I am female. I am Mormon. I have read Twilight.
Okay, so maybe not every single LDS woman has read Stephenie Meyer’s bestselling teenage vampire romance, but I think there’s a chance that a higher percentage of Mormon women discussed Twilight at their last visiting teaching appointment than discussed the Visiting Teaching Message from the Ensign.
I’m just saying.
Personally, I neither love nor hate Twilight (and I can only speak to the first book since—gasp!!!—I have not read beyond the first novel in the series). I think Twilight does a lot of things right—obviously it does, evidenced by how many people love it so. I also think the writing could be stronger, and a few nit-picky elements drove me mildly bonkers. (Yes, yes, Bella is clumsy. Got it.)
There are lots of strong feelings about this book, both positive and negative. On the positive side, I think it’s wonderful that the novel has spurred so many people to read. When my ward book club read Twilight the meeting was jam packed, and a number of women who’d never been to book club before (and, well, haven’t been since) attended. I think Meyer did a masterful job creating a character and a story that resonates with 14-year-old girls as well as 65-year-old grandmothers. And whether or not the Twilight phenomenon can be explained as a product of Meyer’s cunning cultural insight, or simply her amazing luck at capturing lightning in a bottle, the truth is she tapped into something exciting and compelling for many, many people, and that’s an achievement to be respected.
On the negative side, I’ve heard people complain about the writing style (amateurish), the characters (stereotypical), the story (derivative, unbelievable, even socially irresponsible—check out the fascinating discussion on Twilight as an erotic novel not fit for teen consumption on the LDS lit blog A Motley Vision here). Now, those who love the book have lots to say in regards to all these arguments . . . which is why I wrote this post. Twilight is a seminal novel for Mormon lit, and since my monthly turn here at Segullah is dedicated to LDS literature, I figured we darn well better talk about it.
So. What do you think about Twilight? Because I know you think something . . .
I was obsessed; I dreamt about the books. I read all three very quickly and I was shocked at my obsession. Then a week or two went by, and I was slightly embarrassed. Not apologetic, but a tad guilty for having been so taken in with the story. I mean, I’m a fan of good literature, but my forte is more historical fiction or Jane Austen. So, I had to have myself some inner conversations to figure out why I liked them so much.
I realized why:
1. Vampires are cool. I don’t care if they freak people out, like me, they are still cool. And for Stephenie to creat her own twist about the history of vampires? I thought it was really fun. She made it almost believable.
2. I felt like a teenager again. I was 16, crying over boys, longing for true love, and trying to figure out who I was –these books took me back to those days; the good part of those days.
3. Romance, no matter how unlikely, tends to get me.
And that’s about it. Nothing earth-shattering, nothing too crazy. I just enjoyed feeling like a romantic Vampire admirer.
And yes, I’ll read the fourth one this summer. Why not?
It was a page-turner for me — I read it in two days, maybe three, which used to be my typical speed before children interrupted my reading time (these days I’m more likely to spend a month slogging through a book). I enjoyed it well enough. I might read the others in the series if I remember to ask my SIL if I can borrow her copies.
On the other hand…!
Stories like that — dorky, clumsy girl finds true love in the most exquisitely beautiful, mysterious and fabulous boy EVER!!! — leave a bad taste in my mouth after the initial enjoyment wears off. She had my willing suspension of disbelief with the vampire bit, but come on, life just isn’t like that; water (even the undead kind, I’m guessing) finds its level. I have a love/hate relationship with fairy tales for much the same reason: It’s so dreamy on the one hand to think of being swept off your feet, rescued from your mundane existence, bla bla bla, but in the end it’s not only unrealistic but unhealthy to pine for someone to save you all the time. Growing up on fairy tales can seriously skew your perspective and expectations of romance.
I don’t know that I can explain myself very well on this subject, but that’s my best attempt. And as I said, it’s not a bad enough aftertaste that I didn’t enjoy the book (I just said a little Hmmmph to myself about an hour after I’d finished), and I’ll probably read the sequels eventually. I’ll give it one thumb up, lol.
I think the idea that a man will find that certain indefinable “something” about us–that something that isn’t our looks, which are average, or our intelligence, which is also average, or our wealth or wit or style, which are also all average–but that he will look beyond our averageness and see SOMETHING, gosh dang it, and fall hopelessly in love with us despite himself . . . well, that’s a very powerful idea for lots of us. And with our heroine Bella, we have a girl who is decidedly average in almost every way, and this glorious vampire, who has lived on the earth for a pretty long time and run into lots and lots and lots of women, takes one whiff of her and blamo! He can’t get her out of his mind!
Who would have thought that our secret smell could turn the world upside down?? But maybe, just maybe, it can. (When I was a teenager, my secret smell was a mixture of Soft & Dri deodorant and Gloria Vanderbuilt perfume. Blamo!)
I think both of you have made some great points about why this book is so attractive, and why it also has its detractors. The romance angle is what draws so many readers in, but it’s also the angle that causes people to complain because it IS so unrealistic. Glorious men *don’t* fall for clumsy, mopey girls very often . . . and giving up everything in your life for a man is *not* a very good idea . . . and romance does fizzle and real life takes over.
But, you say. But! This is a book. A fantasy/romance/escapist piece of fiction. Why should we expect it to conform to the rules of the real world, the very same rules that have kept us trapped in our own averageness for lo these many years? At least reading about Bella lets us escape from reality for a while, right? And that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Or is it?
I am not a Twilight fan. I think I might have done okay with it if so many people weren’t so obsessed by it. By the time I got around to reading it, I’d had this huge buildup, and I wasn’t impressed. The writing quality is mediocre at best (though I’ve heard it gets better), and I just couldn’t suspend disbelief enough to get into it. The more people talk about how much they love it, the more I want to expose its flaws. Sometimes I hold my tongue. Others… not.
What I wonder about (like RCH) are the moral implications of Twilight–there are many obsessed teenage girls. At my book club discussion of Twilight, one of them came, and talked about how great Edward was, and how some girls were comparing their real-life boyfriends to Edward. That’s not healthy. Does it happen with movie stars or other books? Sure. But it bugs me in this instance. I don’t think Edward and Bella have a healthy relationship, and I don’t think it’s good for teenage girls to set their relationship up as some kind of example.
Ditto Emily. My sister told me it was the best book EVER and that I had to read it. Since I like me a good vampire book, I was eager to jump in. Like you, I found the writing mediocre at best, her location research is laughable, and the story is almost exactly the same as Buffy and Angel (mortal falls in love with vamp turned good), so even if most Mormon women don’t obsess about Buffy like I do, I can’t give Stephanie Meyer props for originality. If this book was touted as pure escapism, I could handle the hype better. But it is being praised as the best book some women have read in years, and it begs the question “Why?” or, more importantly, “What the heck have you been reading then??”
Still, you can’t argue that the series DOES hold an escapist appeal, and you can’t argue with success. Oh, that I could write such a mediocre book….
The biggest problem for me with the Twilight books (I’ve read and enjoyed them all, in spite of all the lameness about them—and I could go on for quite awhile about all the lameness) is that Bella is such a passive character. She’s never proactive. Things just happen to her and around her. She’s irritating.
I thought the author had some great ideas but didn’t execute them very well.
I’ve read them all. They’re great escape fiction, and the plots are page turners.
I made a comment about it at book club that got me stared at, though. I said that I wouldn’t have married my husband if he was a vampire. What I meant by that is that I wouldn’t have wanted to leave my entire existence, including my family, give up the chance to have children, and live outside the human race, just because I loved a man. I did tell my husband I wouldn’t have married him if he was a vampire, and he was okay with that.
I guess that makes me more practical than romantic. Perhaps as a teenager, I would have been swept away by the adventure of it all. But in my mid-thirties, I want an entire life that involves neighbors and family and children, not a life on the edges of civilization like Edward was offering Bella.
Also, I wish Bella would be nice to Alice, instead of griping about every nice thing Alice does for her.
Book Candy. That’s what all three to me. Now, back to Dostoevsky.
Book Candy. That’s what all three were to me. Now, back to Dostoevsky.
Shall I say it again?
The funniest review I read about the book went something like this: Only in the warped Mormon mind would the top priority of a vampire be to get married and settle down. Pretty funny.
I read all three. I agree with MissMel. It’s Candy. (and MissMel, Crime and Punishment is every bit as mesmerizing and gripping, but in a completely fulfilling way, wouldn’t you say?)
But I wouldn’t let my tween kids read them for anything. The third one in particular gets pretty steamy, at least for this white sheep of the family.
I read all three within a month after finishing my MA in comparative literature. And MissMel was right, it was book candy. It was like I was able to turn off my brain and read–a welcome change at that point, but, and MissMel nailed it, the next book I picked up was The Brothers Karamazov.
Now I feel like I have to read Crime and Punishment again. (Read it in 12th grade English–why is it that we end up reading all these books when we’re too young to understand them??)
Apologies to you “Twilight” lovers out there but it makes me want to fall down in a foaming fit.
It’s not that I don’t understand the appeal of certain genres and their tropes. If I’d read “The Last Dragonlord†as a 14 year-old, I’d’ve bought myself a gold-plated copy. The lonely immortal, shape-shifting dragon guy… his hyper-intelligent black stallion… it’s a trifecta (dragons, horses, mystically recognized soul-mates) of girlish glee-buttons. As it is, I’m ludicrously fond of it because I know I would have loved it.
But the girl in “TLD†is a ship’s captain in her own right, a smart and driven young woman from a trading family.
Early on in “Twilight†it’s stated that the heroine is supposed to be smart. This is demonstrated in a science class, which she handles easily because she’d already studied the subject matter at her old school. From that point on, she’s a typical, hormone-fizzing, lying-to-her-father teen and never again is there a hint that she’s remotely good at (or interested in!) anything other than Edward. She lies to her father about spending a day with this guy in another city. She sneaks him into her bedroom! Worse in my book is the way “Twilight†perpetuates damaging myths about female sexuality and power. Edward is the one with all the self-control but Bella can make him dangerously close to losing it with just a “relatively Mormon-approved†kiss. In theory that’s supposed to be about his vampirism but I think the subtext is fairly obvious. Bella’s desire for touch and intimacy is dangerous. Edward is noble for resisting the temptation that she puts in his path just by breathing.
Don’t get me started on the “Romeo and Juliet-whee-he-makes-me-feel-tingly-so-we-must-be-Meant-To-Be” aspects. She doesn’t love him; she doesn’t even know him. Maybe this was explored in later books. Frankly, I don’t have any desire to find out. There were parts that were gripping but mostly I had to make myself finish it.
I’m happy for Stephanie Meyer and think it’s great that a Mormon writer has made good in such a way. On the other hand, I don’t see much that’s particularly Mormon (or what I’d like to see as such, anyway) about her story. If I had a daughter of an age to be reading this… I don’t think I’d want her to. Certainly not without a discussion of some of the points I made above.
Twilight and its sequels was a good read. And I’m always up for a good read, literary or not.
Your comments about how passive and featureless Bella is makes me think this trilogy is not unlike a single-shooter video game. When you read it, you are Bella.
I wouldn’t have picked out the book to my Beehive-aged daughter, but we did have some very interesting Jacob v. Edmund conversations.
I think it’s interesting the way “popular” books are rejected by “intellectuals”. I’ve noticed it with Twilight, The DaVinci Code, Harry Potter and others. I don’t think that Twilight (or the others I mentioned) is the best example of its genre, but it’s certainly not the worst.
I enjoyed reading Twilight and its sequels. But aspects of it drove me crazy, some of which have already been mentioned. I couldn’t relate to the Bella/Edward love story because I had no idea why they were in love. Then I realized this was like most of my friends in high school and many of my roommates in college. Why were they in love with their boyfriends? I didn’t know and they couldn’t explain beyond the fact that they just were.
I am not an intellectual. I don’t want to read about vampires. I watch TV and the series “Moonlight” about the lady (girl) and the vampire sounds a lot like the same story. Of course in the TV version the female protagonist is beautiful, kind and compassionate. It looks like they take turns saving each other, but just as I didn’t read “Twilight”, I didn’t watch “Moonlight”. It seems to me being a vampire is a serious disability in the area of romance.
So I have a question for all of you, If an LDS writer hadn’t published “Twilight”, if you didn’t know she was LDS would you have read this book? If it hadn’t become a best seller would you have read this book? How many of you have read Ann Rice’s vampire books?
I wouldn’t have read it because, like you, Claudia, I have zero interest in vampire romance. I love stories with aspects like “it looks like they take turns saving each other” but good grief, the vampire is undead. There can never be children and unless the girl becomes a vampire too, she’s just going to die in a few years (by the vampire’s reckoning) and leave him alone again. There’s no growth and no happy ending there, only tragedy.
I read the book because I was in a hotel room waiting several hours for someone and she lent me a copy.
I read the other books because I wanted to know if Bella would ever become a vampire. I still want to know what happens when she does! What will her special power be?
Anyway I mostly think of the books as being written like this: “I want to write a romance, but it can’t have any sex scenes. OK, we’ll make it too dangerous for them to do anything more than kiss.” The whole book seemed put together like that—too contrived.
Proud Daughter of Eve, anybody who uses the phrases “fall down in a foaming fit” AND “girlish glee buttons” in one post ought to get some kind of award for commentary, at least. Loved your response.
And Johnna, interesting that you mentioned Bella as similar to a character in a single-shooter video came. I think you’ve hit on something there. I believe part of the reason some women love the book is because they feel they can be Bella, too–she’s an “avatar” of sorts. Very few of us are as wicked cool as Buffy, for example. But it’s easier to imagine ourselves as Bella–making Bella not really a compelling character in her own right, but a girl onto whom we can project our own secret desires without kidding ourselves. (And I’m using the pronoun “our” here rather loosely. I wasn’t too taken with Edward, myself.)
Sar, you also make a good point about teenage romance and how we often fall in love without knowing why. I remember “going with” my 7th grade boyfriend, Anthony, and I’m not sure if we’d actually spoken to each other before he sent me the note (check “yes” or “no”). After I’d agreed, our romance progressed to nodding at one another, knowingly, in the hall. Perhaps the problem with Bella and Edward, though, is that as their romance progresses it’s still hard to understand why their love is so deep and passionate. And I must admit it concerns me some that so many grown women see the Bella/Edward romance as an example of what true love should look like.
Finally, you ask a great question about the LDS audience for the novel, Claudia. Although the Twilight series is a best-selling phenomenon all over the country, and probably would have been with or without the Mormon readership, within our own community I’m positive its popularity has been goosed by her being one of us.
I was bored.
I only read a little more than half the first book.
It was just silliness to me.
I agree lots of us have read Twilight because of the Mormon connection. But the element that many readers have loved–tingly romance without sex scenes–is part of that. In other words, if Meyer wasn’t Mormon, she undoubtedly would have written Twilight differently, and I don’t think Mormon women would love it to the extent they do.
I opted to read Twilight with my 14.5-year-old daughter. Living in the SL Valley, you can’t avoid the buzz about these books. I felt it was better to read and discuss together than to make them forbidden fruit.
Let’s not blame Meyer for the reactions of adult readers who don’t take or like the books for what they are–female fantasy. How many women secretly, or not-so-secretly, want a gorgeous, mysterious, hard-to-please “man” to swoon, salivate, and obsess over them? Many. Meyer didn’t create that desire. Yes, she feeds it, and that’s what we’re paying her for. Is it dangerous to indulge? Not necessarily. Any adult who can’t take a romp in Meyer’s version of fantasyland without having it adversly affect her real-time relationships has only herself to blame, imo.
Teenage readers are admittedly a different story. I can see the risks, but with an adult guide, I think the risks turn into benefits. With or without Meyer, my daughters are going have fantasies, and they’re going to come across material that titillates those fantasies. Meyer gives us ideal opportunities to talk about the many issues springing from these inevitabilities.
I DO think it is a sad state of literary affairs when people list these books as the best ones they’ve read in years.
That said, I do love them. I’d put them in my top-ten books of ESCAPISM-type books. You have to take them that way…the reading equivelent of vegging out in front of the TV for an “America’s Next Top Model” marathon. I think they work by tickling the romance bone…they help us remember how it felt to be a teenager and caught up in the beginning of a relationship—I’ll freely admit to missing that feeling, when everything is still new and things like who does the laundry or listening to him snore all night have just not entered into the relationship. I think, too, that with discussion they are fine books for our daughters to read.
One thing I felt was that Meyer was in some ways trying to distance herself from the LDS perspective. Especially Bella’s reluctance to get married—she says something like “I don’t equate marriage to forever.” Interesting for an LDS writer to write.
Daughter of Eve,
I was that “smart” girl who fell in love and couldn’t think of anything else but my boyfriend. It was really horrible on my grades that semester. Looking back, I wish I’d been rational and not so “in love with being in love” as my mother would say. So there are people out there that can be in love for the first time, and level-headed. I applaud you. I also agree that Bella didn’t really love Edward, but was obsessed with him and the thought of him.
In answer to the questions about reading the books, if they hadn’t been by an LDS author; I read them because my 17 year old daughter did, and loved them. Also, I knew that my 14 year old would want to read them. I DON”T like vampire stories, books, TV shows, etc. I wanted to know what they were reading. My 14 year old niece stopped reading after Twilight because she thought it was too steamy. I probably need to have a more thorough discussion with my 14 year old about Bella’s example in the book.
Thanks for your comments. They got me thinking again.
Drivel, dross, waste of time. Was not an artistic experience for me in the least. CJane’s blog–now that’s art.
We read Twilight for our book group because so many people were saying “you have to read this book!” Fifteen pages into the book, I called my sister whining “Am I actually going to be able to finish this book?!” I too, love me a good vampire story but this one just didn’t do it for me. One of my problems with the book, along with many of those that others have already listed, was that I didn’t care about Bella. I didn’t like her. I also couldn’t picture the gorgeous Edward in my mind. I hate it when I can’t “see” the characters or the story that is happening. I finally picked some skinny model out of my husband’s GQ to be the Edward in my mind. Give me Gary Oldman in the movie “Bram Stoker’s Dracula”, now there’s a hot vampire!
I’ll agree with Salma, but I also say more power to Stephanie Meyer for hitting on something and having success with it.
Angela: Yeah, I alliterate alot. I’d say it’s a sickness but it’s so much fun, I can’t really say that I mind. I’m glad you liked it. heh.
Terry A: My beef with Bella’s supposed smartness isn’t that she doesn’t act smart as in “thoughtful and mature” but that she doesn’t act like a smart person acts. She doesn’t think or speak the way a smart person does. I guess I should clarify and say she doesn’t act like any of the smart people I’ve known have acted. She doesn’t show the depth of understanding of things (like physics or whatever her particular strength or interest is) even in casual conversation. She becomes like a Japanese demon known as the “Nothing Woman,” only instead of obsessing over lost children Bella obsesses over Edward. Thoughts of Edward have replaced every single aspect of Bella’s personality. It’s creepy and it’s not what I want touted as romance to growing girls.
I like a good “turning my brain off now” book. They don’t all have to be capitol “L” literature. That doesn’t mean though that we can ignore what the story says. You can read it, laugh and say it’s silly and keep going but the more books like that that you read, the more the definition of “good” (or, worse, “normal”) found within those stories will re-write your perceptions.
So my brother has his own blog called “Normal Mormon Husbands” –it’s hilarious, and yeah, I’m his sister, but it IS–and he’s taken up the Twilight ball and run with it. Check out a guy’s take on the phenomenon here.
Heh. Sounds fun Angela. Thanks for sharing.
Ang - Thanks for the link to my blog for a guy’s take on Twilight (http://mormonhusbands.blogpsot.com). I have read all three of the Twilight books and agree with MissMel’s “book candy” comment. I tend to devour both novels and candy (in fact, I was gnawing on an Idaho Spud for most of New Moon), so I’m on solid ground. Keep up the good work.
Props to Proud Daughter of Eve and Angela. I appreciate what you said.
First: what Meyers has accomplished as an LDS woman is terrific. What a terrific thing to write a bestselling, mainstream novel since very few LDS writers, nevermind LDS writers, have reached this level of success. Well done. May she be the first of many writers to be recognized.
That being said…
I wish I could like these books. Like Heather O., my teen daughters and I are Joss-Verse lovers and know the Buffy-Angel mythos well. We read these books anticipating that we would find them derivative so our expectations were low. However, we were in the mood for some good escapist fiction and we’d heard such raves about these books that we gave them a shot. All four of us hated them (age 12, twins at 16 and me at 40). Maybe we’re too picky. Maybe we were coming off our “Deathy Hallows” high and they suffered by comparison. Maybe the fact that we had just relocated thousands of miles away from our Oregon home to start an overseas expatriate assignment tainted our POV. I’d probably have to reread them to be sure that I’m being fair.
But what continues to trouble me, lo all these months later, is when I’ve heard friends and acquaintances promote this book as “wholesome, virtuous” reading, mostly because of the LDS author angle. These books, especially the latter ones, are every bit as titilating as a lot of romance fiction out there. Just because there isn’t explicitly physiological sexual content doesn’t mean that these books are “pure.” I’ve heard a lot of women–including several friends and my sisters–rationalize why “Twilight” is okay but other chick-lit isn’t.
I’m bugged by the double standard. They make excuses for the sensuality in the book while I hear these same people condemn books their children are assigned to read for school (hello Isabella Allende) or won’t let their kids watch TV/film that have the same kind of content that is in the “Twilight” books.
If some LDS readers would evaluate the “Twilight” books by the same standards they apply to other media, I would be less annoyed by them. So for me, the problem isn’t as much “Twilight” as a book but the Mormon cultural phenomenon that has sprung up around it. Call the book what it is: mainstream romance fantasy fiction. Don’t apply a different standard to the content because the author is LDS.
From a strictly literary perspective, the books are adequately written-totally a popcorn read. “Twilight” was, IMHO, the best of the three writing wise. The premise, the evocative location, the characters–all decently done. Unfortunately by the last book Meyers suffers from what my literature loving friends and I call the “exposition fairy” syndrome where she has loads of backstory she wants to get into her book but it isn’t smoothly integrated into the text. It becomes pretty plodding. In our house, the teenage daughters and I felt the single biggest problem was that Meyers set Bella and Edward up as the ideal dream couple, but that Jacob was actually a more interesting, more likeable character. I think both pairings (Bella/Edward, Bella/Jacob) are flawed, but at least Bella as a character is less annoying when she’s around Jacob.
Will we read the 4th book? When we were walking through the Rome airport night before last, we saw a copy of “Twilight” in the bookstore. One of my twin daughters said, “I can’t BELIEVE that book is HERE in Italy” and she made a gagging noise. In the next breath she said, “I wonder if I’ll hate myself enough to read the next one. As awful as they are, I might have to see the train wreck for myself.”
Maybe that’s what it will come down to for me too.
When I read Twilight, I was captiviated at first, but after re-reading it and re-reading it, I soon just found it as another book that I had on my shelf that I liked.
I think what really killed my enjoyment of the book was going to a book signing and seeing all the teenage fangirls who kept screaming. I think atleast one of them started hyperventalating when it was told that Jacob Black was single.
Still, I find them decent books, even if the third book did make my eyes pop open in one or two scenes.
Twilight is coming as a movie this December.
Preview footage.
Oh great. Now I’m going to have to read the book, because my daughter will want to see the movie and I refuse to see a movie based on a book until I have read the book (can you say DaVinci Code?).
Ri–I have never been quite so creeped out in my own city–here in the heart of “happy valley”–as when I took my daughter late at night to purchase the third book at its debut. The word skanky is a tad weak for what I witnessed. It’s one thing to see a 10-year-old boy dressed up in some Harry Potter glasses and a lightening bolt “tatoo.” It’s another thing entirely to see a 10-year-old girl (dozens of them really) scantily clad, with fake blood dripping down her neck. Or all the 16-year-old wanna-be Bellas with wanna-be Edwards on their arms and fake blood dripping down everyone’s necks. Even worse was watching the 50-60-year-old men who so obviously were not anyone’s “uncle” cruising back and forth past the crowd in their beat-up 72′ Gremlins. My skin still crawls just remembering.
[...] See: Squeaky Clean by Anneka Majors (AMV); Twilight: Discuss by Angela Hallstrom (Blog Segullah); The Twilight Series for Dummies (Normal Mormon Husbands); Jana [...]
Wow - why can’t Twilight just be a little escapism, remembering when and having a little fun? I’m surprised at the snobby literary tone in this blog by those who feel like they have to beat the book down. Twilight wasn’t written to change the world, win a Pulitzer and yeah, duh, it isn’t rocket science. It was Stephenie Meyer’s dream. Haven’t most of us had a similar one or at least wanted to have a similar one? Kudos to her for taking the time to write it down and get it published. I’m not a teenager - I’m an educated, well-read, 50 year old woman enjoying the “book candy” and a little break away from reality. Angela - your brother’s blog is hysterical!
Ginger, I appreciate where you’re coming from. I agree with you that the book isn’t intended to be a literary masterpiece. But I think that people also have the right to look at a work of art (and a novel is a work of art, no matter its genre) from a critical standpoint. And although Meyer has said that the book’s plot came to her in a dream, I’m sure the writing of the book itself was far from “dreamlike.” She sat down at her computer every day with an artist’s intention to create something meaningful. And she HAS created something meaningful to a huge number of people, which makes her methods an intentions definitely worthy of a close critical look.
Meyer has had a lot of well-deserved success–she’s written a book that has captivated millions of readers, so she’s doing many things right–but the fact that her book was intended to be escapist and fun doesn’t mean it should be immune from criticism. And just because some people found flaws in the book doesn’t make those people “snobby,” a term that obviously has some derogatory connotations. Most of the comments here addressed problems with character and story–elements that are very important when writing escapist genre fiction. It didn’t seem to me that the comments on this blog were written by people who “feel they have to beat the book down.” Many of them were written by people who agreed that Twilight is escapist fiction but felt that the book had flaws even when considering the rules and expectations of that genre.
I’m sure Stephenie Meyer herself understands that different readers will come away from her work with different opinions and experiences. In a way, I believe that the conversation here *validates* Meyer, because people are thinking about and talking about the work of art that she created. One of the many reasons we read–even “book candy” like Twilight–is to be able to have conversations like this one.
Hmmm. I enjoy reading the books, but as my husband and I said this morning it is a fluff read. We both read quite a bit (we rarely watch TV anymore) and sometimes we read classic literature, sometimes gospel books and sometimes just fluff. My life is busy and it is nice to leave my world every once in a while and enjoy a fluff read. I think Stephenie Meyer’s story is compelling, but she is a mediocre writer that losses a lot of opportunities to make the books more interesting. I am reading the books again so I can be aware of the details for the 4th book– just like I did each time with Harry Potter (which is my favorite series of all time) and then it will go on the shelf. I do not think these books are good for young girls. Both Edward and Bella are young and very obsessed with each other– not healthy at all. I agree 100% with the woman who said she would not have married her husband if he had been a vampire. I love living in society with my children, family and friends. My husband is wonderful, but I can’t imagine a life with just us and leaving EVERYONE else I love forever! Once again nice fluff, but there are much better books out there.
for all the protests that Stephenie Meyer is a “mediocre” writer, she sure puts out a page-turner.
Entertainment weekly did a promo for the movie as the cover story, see the cover.