The end of my Twitarded journey (Yay!)
As I'm keeping my Twitarded entries public, I want to make sure that I'm clear on a few points before I progress. First, I don't hate the books, or the author; hating the books would require more emotional involvement than I can dredge up for that mess, and I can't hate someone I've never even met. As much as I deride the clunky pacing, sketchy characterization, and purple prose, my main concern isn't that the rabid fans have terrible literary taste; since when is quality a national concern? I am, however, utterly fascinated by the Twilight phenomenon. If you'll pardon the comparison, studying the Twilight phenomenon makes me feel much the way Jane Goodall must have felt when she was studying chimps.
Based upon how well the Twilight series fits into the library of books I enjoyed as a YA reader, my guess is probably not, though if I had, it would have been on the younger end of the scale, as early as 10, and up to 14 at the very latest. From 11 to 13, my favorite series was The Girls of Canby Hall. They're about a trio of teen roommates who attend a prestigious, all-girl boarding school in New England. While romance is part of the series, the girls have numerous interests and aspirations outside of boys, unlike Bella, who has no life outside of Edward.
From 14 to 18, my favorite series were:
The Chronicles of the Deryni, by Katherine Kurtz. These books were set in a sort of alternate medieval Europe, wherein the Deryni--people with magical powers--are increasingly marginalized and vilified by the Church, until, a century or so later, they begin to creep a bit out of the closet, so to speak, and slowly fight to regain respectability. If memory serves, there are three main trilogies, and I liked the Legends of Saint Camber of Culdi trilogy the best. Of course, if memory still serves, it was probably the most depressing too, so I guess that makes sense.
The Ladies of Mandrigyn (and the two follow-up books) by Barbara Hambly. These books are also set in an alternate medieval Europe. Magic has been squashed by an uber-wizard, and the story centers on a mercenary captain and his second. The books are violent, but not gratuitously so.
The Robotech Saga, by Jack McKinney. The books are based on the iconic cartoon series. Alien invasions, post-apocalyptic survival, death, violence, the works.
Necroscope, by Brian Lumley. In these horror novels, the main character can communicate with the dead, and goes around killing evil things, such as vampires. These vampires don't sparkle, and would certainly not refer to themselves as "vegetarians".
Deathlands, by James Axler. This series is set in a post-apocalyptic United States. They are very violent and fairly gory.
The Vampire Chronicals, by Anne Rice. While Rice writes with her own special brand of cheese, these books are still leaps and bounds superior to Twilight.
I also remember reading Gone With the Wind, The Scarlet Pimpernel, The Mists of Avalon, and various biographies of Viet Nam War vets.
I mean sure, I might have been a total Twihead, but I just don't see how that series fits into the above list. My guess is that, at most, I would have enjoyed the books for a hot second around 12 or 13 years old, and moved on. Much as it pains me to admit it, a lot of the probability of my reading and enjoying the books would likely have depended upon who read and enjoyed them at my school. I freely admit that I was as caste-conscious as any other teen; I would never have touched the series if it were well-liked by the popular kids. (A case where my snobbery might have actually done me some good.) I also can understand some of the appeal to YA readers, even though it hurts just to type that. Consider:
1--That's a whole lotta book! To many young adult readers--and many old adult readers who read like young adult readers--a thick book is, by definition, an intellectually stimulating book, and smart people read intellectually stimulating books. Ergo, you look smart with your nose stuck in that behemoth.
2--The allure of high school. Our culture is permeated with myths about high school, some of which are true, and a few are even positive; dances (especially prom), learning to drive, and a general freedom. Many YA readers look forward to this time, so reading about a high school girl would be interesting. I think the novelty would have worn off on me pretty quickly, as my school was a combination junior/senior high.
3--Bella lives the ideal teenage life, in that she pretty much does as she likes, and her parents are vague background noise; it doesn't seem that they'd be a serious impediment to her wishes, unless of course, it would be convenient for the plot. She has a car, and apparently enough money to buy whatever she wants.
4--The ugly duckling principle--one plane ride and she goes from Plain Jane to It Girl. The school day practically screeches to a halt when Bella is almost hit by a car. The boys fall all over themselves to get her attention. The hot, mysteeeeeeerious guy doesn't just like her, but, like-likes her.
5--Bella likes to read. I like to read. Like, OMG, Bella is kewl!!!
6--Bella hates volleyball. I hated gym class, and am still convinced that there's a circle of hell wherein you spend all of eternity playing volleyball.
7--Bella is clumsy. I am clumsy. Like, OMG, Bella is kewl!!! (Of course, it's worth noting that Bella's clumsiness is portrayed as charming, and allows her to be rescued. My clumsiness just makes people laugh at me.)
8--Romantic fulfillment. Do you remember your teenage crushes--specifically, the ones that were never fulfilled? The pining. The yearning. The angst and woe about every itty-bitty detail regarding your interaction with that person. Bella crushes, and the handsome, smart, dangerous cool guy "loves" her to the point of obsessive stalking. Oh, but wait! Following someone around and entering their bedroom at night to watch them sleep isn't creepy, nor is it stalking--it's wuv!
9--The only people who dislike her are jealous of her. (Okay, they dislike her because they're jealous, bad people, and it's convenient for the plot.) She's done nothing to warrant their enmity, and she knows why they dislike her.
10--Bella doesn't have to do anything to earn Edward's love; he loves her because she exists. Granted, all of us want to be loved for who we are, but who Bella actually is, outside of her relationship with Edward, is fairly empty. Other than reading and cooking, she seems to have no interests, no pre-Edward life, no interior life beyond him, and doesn't express any interest in the future. Bella does nothing to warrant his attention, much less his affection. She's pretty--which, given Bella's apparent lack of exercise or interest in fashion and makeup, is purely a genetic gift--and she smells good. That's it. He doesn't love her mind, or her sense of humor, or her character, or admire any special talent--you know, things that she'd have to work at to develop. Nope. She's pretty and smells good; the end. As an adult, I find that insulting and even a bit objectifying; blowup dolls can also look pretty and smell good too, you know. But, to many teens, that likely passes for je ne sais quoi.
Why does this book appeal to adult women, aka, Twilight Moms and why do I think they're full of it?
First, I want to say that, for my purposes, a "Twilight Mom" is a woman 25 or older, with or without children, who is as much a rabid fan as her teenage counterparts. I'm discounting women who read the books, like them, but aren't rabid. Hey, we all have our guilty pleasures; mine is Will Ferrell movies, the Harry Potter series, and Mad magazine--for others, it's the Twilight series. Second…well, I'm not entirely comfortable with craping on someone's fandom. As I said before, people in Hogwarts houses shouldn't throw stones. Their enjoyment might make me facepalm, but it's really harmless--or at least, doesn't harm me--and I sincerely have more respect for the out-and-proud Twilight Moms for publicly embracing their fandom than the closet-cases. Yes, even if I think that "something" is total crap. I should also add that, while I'd applaud a YA reader who notes the problems with the series, I don't fault them for not catching them; it's hard to catch some of the issues when your brian is drowning in hormonal soup, and you have neither witnessed nor experienced scary-bad relationships.
That said, I actually had to do Internet research because I genuinely can't see the appeal to adult women. Honest, I don't. It seems to boil down to standard romantic wish-fulfillment in general, and specifically--oh, to be young and in wuv again! Personally, my romantic needs are taken care of, thanks, and I remember being a teen in wuv sucking donkey doodle, but clearly the books address an emotional emptiness in these women that I simply don't have. Okay, fine; I'm hardly going to argue the correctness of a person's emotional needs. What really burrows under my skin and chews is this; how naive does and adult have to be to read the books and just see a story about teen wuv, rather than an abusive and possessive guy taking over the life of a vapid and vulnerable girl?
Let's take the fantasy element out of the story, and say that Edward is human and only 20 years her senior, rather than 100-ish:
Bella, a 17-year-old girl, moves to Washington to live with her dad. She is very self-sufficient, which is good, because neither parents seem very invested in raising her. Both of them are loving and polite, but Bella seems to be as much a parent to them as they are to her. She appears to have no interests or interior life, or any life prior to moving that the author thought worth mentioning. All it took was one plane ride for Bella to go from Miss Invisibility to It Girl; she's suddenly very popular at school, and eventually meets Edward, a 37-year-old man. He seems a bit of an odd duck and very old-fashioned. They kiss, and sleep together--which likely keeps her in a permanent state of arousal--but do not have sex. He follows her out of town, and breaks into her house to watch her sleep, which she thinks is his romantic way of showing that he cares. He tells her repeatedly that he wants to kill her, that he could kill her, and she sees evidence that he really is capable of following through--but she doesn't run. He also displays a sharp temper, and she sometimes feels scared of him. He tells her that he's no good for her, and tries to go away, but always comes back to her.
Oh yeah, baby. Give me more of that epic romance.
There are also serious logic flaws in the books. Consider:
1--Why do the "kid vampires" go to school? With the rising popularity of home schooling, it's really not necessary to go to school to keep up appearances. Do they go because they're bored? Because they want to better understand modern times? The question is never addressed, which is a shame, because there's something pathetic about an immortal creature repeating his junior year of high school for all eternity.
2--Edward can read minds--except, conveniently, Bella's. Yet, he was completely unaware how much he and his siblings stood out, until Bella told him as much.
3--Meyer presumes that interpersonal relationships change little over the years, and that psychological growth grinds to a halt when one becomes a vampire. Thus, the "kid vampires" will always think and behave like kids, particularly in relation to "Mom and Dad Vamp". We should also believe that Edward did not grow emotionally since his embrace 80-ish years ago, so that we aren't creeped out by the age difference. I think that Anne Rice handled this issue much more sensitively and realistically; I always loved Claudia, the woman stuck in a little girl's body, much more than Louis or Lestat.
4--Edward tells Bella that being a vampire is a bad thing, but Meyer doesn't show us any real downside. Gee, you get to be young and beautiful for all eternity, wicked fast and strong, with lots of time to perfect any skill you like and you get a special, personal gift; in Edward's case, mind-reading. So, what's so bad about being a vampire? Meyer's vampires are basically sparkly superheroes. Au contraire, the fans would no doubt argue:
Vampires exist by drinking human blood! Well, actually, they don't have to drink people's blood, and, contrary to what Edward says,we see nothing that indicates that it's really that difficult to abstain. Dr. Vampire (I don't remember his name) is around gory scenes every day, and hasn't started drinking from people's wounds. The four kid vampires go to school five days a week with walking blood bags--about half of which are female, most of whom menstruate--and there have been no problems. Edward yearns for Bella's blood--he calls it his personal heroin--yet he hasn't chomped down on her.
Vampires are damned! Er, by whom? Other than a quote from Genesis at the beginning and a ham-handed reference to Eve, God doesn't have much of a presence in the books, at least as far as I read. It's okay to tell a deity-free story, but you can't simultaneously mention damnation and take away the being (or beings) who would damn the character. Sorry, that doesn't make sense.
Vampires murder people! Well, people murder people; if we didn't, we wouldn't have so many religious and secular laws defining what murder is, and then forbidding it. This is the only point that makes some sense, but it's worth noting that we don't see Edward murder anyone up to the point where I called it a day. (I've read that he did kill an evil vampire at the end of the book, but notice the caveat--the vampire was evil, he was going to kill Bella. Edward didn't snuff a random person; he had a motive. It's clear that this is supposed to be murder under an extenuating circumstance, and shouldn't make us dislike Edward--or, I guess, worry about that pesky vampires-murder-people thing.)
Oh, and let's don't forget the implied-attempted-rape-as-cute-meet thing. Much as we'd all like to forget it, let's remember that the implied attempted rape was written solely so Edward could rescue our poor heroine.
Anyway, Twilight is not my thing intellectually or emotionally. Question; should I donate the book to Goodwill, or should I just chuck it in the trash? I have an almost visceral hatred of throwing away books, but I don't know if I want to risk contaminating a naive person with this schlock. What do you think?
Based upon how well the Twilight series fits into the library of books I enjoyed as a YA reader, my guess is probably not, though if I had, it would have been on the younger end of the scale, as early as 10, and up to 14 at the very latest. From 11 to 13, my favorite series was The Girls of Canby Hall. They're about a trio of teen roommates who attend a prestigious, all-girl boarding school in New England. While romance is part of the series, the girls have numerous interests and aspirations outside of boys, unlike Bella, who has no life outside of Edward.
From 14 to 18, my favorite series were:
The Chronicles of the Deryni, by Katherine Kurtz. These books were set in a sort of alternate medieval Europe, wherein the Deryni--people with magical powers--are increasingly marginalized and vilified by the Church, until, a century or so later, they begin to creep a bit out of the closet, so to speak, and slowly fight to regain respectability. If memory serves, there are three main trilogies, and I liked the Legends of Saint Camber of Culdi trilogy the best. Of course, if memory still serves, it was probably the most depressing too, so I guess that makes sense.
The Ladies of Mandrigyn (and the two follow-up books) by Barbara Hambly. These books are also set in an alternate medieval Europe. Magic has been squashed by an uber-wizard, and the story centers on a mercenary captain and his second. The books are violent, but not gratuitously so.
The Robotech Saga, by Jack McKinney. The books are based on the iconic cartoon series. Alien invasions, post-apocalyptic survival, death, violence, the works.
Necroscope, by Brian Lumley. In these horror novels, the main character can communicate with the dead, and goes around killing evil things, such as vampires. These vampires don't sparkle, and would certainly not refer to themselves as "vegetarians".
Deathlands, by James Axler. This series is set in a post-apocalyptic United States. They are very violent and fairly gory.
The Vampire Chronicals, by Anne Rice. While Rice writes with her own special brand of cheese, these books are still leaps and bounds superior to Twilight.
I also remember reading Gone With the Wind, The Scarlet Pimpernel, The Mists of Avalon, and various biographies of Viet Nam War vets.
I mean sure, I might have been a total Twihead, but I just don't see how that series fits into the above list. My guess is that, at most, I would have enjoyed the books for a hot second around 12 or 13 years old, and moved on. Much as it pains me to admit it, a lot of the probability of my reading and enjoying the books would likely have depended upon who read and enjoyed them at my school. I freely admit that I was as caste-conscious as any other teen; I would never have touched the series if it were well-liked by the popular kids. (A case where my snobbery might have actually done me some good.) I also can understand some of the appeal to YA readers, even though it hurts just to type that. Consider:
1--That's a whole lotta book! To many young adult readers--and many old adult readers who read like young adult readers--a thick book is, by definition, an intellectually stimulating book, and smart people read intellectually stimulating books. Ergo, you look smart with your nose stuck in that behemoth.
2--The allure of high school. Our culture is permeated with myths about high school, some of which are true, and a few are even positive; dances (especially prom), learning to drive, and a general freedom. Many YA readers look forward to this time, so reading about a high school girl would be interesting. I think the novelty would have worn off on me pretty quickly, as my school was a combination junior/senior high.
3--Bella lives the ideal teenage life, in that she pretty much does as she likes, and her parents are vague background noise; it doesn't seem that they'd be a serious impediment to her wishes, unless of course, it would be convenient for the plot. She has a car, and apparently enough money to buy whatever she wants.
4--The ugly duckling principle--one plane ride and she goes from Plain Jane to It Girl. The school day practically screeches to a halt when Bella is almost hit by a car. The boys fall all over themselves to get her attention. The hot, mysteeeeeeerious guy doesn't just like her, but, like-likes her.
5--Bella likes to read. I like to read. Like, OMG, Bella is kewl!!!
6--Bella hates volleyball. I hated gym class, and am still convinced that there's a circle of hell wherein you spend all of eternity playing volleyball.
7--Bella is clumsy. I am clumsy. Like, OMG, Bella is kewl!!! (Of course, it's worth noting that Bella's clumsiness is portrayed as charming, and allows her to be rescued. My clumsiness just makes people laugh at me.)
8--Romantic fulfillment. Do you remember your teenage crushes--specifically, the ones that were never fulfilled? The pining. The yearning. The angst and woe about every itty-bitty detail regarding your interaction with that person. Bella crushes, and the handsome, smart, dangerous cool guy "loves" her to the point of obsessive stalking. Oh, but wait! Following someone around and entering their bedroom at night to watch them sleep isn't creepy, nor is it stalking--it's wuv!
9--The only people who dislike her are jealous of her. (Okay, they dislike her because they're jealous, bad people, and it's convenient for the plot.) She's done nothing to warrant their enmity, and she knows why they dislike her.
10--Bella doesn't have to do anything to earn Edward's love; he loves her because she exists. Granted, all of us want to be loved for who we are, but who Bella actually is, outside of her relationship with Edward, is fairly empty. Other than reading and cooking, she seems to have no interests, no pre-Edward life, no interior life beyond him, and doesn't express any interest in the future. Bella does nothing to warrant his attention, much less his affection. She's pretty--which, given Bella's apparent lack of exercise or interest in fashion and makeup, is purely a genetic gift--and she smells good. That's it. He doesn't love her mind, or her sense of humor, or her character, or admire any special talent--you know, things that she'd have to work at to develop. Nope. She's pretty and smells good; the end. As an adult, I find that insulting and even a bit objectifying; blowup dolls can also look pretty and smell good too, you know. But, to many teens, that likely passes for je ne sais quoi.
Why does this book appeal to adult women, aka, Twilight Moms and why do I think they're full of it?
First, I want to say that, for my purposes, a "Twilight Mom" is a woman 25 or older, with or without children, who is as much a rabid fan as her teenage counterparts. I'm discounting women who read the books, like them, but aren't rabid. Hey, we all have our guilty pleasures; mine is Will Ferrell movies, the Harry Potter series, and Mad magazine--for others, it's the Twilight series. Second…well, I'm not entirely comfortable with craping on someone's fandom. As I said before, people in Hogwarts houses shouldn't throw stones. Their enjoyment might make me facepalm, but it's really harmless--or at least, doesn't harm me--and I sincerely have more respect for the out-and-proud Twilight Moms for publicly embracing their fandom than the closet-cases. Yes, even if I think that "something" is total crap. I should also add that, while I'd applaud a YA reader who notes the problems with the series, I don't fault them for not catching them; it's hard to catch some of the issues when your brian is drowning in hormonal soup, and you have neither witnessed nor experienced scary-bad relationships.
That said, I actually had to do Internet research because I genuinely can't see the appeal to adult women. Honest, I don't. It seems to boil down to standard romantic wish-fulfillment in general, and specifically--oh, to be young and in wuv again! Personally, my romantic needs are taken care of, thanks, and I remember being a teen in wuv sucking donkey doodle, but clearly the books address an emotional emptiness in these women that I simply don't have. Okay, fine; I'm hardly going to argue the correctness of a person's emotional needs. What really burrows under my skin and chews is this; how naive does and adult have to be to read the books and just see a story about teen wuv, rather than an abusive and possessive guy taking over the life of a vapid and vulnerable girl?
Let's take the fantasy element out of the story, and say that Edward is human and only 20 years her senior, rather than 100-ish:
Bella, a 17-year-old girl, moves to Washington to live with her dad. She is very self-sufficient, which is good, because neither parents seem very invested in raising her. Both of them are loving and polite, but Bella seems to be as much a parent to them as they are to her. She appears to have no interests or interior life, or any life prior to moving that the author thought worth mentioning. All it took was one plane ride for Bella to go from Miss Invisibility to It Girl; she's suddenly very popular at school, and eventually meets Edward, a 37-year-old man. He seems a bit of an odd duck and very old-fashioned. They kiss, and sleep together--which likely keeps her in a permanent state of arousal--but do not have sex. He follows her out of town, and breaks into her house to watch her sleep, which she thinks is his romantic way of showing that he cares. He tells her repeatedly that he wants to kill her, that he could kill her, and she sees evidence that he really is capable of following through--but she doesn't run. He also displays a sharp temper, and she sometimes feels scared of him. He tells her that he's no good for her, and tries to go away, but always comes back to her.
Oh yeah, baby. Give me more of that epic romance.
There are also serious logic flaws in the books. Consider:
1--Why do the "kid vampires" go to school? With the rising popularity of home schooling, it's really not necessary to go to school to keep up appearances. Do they go because they're bored? Because they want to better understand modern times? The question is never addressed, which is a shame, because there's something pathetic about an immortal creature repeating his junior year of high school for all eternity.
2--Edward can read minds--except, conveniently, Bella's. Yet, he was completely unaware how much he and his siblings stood out, until Bella told him as much.
3--Meyer presumes that interpersonal relationships change little over the years, and that psychological growth grinds to a halt when one becomes a vampire. Thus, the "kid vampires" will always think and behave like kids, particularly in relation to "Mom and Dad Vamp". We should also believe that Edward did not grow emotionally since his embrace 80-ish years ago, so that we aren't creeped out by the age difference. I think that Anne Rice handled this issue much more sensitively and realistically; I always loved Claudia, the woman stuck in a little girl's body, much more than Louis or Lestat.
4--Edward tells Bella that being a vampire is a bad thing, but Meyer doesn't show us any real downside. Gee, you get to be young and beautiful for all eternity, wicked fast and strong, with lots of time to perfect any skill you like and you get a special, personal gift; in Edward's case, mind-reading. So, what's so bad about being a vampire? Meyer's vampires are basically sparkly superheroes. Au contraire, the fans would no doubt argue:
Vampires exist by drinking human blood! Well, actually, they don't have to drink people's blood, and, contrary to what Edward says,we see nothing that indicates that it's really that difficult to abstain. Dr. Vampire (I don't remember his name) is around gory scenes every day, and hasn't started drinking from people's wounds. The four kid vampires go to school five days a week with walking blood bags--about half of which are female, most of whom menstruate--and there have been no problems. Edward yearns for Bella's blood--he calls it his personal heroin--yet he hasn't chomped down on her.
Vampires are damned! Er, by whom? Other than a quote from Genesis at the beginning and a ham-handed reference to Eve, God doesn't have much of a presence in the books, at least as far as I read. It's okay to tell a deity-free story, but you can't simultaneously mention damnation and take away the being (or beings) who would damn the character. Sorry, that doesn't make sense.
Vampires murder people! Well, people murder people; if we didn't, we wouldn't have so many religious and secular laws defining what murder is, and then forbidding it. This is the only point that makes some sense, but it's worth noting that we don't see Edward murder anyone up to the point where I called it a day. (I've read that he did kill an evil vampire at the end of the book, but notice the caveat--the vampire was evil, he was going to kill Bella. Edward didn't snuff a random person; he had a motive. It's clear that this is supposed to be murder under an extenuating circumstance, and shouldn't make us dislike Edward--or, I guess, worry about that pesky vampires-murder-people thing.)
Oh, and let's don't forget the implied-attempted-rape-as-cute-meet thing. Much as we'd all like to forget it, let's remember that the implied attempted rape was written solely so Edward could rescue our poor heroine.
Anyway, Twilight is not my thing intellectually or emotionally. Question; should I donate the book to Goodwill, or should I just chuck it in the trash? I have an almost visceral hatred of throwing away books, but I don't know if I want to risk contaminating a naive person with this schlock. What do you think?