Wow. These books are even more of a train wreck than I had imagined. I'd heard about the whole Bella-having-no-identity-without-Edward thing, but not that it was illustrated with one of the weakest and worst metaphors in the history of books. Christ, you can click on the random Wodehouse quote generator and find 1000% better metaphors, usually in two sentences or less!
I was driving along the other day and a thought occurred to me about the lack of conflict in the stories (yes, please pity me - I was thinking about these books against my will): it seems like the lack of character conflict goes hand in hand with the Mormon concept of not trying to attain perfection, but instead simply being perfect. That is, when one is perfect ("just as they are" <-- today's Colin Firth reference), it implies that any conflict in one's life necessarily comes from outside forces. So this aspect of the books ends up seeming like another one of Smeyers' weak and wet metaphors taken from Mormon dogma. What amazes me is that millennia of story telling tradition has been turned on its head and many, many people don't seem to notice or mind the lack of this crucial (or so I always thought) story ingredient.
The awful metaphors and the amazing popularity of books built on annoying characters moving nearly plot-free through hundreds of pages is making me fear these books will stand the test of time after all, because I can see them being studied for those reasons alone for generations to come ::cries for western civilization::.
In conclusion, Indiana Jones references are made of win...and so are you. Thanks for doing these.
Oh, thanks for the link to the Wodehouse Generator, that's awesome!
And I think I agree with that, re: conflict. Also, I really just think she's a poor writer. But I can see what you're saying. EXACTLY on the outside conflict is the problem.
"In the world, but not of it" is the Mormon creed. We're perfect inside our bubble, the world is wrong.
I really, really think that these books are her way of subconsciously rebelling against her own upbringing. She'd NEVER voice any concerns or questions, because you're supposed to have a perfect faith. But she married young, had babies young, and missed out on a lot of life. I'm sure the romance is gone from her marriage at this point (hi, did you see the garments? your underwear goes OVER that. You always wear them, except for showering.) and she's manufactured this fantasy that can still fit into her belief system.
hi, did you see the garments? your underwear goes OVER that. You always wear them, except for showering.
So you're saying their worn even during sex? I had figured that the wearing of the white 'long johns' was exaggerated by Evangelicals for their own religious purposes. Huh.
For a lot of people, yes. There's one of the Apostles (the 12 leaders under the prophet *eyeroll*) that famously claimed IN CONFERENCE (which every single LDS member is supposed to watch/attend) that he had never seen his wife's body undressed, that's how much he respected her.
*cough* The crotches are split for ease of bathroom attending. So there's a lot of space for sex, is what I'm saying. not everyone adheres that strictly, but a good portion do.
I was driving along the other day and a thought occurred to me about the lack of conflict in the stories (yes, please pity me - I was thinking about these books against my will): it seems like the lack of character conflict goes hand in hand with the Mormon concept of not trying to attain perfection, but instead simply being perfect. That is, when one is perfect ("just as they are" <-- today's Colin Firth reference), it implies that any conflict in one's life necessarily comes from outside forces. So this aspect of the books ends up seeming like another one of Smeyers' weak and wet metaphors taken from Mormon dogma. What amazes me is that millennia of story telling tradition has been turned on its head and many, many people don't seem to notice or mind the lack of this crucial (or so I always thought) story ingredient.
The awful metaphors and the amazing popularity of books built on annoying characters moving nearly plot-free through hundreds of pages is making me fear these books will stand the test of time after all, because I can see them being studied for those reasons alone for generations to come ::cries for western civilization::.
In conclusion, Indiana Jones references are made of win...and so are you. Thanks for doing these.
Reply
And I think I agree with that, re: conflict. Also, I really just think she's a poor writer. But I can see what you're saying. EXACTLY on the outside conflict is the problem.
"In the world, but not of it" is the Mormon creed. We're perfect inside our bubble, the world is wrong.
I really, really think that these books are her way of subconsciously rebelling against her own upbringing. She'd NEVER voice any concerns or questions, because you're supposed to have a perfect faith. But she married young, had babies young, and missed out on a lot of life. I'm sure the romance is gone from her marriage at this point (hi, did you see the garments? your underwear goes OVER that. You always wear them, except for showering.) and she's manufactured this fantasy that can still fit into her belief system.
CREEPY. Also: Om ma Shiva!
Reply
So you're saying their worn even during sex? I had figured that the wearing of the white 'long johns' was exaggerated by Evangelicals for their own religious purposes. Huh.
Reply
*cough* The crotches are split for ease of bathroom attending. So there's a lot of space for sex, is what I'm saying. not everyone adheres that strictly, but a good portion do.
Reply
Leave a comment