Tuesday 14 September 2010

Impressions of Twilight

That's "Twilight" the brooding vampire novel by Stephenie Meyer, not "Twilight" the brooding transition into nighttime, just before the sun goes to sleep. (Not sure where"Dusk" fits into all of this - is it before or after Twilight? - ponderous).

I decided it was time I investigated the Twilight Phenomenon. I've just finished reading the first book in the series. And I now believe the Twilight Phenomenon requires no further investigation from myself. (Although I may watch the films).


I approached this important assignment from a few different angles:

1) through a "teenage filter", ie I tried to imagine how I would've reacted to the novel had I read it when I was a teenager

2) through a "sensible-adult-feminist filter", ie do I think the novel is harmful to teenagers, and especially, to girl teenagers

3) through no filter, ie what do I think of the novel as a piece of writing, no strings attached


Here are my conclusions:

1) Given that my favourite "young adult" novel when I was a teenager was Carrie by Stephen King and my second favourite "young adult" novel was The Shinning by Stephen King, I think it's quite likely that Twilight would've been a little tame for my teenaged reading tastes. However, I suspect I would've at least read, and probably found some enjoyment in, the first book. And I probably would've watched the films (peer pressure would have made watching the films mandatory). I'm not sure I would have been besotted with Edward - Edward-besottedness seems to be a large contributor to the Twilight Phenomenon. Edward's kinda bossy for my liking, and possibly a little too pretty. And I wouldn't have identified with Bella, she's a bit too perfect (bizarre clumsiness notwithstanding); she's too academically gifted and self sufficient and fragile beautied - not a pimple in sight.

2) Harmful? I found this difficult to assess. I probably wouldn't recommend Twilight to teenagers. It's not well written, it's quite bland at times, and I found the characterizations of Bella and Edward a little ridiculous. But are these things harmful? Maybe.

It's true that the Twilight Phenomenon has gotten teenagers to read (at least girl teenagers) and this is a good thing. But if it's the only book a teenager reads, then it could be harmful. Especially in regard to the Bella/Edward interaction. I don't like that Edward is given so much ownership of, and control over, Bella's lust (or 'love', as Bella thinks, fool that she is...what? Me, cynical? Never). And I think there is some danger in a romanticised portrayal of such skewed desire in young adult fiction: Being that they are people with limited life experience in the world of lust/love, they might not read it sceptically, like I did! I also think it's unrealistic that, at age 17, Bella hasn't previously experienced lust (I'd guess most people - boys and girls - would have had some dealings with lust from about age 13...ie about when puberty begins). If Bella had been familiar with the sensation of lust, she might not have been so much in Edward's thrall - she would've still been hot for him but not so ludicrously hot.

There is also something creepy about a 17-year-old getting romantically involved with a 100-year-old. That's right, Edward is just over 100 years old, but was turned into a vampire at 17, so he still looks 17. (This vast age difference thing was something I also found creepy in Buffy, ie Buffy with Angel, although Buffy did have the advantage of being able to throw Angel across the room if he threatened her). Certainly the older lover theme has it's romantic appeal to an inexperienced young person (I had a huge crush on my 35-year-old guitar teacher when I was 17). The notion that the older person will show you what it's all about, and you won't have to fumble around and work it out for yourself - a process that could take years and years! (Hint: maybe it should take years and years). But there's also a gaping power imbalance going on, one that could be easily exploited by a less-than-scrupulous operator. And I think Edward fits this description. He doesn't give Bella room to get to know herself, to become an adult, before he starts using her rampant desire for him to control her (she gets all swoony whenever he gets too close to her - Vomit!). He's incredibly selfish. And having been alive/undead for 100 years should give him some wisdom and restraint, right? Apparently not. This guy stalks Bella, listens in on her conversations, has a violent temper, will possibly kill Bella if he "loses control" around her (read: has sex with her), is very possessive of Bella AND (and this bit made me especially cranky) he instructs Bella not to go into the (dangerous) forest alone (she's only allowed "into the forest" if she's accompanied/led by Edward). Forest rant continues in next paragraph.

[Warning: Gratuitous and tenuous metaphor ensues]. Let me say, right here, right now, on this very blog, that a forest is a wondrous place, and a woman should explore "her" forest whenever, and however, she sees fit. If Bella would like to explore the forest with Edward, that's fine, but it's Bella's decision. I think it would be fantastic if Bella explored the forest by herself for awhile, so she has a thorough understanding of it - its flora and fauna, its various paths, the myriad emotions she experiences within the forest. And then, maybe, she'll have a better understanding of who she might like to accompany her into the forest - if, indeed, she even wants company.

My final rant concerns Bella's father:
Dear Bella's father,
Bella is your school-age daughter. She is NOT your domestic servant. Do your own damn dishes. Clean your own damn house. Learn to cook. AND spend some goddamn time with your daughter. Don't leave her home alone all weekend while you're out fishing. Pretty soon Bella will be off to college and you can do as much fishing as you like, but right now: BELLA NEEDS YOU. And maybe, just maybe, if you spent more time with her, she might not be hanging out with a violently-possessive, self-involved, sexually-sadistic, 100-year-old vampire.
Love, Nicole.

3) I wanna know more about vampire-Alice. Why wasn't this book about vampire-Alice? I will not be reading anymore Stephenie Meyer books unless vampire-Alice is the main character.

1 comment:

kolibet said...

Dear Effulgent,
Thanks for teaching me the expression "no strings attached" (an idiom that seems befitting with the freedom of speech in display on this blog) -
(btw i love your blog - it often elicits in me some beginning of comment, which i have sometimes (maybe too often) tried to write down, in my awkward english...) -
I did not (and do not intend to) read Twilight (nor did i see the movies) (i've never read S. King either - when i was 17, the Big Man, for me, was Dostoievski ! - cf. some other comment that i formerly posted) -
I very much enjoyed the "metaphorical" paragraph about the "forest", with its fiery advocation for a girl's right to explore "her forest" -
Yet i could not help wondering whether the forest that Edward was forbidding was "her forest" (a domain of private use and enjoyment), or... well, "the forest" (which i can imagine, rather, as a domain of meeting and sharing - usually, that's what happens in "the forest" of the tales : you meet some "beast"...)
Well, the 100-years-old teenager doesn't seem very considerate about his girlfriend, but i understand that he does not wish her to go disport herself in "the forest" - when you were involved in a lust-love relation (as you nicely put it), did you encourage your dearie to ramble in "the forest" ?
(i'm afraid i'm getting personal - sorry)
Anyway - thanks again - there's more than words in your blog !