Twilight: Does it really deserve the Hype?
I have to admit to having been very curious about the Twilight series of books by Stephanie Meyers. She's been compared to JK Rowling and the phenomenon of her books has been compared to Harry Potter with a large online fan base and people dressing up as characters from the stories for book release parties. Here is a representative article about it from Time Magazine. I was intrigued by the large displays of her books in Waterstones and Borders, the cover art being particularly stunning, I think (Twilight, New Moon, Eclipse, and Breaking Dawn). So, when I last went to Borders, I decided to pick up a copy. It was a pretty easy read - I started it on Saturday afternoon and finished it yesterday. For me, that's very fast for a 500 page book. Unfortunately, though, I found it disappointing overall. I was able to read this book so fast not because I couldn't put it down (although, I wasn't bored with it and some aspects of it were very interesting), but because much of the writing is repetitive and the plot is very simple.
This is a romance between Bella Swan, a 17-year-old human, and Edward Cullen, a centenarian vampire in a 17-year-old boy's body. Does it sound a bit like Buffy? It did to me, too. In fact, there's a character, Mike, an ordinary human boy, who "likes" Bella and, after awhile, I realized I'd assigned him Nicholas Brendon's voice. (He's the actor who plays Buffy's friend, Xander, who has a long-standing crush on Buffy.)
The unfortunate difference between Bella and Buffy, though, is that Bella is pretty helpless and no match for Edward who is her superior in every way. In fact, it's not entirely believable, to me, that Edward would find Bella so irresistible as he does, except that she's the ultimate Mary Sue. The book is in first person from Bella's point-of-view. According to this narration, Bella is not particularly attractive (though she's instantly popular and many boys want to ask her out, all of whom she refuses, and she "doesn't know how pretty she is") and doesn't want attention (though, she gets it). We're supposed to see her as all about self-sacrifice: she goes to live with her dad in a town she hates so that her mother can travel with her new minor-league baseball player husband; she feels awful about saying something truly horrible to her father to protect him; etc. However, she actually comes off as being rather self-absorbed in how she treats her father and her friends. I didn't really like her, so it was hard for me to see why Edward would, unless it was just all about pheromones. I'm not sure that's enough to sustain a relationship as strained as theirs, though...
Of course, the main aspect of a romance novel is setting up obstacles for the would-be lovers. In this case, the main obstacle is the fact that one is a human, the other a vampire. And, just to make it a bit more difficult, the pheromone that makes Bella particularly attractive to Edward also makes him think she would be particularly good to have for his dinner. This relationship is a challenge for him. Unfortunately, this translates into many, many pages of Edward playing "come hither/go away." Even though the story isn't from his point-of-view, we got to see his struggle, wanting to be near Bella, but not wanting to put her in danger or be driven by his instincts to kill her. I would expect some of that, but it got tiresome after awhile. Meanwhile, Bella just wanted to be with Edward and disregarded all danger - she would take her chances of being killed just to be with Edward without any second thoughts. I found this odd, considering that the book is from Bella's point-of-view. It seems like there should have been more internal struggle on her part. It seems like she should have feared Edward, if not when she was with him (since he had a "dazzling" charisma about him), then later when she had time to think about what she was doing. But she was not introspective in any way.
As I said, though, there were some aspects of the book that were very interesting. Edward could read others' minds, but not Bella's. Ignoring how intrusive it is, in general, he creatively used his skill to find Bella and rescue her from danger. Edward's sister, Alice, was able to see the future (though the future she saw was ever-changing) and was also, apparently, a very good artist. This was also able to lead Edward to Bella and rescue her from lethal danger. However, I think both devices were under-utilized. They should have played more prominently in the story.
That said, when I finished Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, my reaction was that it was a cute story I'd enjoyed and I could see why kids would find it so entertaining. I had no idea that the Harry Potter series would evolve to be such an interesting mystery with a 7-book long story arc. It wasn't until the end of Goblet of Fire that I realized the series was more than just an adventure a year. (Though, I hope I've gotten to be more astute at reading since then.) My reaction to Twilight was less warm than it was to Sorcerer's Stone, but I wonder whether it's worthwhile to give the other books a chance to see where the story goes? After all, the worst flaws of this first book may be improved in the other books, since the characters are already established? Still, I wonder whether the author really had enough time to really develop a sophisticated overarching storyline? The Time Magazine article I linked said that Stephanie Meyers wrote Twilight in 3 months (after conceiving of the book in 6/03) and she's published 4 other books since then. JK Rowling spent nearly 10 years on her story before the first book was published and another 10 years before the last book was published. I'm afraid that the relative (lack of) time and effort show...
ETA: I've been meaning to ask fullmoon_dreams for the author of the books she once mentioned that are romance novels involving vampires & werewolves, etc...do you remember, fullmoon_dreams? I'm still interested in giving them a try.
This is a romance between Bella Swan, a 17-year-old human, and Edward Cullen, a centenarian vampire in a 17-year-old boy's body. Does it sound a bit like Buffy? It did to me, too. In fact, there's a character, Mike, an ordinary human boy, who "likes" Bella and, after awhile, I realized I'd assigned him Nicholas Brendon's voice. (He's the actor who plays Buffy's friend, Xander, who has a long-standing crush on Buffy.)
The unfortunate difference between Bella and Buffy, though, is that Bella is pretty helpless and no match for Edward who is her superior in every way. In fact, it's not entirely believable, to me, that Edward would find Bella so irresistible as he does, except that she's the ultimate Mary Sue. The book is in first person from Bella's point-of-view. According to this narration, Bella is not particularly attractive (though she's instantly popular and many boys want to ask her out, all of whom she refuses, and she "doesn't know how pretty she is") and doesn't want attention (though, she gets it). We're supposed to see her as all about self-sacrifice: she goes to live with her dad in a town she hates so that her mother can travel with her new minor-league baseball player husband; she feels awful about saying something truly horrible to her father to protect him; etc. However, she actually comes off as being rather self-absorbed in how she treats her father and her friends. I didn't really like her, so it was hard for me to see why Edward would, unless it was just all about pheromones. I'm not sure that's enough to sustain a relationship as strained as theirs, though...
Of course, the main aspect of a romance novel is setting up obstacles for the would-be lovers. In this case, the main obstacle is the fact that one is a human, the other a vampire. And, just to make it a bit more difficult, the pheromone that makes Bella particularly attractive to Edward also makes him think she would be particularly good to have for his dinner. This relationship is a challenge for him. Unfortunately, this translates into many, many pages of Edward playing "come hither/go away." Even though the story isn't from his point-of-view, we got to see his struggle, wanting to be near Bella, but not wanting to put her in danger or be driven by his instincts to kill her. I would expect some of that, but it got tiresome after awhile. Meanwhile, Bella just wanted to be with Edward and disregarded all danger - she would take her chances of being killed just to be with Edward without any second thoughts. I found this odd, considering that the book is from Bella's point-of-view. It seems like there should have been more internal struggle on her part. It seems like she should have feared Edward, if not when she was with him (since he had a "dazzling" charisma about him), then later when she had time to think about what she was doing. But she was not introspective in any way.
As I said, though, there were some aspects of the book that were very interesting. Edward could read others' minds, but not Bella's. Ignoring how intrusive it is, in general, he creatively used his skill to find Bella and rescue her from danger. Edward's sister, Alice, was able to see the future (though the future she saw was ever-changing) and was also, apparently, a very good artist. This was also able to lead Edward to Bella and rescue her from lethal danger. However, I think both devices were under-utilized. They should have played more prominently in the story.
That said, when I finished Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, my reaction was that it was a cute story I'd enjoyed and I could see why kids would find it so entertaining. I had no idea that the Harry Potter series would evolve to be such an interesting mystery with a 7-book long story arc. It wasn't until the end of Goblet of Fire that I realized the series was more than just an adventure a year. (Though, I hope I've gotten to be more astute at reading since then.) My reaction to Twilight was less warm than it was to Sorcerer's Stone, but I wonder whether it's worthwhile to give the other books a chance to see where the story goes? After all, the worst flaws of this first book may be improved in the other books, since the characters are already established? Still, I wonder whether the author really had enough time to really develop a sophisticated overarching storyline? The Time Magazine article I linked said that Stephanie Meyers wrote Twilight in 3 months (after conceiving of the book in 6/03) and she's published 4 other books since then. JK Rowling spent nearly 10 years on her story before the first book was published and another 10 years before the last book was published. I'm afraid that the relative (lack of) time and effort show...
ETA: I've been meaning to ask fullmoon_dreams for the author of the books she once mentioned that are romance novels involving vampires & werewolves, etc...do you remember, fullmoon_dreams? I'm still interested in giving them a try.