did throw me off topic. IMHO I think it’s just classy not to use them. (RE: 105).
Comment by sharbear — August 26, 2008 @ 6:03 am
OK, I will contribute to the threadjack.
If anyone is interested, I wrote the following when the same topic came up elsewhere:
“Swearing and Cursing“
Comment by Ray — August 26, 2008 @ 6:38 am
Back to topic — I second Janet’s assertion that it doesn’t rain that much. I too grew up in Port Angeles (I’m the same age as the heroine is meant to be, I think, though I haven’t cross-checked publication dates, but one of the restaurants mentioned in the first book moved when I was 18, so I think the first book is set when I was in high school). I read this book on the way back from my ten-year high school reunion, and my throbbing sunburn (and hour and a half at the county fair riding scary rides with my 9 yo nephew. Who would have thought?) said that there was a certain amount of sun. I admit that Forks is rainier than Port Angeles, but it’s not THAT rainy. There’s rain almost every day, but there are rarely if ever thunderstorms (so not actually conducive to vampire baseball).
Comment by Beth — August 26, 2008 @ 7:22 am
re: 127
A great description of the problem as I see it. Trying to completely ignore such a crucial aspect of humanity really neuters (no pun intended) our literature. And works like that of John Wright and apparently of Meyers seem to be fairly superficial solutions. They may conform to the letter of the law by not having unmarried people have sex, but their seemingly unhealthy attitudes towards spirituality don’t seem to fit the spirit of the law.
As to swearing, I’m with the swearers. That also appears to be a letter of the law issue: if using a word as an expletive is wrong, it should be just as wrong to use a substitute word, whether the word merely changes a few letters or is a complete fabrication. I mean, if I say Gee Wilikers, how does that differ from how I might use any number of original expletives?
And don’t even get me started on the linguistic silliness of our categorization of swear words (why is “intercourse” proper, while a certain f-word is vulgar and indecent? They mean the exact same thing. Are Romance languages and terms somehow morally superior to Germanic ones?)
Comment by Derek — August 26, 2008 @ 7:29 am
I was tricked into reading these books over the summer and got hooked. Horribly, heroine-level addicted. Enjoyed them as a guilty pleasure (more than once!) and will be first in line for the movie.
The characters are a bit obnoxious sometimes, but they generally make up for it. They were a great read for the summer between semesters of a phd program. I needed fiction and escape, bad!!
PS - The Host (Meyers’ adult book) is a fun read as well. Looking forward to the sequel.
Comment by Eris — August 26, 2008 @ 7:30 am
Oh, and I thought of submitting a guest post, but I wonder if I might be reaching the upper limit on guest posts for someone who does not genetically qualify as a “housewife”
Seriously, as a man, I would feel uncomfortable initiating a conversation on a sexual topic on a blog primarily for women. I would feel nervous that it would be perceived in a poor light by the women (”another typical man with only one thing on his mind!”) and would be afraid of not being sufficiently sensitive to the feminine aspects of sexuality. I would more be willing to participate as a commentor.
Comment by Derek — August 26, 2008 @ 7:38 am
The book(s) reviewed, Twilight Series are not (IMO) anything I would read with regards to proper “filtering behaviors”. I simply don’t want junk like that in my head. Secondly, in archiving “Balancing Art and LDS Standards”, Aug.1,2007- I noted some flip-floping by Mfrant (#28) “Get off my back. I already apologized for my poor use of words in that sentence”.
Also note Lupita (#14) “I usually attempt to avoid anything audio or visual that, to me personally, openly offends the Spirit or is just lacking in artistic value”. My point being, those of us who come to this site for uplifting mentorship, I have been dissapointed by Iris saying “swear away” and lazy typing etc. It’s easy to take the path of least resistance. Maybe I am not a match for this site on some views, but I do wish to compliment those that have had positive and uplifting posts. Best regards, S
Comment by sharbear — August 26, 2008 @ 7:46 am
Damn, I missed a good discussion…not to downplay what 131-134 said, but I could have gotten in good with mfranti and quimby… I have a book full of four letter words
Comment by Sunshine — August 26, 2008 @ 7:53 am
Sharbear, I’m a bit confused. After lumping me together with that obviously flip-flop wearing mfranti, you assign me a random number (#14). If that was to refer to my standing in the Games so far out of the medal stand that no one even knows my name, I’m gratified that at least someone noticed.
I do usually attempt to avoid anything audio or visual that, to me personally, openly offends the Spirit or is just lacking in artistic value. I am not offended by Stephenie’s books in the least.
As far as uplifting mentorship goes, I think that you bring up an interesting point regarding what this site is and can be for people. If you can’t see past the hells and damns, then, unfortunately, you’ll miss out on a lot. I personally find a lot of humor in words. I am happy for you that you are finding something uplifting here.
I am not happy that I have to be awake right now.
Comment by Lupita — August 26, 2008 @ 8:20 am
Ray, I enjoyed your post.
Especially all of the disclaimers
Comment by Lupita — August 26, 2008 @ 8:25 am
Why is it alright to refuse to read the books because she is Mormon? I wouldn’t read them because she is Mormon any more than I would refuse to read them for that reason.
I also have a hard time knowing how to respond to people who comment on what the books are saying who haven’t read the books.
Comment by just me — August 26, 2008 @ 8:59 am
so i’m low class, low brow and a flip flopper. anyone want to go ahead and call me ignorant, uneducated and totally not worthy to be in your presence?
why is everyone picking on me?
Comment by mfranti — August 26, 2008 @ 9:11 am
sharbear–I can understand taking offense at swearing. I’m not a fan (though I don’t count the h and d words), but expecting perfect typing on a blog will simply lead to heartbreak. Posts ought to be proofread, and I say that as a frequent posting offender (can’t spell) but comments? Well, that’s like expecting perfect grammar in oral conversation. If you’ve ever seen a transcript of oral conversation, you know how rare perfect grammar is.
Like Lupita, I see potential for an interesting conversation regarding the relativity of “uplifting” conversation. I find discussions of art necessary for a meaningful life, and inevitably one winds up reviewing some mediocre material against which to measure the great stuff. Additionally, one realizes that mediocrity has a place. Airplane reading, for instance :). But what uplifts one person might simply bore an equally spiritual other person. There’s no platonic ideal for inspiration. Except possibly Mozart. So I recommend sticking around for conversations which interest you and simply ignoring the rest–it’s the only way to stay sane and follow a blog anyhow!
Comment by Janet — August 26, 2008 @ 9:16 am
mfranti, everybody requires a good pair of flip flops or they risk a truly low brow condition: stinky summer feet!
Comment by Janet — August 26, 2008 @ 9:32 am
janet,
not helping.
Comment by mfranti — August 26, 2008 @ 9:38 am
I hope my teasing of M did not incite the “lazy typing” comment. If so, I apologize. I was only making a silly joke.
M, I love that you feel honest enough to use the language that feels comfortable and truthful to you, rather than making silly word changes just for the sake of convention.
Comment by Derek — August 26, 2008 @ 10:08 am
Janet & Beth, PLEASE do not tell me that “it’s not really that rainy.” It being “that rainy” is exactly why I want to live there!
mfranti, I agree. Swear words are all about intention. Switching around a few letters don’t change the intention. And the “real” swear words carry so much more punctuation. That’s why I use them.
Derek, you should definitely do a post about sex in literature. I’ve been rereading one of my favorite novels and there’s a pretty hot sex scene at one point. It’s short, just a couple of paragraphs, but it got me thinking back to this conversation and asking myself, “Why am I okay reading this but I sneer at the described sexuality of the Twilight series or mainstream p*rn in general?” I think part of it has to do with the context of the scene, i.e. two people who really care about each other and who are obtaining mutual pleasure without objectification of the woman. Then again, the woman is cheating on her husband in this particular scene. That should make it very problematic, but it doesn’t, when I’m reading it. It’s confusing all right. I am generally completely fine with sex in books and even in some movies, and I find sex in art generally fabulous; it’s the context of it that might bother me. But I’d have a hard time defining that context it. I guess I just “know it when I see (read) it.”
just me, I think I’m the only one who commented on the Mormonness of the writer. I wouldn’t avoid the book just because she’s Mormon, but it might contribute to my hesitation. As I said, I have yet to read a book by a Mormon writer that I enjoyed or found impressive. It’s not that much different from someone saying that they’ve disliked any book recommended by Oprah so they’re not inclined to read anything she mentions.
You are completely within your rights to blow off the assessments of those (like me) who haven’t actually read the book. Blow away.
Comment by Chandelle — August 26, 2008 @ 10:18 am
Derek- I really liked your questions and the comments on sexuality. I am in the belief if you write fiction for teens or adults and don’t include some sexual something (tension, kissing, etc.) you are denying a huge part of them.
About the Chaos series. I haven’t read it, but the experiences you mentioned are interesting. Here is one thought arousal does not constitute consent. Arousal can happen even if the contact is not desired and one wishes it would stop. Ones body and mind always aren’t on the same wave length.
Another questions keeps coming up about the quality of Bella’s sex life. Is it realistic, no, plus half the time superhuman so of course its not realistic. Though, she seems OK with their first encounter when she is human and wants to figure out how to make it better. That is a pretty healthy attitude. Communicating about your sex life is pretty mature. Plus, tearing lingerie is just one way to get naked.
Comment by miles — August 26, 2008 @ 10:23 am
I devoured the books, but didn’t like their message, guess that makes me a hypocrite. Somehow they are oversexed, but without any, weird. Bella is way too passive, her “men” too controlling, it all seems a study in codependence. They can’t live without each other, Bella has little to no thoughts not related to at least one of her beaus…does she have value beyond her love life? I have often heard the defense that this is “normal”, but I know many young women who actually have goals and thoughts outside of boys, believe it or not.
Those might be feminist thoughts, if so, then I don’t see how a fmh can applaud this series, except for the fact the author has become so successful! Can’t argue that.
Comment by Elaine — August 26, 2008 @ 10:37 am
Chandelle, have you read anything by Levi Petersen, Terry Tempest Williams, or Margaret Young? I think you’d enjoy Terry Tempest Williams a great deal. Try *Refuge*. It’s very much up your alley–ecofeminist, and some of the first good ecofeminist prose.
Comment by Janet — August 26, 2008 @ 10:43 am
I’ve read TTW, though not Refuge. I do love her. I’m at the library right now, so I’ll see if I can find that book. Have not heard of the other two authors, but I’ll look for them as well. Anything you recommend, Janet, I’ll be sure to find.
Comment by Chandelle — August 26, 2008 @ 10:46 am
i have much love for that book. thanks for reminding me to go back and read it again.
Comment by mfranti — August 26, 2008 @ 10:46 am
I need to do a post on Mormon lit, clearly. Because it’s not all tripe.
Comment by Janet — August 26, 2008 @ 10:47 am
Chandell, sorry if that sounded rude. I may agree that I have yet to read anything from a Mormon writer that thrills me, but I haven’t given up hope that someday I will find something great. I was also thinking of a comment from my SIL when she said that she thought a film we had just watched was good because it was church related even though everybody else in the room found it a bit lacking. If she is going to like it, that’s fine, but there has to be more of a reason to that. If you were to say that you love reading teen romances about vampires, but I won’t read this because it Meyer is Mormon, that might seem wrong, but your reasons go beyond that.
I don’t mean that you can’t share your opinion, but I don’t know how to respond to it because I can’t refer to parts of the book that I thought might put a different angle on things.
Comment by just me — August 26, 2008 @ 11:01 am
re: 150
Not all, just the vast majority.
Chandelle, how dare you come to the library while I’m on shift and not come say “Hi”!
Comment by Derek — August 26, 2008 @ 11:42 am
Derek, I’m here every day and I never see you. I always think about you being here and wonder why I don’t see you. Are you hidden in the back or something? I’d come say hi if I knew where you were…
Comment by Chandelle — August 26, 2008 @ 11:49 am
Re: 131 “Are Romance languages and terms somehow morally superior to Germanic ones?” AND the “low class” bit on 139
I am SOO sorry to continue the threadjack, but I just can’t help myself!
Most of our swear words actually have their origin in the Romantic/Germanic linguistic split that dates back to the Norman invasion of 1066. The Normans (romantic) became the ruling class over the English (well, they weren’t exactly “english” at that point, but the language as we know it is called Old English and it was GERMANIC).
So. The language changed.
Ever notice how in English there are two words for almost everything? And that one of the words is considered “more refined” than the other? “Cow” versus “veal”; “intercourse” versus “f*ck”; “excrement” versus “sh*t?”
One is usually germanic, the other is usually romantic.
in other words, the word of the “ruling class” is the “refined” word and the word of the “lower class” is a swear word.
but since I live in a purty redneck part of town, I kinda like the lower class folks. you’nme can be friends, mfranti.
Comment by Isis — August 26, 2008 @ 12:57 pm
What is the average age of the bloggers on this site? I am older (closing in on 60) so maybe that is why I am not as flexible as a younger crowd with different book tastes, word choices and proper grammar usage. I was also using this site as one tool to teach some friends about contemporary Mormonism. I see a wonderful, diverse group of strong personalities, but on the age curve, I feel I’m “up there”.
Comment by sharbear — August 26, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
re: 154
Exactly what I was alluding to, Isis. It is pretty arbitrary (and rather classist) that the terms we came to consider vulgur, crude, and profane were simply the Germanic (and thus, “lower class”) cognates to the Latinate (via French) terms we consider proper and acceptable.
Comment by Derek — August 26, 2008 @ 1:08 pm
sharbear, there’s a pretty big age range here. Your age might make you less inclined towards the grammatical fluidity which marks blogs, though–just as mine makes me resistant to what I perceive as thoroughly obnoxious text messaging “words.” The swearing might have more to do with background though. Rural areas seem less serious about the “d” and “h” words (indeedy, my orthodox relatives who wouldn’t dare touch a diet coke use such words all the time, but would deny that they’ve ever sworn in their lives).
Not to worry–I think we’ve got plenty of readers in your age range. We’ve also got a few teens. I’d bet the average age is somewhere between 32 and 42, but that’s just a really lame guess.
Comment by Janet — August 26, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
Chandelle, after you read *Refuge* I’ll give you a nice long list. Perhaps we could distinguish between “Mormon lit” and “literature which happens to be written by a Mormon.” The Twilight series reveals a lot of SM’s Mormon background without ever mentioning her religion, whereas traditional “Mormon lit” centers on proselytizing. Tess Santiago wrote a great essay about there being a place for both kinds . . . I’ll see if I can dig it up.
You’d probably like Phyllis Barber and Larua Kalpakian as well. I quite like both, though Barber is the better writer and Kalpakian’s *These Latter-Days* provides a worst-case Mormon marriage I hope “gentile” readers don’t see as standard. And I’m a fan of the classic *The Giant Joshua* as well. It beat out Willa Cather for a literary prize, if memory serves.
Comment by Janet — August 26, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
I really want to read Janet’s post on Mormon lit. I hope it gets here soon.
Comment by just me — August 26, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
Chandelle — it’s not that it doesn’t rain that much. It rains a lot. But moving there because it has to be cloudy all the time because your skin glows like diamonds in the sunlight is a bad idea because a) the summer has a few months of low-ish temp but high sun days, b) there are lots of moments where rays of sun break through the clouds. And then it would catch you, and people would think “I wonder why that unnaturally pretty young man is suddenly GLOWING LIKE A DIAMOND.”
It’s also rainy lightly and intermittently. I don’t think that I owned an umbrella until I came to the midwest with its NASTY rainstorms where you get soaked going from the car to the door. I just walked in my wool sweater and shook the rain off when I went indoors. Ah, beautiful pacific northwest . . .
Comment by Beth — August 26, 2008 @ 2:52 pm
Following the threadjack, #129 Ray, I liked your post. about swearing/cursing. I have taught my children that there are two kinds of unacceptable words-vulgar and profane, and gradations of unacceptability based on place and audience. I was raised in a home where both vulgar and profane language were not unknown and I embarrassed myself many times my first year at BYU until I learned the prevailing standard.
I read a few dozen pages into New Moon and did not read on. I was unable to suspend my disbelief or quick mocking it all. I read plenty of fiction with sex in it, but it has to be a believable story with some sex in it, not a whole bunch of salacious stuff hung on not much of a story.
There is no tolerance in the church for visual pr*n-the kind men like. I had a problem with the way my 29 yo son and his friend leered and whooped at the Olympic women’s volleyball. When I told him so, he watched the soccer instead, but he rolled his eyes. There is quite a bit more tolerance for literary p*rn-the kind women like. Also, the line seems not to be as clear with lit as it might be with pictures. If the main result to the reader of a book is to become sexually aroused, it is p*rn. I know there are some women, married and single, who use this series and other romance lit to lead where men go with visual stimulation. For a normal, well-balanced woman occasional indulgence in M&Ms for the brain may not be harmful, but obsession with, anxiety about or any other symptomatic behaviors associated with these books certainly make them p*rn for that person. Is this at the level of a Victoria’s Secret catalog for an adolescent boy?
Comment by Karen — August 26, 2008 @ 6:04 pm
edit -sorry
…or QUIT mocking it all.
Comment by Karen — August 26, 2008 @ 6:04 pm
mfranti, PLEASE know that I was joking. If not, I’ll think you are not only “not classy” but also extremely humor impaired (see, joking again). And that would make me sad.
Comment by Lupita — August 26, 2008 @ 6:37 pm
lupita, i know.
i had a bad morning if you couldn’t tell.
apparently, i’m not so tough.
Comment by mfranti — August 26, 2008 @ 7:38 pm
Sorry, following the threadjack of #161 here. We had a high council talk a few weeks ago about keeping filth out of our minds. In the talk, he spoke of p*rn as being anything that is meant to incite sxual feelings. That includes images and words. I loved that he didn’t make a big deal about them being the same thing. He simply stated the fact that romance novels can be as p*rnographic as pictures. I had been reading a book at the time that had some pretty explecit chapters, but kept reading because the story was interesting. When we got home from church, I threw the book away.
Comment by Tonya — August 26, 2008 @ 8:16 pm
#161 “There is no tolerance in the church for visual pr*n-the kind men like”
So I take it porn is not sold in Utah in as much as there is no market for it?
Comment by Ruby — August 26, 2008 @ 9:11 pm
Tonya: yup.
It’s back to that debate that happened a while back on here about what IS pornography. I think the definition has to be limited to the person in question. If you read Stephenie Meyers’ books and feel aroused by the sexy scenes, and you read it FOR that purpose, to feel those feelings, then I would argue that it is porn. If, though, you read those scenes and find them funny, or maybe you feel those feelings but push them aside because you want to be able to read it for the story, maybe not so much porn?
But that’s another threadjack (sort of. It is one of the objections some have to the books.)
Comment by sare — August 26, 2008 @ 9:18 pm
Whew. As long as your humor is intact, the show can go on.
Sorry about your morning and nah, you are tough.
Comment by Lupita — August 26, 2008 @ 9:25 pm
I haven’t read the books. My wife finally did after hearing so many adults talk about how great they were. She could barely finish one book. She felt like it was just too much juvinile fiction to hold her interest.
Comment by Cyclingred — August 27, 2008 @ 6:09 am
mfranti, so if you had one of those “Show your Status” signs hanging above your head, what would it have read this morning? Just curious as mine would have read “I will repeat these words one million times today…that candy is $.25, same as it was last week..”
Maybe that’s not funny and I should not post it, but … oh well
Comment by Sunshine — August 27, 2008 @ 4:02 pm
it would have said:
i have no self esteem today. feel sorry for me. i am worthless.
love me…
.
.
.
.
.
totally over the top, eh?
Comment by mfranti — August 27, 2008 @ 4:17 pm
Oh how I relate. Especially feel sorry for me, love me, okay, well the whole thing really.
And, I am sorry, hope you have a better day tomorrow.
Comment by Sunshine — August 27, 2008 @ 5:00 pm
OK Ruby– …no OFFICIAL tolerance for p*rn in the church. My husband is a president of a singles unit. I’m pretty sure what I see is only the tip of the iceberg that he sees. There is an announcement in the bulletin every Sunday about how to get help for substance or sex addiction. Somebody must think somebody needs it. There is recognition among top leadership that p*rn is a problem and training is being provided to bishops at levels unthought of a decade ago. Yes, there is a problem. The OFFICIAL church is recognizing it and taking steps to combat it. I think that is a good thing.
I know little about what is sold in Utah. I don’t live there. Utah is not the church. The church is not Utah. Of course, purveyors don’t care where people live when they buy stuff over the internet. They just want your money. Satan just desires to sift us as chaff.
Comment by Karen — August 27, 2008 @ 10:25 pm
I don’t think I can vote, because I’m of two minds on the series.
Fanatically loved the first two.
Fanatically loathed the last two.
And while I had some moral quibbles, I was willing to overlook it to try to enjoy the genre book as a whole (because I like genre fiction despite the bad rap it gets (not to mention that I write genre fiction), and I’m questioning where the line is for LDS authors in writing non-LDS characters, something I’m still working out for myself). My dislike for the last two came from poor writing, gaping plot holes, rewritten characters, out-of-nowhere backstories, etc.
But congrats to Stephenie Meyer for what she accomplished. It truly is phenomenal, and I hope she enjoys her success.
Comment by Sariah — August 28, 2008 @ 12:14 pm
My 17yo and 12yo sisters love the series. Particularly the 17yo. I would guess that she secretly identifies with Bella because of the very fact that Bella is not much of a protaganist. Teen girls are hard on themselves. They don’t recognize their own individual talent. They think that to be ‘worth’ something, you need to be Prom Queen, Varsity Girl, Valedictorian, Student Body Pres, Laurel’s Class Pres.
Bella is just the average girl with not much going for her (except Edward). Unfortunately, I think this is exactly why girls love this book so much.
So how do you start a dialogue with a teen girl about the dangerous aspects of the book, without sounding like an uppity pro-feminist adult? Any attack on Bella is going to come across as an attack on the girl who identifies with her.
Comment by sophrosene — August 29, 2008 @ 8:13 am
Gah! stop comparing Twilight to Harry Potter! Okay, yes, they may both be the eqivilent of literary junk food, but if so Twilight is a single twinkie (blegh) and Harry Potter is a bowl of Pico de Gayo with a handful of freshly baked tortilla chips. While the twinkie is made wholly out of chemicals, there is actually some nutritional value to the chips and salsa. Twilight: not worth my time. Harry Potter: totally.
Comment by Rachel — August 29, 2008 @ 10:49 pm
Stephenie Meyer just posted a FAQ about Breaking Dawn on her website. She addresses the question of whether or not Bella is an anti-feminist heroine.
Comment by Sara R — September 2, 2008 @ 10:26 am
I am currenty finishing the 4th book. I resisted reading the series strictly based on the aversion I had to the whole “vampire” thing and because I was sure the idea was idiotic. Out of sheer resignation, I partook and began reading Twilight. I must admit that the non-vampire parts of Edward are really appealing. But Bella bugs me. I have a lot of issues with this story strictly because the author is Mormon. I see a lot of suggested morals but that is it. I am forcing myself to finish the fourth book just because I want to see how this mess of a “love story” cleans up. I’m afraid to post this commentary ’cause I’m afraid I’ll be hunted down and stoned to death by all the Twilight fans. I may come back and comment after I finish the series. Until then…
Comment by Stunned — September 16, 2008 @ 6:57 pm
I love the series and I can not wait for the movie! I think entirely too many people are blowing the book and its meanings out of proportion. But then, you will always have critics who think they know all the rights from the wrongs. I could care less what you all think. The books rock and I am super excited about the movies.
Comment by Erica — October 10, 2008 @ 8:34 am
I didnt realize that Stephanie was LDS, Thats Great. I have a daughter that is also LDS that read the books and was inspired to write songs with the hopes of landing some of them on the movie sound track. Please take the time to listen to her newest song. You can hear it at myspace.com/candacewilsonmusic. Please leave her a comment and thanks for taking the time to listen to her song.
Neal B
Comment by Neal B — October 15, 2008 @ 9:25 am
Okay, I’m thirteen and I live in Malaysia. Twilight is really HOT among teens my age here. I haven’t read them yet. But I am wondering how a love story could be dragged on to have so many sequels. I’m curious. A lot my friends recommend it. They say its the best But a close friend of mine recently said tht Twilight is “Demonic”. I’ve been Christian all my life and I’m careful with what I read. I’ve been researching for HOURS trying to find out what is it that is so “demonic” about Twilight”.
Will someone please PLEASE tell me?
Comment by Celine — November 11, 2008 @ 7:42 am
Celine,
Because of this thread, I have read all four of the Twilight series and enjoyed it very much. My teenagers liked them as well. As a person of faith, I did not find the books demonic in any way. Yes, there are evil elements in the plot line, but there is no way to demonstrate the struggle of good vs. evil without including the evil counterpart, is there? I thought it was useful to contrast the two family groups who elected not to give in to the evil aspect of taking human life versus the vampires who succumbed to their natures. Maybe you could share the books with your mom and discuss the themes involved.
Comment by Kimberly — November 11, 2008 @ 8:04 am
I have always loved vampire movies…I ventured to share one of my favorites, “Lost Boys”, with my 14 year old daughter over the summer.
Then, she started reading “Twilight” & was all ‘Edward this’ & ‘Edward that’ & she told me ‘he’s a vampire.’ So…I shared a few more of my favorite vampire movies with her…”Interview with a Vampire”, “Underworld”, and “Bram Stoker’s Draucla”…she liked the movies, but kept comparing them to what she was reading.
Sooo…I decided to read too. When she finished ‘Twilight’ I bought her ‘New Moon’…she was half way done with that & I was catching up to her, so I bought ‘Eclipse’ so she’d speed up to get to it so I could have ‘New Moon’ as soon as she was done. Then…we went on to ‘Breaking Dawn.’ I read all 4 books in 7 days (& still managed to go to work, do housework, & sleep, a little, in between!)
We’re hooked! We already have our tickets for the midnight premier movie release. And…considering the movie is rated PG-13…I know it won’t be the bloody gore/vampire violence of the movies I mentioned. The books, & the movie, seem to be more about a test of time & devotion & sacrifice for those we love.
Comment by Lisa — November 11, 2008 @ 6:49 pm
I wasn’t interested in reading these books–I hate hyped up media–until my agnostic, thinks-all-religion-is-a-fairy-tale-but-still-respects-me friend told me they were good. She also reads pretty good books. I think the vampire thing was the hook for her (when I am done with the Twilight series I will start on the True Blood series by Charlain Harris–the TV show is based on the books but my friend said the books aren’t as dark).
So, I zoomed through Twilight (hey, it is nice to pick up an easy read once in a while) and started the second. I am only on Chapter 6 of New Moon and I am so annoyed by Bella. Seriously, I don’t think girls should be reading about pining over a boy for 5 months rather than living life. So, I complained to my friend about how the book should show a stronger woman. She teased me, “maybe she will be strong some day.”
Then she reminded me about how, as teenagers, we pined for boys that might not have even known our names, let alone kissed us or saved our lives a couple of times. So, Bella is an ordinary teenage girl who experienced an unusual (to put it lightly) experience with a boy.
I am still annoyed with Bella. Get over the boy who will never grow old with you. Go to college (why was she talking about college being Plan B? Can’t she go to college as a vampire?) Stay in touch with Jacob, go to prom with him maybe.
Comment by In Cal — November 14, 2008 @ 6:30 pm
The Twilight Saga is one of the most popular books at the present. It’s everywhere. When i ride the jeepney. When i get on the ever busy LRT. When I run stead-fast in the morning hoping that i can be in the room before my professor does. Wherever I glance, someone is holding one of the publsihed books of the TWLIGHT SAGA. And most of them- I think all of them- are women or the woman at heart putting it in a more elegant phrase.
I read the book. Stopped in the middle. I didnt finish the first book.
“I does’nt pass my standard of a book worth reading.”
My reasons…
1. Bella’s thoughts about Edward is degrading for women.
I get it, she’s IN LOVE. That’s what the author is trying to say. But Bella’s thoughts - what and how she thinks- about edward is more of OBSSESSION. No matter how good-looking the guys is, I WILL NEVER COMPARE HIM TO A GREEK GOD ZEUS.
2. Edward is HOT but why does his physical features have to be mentioned on every damn page?
I get it, Edward’s goodlooking, handsome, hot, and sizzling if it’s the proper hyperbole for it. But his physical feautres are on every page. While i was reading, i kept on screaming in my head “I get already! He’s hot! Get on with the story!”
3. Romantic NOT!
Everyone I met reads the saga due to its romantic genre. But personally i dont find it romantic. Maybe it is but not enough for me to have butterflies in my stomach. I’m not romantically frigid. It’s just that my perception of ‘romantic’ cannot be solely factored by body physique. And as we all know, the first book is focused more on edward’s physical perfection and it overshadowed a deeper side (if there’s any) of the romantic side of the story .
4. VAMPIRE angst = high expectation
The vampire theme is timeless. It will never fail in catching every reader’s attention. So, I was expecting more about the battle of light and darkness, good and evil, and life and death. I was searching more depth in the story. In tagalog term, i can call the book MABABAW.
5. “Hottest book since Harry Potter..” NOT!
Harry Potter may be a children’s book but the whole series showed how a mere boy overcame his own weaknesses, fears, and own darkness. It showed a complete transformation of a boy to a man. TWILIGHT deos not deserve to be aligned with Harry Potter
*We are all different in likes and dislikes Views and point views. It was just a coincidence that a popular book did not pass my standards.
*For me, the books i read and finish, and preference of books are mirrors of my personality and philosphy in life. My book preference determines what kind of person I’am. The popularity of TWILIGHT shows how different I am from others. OR should i say, how similar people of this generation are.
IN SHORT for me.. The book is boring. Sow pace of events. Bella (heroine) is annoyingly obsessed with Edward (hero). Edward is unrealistic.
TO Kerry: I agree with you! And ‘all’ my friends and people around me likes it. (sigh) Where is the world coming to..?
Comment by Thesa — November 22, 2008 @ 4:23 am
I was curious a few weeks ago about the excitement over these books. I read the first one on a flight from Los Angeles and was hooked. Within a week I had read the other three. My thoughts:
1) While the books may lack the sophistication or depth of great literature…which also tend to be kind of bleak and depressing…, the Twilight series makes for a fun, quick read.
2) These books reminded me greatly of the former series, Roswell, where an adolescent girl and alien boy fall in love. Like Roswell, Meyer’s books play into the sense of teen alienation…of not fitting in…of finding in an outsider/bad boy the meaning and purpose missing from life.
3) Altogether, while I enjoyed the books, they foster an idealized fairy tale to a young woman that:
*some boy will fall in love with her and she will be the center of his universe
*he will love her forever…she will love him forever
*the future is finding a man, marrying him, making a baby, having a house…and then what? Unless your family are attacked by scheming Italian vampire royalty, Bella’s life basically ends with a vague happily forever after
*obsessive love for the bad boy is better than the ups and downs of life with a good guy (Jacob) who cares for you
*all the main characters (Bella, Edward, and Jacob) all attempt to some degree to commit suicide over their depression over their love lives
*the world is Disneyesque where everything works out fine…only bad people end up dead, unhappy, widowed, etc. for the most part
*Unfortunately Stephanie Meyers is snagged by her LDS membership…and its politics. She may not be for Prop 8 or even cared, but if she is tithing 10% of her profits to the church which supported it, her tithing has implications. I have already met several people who are refusing to see the movie over this. While the Roman Catholic church spearheaded Prop 8 and talked the LDS into funding Yes on 8, it looks like the LDS will be taking the fall for it culturally. Sadly, Meyers will have to negotiate this. Her book doesn’t have a gay character but there are some slightly homophobic moments where the Native American boys, etc. react to male-male physical intimacy brought on by their shapeshifting, etc.
All in all, the books are like Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the thousands of teen-directed love song babbles on the radio: fairy tales where the characters live out the lives we wish might happen…and would be naive to believe they are true. Obsessive love usually leads to stalking, getting knocked up, beaten, abandoned, or some mix of this by the bad boy…not given eternal life, unshakable love, and unimaginable wealth. I’m using these books with my niece as a teachable moment to explain how the vampires may be more real than Bella’s expectations and realities around her romance.
Comment by KYIndigo — November 23, 2008 @ 7:04 pm
I am who I am. Pick your label. I am a Washington, DC attorney. I am a woman. I am Christian, in fact Mormon. I am very well traveled. I’m fairly well-read. I have a gutter-mouth. I got married at 34, after five years of dating. I am a full-time parent of three step-children who do not share my faith. I’ve lived life and my eyes are open.
The point . . . The audience for these books is Young Adult - teenagers. No, the writing isn’t great, the editing is worse, but it’s a fun story. I’m grateful that there is a series of books that my daughter can read and enjoy that isn’t replete with foul language, isn’t cavalier about love or sex, and doesn’t advocate alienating parents.
Halle-freaking-luja! It is hilarious to me that adults are getting so over-wrought about teen fiction. FICTION!
My 13-year-old stepdaughter reads well above her grade level and we have a very difficult time finding age appropriate reading that will interest her. For a few years now I’ve been reading the books she reads or online commentary about the books she reads (which isn’t censoring, it’s called parenting). I’ve been horrified by what is out there. When she was 11 we had to discuss the difference between oral sex and “regular” sex, their definitions, health hazards, the acts’ intimacy, and popular ideas about them. I can’t express how fun that was . . . This happened because she was reading one of the popular series her friends were reading which completely desensitized oral sex and pleasing boys (e.g., The Clique, It Girl, Gossip Girl). That one slipped by me before I caught it. From experience, I’d so much rather discussing the physical relationship (unconsumated and consumated) in the Twilight books.
The main messages in my home (when I’m not too tired or pissy from a long day and long commute) are integrity, respect, love, and eduction. My daughter has no intention of getting married too young, no intention of subjugating herself to any partner. She is strong, smart, attactive, articulate, kind (when not hormonal), and yep likes to get lost in fantasy. Good for her. She is normal! In fact, I’ll brag, she’s better, because sometimes she’d rather read a book than watch more crap on TV or chat online with her friends. Furthermore, this is pleasure reading. I haven’t heard academics saying this is literature or meant to provoke thought.
Reading these books has also provided another common ground for us. We talk about the books. We are fans, but not beyond thought. We “love” Edward, we think he’s incredible. In-credible. Not-credible. She knows he’s a caricature. We talk about Bella. We joke about how an unpopular, mousy girl in Phoenix can become the “belle” of the ball in Forks. At the same time we snicker a little at how Bella becomes a super star Vampire in the fourth book. I don’t want to get too caught into the story line, because, lest we forget, it is a story . . . But, don’t forget, the passive chick does evolve into a badass and saves the day.
Cheesy, but not such a bad message. FICTION or not.
Comment by 2 cents — November 25, 2008 @ 3:23 pm
[…] a discussion about the book on a Feminist Mormon Housewife […]
Pingback by Twilight « Lactating Bookworm — December 6, 2008 @ 6:33 am
oh my gosh this book is like awsome!!!!!!!
i wish i could see the movie:( oh well:)
i love twilight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by qutie pie — December 9, 2008 @ 7:12 pm
:(:)
Comment by qutie pie — December 9, 2008 @ 7:12 pm
twilight is not Demonic.. i bet there saying that so you don’t read it also whoever said twilight is boring………….. you are a doof
ok
Comment by qutie pie — December 9, 2008 @ 7:16 pm
I think everyone thinks too much into these books. They are wonderful books about the first all-consuming first loves of your life. There is virtual and morality portrayed in these novels which is a big change from what many other novels have done.
I think back before marriage, six kids, bills and worries and how my heart raced at the thought of my true love. It’s meant to be a STORY…..ENTERTAINING, not something life defining.
Enjoy it, enjoy them all. They are all very good reads!
Comment by Allison — December 10, 2008 @ 3:30 pm
‘The Twilight Series is to Great Literature’ as ‘Spaghetti-O’s are to fine Italian food”. You know Spaghetti-O’s are overly sweet, meant for a much younger eater, and a will only keep you full for a minute. But, dang, sometimes I’ve eaten them cold, straight out of the can.
I read 3 and 1/2 Twilight books, and then gave up and read a plot summary. As with Spaghetti-O’s, even if you love them, you get to a point where you’ve had your fill. I rolled my eyes and finally put the last book down right around the point where Bella [SPOILER ALERT] realizes she has missed her period. Ay, ay, ay.
Comment by Chercher — January 8, 2009 @ 6:45 pm
[…] fun: Desperate housewives hate […]
Pingback by Vampires are cool (again) « Elephantbeans — January 16, 2009 @ 12:35 pm
[…] di Twilight troppo scema, troppo passiva, troppo docile e sottomessa, e c’hanno ragionissima (cito) In questo libro c’è tutto quello che non va nelle ragazze adolescenti. Rinforza alcune idee […]
Pingback by le Malvestite » Blog Archive » Twilight Saga #1: Stephenie Meyer, l’autrice più mona — July 2, 2009 @ 8:52 pm