ElvenAngel
I forget stuff because I had to make room in my he
I wrote this two years ago for the college's magazine/literary journal after being dragged into the content committee because I actually wrote shit and people knew it and because everyone else was lazy. I thought we were going to be way too serious and I suggested we lighten the content a little with some light-hearted satire. EVERYBODY was in agreement and I decided to poke some fun at the craze that around at the time: Twilight.
So I wrote this puppy up. I'll tell you how that ended up after you read it (or skim it).
---
In 2005, mid-aged and married mother Stephenie Meyer published the first book of what she calls 'The Twilight Saga', even after just one book. Now it’s 2009, four books (Twilight, Eclipse, New Moon and Breaking Dawn) and one movie later, she has become a high-profile celebrity and has in her grip a large number of faithful --even fanatical, occasionally-- readers and fans.
The question that arises is...does this writer and her vampire fiction deserve praise and following?
The answer is a resounding, stern and absolutely deadpan hell no.
And this is coming from someone who otherwise loves (properly written, carefully edited and above all, spell-checked) vampire and overall gothic fiction; with enough knowledge of the subject to not be confused with some self-important hacks from gossip magazines who claim to be literary experts and toss forth commentaries on books that are inaccurate at best. Against my will, I was drawn into this fad --because it is a fad-- of bad literature and even worse writer attitude and behavior. Before I knew it, my internal writer's alarm went off and blaring in my head, demanding me to investigate this literary craze and write about it. I fell for it, as I usually seem to do. So I attempted to read a bit of this so-called saga.
‘Saga’ isn’t quite as fitting as Meyer would like it to be. Sagas are epic tales of fantasy, adventure, tragedy and the occasional touch of romance—and usually written in stanzas. Twilight might have fantasy but it’s the kind that doesn’t quite work. I think more accurate words would be soap opera; lots of it. As for tragedy, well, that depends on what you think is tragic…or ridiculous.
I’m not even going to start on whether the books have romance or a perversion of it.
Trying to read this was the biggest mistake I've ever made, reading-wise. But I digress. Bottom line is, I have difficulty writing anything positive for this series or its writer, and heaven forbid I mention the fans. They're like a horde--though I do think that most of them make Tolkien's Orcs seem polite.
To say that Meyer's story is anything original or well-presented enough to deserve such praise and worship would be lying. It seems more honest to say that she had some dreams--or if you may, unfulfilled erotic fantasies--concerning what she so determinedly labels as ‘vampires’. She felt they were so exciting to be worth recording, which she later claimed in interviews, to have done ‘for herself’.
If they were meant ‘for herself’, why on earth did she publish them? Without going over them for editing and refining, no less—she admits to that. Even more so after she received about a dozen of rejection letters from publishers before somebody had the bad idea to publish her dream logs--If you take a step back, that’s what these books essentially are.
The worst outcome of this phenomenon is the shocking impact the books had on readers. It’s either touched on the repressed, sex and passion-depraved women; all the insecure, almost ignorant teenagers and the impressionable little girls and completely transformed them into squealing and obsessive fangirls who will not listen to reason; or Meyer’s somehow unlocked the secret to complete brainwashing. Some of them seem to think that everyone who disagrees with them about their precious books must either be ‘converted’—or punished!
If you haven't noticed yet, I’ve been holding back my opinions on it because I’m normally a blunt and honest person who sometimes doesn’t consider the feelings of others for the sake of truth. I thought that making my opinions public on this was too evil even for me! I tried to restrain myself thinking it had to go away eventually, if I ignored it enough!
Yet the fad did not go away. I’ve started criticizing the books openly, often at life’s risk as the majority of its fans seem to react very, very badly when their center of the universe is in question.
This reaction of some fans strikes me as very strange and immature. Ironically, this is observed on both younger and older readers, some of whom are mothers with daughters. They’re just as entranced—or brainwashed. I can’t comprehend this deep hate for anyone who contradicts their beliefs.
I have considered myself a ‘fangirl’ too, but I’ve never behaved in such a crazy manner. This is my philosophy: “Look, I like the damn thing. I know it has faults. I know it can be rubbish, but will you stop hammering me about how much you hate it and how stupid you think it is? I don't care what you think! I still like it.”
You see, there is no need to become physically aggressive. You just let the other know that you’re not about to change your mind and the matter is put to rest in a civilized manner. I can respect that. But some fans insist on turning you around and make you love what has taken over their head.
I’m supposed to talk a bit about the actual books and the story, which some fans I am acquainted with assume I have not yet experienced. That I need to be ‘illuminated’ from the beautiful and tragic love tale between a human and a vampire--
Oh God, I can’t do this.
Just go look up the plot summary on the Internet. I really cannot manage to get it out here without resulting in a pile of profanity.
I will say one thing: Twilight and all the books that go with it, is not literature.
It is, at best, the dream records of a housewife's fantasies, who manages to come off like she didn't get enough romance in her life and never fulfilled her own want for a 'bad boy' soul mate. She sounds like she hasn't had any satisfying sex at all, ever! Everyone has these kinds of ideas, but they aren't making books out of them and attempting to pass them off as literature. Never mind inflating their egos to the bursting point and spouting one arrogant notion after another.
Every time someone defines this kind of thing as literature I feel the urge to smash them. But then again, I have a classical concept of 'literature'. It might just be me, but these days even cook-books are passing as literature!
I’m not a literary critic with a difficult name, sitting on a high horse and preaching about literature. All the things mentioned in the following paragraphs are things that any reader can notice and understand too, if only they take a moment to get their head out of the book. That’s especially for those almost rabid fans. I know it’s very hard if you're a devoted fan of something to be objective about it. But it’s far from impossible: You just need to take off the candy-pink glasses, take a step back and judge the books as a literary work. That’s what proper fans ought to do, getting over the hype and appreciating the substance.
With those issues out of the way, I can safely tell you that Twilight is more or less a very poor piece of writing. To be very blunt, it’s a pile of drivel and I am being lenient. Yes, I did try to read the first book. I confess that I have rarely read books that have caused me actual pain. The last one was on literary criticism theory, but it was nothing compared to this. Halfway through, I was in too much pain--mental and physical--to continue. I just couldn't do it and I'm not even going try picking it up again. Unless I suddenly turn violently masochistic. But if I do, I'll probably be stabbing my eyes out before I even think of picking Twilight up again.
You see, Meyer is far from a genius or even talented writer. She's competent at best and you don't need to be a critic to tell that she's basically abusing a thesaurus in order to cover up her lack of real storytelling with some of the most unnecessarily fancy writing ever. Every noun is followed by half a dozen adjectives; every sentence is filled with needless decorative words. It's painful to read! This is called purple prose. Purple prose is text written in such an over-the-top, extravagant, over-decorative, and flowery manner that it breaks the flow of the story and draws more attention to itself than what it’s talking about. It employs exaggerated rhetorical effects and pathos, trying to manipulate the reader into responding to it.
And if you like it, you've either got the most enduring brain ever...or just don't know any better. Go on, try to read this page sometime: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PurpleProse
Writers like George Orwell were more than right to establish rules in their own writing, like "Never use a long word where a short one will do" and "If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out". These rules have become accepted practice over time. And now, if you think that an important, classical writer like Orwell can be overturned by a lime-light writer like Meyer…sorry, but you're foolish.
This next point can vary from individual to individual, but generally, it is considered smart to do research before you write about something that you have little knowledge about. So that you don't turn out to look ignorant and silly. Unless of course, you don't give a dime about consistency, how believable you are, or how big a fool you make out of yourself. I'm thinking that Meyer doesn't care if she looks like an ignorant fool. She didn't even bother to visit the place she set her book in, or to even research the basic principles of the center of the books: Vampires!
And yes, she admitted so publicly. She’s admitted, several times, to not even have read Stoker’s ‘Count Dracula’, the quintessential vampire story. She claims she perused the Internet a little but it was clearly not enough. I suspect that it was because what she did see didn’t fit her sugar-coated, glittery fantasy. Sure, the thousands of writers or college students doing serious researching before they write essays or novels are losers.
Let’s move on to the protagonists, Edward and Bella. I'm a little confused here. Am I the only one who didn't see any personality whatsoever in these two? Bella just seems to me like the lamest Mary-Sue ever made. Mary-Sue is a term used to describe characters that can’t be taken seriously because of their utter lack of flaws and their over-idealized features. You can’t relate to them. They’re too ostentatious for the audience and the author always seems to favor them to an overwhelming degree and making them the absolute focus of the plot, to the point where readers get sick of the character.
That’s what happens with Bella. She's Meyer's pet; there's nothing really wrong or real about her. She has no flaws except for a supposedly endearing clumsiness that ends up making her look incompetent. She's the prettiest girl in school, she gets the undeniable and complete attention of just about everyone in school—which she then proceeds to whine about-- becomes the target of attention for every boy and the envy of every girl and she's the smartest--oh wait.
The intelligence thing...I might be mistaken on that—or rather Meyer could be, because she claims that Bella is very intelligent. However, I never once saw Bella exhibit any of that claimed intelligence. I don't get that; I thought that when you state a character to be smart, you're going to actually make sure you show that he uses that intelligence in the story. You know, the old ‘show, don’t tell’ axiom. Bella never seems to do that; she doesn’t think before she acts.
The most I get out of her is that she thinks she's such a special snowflake and that the whole world turns just for her; which is ridiculous.
Edward isn't any better. The first thing that comes to me when I consider this guy is the Byronic hero: An idealized but flawed character (think of Mr. Rochester in Jane Eyre, Heathcliff from Wuthering Heights or the Phantom from Phantom of the Opera). But the problem with Edward is that he doesn’t even come properly close to the type because he doesn't have any flaws. If anything, he’s a parody of the Byronic hero and a Mary-Sue himself. Edward's constantly described as some kind of avatar of male beauty and perfection—like a classical or Renaissance statue. He's so handsome, so sensual, so gorgeous, so erotic, so boringly perfect.
Apparently he can send Bella into a fangirl stupor--by accident!
Yet, he really doesn't have any specific description of his features to make him seem real. It’s as if Meyer is expecting us to fill in the blanks. Why is that? Is she expecting her fans to just imagine Edward by superimposing their very own dream man on him? Why? She couldn't think of a way to make him actually interesting, except keep on repeating how pretty he is until we scream uncle and start believing it, or is it just a lack of actual creativity and grasp of the English language on Meyer's part? I don't want to have to use my creativity to fill the gaps of a character because the writer is too incompetent or bored to make an interesting one on her own.
Now, the whole 'bad/dangerous boy' image is getting degrading. Let's get one thing straight; you're never going to get hooked up with a really bad boy who will be jealous, protective and yet treat you like a queen. If you do find a bad boy who is jealous to the point of being territorial, you'll likely end up in prison with him because he'll be using you for God knows what means--or chopped up in a ditch when he gets bored of you and you don't want to get the hell out, or because his abusing went too far.
Let’s look at the whole deal about Edward creeping in Bella's room to watch her sleep. Yes, that’s what he does at some point, he watches her sleep. In her bedroom. In the middle of the night! There's a technical word for that: Stalker. You know what stalkers end up doing? They end up killing their targets because they're insane or going to jail because someone noticed how bloody creepy it is.
Where does that leave their "relationship", then? Downright abusive. Bella gave up her ambitions (if she ever had any), her friends and her family because she fell in love with a stalker. It’s as though she has anything else in her life, no hobbies and no interests, other than this obsession with Edward. Aren't relationships supposed to benefit both partners? You know, give something and gain something. Relationships are supposed to make them better people. Fill in the gaps. Make the two of one mind and soul. Or something like that, anyway. I'm not seeing that anywhere with them.
I know what you're thinking; Edward hasn't done anything to harm Bella.
I really like Wikipedia's accurate definition of what abusive relationship is: "Abusive relationships are often characterized by jealousy, emotional withholding, lack of intimacy, infidelity, sexual coercion, verbal abuse, broken promises, physical violence, control games and power plays." - Taken from Wikipedia.
I like it exactly because it’s telling the truth. Most people seem to have the wrong idea of what an abusive relationship is. They think it is entirely physical. That’s something only jerks and drunkard husbands do to their wives who were foolish and unlucky enough to marry them.
It’s true though; physical violence is only one tiny part of abuse. Mental and emotional abuse can traumatize someone much more permanently than beating ever can. Edward and Bella's relationship seems to be shock full of jealousy, lack of intimacy, sexual coercion, broken promises and a lot of controlling behavior. For example, look what happened when Bella met Jacob. Edward seemed to have some kind of panic attack that she might prefer Jacob over him and forced her to choose between them. What kind of relationship is that?! It’s like he knows that all that's keeping her close to him is his good looks!
I smell the foul stench of insecurity!
The best part of this is that Bella, who is supposed to be smart and educated--seemingly doesn't realize any of this. She coyly thinks that he just does it because he loves her and everything is fine and dandy! She's already showing textbook signs of abuse. When they do get married, the next morning after they consummate the marriage, Bella is left with more bruises than a battered wife--and having felt nothing.
And then there's the baby in the last book... Good God, what was that!? It’s Satan incarnate! Eating its mom from the inside! Breaking her spine in delivery! Then insta-growing up so that Meyer could dodge all the nasty, smelly, noisy, unpleasant things that are associated with babies. That kid with a name like cheese is just a perfect little snowflake, just like mommy.
And mommy's ex-sort-of-boyfriend-furball, Jacob, falls in love with the toddler and the toddler swears undying love for him! That’s borderline pedophilia, bestiality and has to be world-record Mary-Sueness!
Yeah, this is a nice thing to teach young kids who read the books these days; it’s ok to be in a relationship that smothers your individuality and reduces you to a faceless, pretty-to-a-gag-inducing boy or girl. Teach little girls to want a monster baby that will kill them. I've heard people go on about "It’s just a book! It’s just fiction!" and that no one is influenced.
Perhaps ironically, our world has come this far largely because of things people wrote and which others then read.
The French Revolution just happened totally at random! It really was not because the middle class read about the American Revolution! Benjamin Franklin's works had nothing to do with it! Robespierre totally did not read Rousseau before he wrote his stuff! Julius Vern's stories really had nothing to do with impacting creations like the submarine and concepts like putting a man on the moon!
The frustrating thing is that many of the books’ fans claim that Twilight is the literary miracle of the century, or the best book ever written. They claim Shakespeare is nothing to it. What's worse, Meyer is fueling these notions of theirs. In one of her recent blogs she openly declared ‘Wuthering Heights’, among others, to be an inferior book--because she said so.
My message to the fans and Meyer, over this issue: A book is not bad because one incompetent woman says so. It's not going to hurt you to read a book that's going to make you think. You aren't going to die from shock.
Bottom line, it’s really hard to see a consistent, actual plot in this story. What we mostly have is context—and a lot of talking about how gorgeous Edward is. There's no escalation, no true climax, no development of character, no change. It’s like Meyer is afraid of writing about change! All she seems to write about is how perfect Edward is and how much Bella is out of her senses for him; to the point of making readers sick of him.
Oh, and I left the best bit for last.
Honestly now...how can you read about sunlight producing sparkling vampires and not want to hit your forehead so hard that your brain's going to bounce around for hours? Sunlight is supposed to kill vampires! Bram Stoker must be frothing in his grave.
Meyer’s just taken out everything that makes vampires what they are, destroying one of the most well-loved horror-genre creatures.
Sparkling vampires...look, it’s a JOKE, any way you see it. And the unhinged fans of the series don’t seem to notice. They can’t stop thinking it’s hot and hot. But it’s not. It’s sad, pathetic and somewhat seriously disturbing in an I-am-totally-disgusted way.
Lastly, not wishing to add insult to injury, but the Twilight movie was less than average. At least it was a small dash better than the book. Allow me, though, to point out the opinions of the very protagonists, on the books and story they were asked to portray.
Robert Pattinson, who played Edward, had this to say: “When I read it, I was convinced Stephenie was convinced that she was Bella, and it was like a book that wasn’t supposed to be published. It was like reading her sexual fantasy, especially when she said it was based on a dream and it was like, ‘Oh I’ve had this dream about this really sexy guy,’ and she just writes this book about it. Like some things about Edward are so specific, I was just convinced, like, ‘This woman is mad. She’s completely mad and she’s in love with her own fictional creation.’ And sometimes you would feel uncomfortable reading this thing. It’s kind of a sick pleasure in a lot of ways.” – Taken from Topless Robot: http://www.toplessrobot.com/2008/11/everyone_loves_twilight_except_for_the_stars_and_m.php
While Kristen Steward, the movie’s Bella, was far more direct to the fans—in a way I find appropriately delicious. “I was like, ‘You guys are celebrating something that has not come true yet. So, you are really retarded and have nothing to do with this creative process and I really don’t want to hear you celebrate in front of me. Get out of here!" – Taken from Topless Robot, as above.
All this just makes me all the more eager for the time when this will be over. The Harry Potter tide passed (at least that was pleasant as a reading experience) and so the Twilight one needs to pass.
---
So anyway I wrote this up and presented it to the committee. Almost everyone loved it and chuckled about it. So what do you think happened? The vocal majority prevailed and it was published?
Nope.
The Editor in Chief, unfortunately, was a complete Twitard and got the article shunted the way of the dodos by stepping her foot down. And she did it on the very last day of submissions, giving me or anyone else no time to make an appeal about reconsidering. She didn't even bother to give me a diplomatic excuse when I asked her about it. She just outright admitted it was because it 'bashed' Twilight.
I've chuckled about this ever since and published it everywhere else I could. The entire campus read it anyway and for a while afterwards I was death-glared by fangirls around campus. It was hilarious. Scary as hell but hilarious.
So I wrote this puppy up. I'll tell you how that ended up after you read it (or skim it).
---
The Twilight Phenomenon
- An editor’s take -
- An editor’s take -
In 2005, mid-aged and married mother Stephenie Meyer published the first book of what she calls 'The Twilight Saga', even after just one book. Now it’s 2009, four books (Twilight, Eclipse, New Moon and Breaking Dawn) and one movie later, she has become a high-profile celebrity and has in her grip a large number of faithful --even fanatical, occasionally-- readers and fans.
The question that arises is...does this writer and her vampire fiction deserve praise and following?
The answer is a resounding, stern and absolutely deadpan hell no.
And this is coming from someone who otherwise loves (properly written, carefully edited and above all, spell-checked) vampire and overall gothic fiction; with enough knowledge of the subject to not be confused with some self-important hacks from gossip magazines who claim to be literary experts and toss forth commentaries on books that are inaccurate at best. Against my will, I was drawn into this fad --because it is a fad-- of bad literature and even worse writer attitude and behavior. Before I knew it, my internal writer's alarm went off and blaring in my head, demanding me to investigate this literary craze and write about it. I fell for it, as I usually seem to do. So I attempted to read a bit of this so-called saga.
‘Saga’ isn’t quite as fitting as Meyer would like it to be. Sagas are epic tales of fantasy, adventure, tragedy and the occasional touch of romance—and usually written in stanzas. Twilight might have fantasy but it’s the kind that doesn’t quite work. I think more accurate words would be soap opera; lots of it. As for tragedy, well, that depends on what you think is tragic…or ridiculous.
I’m not even going to start on whether the books have romance or a perversion of it.
Trying to read this was the biggest mistake I've ever made, reading-wise. But I digress. Bottom line is, I have difficulty writing anything positive for this series or its writer, and heaven forbid I mention the fans. They're like a horde--though I do think that most of them make Tolkien's Orcs seem polite.
To say that Meyer's story is anything original or well-presented enough to deserve such praise and worship would be lying. It seems more honest to say that she had some dreams--or if you may, unfulfilled erotic fantasies--concerning what she so determinedly labels as ‘vampires’. She felt they were so exciting to be worth recording, which she later claimed in interviews, to have done ‘for herself’.
If they were meant ‘for herself’, why on earth did she publish them? Without going over them for editing and refining, no less—she admits to that. Even more so after she received about a dozen of rejection letters from publishers before somebody had the bad idea to publish her dream logs--If you take a step back, that’s what these books essentially are.
The worst outcome of this phenomenon is the shocking impact the books had on readers. It’s either touched on the repressed, sex and passion-depraved women; all the insecure, almost ignorant teenagers and the impressionable little girls and completely transformed them into squealing and obsessive fangirls who will not listen to reason; or Meyer’s somehow unlocked the secret to complete brainwashing. Some of them seem to think that everyone who disagrees with them about their precious books must either be ‘converted’—or punished!
If you haven't noticed yet, I’ve been holding back my opinions on it because I’m normally a blunt and honest person who sometimes doesn’t consider the feelings of others for the sake of truth. I thought that making my opinions public on this was too evil even for me! I tried to restrain myself thinking it had to go away eventually, if I ignored it enough!
Yet the fad did not go away. I’ve started criticizing the books openly, often at life’s risk as the majority of its fans seem to react very, very badly when their center of the universe is in question.
This reaction of some fans strikes me as very strange and immature. Ironically, this is observed on both younger and older readers, some of whom are mothers with daughters. They’re just as entranced—or brainwashed. I can’t comprehend this deep hate for anyone who contradicts their beliefs.
I have considered myself a ‘fangirl’ too, but I’ve never behaved in such a crazy manner. This is my philosophy: “Look, I like the damn thing. I know it has faults. I know it can be rubbish, but will you stop hammering me about how much you hate it and how stupid you think it is? I don't care what you think! I still like it.”
You see, there is no need to become physically aggressive. You just let the other know that you’re not about to change your mind and the matter is put to rest in a civilized manner. I can respect that. But some fans insist on turning you around and make you love what has taken over their head.
I’m supposed to talk a bit about the actual books and the story, which some fans I am acquainted with assume I have not yet experienced. That I need to be ‘illuminated’ from the beautiful and tragic love tale between a human and a vampire--
Oh God, I can’t do this.
Just go look up the plot summary on the Internet. I really cannot manage to get it out here without resulting in a pile of profanity.
I will say one thing: Twilight and all the books that go with it, is not literature.
It is, at best, the dream records of a housewife's fantasies, who manages to come off like she didn't get enough romance in her life and never fulfilled her own want for a 'bad boy' soul mate. She sounds like she hasn't had any satisfying sex at all, ever! Everyone has these kinds of ideas, but they aren't making books out of them and attempting to pass them off as literature. Never mind inflating their egos to the bursting point and spouting one arrogant notion after another.
Every time someone defines this kind of thing as literature I feel the urge to smash them. But then again, I have a classical concept of 'literature'. It might just be me, but these days even cook-books are passing as literature!
I’m not a literary critic with a difficult name, sitting on a high horse and preaching about literature. All the things mentioned in the following paragraphs are things that any reader can notice and understand too, if only they take a moment to get their head out of the book. That’s especially for those almost rabid fans. I know it’s very hard if you're a devoted fan of something to be objective about it. But it’s far from impossible: You just need to take off the candy-pink glasses, take a step back and judge the books as a literary work. That’s what proper fans ought to do, getting over the hype and appreciating the substance.
With those issues out of the way, I can safely tell you that Twilight is more or less a very poor piece of writing. To be very blunt, it’s a pile of drivel and I am being lenient. Yes, I did try to read the first book. I confess that I have rarely read books that have caused me actual pain. The last one was on literary criticism theory, but it was nothing compared to this. Halfway through, I was in too much pain--mental and physical--to continue. I just couldn't do it and I'm not even going try picking it up again. Unless I suddenly turn violently masochistic. But if I do, I'll probably be stabbing my eyes out before I even think of picking Twilight up again.
You see, Meyer is far from a genius or even talented writer. She's competent at best and you don't need to be a critic to tell that she's basically abusing a thesaurus in order to cover up her lack of real storytelling with some of the most unnecessarily fancy writing ever. Every noun is followed by half a dozen adjectives; every sentence is filled with needless decorative words. It's painful to read! This is called purple prose. Purple prose is text written in such an over-the-top, extravagant, over-decorative, and flowery manner that it breaks the flow of the story and draws more attention to itself than what it’s talking about. It employs exaggerated rhetorical effects and pathos, trying to manipulate the reader into responding to it.
And if you like it, you've either got the most enduring brain ever...or just don't know any better. Go on, try to read this page sometime: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PurpleProse
Writers like George Orwell were more than right to establish rules in their own writing, like "Never use a long word where a short one will do" and "If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out". These rules have become accepted practice over time. And now, if you think that an important, classical writer like Orwell can be overturned by a lime-light writer like Meyer…sorry, but you're foolish.
This next point can vary from individual to individual, but generally, it is considered smart to do research before you write about something that you have little knowledge about. So that you don't turn out to look ignorant and silly. Unless of course, you don't give a dime about consistency, how believable you are, or how big a fool you make out of yourself. I'm thinking that Meyer doesn't care if she looks like an ignorant fool. She didn't even bother to visit the place she set her book in, or to even research the basic principles of the center of the books: Vampires!
And yes, she admitted so publicly. She’s admitted, several times, to not even have read Stoker’s ‘Count Dracula’, the quintessential vampire story. She claims she perused the Internet a little but it was clearly not enough. I suspect that it was because what she did see didn’t fit her sugar-coated, glittery fantasy. Sure, the thousands of writers or college students doing serious researching before they write essays or novels are losers.
Let’s move on to the protagonists, Edward and Bella. I'm a little confused here. Am I the only one who didn't see any personality whatsoever in these two? Bella just seems to me like the lamest Mary-Sue ever made. Mary-Sue is a term used to describe characters that can’t be taken seriously because of their utter lack of flaws and their over-idealized features. You can’t relate to them. They’re too ostentatious for the audience and the author always seems to favor them to an overwhelming degree and making them the absolute focus of the plot, to the point where readers get sick of the character.
That’s what happens with Bella. She's Meyer's pet; there's nothing really wrong or real about her. She has no flaws except for a supposedly endearing clumsiness that ends up making her look incompetent. She's the prettiest girl in school, she gets the undeniable and complete attention of just about everyone in school—which she then proceeds to whine about-- becomes the target of attention for every boy and the envy of every girl and she's the smartest--oh wait.
The intelligence thing...I might be mistaken on that—or rather Meyer could be, because she claims that Bella is very intelligent. However, I never once saw Bella exhibit any of that claimed intelligence. I don't get that; I thought that when you state a character to be smart, you're going to actually make sure you show that he uses that intelligence in the story. You know, the old ‘show, don’t tell’ axiom. Bella never seems to do that; she doesn’t think before she acts.
The most I get out of her is that she thinks she's such a special snowflake and that the whole world turns just for her; which is ridiculous.
Edward isn't any better. The first thing that comes to me when I consider this guy is the Byronic hero: An idealized but flawed character (think of Mr. Rochester in Jane Eyre, Heathcliff from Wuthering Heights or the Phantom from Phantom of the Opera). But the problem with Edward is that he doesn’t even come properly close to the type because he doesn't have any flaws. If anything, he’s a parody of the Byronic hero and a Mary-Sue himself. Edward's constantly described as some kind of avatar of male beauty and perfection—like a classical or Renaissance statue. He's so handsome, so sensual, so gorgeous, so erotic, so boringly perfect.
Apparently he can send Bella into a fangirl stupor--by accident!
Yet, he really doesn't have any specific description of his features to make him seem real. It’s as if Meyer is expecting us to fill in the blanks. Why is that? Is she expecting her fans to just imagine Edward by superimposing their very own dream man on him? Why? She couldn't think of a way to make him actually interesting, except keep on repeating how pretty he is until we scream uncle and start believing it, or is it just a lack of actual creativity and grasp of the English language on Meyer's part? I don't want to have to use my creativity to fill the gaps of a character because the writer is too incompetent or bored to make an interesting one on her own.
Now, the whole 'bad/dangerous boy' image is getting degrading. Let's get one thing straight; you're never going to get hooked up with a really bad boy who will be jealous, protective and yet treat you like a queen. If you do find a bad boy who is jealous to the point of being territorial, you'll likely end up in prison with him because he'll be using you for God knows what means--or chopped up in a ditch when he gets bored of you and you don't want to get the hell out, or because his abusing went too far.
Let’s look at the whole deal about Edward creeping in Bella's room to watch her sleep. Yes, that’s what he does at some point, he watches her sleep. In her bedroom. In the middle of the night! There's a technical word for that: Stalker. You know what stalkers end up doing? They end up killing their targets because they're insane or going to jail because someone noticed how bloody creepy it is.
Where does that leave their "relationship", then? Downright abusive. Bella gave up her ambitions (if she ever had any), her friends and her family because she fell in love with a stalker. It’s as though she has anything else in her life, no hobbies and no interests, other than this obsession with Edward. Aren't relationships supposed to benefit both partners? You know, give something and gain something. Relationships are supposed to make them better people. Fill in the gaps. Make the two of one mind and soul. Or something like that, anyway. I'm not seeing that anywhere with them.
I know what you're thinking; Edward hasn't done anything to harm Bella.
I really like Wikipedia's accurate definition of what abusive relationship is: "Abusive relationships are often characterized by jealousy, emotional withholding, lack of intimacy, infidelity, sexual coercion, verbal abuse, broken promises, physical violence, control games and power plays." - Taken from Wikipedia.
I like it exactly because it’s telling the truth. Most people seem to have the wrong idea of what an abusive relationship is. They think it is entirely physical. That’s something only jerks and drunkard husbands do to their wives who were foolish and unlucky enough to marry them.
It’s true though; physical violence is only one tiny part of abuse. Mental and emotional abuse can traumatize someone much more permanently than beating ever can. Edward and Bella's relationship seems to be shock full of jealousy, lack of intimacy, sexual coercion, broken promises and a lot of controlling behavior. For example, look what happened when Bella met Jacob. Edward seemed to have some kind of panic attack that she might prefer Jacob over him and forced her to choose between them. What kind of relationship is that?! It’s like he knows that all that's keeping her close to him is his good looks!
I smell the foul stench of insecurity!
The best part of this is that Bella, who is supposed to be smart and educated--seemingly doesn't realize any of this. She coyly thinks that he just does it because he loves her and everything is fine and dandy! She's already showing textbook signs of abuse. When they do get married, the next morning after they consummate the marriage, Bella is left with more bruises than a battered wife--and having felt nothing.
And then there's the baby in the last book... Good God, what was that!? It’s Satan incarnate! Eating its mom from the inside! Breaking her spine in delivery! Then insta-growing up so that Meyer could dodge all the nasty, smelly, noisy, unpleasant things that are associated with babies. That kid with a name like cheese is just a perfect little snowflake, just like mommy.
And mommy's ex-sort-of-boyfriend-furball, Jacob, falls in love with the toddler and the toddler swears undying love for him! That’s borderline pedophilia, bestiality and has to be world-record Mary-Sueness!
Yeah, this is a nice thing to teach young kids who read the books these days; it’s ok to be in a relationship that smothers your individuality and reduces you to a faceless, pretty-to-a-gag-inducing boy or girl. Teach little girls to want a monster baby that will kill them. I've heard people go on about "It’s just a book! It’s just fiction!" and that no one is influenced.
Perhaps ironically, our world has come this far largely because of things people wrote and which others then read.
The French Revolution just happened totally at random! It really was not because the middle class read about the American Revolution! Benjamin Franklin's works had nothing to do with it! Robespierre totally did not read Rousseau before he wrote his stuff! Julius Vern's stories really had nothing to do with impacting creations like the submarine and concepts like putting a man on the moon!
The frustrating thing is that many of the books’ fans claim that Twilight is the literary miracle of the century, or the best book ever written. They claim Shakespeare is nothing to it. What's worse, Meyer is fueling these notions of theirs. In one of her recent blogs she openly declared ‘Wuthering Heights’, among others, to be an inferior book--because she said so.
My message to the fans and Meyer, over this issue: A book is not bad because one incompetent woman says so. It's not going to hurt you to read a book that's going to make you think. You aren't going to die from shock.
Bottom line, it’s really hard to see a consistent, actual plot in this story. What we mostly have is context—and a lot of talking about how gorgeous Edward is. There's no escalation, no true climax, no development of character, no change. It’s like Meyer is afraid of writing about change! All she seems to write about is how perfect Edward is and how much Bella is out of her senses for him; to the point of making readers sick of him.
Oh, and I left the best bit for last.
Honestly now...how can you read about sunlight producing sparkling vampires and not want to hit your forehead so hard that your brain's going to bounce around for hours? Sunlight is supposed to kill vampires! Bram Stoker must be frothing in his grave.
Meyer’s just taken out everything that makes vampires what they are, destroying one of the most well-loved horror-genre creatures.
Sparkling vampires...look, it’s a JOKE, any way you see it. And the unhinged fans of the series don’t seem to notice. They can’t stop thinking it’s hot and hot. But it’s not. It’s sad, pathetic and somewhat seriously disturbing in an I-am-totally-disgusted way.
Lastly, not wishing to add insult to injury, but the Twilight movie was less than average. At least it was a small dash better than the book. Allow me, though, to point out the opinions of the very protagonists, on the books and story they were asked to portray.
Robert Pattinson, who played Edward, had this to say: “When I read it, I was convinced Stephenie was convinced that she was Bella, and it was like a book that wasn’t supposed to be published. It was like reading her sexual fantasy, especially when she said it was based on a dream and it was like, ‘Oh I’ve had this dream about this really sexy guy,’ and she just writes this book about it. Like some things about Edward are so specific, I was just convinced, like, ‘This woman is mad. She’s completely mad and she’s in love with her own fictional creation.’ And sometimes you would feel uncomfortable reading this thing. It’s kind of a sick pleasure in a lot of ways.” – Taken from Topless Robot: http://www.toplessrobot.com/2008/11/everyone_loves_twilight_except_for_the_stars_and_m.php
While Kristen Steward, the movie’s Bella, was far more direct to the fans—in a way I find appropriately delicious. “I was like, ‘You guys are celebrating something that has not come true yet. So, you are really retarded and have nothing to do with this creative process and I really don’t want to hear you celebrate in front of me. Get out of here!" – Taken from Topless Robot, as above.
All this just makes me all the more eager for the time when this will be over. The Harry Potter tide passed (at least that was pleasant as a reading experience) and so the Twilight one needs to pass.
---
So anyway I wrote this up and presented it to the committee. Almost everyone loved it and chuckled about it. So what do you think happened? The vocal majority prevailed and it was published?
Nope.
The Editor in Chief, unfortunately, was a complete Twitard and got the article shunted the way of the dodos by stepping her foot down. And she did it on the very last day of submissions, giving me or anyone else no time to make an appeal about reconsidering. She didn't even bother to give me a diplomatic excuse when I asked her about it. She just outright admitted it was because it 'bashed' Twilight.
I've chuckled about this ever since and published it everywhere else I could. The entire campus read it anyway and for a while afterwards I was death-glared by fangirls around campus. It was hilarious. Scary as hell but hilarious.