the delphic expanse

Twilight

Discuss non Trek books and book series here.

Twilight

Postby creek_chub » Wed Aug 03, 2011 5:20 pm

Ok, so I have this personal rule that I'm not allowed to make fun of a book I've never read. So I slogged through ALL FOUR BOOKS of the Twilight series back when I lived in Utah. Four books worth of reading that I will never get back (my apologies to anyone who actually liked these books.)

Anyway, once upon a time I came upon this livejournal post that is not only a parody of the series (warning, I quickly learned not to eat or drink while reading this) but also offers an interesting critique of the work based on LDS beliefs.

I'm also curious to hear the opinions of these books from everyone hear who has read them. Discuss!
creek_chub
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Twilight

Postby Brandyjane » Thu Aug 04, 2011 9:37 am

That is too funny! Thanks for sharing. I read the first two books a few years ago. I didn't hate them, but I didn't fall in love with them, either. Somehow I convinced my husband to watch the first movie with me. He is still making fun of it on a regular basis. The scenes where Edward carries Bella through the forest really, really don't film well. The biggest problem I had with it is that Edward and Bella have a pretty dysfunctional relationship: he tells her he wants to kill her, but instead of running away, she sees it as proof that they are meant to be together. I'm not sure that's the lesson we want teenage girls to get! But, for all that, I have to admit that I did enjoy the first book quite a bit. It will never be on my list of all-time favorites, but I liked it. One of these days I'll probably give them another try and read the whole series, but for now I'm reading the Southern Vampire novels that True Blood is based on. I've only read the first one, but so far Bill is waaay sexier than Edward!
Brandyjane
Lt. Commander
 
Posts: 359
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:18 am

Re: Twilight

Postby Honeybee » Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:32 am

I had student write a long, thoughtful paper about the Twilight series, which I had not read at the time, but she did also call them out for being vehemently anti-feminist. Bella's only function is to nurture and care for men or children, either her father or later her husband and child. Edward shames her for wanting to have sex outside of marriage very early on, and it is a very dysfunctional and abusive relationship. But as far as the book is concerned, Edward has a right to abuse her if she is not submissive to him as she should be. It's not S&M in a good way, it's hard core misogyny. I eventually slogged through the first book, and it wasn't easy for me. Much of it made me cringe, especially the underlying message of men being in charge, women submitting.

Jacob, the werewolf, symbolizes secular society and its evils. I remembered praising the character in a discussion group and I was told that made me on Team Jacob. My students got my shirt that says Team Jacob! One of the good things about fandom these days is that people who were on Team Jacob could write their own stories where Bella rejected the abusive Edward in favor of Jacob, who had his own problems but was not nearly such a bad choice. This is a fantastic example of when its healthy to reject canon and why fans should feel empowered to create their own stories. The bottom line is that Jacob is right when he says the Edward is bad for Bella, and it's no accident so many fans of the book agreed.

But most scholars, and there are scholars who study lousy books that become cultural phenomenon, do think that the Vampires are stand ins for Mormons. However, this goes over a lot of the fans heads.

I never judge young, female fans of the books. There is something captivating about the story. I wanted Buffy and Angel to get together, even when I knew it was a bad idea. What I do say is, relationships in fiction are one thing, relationships in real life are another.

However, I maintain it is a attempt to undo the feminism of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. In that story, Buffy and Angel could never be together after he abused her and tried to kill her, even though his "other" persona Angelus did the abusing. Joss Whedon always planned that ship to be a metaphor for an abusive relationship and despite heavy pressure from fans to give Buffy and Angel a happily ever after, Joss stuck to his guns. Abusive relationships don't end happily, even if the guy reforms. I will always respect Joss for that.

I have a couple of friends who run The Journal of Dracula Studies, and they loathe Twilight for being poor quality and encouraging abusive, controlling relationships. But there's no denying that the story resonates with a lot of people.
User avatar
Honeybee
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5634
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Twilight

Postby creek_chub » Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:57 pm

I recognize that, had I read these books as a teenager, I probably would have been just as swoon-y over Edward. It's hard to sort out the serious stuff when you're swimming in hormones...which is why it makes me uncomfortable that such an obviously abusive relationship is being so glorified not just in the book, but outside it as well. Now, I'm not an advocate of censorship (quite against it, actually) but I seriously wish there was some tempering of the idea that Edward is THE epitome of a perfect man. Yes, relationships in fiction are quite diffferent from relationships in real life...the unfortunate main difference being that abuse in fiction is too often romanticized.

I never watched Buffy, but a female-driven show that I absolutely loved (and still do...I swear I'm going to write a thesis someday on just why this show kicks so much butt) was Charmed. In this show, Pheobe falls for a half-human/half-demon and over the course of several seasons they fall in love (having met when he was sent to kill her and her sisters) he promises to be good, he fails, he exorcises his demon side, he becomes posessed by the source of all evil, and finally the sisters vanquish him. Through this all, I was definitely rooting for them to get together. It was actually in a moment of clarity not too long ago that I realized just how smart the writers were in keeping the two apart. And this is having once been in an abusive relationship myself.

Honeybee, I find it interesting that you say it's an attempt to undo the feminism of Buffy. I read a quote from Meyers who said she's feminist in the sense that she doesn't want to be looked down upon for wanting to pursue traditional feminine activities (I'm definitely paraphrasing, but that was the gist.) While I agree with her (I've long had a bone to pick with feminists who think I should act masculine in order to be a feminist) I don't think her execution supported this idea. And I felt from the moment I began reading the books, before I even read the livejournal post, that this was written by a woman who was very used to submitting to a man's authority. That's why I agree with the author of the livejournal post when she suggests that Meyers was writing these books with absolutely no clue that she was putting all these themes into it. To me, it seems as though Meyers authored these books as a way to give life to a secret fantasy...and given that Meyers wrote these books after having a dream of Bella and Edward together, I don't think it's impossible. Also, when I lived out in Utah, as I made female friends who were raised in somewhat the same manner as Meyers (man is the woman's lord and spiritual leader, etc.) it really drove home to me that there is the potential for women to be quite sad and unfulfilled when in this type of society...but it's hard for them to comprehend anything else, so even their romantic fantasies have them submitting to man's authority. Considering how into Edward the middle-aged ladies I knew and worked with while out there were, I don't think this viewpoint is an impossible one, either. I'm not suggesting you're wrong, I'm just curious to hear more of what makes you think this (like I said, I never watched Buffy.)

On a side (but sort of related in that it's also teen fiction) note, has anyone read The Hunger Games? Hmm, starting to wonder if there should be a general books thread (is there one? I don't think I saw one) or even forum, lol.
creek_chub
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Twilight

Postby Honeybee » Thu Aug 04, 2011 3:54 pm

If Stephanie Meyers thinks feminists look down about women who pursue traditional "feminine" activities she has no idea what feminist is and she's twisting it knots if she is. What feminists do look down upon is men who control and abuse women, and laws who support a man's "right" to do so. Her books celebrate that dynamic.

Feminism is about equality, but her implication, if I understand it, is that there's something un-feminine about being a woman who isn't traditional as she defines it. In other words, "feminine" is submission to men, home and family. I object to that in the strongest possible terms, not only because I believe that pursuing whatever interest you like can be feminine AND that being a homemaker and raising a family does NOT require a woman to be submissive to a man in any way. Plus, there are many ways to define femininity itself.

However, Stephine Meyer wrote a book that glorifies violence against women and being in a controlling, abusive relationship. She has a lot to answer for. The message of Twilight is clear - get back in the kitchen where you belong and then get on your back when your husband says so. It's vile. Those of us who don't? Well, we must be disordered, lesbians, whores or some other kind of deviant.

Buffy the Vampire slayer was conceived as giving one of the weakest people in society power. Joss Whedon has said he was disgusted by horror films that invited the viewer to take pleasure in the violent deaths of girls who were sexy and pretty. After all, just like in Twilight, sexy girls are evil and must be shamed and punished and/or pushed into roles as wives and mothers. Instead, he gave Buffy the power to defend herself. The entire show was built around Buffy bearing responsibility that nobody, at first, believed she could handle. AND, she could have this power and still be pretty, fun and have friends. But even Buffy fell in love with the wrong guy, and as painful as it was, she eventually moved on and recognized she was better off without Angel.

Now, when I'm talking about objecting to submission, I"m talking about people who believe that's femininity and the only proper role for a female in all aspects of her life. I think Mistress Euclid could talk more about this, but people in S&M relationships often have very healthy relationships because the role playing is just that, play. When it comes to each person's autonomy, they have it. Taking away a person's autonomy, as Edward does to Bella, is totally wrong.

In other words, Stephanie Meyer can start quacking like a duck, but it doesn't make her a duck. And I do agree that many women raised in misogynist societies know of know other way, so their romantic fantasies are filled with dominance and submission fantasies that the barely understand. It doesn't make it right. Follow the Warren Jeff's trial or read Under The Banner of Heaven by Jon Kraukauer if you want to see what these dynamics can produce in its extreme form.

Buffy, and books like Wuthering Heights and Dracula, have the protagonist in romanticized abusive relationships, but they end tragically. Jane Eyre has Jane gain her independence and autonomy before she can happily marry Rochester. It's true that women do seem to be attracted to dysfunctional fictional relationships, but you can write a good book that portrays them without endorsing them. A more talented writer would have written it that way.
User avatar
Honeybee
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5634
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Twilight

Postby Honeybee » Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:28 pm

I've taken Creek_chub's suggestion that we need a space to talk about non Trek books. So I've created a forum and moved this thread!

Great idea! Feel free to start a Hunger Games thread if you like! ;)
User avatar
Honeybee
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5634
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Twilight

Postby creek_chub » Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:31 pm

Considering I'm in agreement with everything you just said, I think I may have been misreading your earlier post in regards to the Buffy reference.

I also would like to clarify, when I was paraphrasing Meyers' quote about feminism, and I mentioned that I had a bone to pick with feminists who think masculine behavior = feminism, I understand that that is not true feminism. However, it is unfortunate that there are some people who consider themselves feminist who do indeed think this way. Those are who I meant.

Yay! New forum! :)
creek_chub
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Twilight

Postby Mistress Euclid » Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:38 pm

I'm afraid I can't speak about the Twilight books, as I've only seen the film. As someone who practices dominance and submission however, I do always find it amusing when so called "holy" people sit in judgment of our community all the while living lives that break the standards we set for ourselves. Even emotional coercion, as seen in the Twilight, is highly frowned upon. Everything must be consensual from within, not dictated from any sort of higher authority. People make their choices, and they have a right to change their mind. Unfortunately, in many of these misogynist communities, there is no choice for women. I think that's what is so alarming about the themes in the book.

In our community, we also recognize that fantasies are just fantasies sometimes. And if young women want to fantasize about a vampire, they are welcome - as long as they understand that it's not real life. Thankfully, we live in a world that if you are strong enough to choose it, you can pretty much live out whatever fantasy you like, within the law. I know some people who engage in Vampire cosplay, and they understand what they are doing.

I am a big fan of Daphne DuMariner's gothic novel Rebecca - which plays with attraction to a dangerous man, but it has a very healthy and happy resolution.
I have an AT&T avatar and you don't.
(Thanks to Misplaced!)
User avatar
Mistress Euclid
Moderator
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 5:09 pm

Re: Twilight

Postby Honeybee » Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:43 pm

Considering I'm in agreement with everything you just said, I think I may have been misreading your earlier post in regards to the Buffy reference.


Sorry if I didn't make myself clear! Also, Buffy ran for seven years and had a very complicated arc as far as her character went. Sometimes it's tough to articulate. My bad!

Oh, and I want to say I didn't think you were endorsing Meyers position! I confess I get sensitive to the idea that "real women" should be one way or another, when real women come in many forms and make many choices. Real women can even be men! It's all good.

And yes, Mistress Euclid, I love the book Rebecca and love the Alfred Hitchcock film of it with Joan Fontaine.
User avatar
Honeybee
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5634
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Twilight

Postby tish » Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:08 pm

I read theTwilight books along with my daughter, so I could know what it was all about. i agree with the lack of literary style, these do seem to be written for a y'ounger audience!. I am firmly on Team Jacob ("you would not have to change to be with me") straight to the heart of the matter in my opinion.

Strong women run in our family....and we chose strong men who can be partners, neither submissive nor dominate (unless ya wanna behind closed doors, but that's another topic!) so there has always been an equity and trust in our relationships. i will admit, though, this strong woman does love it when her men have her back in moments of need. I do love their strength then. :hugs
TRIP: Hold on. You never said anything about feet.
T'POL: Is that a problem?
TRIP: Well, for one thing, I haven't had a shower since this morning, and I know how sensitive that Vulcan nose of your can be.And I'm a little ticklish.Maybe more than a little.
User avatar
tish
Commander
 
Posts: 926
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:01 am
Location: As close to Texas as I can be, for the moment.

Next

Return to Book Talk

  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest