posted
It's not, hee hee, this should offend some people, as bad as Robert Jordan.
But it has been hyped to be "the ultimate reading experience", according to my unintentional survey of the starry-eyed teenage girls around me.
Gosh, I feel so OLD--complaining about what teenage girls are reading. Normally, I just READ what teenage girls are reading.
I object to Stephanie Meyer's books on literary grounds--it's silly.
Silly is fine; sometimes we need brainless, and I will read brainless stuff, too, when I need to just cool down.
But people act like it's groundbreaking vampire fic, when, honestly, a vampire with the "I want to eat you, but I mustn't, but I really want to, ooooo *angst*" struggle is sort of....old. The real meat of the moral/theological struggle is sort of ignored. It's more like just a support structure for the highly sexed non-sex sex scenes.
Okay. That's fine. Like I said, I expect romance novels to be a little silly, and to not have a moral lesson.
Which people keep telling me is part of the appeal of the series--you take a Mormon author, have a superficially "chaste" romance novel, and, viola! Moral infotainment!
Okay. I won't call it "bad". I'll call it "overhyped and misleading". Better? Posts: 575 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have I just not been talking to the right people? I don't know very many people at all who read this, even at church.
Maybe they are hiding.
When someone does, though, I am going to recommend Buffy the Vampire Slayer to them. I think it would be interesting to see the reaction - my general impression when I recommend Buffy is that it isn't kosher.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, um, I started reading Twilight to see what all the fuss was about, and I have to give it snaps for readability. The main character is a bit of a passive paper doll, but that's not that unusual, I guess. Not a deal-breaker, anyway, as she is less fatuous than the heroines of some novels aimed at the age group.
I wondered, before I started reading, why teen and tween girls find Edward so appealing. I mean, that age group usually goes for the softer, androgynous sort of boy (remember Hansen?) and this guy is a vampire -- generally a symbol of more threatening sexuality. Then I got to this bit:
quote: Edward in the sunlight was shocking. I couldn't get used to it, though I'd been staring at him all afternoon. His skin, white despite the faint flush from yesterday's hunting trip, literally sparkled, like thousands of tiny diamonds were embedded in the surface. He lay perfectly still in the grass, his shirt open over his sculpted, incandescent chest, his scintillating arms bare. His glistening, pale lavender lids were shut, though of course he didn't sleep. A perfect statue, carved in some unknown stone, smooth like marble, glittering like crystal.
He SPARKLES.
Now I get it. Edward is not really a vampire. He's not even recognizable as a boy.
He's a My Little Pony with fangs.
(Not that that is necessarily a bad thing. If they'd had My Little Ponies with fangs when I was a kid, I sooo would have had one. Just sayin'...)
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
I'm sorry to inform of this copyright infringement, but....I am so stealing that!
And, Katharina, that's just what I've been doing. That is, rec. to the girls I know to watch BtVS.
It's funny; based on my comments about Twilight and my being a homeschooler, most people I've talked to seem to think I'm some easily horrified burn-the-smut church lady type.
But my oldest daughter is called Buffy. I cannot believe that I had to hide my Buffy fandom at church all these years....and now girls are reading Twilight at church, brazenly, right there in front of God and everybody.
Maybe I'm just jealous? Posts: 575 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I take it that scene was the first page of the book she ever penned, after having a dream about Edward. I read an interview Motley vision did with her back when the momentum was just building.
My daughter's friend who was quasi-evangelical had read the books and was into other YA vampire romance. Just getting back to whether other religious people would read these books...
I have told my daughter if she really wants to read these, I will read them with her. Though on Sunday she was reading her Primary Gospel Standards and said "So Stephanie Myers books probably aren't a good idea?" We talked about the Harry Potter books a bit too. I asked her if she could think of anything uplifting from them. But then, she thinks really big spiders are uplifting, so there you go. But I think most of the guidance Dumbledore gives Harry is pretty uplifting.
And I did have one person give an example of a good message in the Twilight books, which is that Edward's clan chooses not to follow their impulses to drink human blood. The trouble seems to be that while he also resists other impulses, the impulses are being described in rich detail, and would probably not be resisted by normal people.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Like (to repeat myself, I've used this example before) Pit Bulls Against Mauling Toddlers?
"You know, when you grab them, and shake them, and tear them up, and make them scream? Yeah...let's not do that."
There's a lotta that in the Twilight books. Both when it comes to drinking people's blood, and the more ordinary fornicatory impulses.
Posts: 575 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I find funny is there is one side that thinks the books are too dripping with sex and another side that thinks they are too chaste to the point of evangelism. As for myself, I agree with both sides. Could the books be a type of sex Rorshach test?
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've never heard anyone complain they are too chaste. Unrealistically chaste, perhaps.
Sorry about my syntax, my sister made fun of me for my test of standard written english score in high school. I think that one comes with the PSAT.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
They're both. They seem to be chaste ("It's so cool, a romance novel without sex! It's like G-rated and I can read it in seminary!") but really it's more like they talk about having sex, describe how much they want to have sex, practice nearly having sex....without actual intercourse.
Like I've said before. Romance novels are verbal porn--not said caustically, I've read some romance novels, it's just how they ARE--and Twilight is no exception. It just offends more people who, when they heard "no sex" actually thought that meant no sex in the books. Not, no coitus.
When you said "sex Rorshach test" I flashed to that scene in Armageddon where the psych evaluator is using inkblots to test Steve Buscemi. Hee. Posts: 575 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, I finally started reading these books because the reviews were too funny. But I HATE them. I feel like Meyer made so many amateurish mistakes that are supposed to keep your stuff from getting published and encourage you to write better. It's completely grating to read her version of first person POV, which isn't really first person at all. Here's a good example of the stuff that is stressing me out:
"My eyes did not stray toward the black garbage bag that held my present from that last birthday, did not see the shape of the stereo where it strained against the black plastic; I didn't think of the bloody mess my nails had been when I'd finished clawing it out of the dashboard."
If you're not thinking about it, then why am a reading about it? ARGH. I guess you could see this as Bella trying to convince herself that she isn't thinking about those things, but it happens way too often to be anything but amateurish mistakes.
So I don't think I'll be able to finish this series. But at least I had some laughs.
edit: Another thing that's cracking me up: The ad for "Afro Love" at the bottom of the page, promising me that I can find inter-racial singles. What exactly IS the definition of an inter-racial single, anyway?
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Clearly, it's romance for teens. None of the actual gory bits, but all of the ridiculously long sentences, the use of the word 'scintilating' the idea that the man is carved out of stone etc.
posted
The writing isn't the greatest, that's for sure.
And sure, Meyers isn't all that great on continuity or the intricacies of world building. So I let that slide and just try to see what she does with people.
Spoilers:
I thought the birth got a little melodramatic, but I thought it was awesome she got to experience motherhood. I thought her power was interesting.
Sure, it was frustrating that the Alice instructions to her turned out to be needless, however it did make sense. Alice couldn't see the decisions of the other halflings and how that would affect things. If any reader hadn't figured out pretty much from when Alice left that she wasn't a coward and traitor, they weren't paying very good attention.
She says this is the last book, but there are lots of wide open story lines. Bella and Edward's story is finished, but I bet she'll write more in this universe, especially since the publishers probably want more of this from her. Leah is interesting. The South American vampires are interesting.
So, it was fun. But not great.
I do like The Host better.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought it would be interesting to show two completely different interpretations of Myer's Twilight series. The first one is negative and argues the books preach Mormonism and that is a very bad thing. Then again, apparently the reviewer is one of those "Harry Potter is evil" believers. She also represents Mormon doctrine very loosely and very strictly at the same time that distorts both the book and the religion.
The other argues the seriesis good for Mormon literature as an exploration of religious ideas. It almost made me want to go back and read the book to see how Myers examines the implications of immortality and eternal family. The problem with this review, as pointed out, is ignoring the awful writing skills and poor editing.
I actually present these two interpretations because I have a question. What makes Mormon doctrine weird or even, as implied by the first, dangerous? Is that a moral or philosophical statement? Couldn't different or strange (not familiar or out of the normal) be more accurate terms?
I think, like Orson Scott Card, Stephanie Meyer is dealing with similar questions in her books. It is clear literary skills are miles apart. Yet, family, our eternal natures, and the implications of deification are to be found in both author's works. The responses have been equal to each other as well. Mormons should NEVER explore their faith outside of their own group because then it preaching Mormonism, and you can't do that! Or, I might add, its a Mormon author so whatever they say is safe.
quote:I think the equivalent to a bunch of Mormon girls reading the full Twilight series would be to pass out Sports Illustrated's Swimsuit Edition to the young men at church. The girls are covered up, so it's not technically porn, right? And the young men won't be able to look away--a sure sign of great, compelling literature.
This was brilliant.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I actually present these two interpretations because I have a question. What makes Mormon doctrine weird or even, as implied by the first, dangerous? Is that a moral or philosophical statement? Couldn't different or strange (not familiar or out of the normal) be more accurate terms?
Different or strange would be more neutral terms. I think some sects consider LDS beliefs to be essentially blasphemous (I think this generally stems from the LDS belief that mortals can eventually become like God, and that God was once like us). Blasphemy could lead to damnation...so the beliefs might be considered dangerous in that sense, from a certain point of view.
From a secular point of view I don't think "dangerous" could be easily justified.
While the religious influence might be there - the protagonists' (throbbing) chastity, maybe sparkly immortal fluidless vampire as a type of glorious resurrected flesh? (dubious) - I kind of doubt that the Twilight books seriously attempt to explore theological questions.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:What makes Mormon doctrine weird or even, as implied by the first, dangerous?
I don't think Mormon doctrine is uniquely dangerous. Like all religious doctrines, it can be dangerous. And because it's different from some religious doctrines, it can be dangerous in different ways.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Just sayin'...)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
