Twilight

[MattG]

I still think Raymond Chandler wrote pulp and trash, and I don't know many who consider him to be that great a literary mind, perhaps merely a significant developer of a genre that for the most part is pulp and trash.

Well you're obviously much higher minded than I am. I do appreciate your willingness to descend for long enough to put me in my place though.

[Joreads]

Because she and Edward were supposed to have a perfect obsessive teenage romance forever. And now they have responsibilities which ruins the perfection. Obviously, I like this story because of completely impossible it is in real life to have such a romance.

The imprinting didn't bother me, really. There is no sexual desire while the child is that young. It's merely a caring uncle type thing.

OK I see where you are coming from now. I guess I can see that. I


Charm remember that Edward told Bella he did not want her to miss out on human things and she said she did not care? I liked the reversal when she found out about the baby she wanted the baby more than her life and Edward was the one that was concerned. That was why I liked that story line.

Unlike a good number of the critics, I actually did read the first book. It was OK, the characters were a little young for me to really connect with both in literal age and in insight, but I don't have anything against it. I certainly wasn't compelled enough to go get the second book.

.

Matt you little devil you read the first book. They are a little young for me as well but I loved them. You know what I think this is a book for woman maybe can you guess why? Edward of course, He is a dream man - if you can over look one tiny floor he wanted to kill you. Why is it that woman love the bad boys?

[JBI]

Matt you little devil you read the first book. They are a little young for me as well but I loved them. You know what I think this is a book for woman maybe can you guess why? Edward of course, He is a dream man - if you can over look one tiny floor he wanted to kill you. Why is it that woman love the bad boys?

I know I promised not to post here, but I couldn't help but jumping in on this comment.

Some critics believe that the whole liking the bad boy is a gender role adopted by people because society creates that image. There has been a great deal of scholarship done on gender and sexuality as roles, rather than biological necessities, and for a great many of critics, the "she likes him because" is another way of saying "society makes her like him because," or "she pretends to like him because..."

The notion of women liking someone because of x or y is really societal more than biological or truthful. I think, up until about age 20 that may be so, but after that, when people begin to accept a more solidified sense of self, they kind of drift away from those notions, to the more nuanced.

I can see many critics, if they were writing criticism on these books, which they probably won't, take issue with this notion of female submission and male dominance. I know one poster has already razed the issue, so I am just going to throw it out there, as you know, at this point I could really care less, I just think this would take the book into an interesting angle, in terms of theme, symbol and allegory.

[*Classic*Charm*]

OK I see where you are coming from now. I guess I can see that. I


Charm remember that Edward told Bella he did not want her to miss out on human things and she said she did not care? I liked the reversal when she found out about the baby she wanted the baby more than her life and Edward was the one that was concerned. That was why I liked that story line.

Yes, I do remember that. It wasn't the fact that she suddenly wanted a human experience that bothered me. It really was simply that suddenly she cared about something/someone more than she cared for Edward. I'm lame.

Some critics believe that the whole liking the bad boy is a gender role adopted by people because society creates that image. There has been a great deal of scholarship done on gender and sexuality as roles, rather than biological necessities, and for a great many of critics, the "she likes him because" is another way of saying "society makes her like him because," or "she pretends to like him because..."

Interesting point, but I have a hard time blaming everything on society.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Does society reflect the opinions/desires of individuals or does the individual adopt what is shown to him/her by society?

Maybe I'm just not ready to entirely give up my free will to the general opinion of the media and the masses, especially when it comes to attraction, etc.

The notion of women liking someone because of x or y is really societal more than biological or truthful. I think, up until about age 20 that may be so, but after that, when people begin to accept a more solidified sense of self, they kind of drift away from those notions, to the more nuanced.

But there is also evidence that women typically find themselves "attracted" to men who are similar in some way to the male authorities in their lives. Is that biological or societal?

I do, of course, acknowledge that society does impact what an individual finds attractive about another ("she likes him because"), but I wouldn't attribute the liking of the "bad boy" image to that. I'll admit that yes, that image is portrayed in the media as being attractive, but I think it's the female's reaction the whole "bad boy" thing that's important. What aspect of the "bad boy" is attractive?

I also wonder what you mean by truthful?

I can see many critics, if they were writing criticism on these books, which they probably won't, take issue with this notion of female submission and male dominance. I know one poster has already razed the issue, so I am just going to throw it out there, as you know, at this point I could really care less, I just think this would take the book into an interesting angle, in terms of theme, symbol and allegory.

Yes, I agree that critics probably would take issue with the male dominance/female submission view. It's interesting though, because while it's typically women who have a problem with being portayed as weaker and submissive, it's the women readers who are so attracted to the idea of being submissive to a dominant male like Edward's character. Apparently, we like being weak and in need of protection.

[Mopey Droney]

Why because he is commenting on something that he hasn't read?

Well, I did read the first book, and I can tell you that despite the fact that JBI has only read three pages of the actual novels in addition to the Wikipedia pages, he has so far given us far more spot-on analysis of the novels than any of those who have read the whole series.

[Joreads]

I know I promised not to post here, but I couldn't help but jumping in on this comment.

Some critics believe that the whole liking the bad boy is a gender role adopted by people because society creates that image. There has been a great deal of scholarship done on gender and sexuality as roles, rather than biological necessities, and for a great many of critics, the "she likes him because" is another way of saying "society makes her like him because," or "she pretends to like him because..."

The notion of women liking someone because of x or y is really societal more than biological or truthful. I think, up until about age 20 that may be so, but after that, when people begin to accept a more solidified sense of self, they kind of drift away from those notions, to the more nuanced.

I can see many critics, if they were writing criticism on these books, which they probably won't, take issue with this notion of female submission and male dominance. I know one poster has already razed the issue, so I am just going to throw it out there, as you know, at this point I could really care less, I just think this would take the book into an interesting angle, in terms of theme, symbol and allegory.

Glad to have you back JBI.

You raise a very valid points there. So I guess the question is do you think Bella is submissive to Edward?. I am not sure I think that she is. In the third book she insists on seeing Jacob even though Edward doesn't want her to. I will admit that Edward is more than a little controlling with Bella but there are reasons for that, so I guess the question is does the "why" justify his actions.

I will admit that it didn't bother me so much but I can see how it would bother some people.

Yes, I agree that critics probably would take issue with the male dominance/female submission view. It's interesting though, because while it's typically women who have a problem with being portayed as weaker and submissive, it's the women readers who are so attracted to the idea of being submissive to a dominant male like Edward's character. Apparently, we like being weak and in need of protection.

And there we have it folks the nail has just been hit on the head. We like to feel protected, I am not so sure about weak though Charm. The other thing to consider here is that Bella is weaker than most of the characters in the book that she comes up against, even Jacob (apart from the humans of course). There is no way she could defend herself against James and the others she needs Edward and Alice to help her.

Lets also not forget that Bella walks into the ballet studio on her own to face James not knowing that Edward would be there to save her. I wouldn't call that weak.

Also in Breaking Dawn it is Bella's skill that protects Edward and everyone else in the clearing from Jane and her brother. Bella is in fact the reason she survives.

[*Classic*Charm*]

And there we have it folks the nail has just been hit on the head. We like to feel protected, I am not so sure about weak though Charm. The other thing to consider here is that Bella is weaker than most of the characters in the book that she comes up against, even Jacob (apart from the humans of course). There is no way she could defend herself against James and the others she needs Edward and Alice to help her.

Lets also not forget that Bella walks into the ballet studio on her own to face James not knowing that Edward would be there to save her. I wouldn't call that weak.

Also in Breaking Dawn it is Bella's skill that protects Edward and everyone else in the clearing from Jane and her brother. Bella is in fact the reason she survives.

Haha Jo, actually that last sentence was said with a touch of sarcasm. Obviously, no one wants to feel weak or in need of protection. I'll not argue with the fact that we do like to feel protected though. Whether or not she could have protected herself is really not of importance though- the point is that she has this guy who will do absolutely anything for her including risk his own life. I'm not saying that Bella is weak (as a person, this is not a commentary on the quality of the written character), just that she's a typical woman- she likes having a big strong man to save her. Who wouldn't?

[Joreads]

Haha Jo, actually that last sentence was said with a touch of sarcasm. Obviously, no one wants to feel weak or in need of protection. I'll not argue with the fact that we do like to feel protected though. Whether or not she could have protected herself is really not of importance though- the point is that she has this guy who will do absolutely anything for her including risk his own life. I'm not saying that Bella is weak (as a person, this is not a commentary on the quality of the written character), just that she's a typical woman- she likes having a big strong man to save her. Who wouldn't?

Got you sorry about that my fault.

As for the strong man to save you feel free to send a few my way. Oh can they look like Edward or is that asking for to much. Gee we have one track minds and it is only 12:30 in the afternoon here.

[Zee.]

If you read the synopsis, it sounds like one of those terrible ridiculous teenage books that are all written the same and have proposterous plot lines that make you want to throw up.

But it isn't.

But...

it is.

[*Classic*Charm*]

But...

it is.

Yeah, it really is.

And I love it

Got you sorry about that my fault.

As for the strong man to save you feel free to send a few my way. Oh can they look like Edward or is that asking for to much. Gee we have one track minds and it is only 12:30 in the afternoon here.

Whoo, I wish I had one for myself, let alone a few to send your way! Haha.

We really do have one track minds

[Pewnut]

I know there are a lot of Twilight fans out there who aren't necessarily hormone-driven teens, and I say this having read the books myself, but I found the entire "saga" to be nothing more than glorified amateur fiction. Kills your brain cells, to be honest.

[JBI]

Got you sorry about that my fault.

As for the strong man to save you feel free to send a few my way. Oh can they look like Edward or is that asking for to much. Gee we have one track minds and it is only 12:30 in the afternoon here.

See that's the problem - contemporary trends in literature, and I am talking specifically from a Canadian literary viewpoint, have been to go against these notions of damsel in distress, undercut them, and create a new image of independent female, or at least one as capable and strong as the "knight in shining armor" cliché fed out by, it would seem from your description, Twilight, and essentially every romance novel ever written.

I think the approach of "it's just a silly novel" is not a fair one, given that these novels most definitely have an impact, and perhaps are resetting, feminist notions. I don't think it would be too far a stretch to say the books don't approach, if not support, a patriarchal vision, or at least one with women as subordinate.

The notion of the woman needing rescuing, percieved through the novel as commentary, would connote a meaning of perhaps a necessity of male dominance, or male protectiveness, when really, I would think, especially for teenage women's literature, a viewpoint towards progress, or independence would be more suitable.

Ultimately the book shares many similarities with the Bildungsroman narrative, from what I understand, and for young women, and girls reading these novels, while furnishing their own identities, to be subjected to such close-minded a vision as the one you seem to equate with the book is perhaps a little bit disastrous in terms of progress.

The vision of Twilight, from my understanding, is one of female weakness, or perhaps one female's weakness, where protector men save the day, and good ol' fashion girls seem to be idealized for allowing the men to. It is a patriarchal vision from my understanding, and one agreeing with many religious, and political trends that seem to be heightened by American media, and to a lesser extent, world media.

[mortalterror]

See that's the problem - contemporary trends in literature, and I am talking specifically from a Canadian literary viewpoint, have been to go against these notions of damsel in distress, undercut them, and create a new image of independent female, or at least one as capable and strong as the "knight in shining armor" cliché fed out by, it would seem from your description, Twilight, and essentially every romance novel ever written.

I think the approach of "it's just a silly novel" is not a fair one, given that these novels most definitely have an impact, and perhaps are resetting, feminist notions. I don't think it would be too far a stretch to say the books don't approach, if not support, a patriarchal vision, or at least one with women as subordinate.

The notion of the woman needing rescuing, percieved through the novel as commentary, would connote a meaning of perhaps a necessity of male dominance, or male protectiveness, when really, I would think, especially for teenage women's literature, a viewpoint towards progress, or independence would be more suitable.

Ultimately the book shares many similarities with the Bildungsroman narrative, from what I understand, and for young women, and girls reading these novels, while furnishing their own identities, to be subjected to such close-minded a vision as the one you seem to equate with the book is perhaps a little bit disastrous in terms of progress.

The vision of Twilight, from my understanding, is one of female weakness, or perhaps one female's weakness, where protector men save the day, and good ol' fashion girls seem to be idealized for allowing the men to. It is a patriarchal vision from my understanding, and one agreeing with many religious, and political trends that seem to be heightened by American media, and to a lesser extent, world media.

You are operating under the fallacy that gender roles are interchangeable and that feminism is a striving for masculine equality rather than a liberty to be truly feminine in behavior. Simple sexual dimorphism should tell you that biologically men and women are not the same and should not act as if they were. Furthermore, you are assuming that traditional roles and behaviors are unnatural and the product of repressive societies as a given, instead of proving your underlying premise at the outset of your argument.

"How can society be just when genetics are so manifestly unjust?"- Dr. James Watson, winner of the Nobel Prize, discoverer of DNA

[Joreads]

Yeah, it really is.

And I love it

Me to.

I was wondering what people would say was their favorite book from the series. For me it is Midnight Sun, I know it is not complete but I am including it anyway because well I can. I loved hearing what Edward was think and I love the way he makes fun of himself after he realises that he is in
love with Bella. "Feel the burn" is still my favorite of his saying to himself.

[Mopey Droney]

Also not all feminists hold that desiring a man as a life partner or hero figure is necessarily a weakness or bad thing. They should be free to go after whatever man they feel would fulfill their needs, and saying to them: "No man will fulfill your needs" may be true, but it's just imposing another stupid set of laws upon them.