The Twilight Saga: Breaking Down
Originally published as a series of reviews on LibraryThing.
Book 1: Twilight
Ah, Twilight. What can I say that other reviews have not? The first thing I’ll make clear is that I’m not going to vie with the reviews that find creative new ways to snark about the book’s weaknesses. Oh, there are plenty of them, and a book like Twilight just begs to be made fun of. But snark is so done already. I’ll divide my review into three sections: the little things that bothered me, the elements that are more deeply disturbing, and the things I did manage to enjoy.
For the little things: the first order of business is the writing. Usually this wouldn’t be a “little thing” with me, but in light of the other issues, it seems smaller. I went into this expecting the style to be, as a friend of mine put it, about as “insipid as hose water,” and found the expectations justified. It was not as bad as that monumental piece of bad writing, Eragon, which I had to drop after thirty pages because I simply couldn’t do it anymore. Nor was it quite at the level of Frank Beddor’s Looking Glass Wars, which was more like muddy hose water.
But that’s about where my dubious praise ends. Stephenie Meyer does a lot of “telling” instead of showing. I recently took a course on editing fiction and many of Meyer’s sentence constructions could be pulled for the samples we were to correct for our homework. An example of this is “Desolation hit me with crippling strength.” That’s called telling: no subtlety about it, no descriptions that would clue us in without being explicit. (And hint: “I felt desolation hit me with crippling strength” is not the way to fix that problem.) The writing is readable, but definitely frustrating and clunky. It is not necessary to follow every sentence of dialogue with a description of how it makes Bella feel, how Edward looks, etc.
(And speaking of the writing, I also have a problem with the editing. Have you ever heard of a “dust moat”? Me neither! Dust motes I have seen, but never a moat composed of dust. Fascinating thought. Who checked this book for typos, and why wasn’t it me?)
I confess being a little disappointed that Dracula didn’t even get a mention in this book; it’s such an important work to the history of vampire lit. But it wouldn’t jibe with Meyer’s good vampires, I suppose (noting, of course, that the idea of good vampires is nothing truly original with Meyer). I also didn’t understand why Meyer felt the need to include little digs against foreign-made cars, of all things! We are twice reminded that Bella’s truck would demolish any foreign-made car that it struck. Okay — ?
In addition, the plot is weak in many places, and Bella is not a consistent character. One minute she is coming up with a smart plan to escape the tracker, and the next she is stupidly walking right into his trap. And no one can be that klutzy. The story they fabricate at the end to explain things would strain the credulity of even the most naive parents.
The bigger issues are a little more serious, and are interrelated. The biggest problem, of course, is Bella’s unhealthy obsession with Edward and her instant willingness to give up her life, her soul, her very self just to be with his gorgeousness forever. How disturbing is that? She loses herself entirely in her lust (not love) for him, and though there are hints here and there that this isn’t good (she calls herself “pathetic,” he says their relationship is not healthy, etc.), none of these objections are given any weight in the behavior of the characters. It’s bad, sure, but it’s a good bad.
Edward doesn’t love Bella for herself. (Admittedly, that would be hard to do; as one friend put it, Bella is a shell for the reader to fill with herself — giving Bella very little personality of her own.) He is drawn to her on a physical level, by a primitive desire for the scent she has. Their entire relationship is predicated on his desire to kill her; he can’t stay away not because he cares for her as a person, but because he has a physical need for her. The sad thing is that this is touted as romantic, and young girls want that. They want to be simply the object of a man’s physical desire, and think that somehow this will fulfill their need for love. But lust — blood or otherwise — is not love.
Add to that the graphic descriptions of sexual desire, and you have a real problem with young girls absorbing this stuff. Sure, Edward and Bella don’t have relations, but they might as well for some of the descriptions Meyer gives. I’m amazed she has no shame about writing such explicit scenes and offering them up for the reading diet of young girls. And Bella is not chaste out of morality or self-preservation; she refrains because it’s “Edward’s rule.” *sigh*
Edward gets a lot of flak for being the classic abusive boyfriend, but Bella shouldn’t get off so easily as a helpless victim. She is very assertive about getting what she wants; it’s just that what she wants is selfish, stupid, and dangerous. But anyone who complains about Edward being controlling and selfish (and he is) should also realize Bella’s complicity with the situation, and indeed her insistence that it should be so. I think a lot of young girls will go into life expecting their boyfriends to be completely obsessed with them as Edward is with Bella… and when that doesn’t happen, they will wonder what they are doing wrong.
And now, having said all this, why did I read and even manage to partially enjoy this book? My main objective in reading it was to build credibility in criticizing it; I have some younger friends who love it, and I want to be able to discuss its problematic themes with them. I also enjoy fantasy and some vampire mythology. And I do think Meyer has managed to create an interesting idea in vampires choosing to become “vegetarians” and not drink the blood of humans. There’s a hint of redemption there, a theme I love. But it is, of course, a redemption brought about by those who need it rather than by an outside power. Edward and the Cullens are redeeming themselves, not being redeemed. The sacrifice they make is significant; they are constantly denying themselves the human blood they crave. But their strength to resist this temptation comes from within and from one another. Meyer belongs to the Church of Latter-Day Saints (Mormonism); her theology should not be conflated with mainstream Christianity.
Feminists rail against the book for the way Bella’s weakness and insipidity are presented as virtues, and I have to agree with them to a point. But one thing Meyer does get right (quite accidentally, I am sure) is the idea of the man being stronger so that he can be the protector. This does not automatically make the woman weak, helpless, and stupid, of course (this is where the feminists and I part company). Bella and Edward have different roles in their relationship, and though these roles are terribly skewed, at least they are different.
And there really is something entertaining in the story, despite its many flaws. I want to see where Meyer takes the mythology, if she does any real research to add more depth to her world. I’m curious about the other vampires and how their stories will play out. I seem to be able to successfully ignore the constant descriptions of Edward’s beauty and Bella’s pathetic, selfish obsession, and so I think I will carry on with the rest of the series if I can stomach it. I reserve the right to drop it, but we’ll see how it goes.
More mature readers may enjoy parts of this book as I did, but it does not deserve the hype it has received, and it’s worrisome that so many young girls are allowing this story to shape their ideas of romance. I’m enjoying it, but with very mixed feelings. Mostly I’m just curious how it will all end. It would be nice if someone would rewrite the book to remove the bad characters, weak plot points, disturbing romantic ideas, and those pesky dust moats. Though perhaps the whole thing would be less entertaining without those very problems… Hmm.
Book 2: New Moon
What struck me about this book was the introduction of more dangerous relational dynamics, in addition to the issues that I explore in depth in my Twilight review. It seems that Meyer is going to search out new problematic ideas for each of her books and emphasize them each in turn as positive — or at least acceptable — ways of behaving.
The plot of this installment is a little less known than that of the first book, so briefly: Bella and Edward break up because Jasper almost kills Bella when she cuts her finger while opening birthday presents. Edward realizes that he is not good for her and ends the relationship. The Cullens move away and Bella falls apart. She has horrible nightmares and goes through each day like a zombie, trying to keep the pain at bay. She begins hallucinating, hearing Edward’s voice when she does dangerous things, and so she starts doing them more often just so she can feel closer to him (fantastic role model for young women right there). During this time she becomes friends with Jacob Black, who turns out to be a werewolf. Of course Jacob is in love with her, and because she feels warmed by his presence, Bella leads him on.
Meyer often makes her characters do uncharacteristic things because it serves the plot. But the characters are much weaker for it. The explanation of why Bella does not commit suicide is completely unconvincing; Bella says that she never considers it because she owes too much to her parents. Please! When you are in that kind of distress, you aren’t worried about who you’re going to hurt when you are looking for relief. If Bella was as bad off as Meyer wants us to think, she would have killed herself. Without Edward, there is nothing worth living for, in Bella’s mind. But then we wouldn’t have two more best-selling books, would we?
It also does not make sense that Bella would be hesitant about marrying Edward simply because her mom doesn’t think anyone should get married before age 30 — yet Bella is willing to make an eternal commitment to vampirehood for his sake. So she won’t marry him yet, but she is going to take an irrevocable step so she can be with him for the rest of their existence, which is pretty much forever? Weak.
One of the most disturbing parts of this book was the character of Emily, the fiancée of Sam Uley who is the alpha werewolf. Sam became a werewolf without knowing what was happening to him… and one night he was too close to Emily when he lost his temper. He gouged her left side, raking his claws down her face and leaving her with horribly disfiguring scars all down her face. But Meyer portrays their relationship as a very loving one; the past is all forgiven. The physical abuse is just a regretful memory that Sam has to deal with occasionally. Emily is happy to stay with the man who disfigured her so horribly in a moment of anger… just like so many women in physically abusive relationships. Oh, he was so sorry, he bowed and begged and felt just awful. But the woman is the one who wears the scars. I felt a little sick about how that was portrayed. What kind of message is that sending to young girls? As long as he’s sorry afterwards, you should stay with your physically abusive guy?
Fewer people will probably agree with me on this next point, but I was uncomfortable with the idea that a girl can have a male best friend. Jacob demonstrates the point by not being able to “just be friends” with Bella — but Bella is somehow able to not return his feelings. It’s because of the Incomparable Edward, of course. But there are no Incomparable Edwards in real life (thank goodness), and I think most girls would develop romantic feelings in a “best friend” relationship like that. I think your lover should be your best friend anyways. It doesn’t make sense to me to compartmentalize like that.
Again, just as in Twilight, I did enjoy the plot of the warring vampires and werewolves, with all the history behind their unusual relationship. The Volturi were fascinating too. I liked this book less than the first one, mostly because the plot was not as interesting and it left me even less enthused about starting the third book. I wanted a break from Meyer’s mediocre writing and the unhealthy relationships of her inconsistent characters. I have since started the third book and will probably be finishing the series soon. I want to get this over with! I’m enjoying it, but I’m not. It’s hard to enjoy a series with so many fundamental problems, and yet the idea is appealing enough to fantasy fans to make it worth picking up. I don’t see myself ever rereading, though.
Book 3: Eclipse
Just when you think there are no more sick and twisted situations left for Stephenie Meyer to explore in her books, she pulls another one right out of the air and plops it down in the middle of what could otherwise be a decent story. Eclipse had the potential to be one of the better installments in the series until it became engorged with too much meandering, too little plot, and some authorial fantasies that I would much rather not have known about.
In this story Bella is finally graduating high school and playing a neutral Switzerland to her two crazed lovers, Edward and Jacob. There are reports of strange killings taking place in nearby Seattle, murders with no attempt to hide the remains. All the signs point to an army of newborn vampires… created by an older vampire with a very definite purpose in mind. Bella, of course. Could you have any doubts? I couldn’t, though it took the characters about 400 pages to realize what was going on. *sigh*
Again, there are little problematic things in the relationships — with some rather huge issues alongside. Edward is smug about forging Bella’s name on her college applications; he even says he can write her name better than she can herself. There is the disrespect to Charlie… the way that Bella continues to use and abuse Jacob… the way that the Cullens hold Bella against her will, for her “protection”… the exploding physical passion that Bella describes in excruciating detail every time Edward kisses her. Ugh.
In the first two books all the smaller problems are accompanied by an issue that is not small in the least. Eclipse is no different. This one occurs when Edward and Jacob have smuggled Bella away from the coming attack and they are all in a tent during the cold night. Bella is so cold — of course — that Jacob is forced to curl up next to her inside the sleeping bag to keep her warm. Edward, being a vampire, cannot warm Bella as his skin is always cold to the touch. What follows is a disgusting revelation, an almost embarrassing exposure of Meyer’s deepest fantasies. She places Bella in close physical proximity with a young man who loves her ardently, with another lover glowering nearby, forced to watch. And the two boys have a conversation, while Bella drifts on the edge of sleep. Oh, to have two such handsome, perfect boys in love with you! To be forced to do such a thing. I was a little sick after reading this chapter. The whole Jacob-as-a-space-heater scene confirmed it beyond a doubt: there is something seriously warped about Meyer and her view of relationships. This scene exposes something very personal about her, and it isn’t a pretty sight. Did Meyer not realize how much she was exposing?
I did enjoy some parts of this book. Rosalie’s back story was pretty interesting and it was nice to have her persona explained. It was also fascinating to learn more about Jasper. Really, the best things about this series are the other characters and the mythology. I also enjoyed the introduction of Seth Clearwater, a minor character who nevertheless manages to be far more interesting and vital than the main players.
Bella is, of course, still determined to sacrifice herself and become a vampire so she can stay with Edward forever. It was less annoying in this book though, probably because it’s become more of an accepted fact by now and Meyer isn’t reminding us in every other sentence of Edward’s gorgeousness and Bella’s utter absorption in him. It’s sick and wrong… okay, let’s move on, what’s happening in the rest of the story? I can understand how a lot of readers can’t get past Bella and Edward, though.
Again Meyer makes her characters do uncharacteristic things to make the story work. I have to laugh at how Edward just suddenly tells Bella, a few chapters before it’s important, that he no longer wants her blood. Apparently it was so awful when he thought she was dead that he would never desire anything that could bring that about. Convenient, isn’t it?
Really, this book is just more of the same. New Moon and Eclipse are both pretty weak in the plot department. Some things do get resolved and explained, but there is so much padding it’s hard to remember the essential things. One thing does stand out, though: the disturbing, even repulsive relationship dynamics that are apparently a very personal part of Meyer’s erotic imagination. Blech.
Book 4: Breaking Dawn
I’m going to buck tradition and start off by saying that I think I actually enjoyed this book for the most part. Before you gasp and gape at such an admission, be assured I’m still going to rip apart all its stupid/sick elements. But there is a little more to like here, toward the end of the book at least.
Bella and Edward finally get married. The plan is that they will attend Dartmouth College in the fall, if Bella — as a newborn vampire with unpredictable and strong desires — can stand to be around humans without killing them. But of course this doesn’t happen… on their tropical-island honeymoon, Bella gets pregnant.
There are two seriously disturbing issues in this book. First, Edward leaves horrible bruises all over Bella from their lovemaking. He feels awful but Bella, of course, just eats it up and even enjoys it. Apparently it’s okay if he hurts you so long as he’s what you want, right? Nothing else matters.
The other big problem is when Edward offers to let Bella bear Jacob’s children, if she will only let them abort Edward’s child that is slowly killing her from the inside out. If Bella wants babies, she must have them at whatever cost. How twisted is that offer? And let’s just kill the baby we’ve made because it’s convenient for us to do so. That makes it okay, right? The relationships in this book are really sickmaking. I don’t care that Meyer tries to straighten them all out by having Jacob imprint on Bella’s daughter later. That makes it even worse! The whole thing is just banal.
Another issue, and one that has run through the entire series, is the graphic descriptions of sexual desire, so incredibly unrealistic and inappropriate for young girls to be absorbing. If raging physical desire sweeps through your entire being at a simple kiss, you have bigger problems than vampirehood. Why are girls as young as eleven and twelve reading these books? They aren’t old enough to realize that this is all fantasy, and fantasy of a dangerous breed. Many older readers may not be able to make that distinction either. I think these books are setting up young women for a lifetime of disappointment; nothing and no one can ever live up to Meyer’s ridiculous fantasies.
Once more the characters are weakened by being forced to fit the plot rather than the other way around. Bella’s father Charlie’s unwilling, uncomfortable acceptance of the supernatural does not ring true. Meyer is trying to sew up two completely different worlds and it just doesn’t work.
But as I said, I did find the second half of this book quite interesting. The strategic plans for negotiating with the Volturi, all of Carlisle’s friends gathered from around the globe to stand witness that Renesmee is not a dread “immortal child,” and the final confrontation made for an absorbing finish. I’m surprised that a lot of Twilight fans rate this fourth book as the worst of the bunch; though I was bothered by several things, it seemed that this one had the most cohesive and interesting plot, despite being a bit too long.
For this article, I’ve tried to dredge up any redemptive elements or accidental reflections of divine truth that might have made their way into the Twilight Saga. They’re hard to come by. I think the theological stance of the stories is revealed in a short conversation Edward and Bella once have about his soul. She thinks God will accept him because he has forsaken the traditional vampire diet of human blood, though he thirsts for it constantly; Edward doesn’t think it’s enough, and pretty much considers himself damned forever. And that’s all we ever get… Meyer never again revisits this fascinating theological question.
This is the real danger in these stories, beyond even the relationship issues I’ve dissected. And they are so bad they can distract us from the underlying issue, which is subtle. It’s not what’s there in blazing lights, but what isn’t there. It’s this: theology, morality, and eternity are never the important things. Bella and Edward live in the now of physical passion, which will never end for them since vampires are immortal. They live to gratify themselves. God doesn’t matter (why would He?) and even the idea of eventually going to Hell has little weight next to the immediacy of physical desire. Sex, disguised as relationships, has edged out all other contenders to be the deity of choice in the Twilight Saga. And so many readers are worshiping at that altar.
Overall, I’m glad I read the Twilight books. I can criticize them knowledgeably and — I hope — point out their problems to young readers. The series can be enjoyed for some of its characters and its mythology, I’ll admit that. But with the abusive/disturbing relationships presented in a favorable light, the mediocre writing, the weak plotting, and the applauded idolatry, I could never recommend them. There are so many better books out there.
Amy Timco is a committed Christian, voracious reader, incorrigible booksale bum, professional editor, moderator at the NarniaWeb.com forum, and happy wife.
Catch up with her other book reviews at her LibraryThing profile.
Thanks for this! I only managed to read the first book and I often point out to the youth I work with that Bella and Edward are lousy examples. I appreciate everything you said and I’ll be recommending this one highly.
Amen. I do not plan to ever read them, but it is good to see a review from someone who has.
I only read the first three. This review has many thoughts similar to my own, plus some I hadn’t thought about. I admittedly don’t read in “editing mode,” so I didn’t notice some of that.
Great article, Amy! I disagree with you about guys and girls not being able to be best friends without romantic feelings surfacing but that’s okay.
As for Twilight, I’m really concerned about the effect of the books on the minds of girls and women. If they expect men to act like Edward and be Edward they are in for a shock and males can’t live up to those lofty (if disturbing) heights. That’s my main concern with the series, despite the poor writing etc. I really don’t think I’m being too strong in saying that these books are an ‘acceptable’ form of pornography for females. Yes, they’re emotionally-based, not visually based but it’s lust all the same. We need to recognise that both genders can fall for the deadly charms of lust (yes, often in different ways) and that we need to be responsible and take these thoughts captive, run from danger and run to God to repent and let Him redeem us.
I agree I think it’s possible to “just be friends.” However, I do think Amy makes a good case in that Bella and Jacob *do* have romantic feelings, which makes the “just be friends” bit rather difficult at best. So, either way, in this particular case. And I also agree with her that your best friend should be your spouse.
True, Kaci. I agree with you. I have several best friends, two of them are girls. One is married (I get along very well with her husband) and the other is not , but there’s no romantic attraction between us. She’s like the sister I never had. I guess that’s why I came to this conclusion. That said, when there are romantic feelings involved, it would be a more difficult and not recommended, unless you both planned something beyond friendship.
I greatly enjoy these reviews, though the snark factor did unintentionally come in. I tend to be increasingly averse to it since it’s so done, and (though I know you don’t think this way, too many in society do) wonder how it is that sarcasm got turned into the ultimate form of wit and intelligent conversation where society is concerned.
That said, I agree with everything you said, except for in a few areas, where I HALF-agree. I know, I always must be overly-specific.
Suicide: I have contemplated this myself, more than once, and have read statistics about others who have. Often, the desire to kill one’s self is mitigated by feelings of allegiance or loyalty to others. That is why one of the first things a counselor will do when talking to someone who wants to do thusly, will be to ask the person of all of those will miss them and be hurt by their actions. It’s a subtle psychological tool to remind them. It gives hesitancy to them. Often, that time of reflection is enough to get the (what I call dark or rough times) urges to pass.
You ARE right, however, in two ways. First of all, the urge can be frequent, but is in frequent bursts. It would not be a continuous feeling for months on end. Bella is unrealistic to the extreme that way. She may have suicidal tendencies, but they would be intermittent with extreme bouts of joy and contentment. No one in real life has EVER been documented to act like Bella is, in one extreme, months long bout of constant suicidal though.
Friends of opposite genders. I disagree here as well, since my whole life through, most of my best friends have been females. I really think that historically, men and women could be amicable towards each other, and even enjoy each other’s company. Only the past 50 years in our oversexed culture since the late 50’s/early 60’s, has this been a huge issue. We ought to be striving to move away from this hurtful, more modern view that platonic friendships don’t or can’t work.
However, you are right in that this situation is one where it can’t work. If Jacob were to like Bella, but say, I don’t have any intention of ruining a good friendship, you’ll never hear me mention it, that would be one thing. However, he is making his intention clear to win her over no matter what. On such a foundation, nothing but marriage, or irreparable separation, can occur.
Of course, Bella’s leading Jacob on is sick. She seems to lead on EVERY male character, and that is a tad frightening to me as a guy that young girls are seeing this an action for the “heroine” of the story to do.
I really hate to disagree even in part here, but I must, with the whole “Jacob as space heater” thing, at least in part: it is written disgustingly, and entirely unrealistically. However, it IS actually a method of dealing with cold-weather injuries. In such cases, the affected person or body part must be either warmed up or at least have the temperature stabilized as the situation may call for (trench foot is a case of stabilization more so than any warm up). In cases without a wool blanket or other supplies (or if they are ruined, wet, destroyed, etc., you use what you have. The person’s limb/life, is more important then anyone’s discomfort. And yes, if the girl who occassionally drove in my unit on some missions had needed it, that includes her.
However, in the end you are right, because Stephanie Meyer did not even ATTEMPT to portray it realistically. One can freeze to death, yes. But for the most part, sitting back to back with Jacob, or lying back to back, should suffice. Usually, though, the person is extremely wet. Clean changes of clothes is not ordered on military missions in cold or rainy environs for the sake of irritating troops’ (as much as my guys and gals sometimes thought so).
The purpose of that (ENTIRELY unrealistic) scenario was pure, disgusting, and inappropriate sensuality. A girl has to handsome men spar over her in a very sensual situation. That may be Stephanie Meyer’s sick fantasy, but please don’t let it become her young readers.
Overall, I have to agree with you on everything else you said. It is going to send the wrong message to girls. Even where a defense COULD be made, as in the case of the Emily/Sam thing, to differentiate it from real-world abuse (it being a fantasy setting akin to in real-life shooting someone by mistake or something), that is not something to be in these books. The girls at young ages can not understand them.
Heck, if boys read these more, they’d proabably come to the conclusion that hitting girls is okay. Which is one issue I have with modern culture and comic books, though I enjoy them, by the by.
And thank you for pointing out the dropped ball on the theological questions, the fact that the LDS faith is NOT true, Biblical Christianity, and Bella’s complicity in Edward’s abhorrent behavior. These three points I see come up almost nowhere. And they need to be brought up, or folks will think that Mormons are Christians (they aren’t), and that Bella’s behavior is somehow “better” or “not as bad as” Edward’s.
Great reviews. I remember reading them on LT, and they’re even better all tied together like this. God bless you, and thanks for the great piece.
E. Stephen Burnett (the editor of this) found a posting on Facebook about my reaction to this review and asked me to come post it here . . .
I had originally written:
I read this, and I agreed with alot of it but definitely not all of it. This reviewer outwardly states in her bio she’s a devout Christian. This makes her biased in some regards and that shines through in this review. I’m shocked at the constant disgust and surprise she feels towards Meyer’s explanation of teen sexuality/lust/emotions in the Twilight books. Either this reviewer is out-of-touch with today’s youth or she is unable to accept the fact that sex outside of marriage happens – even to “good” Christians.
To which E. Stephen Burnett responded:
Hey Steff, feel free to post your thoughts in response to the review. I edited the thing, but I know it’s not above challenge — and challenge brings great “iron-sharpening-iron” discussion.I happen to know, though, that Amy’s reaction of disgust is not toward honest depictions of sin. It’s to overt glorifications of it.
Evidently that’s what the series does, and while that certainly won’t be the target of blame in those who therefore decide their sinful behavior is normal and okay, it is still a factor. Christian readers should balance both enjoyment and discernment in their reading, whether it’s a “Christian story” or not. And if something causes us personally to sin — well, Jesus had some extreme statements about what we should want to do to ourselves to get away from that. Fortunately, He’s provided a much better solution, which enables us to kill sin, and even engage with those who want to make sin seem shiny, in impossible universes.
Finally, I’m not sure what you mean about bias. Of course this is a “biased” review. As one apologetics dude likes to say, “it’s not a matter of whether you’re biased, but of which bias is the best bias by which to be biased.” 🙂 (Thought: seeking Biblical bias is best!)
To which my final reply was:
It’s fine to be biased. For example, I think I’m awesome and I’m entitled to that opinion. And you’re biased because you edited her review. So, of course, I expect biased to play a roll in most everything we do, see, hear, or read in life.
My issue was that she seemed to be letting her Christianity be the focus of her bias, of what drove her entire review. I expect book reviewers to be honest, and they absolutely can have their own opinions based on past experiences, religious beliefs, political alignment, likes, dislikes, what have you, but for a “fair” review it would have been nice to see her write something that was a little more focused on the story, the writing, Meyer’s literary voice, etc. and a little less focused on her personal disgust at how sinful, immoral, and non-Christian it reads (this undercurrent of her review was so palpable it was distracting to me).
I am a Christian.
I am a writer.
I was once an impressionable, avid-reading, teen girl.
And I read these books as an adult and enjoyed them, mostly from a marketing stand-point (while a lot about “Twilight” is absolute fluff, and Meyer’s writing style is nothing impressive or revolutionary, she did develop very strong, identifiable characters that resonated with a large enough population of readers to make her series explode – and explode at a time when “supernatural” [especially vampires] was a popular theme. Kudos to her for either predicting the market that well, or just having written the right thing at the right time. Kudos to her for getting an entire generation to read. Are we forgetting that BIG point? She got people to read – which is quickly become a rarity among people).
As a Christian, I feel affronted by this reviewer. Because I don’t feel as impassioned by the sexual nature of these books, she makes me feel like less of a Christian. Like I’m doing something wrong. Like Jesus loves me less because I don’t feel enraged by the sin of this book. He doesn’t. He made me the way I am.
As a writer, I feel affronted by this reviewer. I hope she never reviews a book of mine, because I know it will be driven by specific biases and not based on literary merit or credit.
And as a once impressionable, avid-reading, teen girl I feel affronted by this reviewer. I read books that had strong sexual themes when I was thirteen (The Lioness Quartet, by Tamora Pierce, for example). I didn’t come out of it corrupt or obsessed with my sexuality, or desperately thinking that I needed a boy like the dark-haired, passionate Prince or the light-eyed, flirty and playful Thief. More than anything, it embarrassed me. So, let’s not discredit teen readers thinking they are going to be driven to sex, drugs, and rock and roll because of a book that explores what MOST teen girls are thinking or feeling anyway.
Just to clarify, by “editor” I mean that I asked Amy for more about the series’ spiritual components, positive or negative, and adapted it (mostly visually) for this site, based on its original serial installments. Otherwise, the material itself doesn’t differ from her original, self-edited version.
I’m sure folks will have some thoughts in response, Steff. Thanks, and welcome!
Forgive the list format; it’s just easier to read, I’ve learned.
1. In large part, it’s the age group at which it’s directed. My personal issue is more this: These books do not promote ‘abstinence’ when the characters (again, I have not read book four, but I am aware they get married and have a kid in book four) do everything short of actual intercourse, including pantomiming it on the couch with her dad in the other room. That’s not abstinence. That is not purity.
Speaking as someone who chalked most of Edward and Jacob’s behavior to their not being human, there was really *no* reason to handle Jacob-the-space-heater the way they did. (Note: By this I mean that Edward wants to kill her and vampires and werewolves are mortal enemies. I might not approve of the “romantic relationship” parallel, but I can at least buy that a vampire and a werewolf would behave that irrationally.)
But hey, you’re now having this discussion with someone who swears the books work better if Edward and Bella have a platonic relationship – from a story standpoint. Leave it at she’s entranced by the ‘vampire allure’ and he’s in a tug-of-war with his own nature and let them be friends. Not…whatever this thing is.
2. A lot of things, I’ve learned, are in how subject matter is handled. One of my favorite things about Marley & Me is that when the couple is having marital issues, they sit down like rational adults and decide as a couple that divorce is off the table for them. I know they’re adults, not teenagers, but I still maintain that much of the situation could have been handled much better than it was. Besides, Bella is initially presented as a bit of a book nerd and thinker, a fact that, like the questions of Edward’s damnation and such, gets completely left behind as the story progresses.
3. This may or may not be my weakest point, but I’m gonna go back to a very tired cliche of “Just cuz everyone’s doing it don’t make it right.” The thing is, I don’t see that much of a struggle on the sexuality front with this particular couple, strictly from the standpoint of they’re doing pretty much whatever they want, physically. That’s not struggling; that’s embracing.
To be fair, though, you’d have to agree that there’s no real separating your personal beliefs from the core of who you are. Personally, I didn’t think the writing that terrible. (I also turn the editor brain off while reading, so I really do miss things like that anyway.) By itself, no ethical underpinnings added (because it’s really operating in a world with a deistic god anyway), I’d probably rate it (I know, I know, Stephen) a 3/5. I drop it to 2/5 for the pseudo-abstinence. Neither terrible nor glorious.
Plus….I don’t know a teenager who says “you’re dazzling me!” or one teenage girl who finds cold, undead, and marble-hard attractive. And I”m a middle and high school substitute teacher. Just sayin’. Jacob had my vote simply by being dark, warm, and alive. So if we’re going to go that route, there’s still that hurdle to jump.
So am I, and so was I. 😛 Hehe. But I’m the wrong audience: I was reading The Oath at age 12 and had no interest in vampires, romance, or boys. I wouldn’t have touched Twilight with a ten foot pole, even if my mother had let me.
Honestly, I think Rosalie was the most fascinating character she had (seriously, and I really loved her in book three) and Edward should’ve been the narrator. But I don’t like female characters most of the time, so… grain of salt. 0=)
I’m not sure I can agree here. People liked that argument with Harry Potter, and I”m still not sure I can fully agree on “well, they got kids to read” as a viable argument. Yes, it’s great to get kids to read. But I think *what* they’re reading matters, regardless of my stance on Twilight, Harry Potter, or anything else (just for the record, I’ve read books 1-3 of Twilight, seen two of the movies; and seen all but the first HP movie; I haven’t read the HP books).
Anyway, this is long. Hope all’s well.
Please, someone respond to this final comment. Some one with more time, maturity, and clarity of thought than I have at the moment -please don’t let this be the final word. It weakens what, in my view, was a VERY well written article that was more than fair to this series. How many Christians do you know that would have admitted to liking any part of Twilight? Do not miss the admirable honesty.
As for the Christian bias of the review, Miss/Mrs Steff, if you are a Christian this should not bother you. Period. Do remember the name of the website its posted on, for goodness sake. The angle Miss Amy came in on is the one you should expect.
Tell me you haven’t ever read an article biased towards evolution. Like you said at first, everyone is biased. Not to mention some biases are good. This article has such a bias towards discernment and truth. We should not compartmentalize our faith, and the articles on this site are great tools to look keenly beyond plain entertainment value.
Of course God does not love you less because you read a certain book, please don’t pull the cheap “it made me feel judged so it is bad” shot. The embarrassed reaction of your teen self was the proper one, but don’t assume that because that experience did not harm you that it would not harm others.
I have only one advantage over you ma’am, I still AM an avid-reading teen girl. What I read affects who I have become and am going to become, much more so than any reading I will do as an adult. I personally thank Amy for her review, so that I was able to avoid letting these stories become part of my reading experience.
Alright. I leave this to greater minds.
Remember: I was just expressing myself as was requested by someone on this site, because he thought it would bring an interesting discussion about. I had never heard of this site before, I had never been to this site before. So, respectfully, I ask that none of you “attack” the outsider who was intentionally brought in to this discussion because she had a different point of view from the rest of the people posting.
I have the right to my opinion. You have the right to yours. But remember, the more eloquently – and less accusatory – you can voice your opinion, the more it will be heard, recognized, and respected.
Remember: I said I appreciated these books from a MARKETING STAND POINT. Because whether or not any of you will agree with me about my personal (and biased) feelings regarding this review, the bottom line is: Stephanie Meyer did something right. And as a writer, I appreciate that. The publishing industry is an incredibly difficult thing to break into. So again – kudos to her for doing so with the manuscript she had.
Cheers!
Steff,
I’m not sure if you’re referring to me, but, just in case, I honestly had no intention of attacking anyone. If it came across that way, I apologize. Forgive me?
Steff, I don’t see anyone attacking anyone. It seems to be part intelligent discussion and part CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. Please don’t play the victim card just because you’re new and everyone seems to think differently from you. Maybe you’re the one who’s reading into the article something that’s not there. Because no-one here has attacked you. It’s possible that people’s posts came across as confrontational if you’re not familiar with their writings. I don’t know, that’s all I can think of at the moment.
In Steff’s defense, it was clear to me from the outset of this review that Amy had the entire kitchen cutlery set sharpened up and ready for action. I’ve been there myself, and there’s a certain satisfaction in dismantling a book you viscerally dislike. She did warn us, so points for truth-in-advertising. Still, Twilight is an easy target, and a receptive audience for the review was guaranteed here, so it felt a little like grandstanding to me at times. The end-zone dance loses a bit of its luster after the fourth touchdown.
In Amy’s defense, I haven’t read a serious review of this series that was much beyond indifferent, and some are just plain savage. This review wasn’t off the rails or outside the box. I could see that Amy worked hard to balance her comments, even when she didn’t have much enthusiasm for the task, and I think she did drill down to some of the literary deficiencies. I would caution against using emotionally-charged words and phrases in a review, like “sick and twisted,” “disgusting,” “stupid,” “ridiculous,” and “sickmaking,” which undermine the reader’s perception of the reviewer’s objectivity, even if they can be justified.
Just wanted to say, I am reading your comments with interest and will be posting some responses soon—I hope by tomorrow. Keep ’em coming!
Okay, I finally have some time to respond!
Tim and Christian, I agree that men and women can be good friends. I have several male friends and I appreciate them very much. And I used to think that a single guy and a single girl can be best friends without necessarily having any romantic interest. A woman in the church I grew up in used to say that, and I always disagreed with her in my head. But over the years I have come to change my mind. If you are best friends with a person of the opposite sex, why *wouldn’t* you also have romantic feelings? You already value that person’s company, spend a lot of time with him/her, and find in that person the attractive qualities that drew you to deep friendship in the first place. Is it really possible for single men and women to be best friends, with all the affection and camaraderie the term implies? I really don’t think it’s possible (or even desirable).
And Kaci, I absolutely agree, married couples ought to be one another’s best friends. My husband Todd is mine. There is no one I would rather spend time with than him, and that is because we are more than just lovers. We are companions. No married person should ever have a best friend of the opposite gender who is not his/her spouse. To do so implies a sort of emotional adultery, I think.
Christian wrote: “I really don’t think I’m being too strong in saying that these books are an ‘acceptable’ form of pornography for females.”
I agree. That is why I am always so astonished when Christians hold up the books as paragons of virtue just because Edward and Bella don’t have sex until marriage, and because Bella refuses to abort their baby. Those things are really peripheral to the books’ main themes. And really, having them abstain is just a way to heighten the sexual tension. I very much doubt there is any moral conviction about it; it’s sexier to go right to the edge (as the characters do, many times) and then pull back panting. This isn’t something to praise. Kaci, your comment hits on this point and I couldn’t agree more.
Tim wrote: “I greatly enjoy these reviews, though the snark factor did unintentionally come in.”
I’m sure it did; I wanted to make the reviews interesting and fun to read, rather than just being a litany of I-liked-this-I-didn’t-like-that. My standard of comparison for snark was the other reviews at LibraryThing.com, and compared to many there, my reviews are extremely tame in the sarcasm department. Have you seen them? Some are just vicious.
Tim wrote: “Often, the desire to kill one’s self is mitigated by feelings of allegiance or loyalty to others.”
I appreciate your perspective and you definitely know more about it than I do. I have never seriously considered suicide. I guess I found this reason hard to believe in Bella’s case, especially when she starts doing dangerous, even suicidal things so she can have Edward near. But your point is well taken, thank you.
Tim wrote: “The whole “Jacob as space heater” thing is written disgustingly, and entirely unrealistically. However, it IS actually a method of dealing with cold-weather injuries.”
Oh yes, I know it is a survival tactic and I’m not faulting it for that. It was just so perverse that I found it utterly repugnant. But I think we are in total agreement here 🙂
Steff, welcome! I’m glad you made your way here. I have read your comments with interest and I hope you’ll read my thoughts in response. I notice that you say twice that you feel “affronted” by me. You say it is because of my bias and because I let my Christianity be the point from which I base all my thoughts and criticisms of the series. Yet in another place you say that a Biblical bias is what we should have. It seems you are contradicting yourself: it’s bad for me to make my faith the foremost thing when I review these books, and yet we should also operate from a Biblical bias in everything. Which is it?
So, working from the premise that we are both Christians who love the Lord and want Him to be preeminent in our hearts and minds, I would love to know what I said that is affronting and offensive to a fellow Christian. Is it how I made my points? Or is it the points themselves? Is it me who is offensive, or is it the Biblical standards that I am expressing? What have I said that is unbiblical? As a Christian, shouldn’t all my biases be Biblical and all my thoughts informed and instructed by God’s Word?
One of your arguments for why Twilight isn’t so bad is that it “explores what MOST teen girls are thinking or feeling anyway.” Let me be clear here: I am not condemning the depiction of sexual desire in all fiction, period. I’m not even really condemning it in Twilight. The problem is not that the book deals with sexual desire, but HOW it deals with it. It glorifies it. It deifies it, even. Bella’s goal in life is to get Edward to make love to her. She is desperate to have sex with him. And this is presented as normal and highly romantic. Would you agree that it matters how we present sexuality to young people? Sure, they are probably thinking about it already… so let’s demonstrate godly thinking. Let’s show them how God would have them think and live. The fact that they are already thinking about sex should spur us to talk about it like the Bible does, not like the world does. Wouldn’t you agree?
Kaci, again I’m stealing your point. It’s not what the subject matter is; it’s how it is presented that makes the book either morally valuable or morally detrimental.
I disagree with you (Steff) that I did not address anything else about the books, such as the writing style, characters, plot, etc. Indeed, I think I spent much of my time talking about those things. A cursory glance at the theme of each paragraph should make that clear. I am an editor and an avid reader of fiction, and style/artistry is very important to me in the books I read. I love beautiful writing, and I dislike poor writing. I have given specific examples of what is wrong with Meyers’s writing (the telling versus showing paragraph, for one). So I’m really puzzled as to how you could honestly claim I addressed nothing but my Christian objections to the series.
And yeah, getting people to read isn’t necessarily a virtue. It depends on what they’re reading. I know a lot of women who read Twilight and never moved on to anything else. It matters what you read, just like it matters what you eat. Junk food may fill your stomach but that doesn’t make it nutritious for you. And unfortunately I think Twilight can spoil the literary palate for many people who don’t normally read. It’s not like someone is going to start reading Twilight and then move to Dickens or something else halfway substantial; he/she will (if reading is continued at all) probably pick up more paranormal romance of the sort that has been churned out nonstop since Twilight exploded to fame. Create a taste for junk and that’s what the person will want to consume.
And, speaking of spoiling the literary palate, I rushed to get through the last book because I was reading them all so close together and I found myself starting to THINK in Meyer-esque sentences (!). I wanted to be done with her influence as soon as possible. You are what you eat; you write what you read.
And Steff, I am not often on SpecFaith myself. I’m a friend of Stephen’s from NarniaWeb.com and I don’t really have a niche or following or anything like that here. We are both guests here. No one has attacked you and I’m sorry if you feel that way. I could easily feel defensive and attacked by some of the things you said about me in your comments, but I’m choosing not to. And you can make the same choice. I hope you will and that we can continue the conversation!
Katrina: thanks for your comment. I appreciate the points you make and I am thankful that my reviews blessed you.
Fred: yes, I certainly did have the kitchen cutlery sharpened and ready for action! I mean, it was Twilight! I wanted to read thoughtfully and critically because it’s such a hot topic these days and I have a strong incentive (the welfare of younger readers I personally care about) to get to the root of the books. But I really did try to be fair in my comments and praise the things I liked.
You make a good point about the strong, emotionally evocative words I used in my reviews, though I think it would be almost dishonest to use weaker words to describe my response to the books. I WAS repulsed and disgusted. I did feel sick to my stomach (literally, when Bella is drinking human blood *before* she’s a vampire during her pregnancy, since that is what the baby inside her wants… even now when I think about it I get a flutter of nausea). Would it be honest of me to temper my response (more than I already did) so I can get more people to agree with me? But I will consider that caution in future… thank you.
Originally these reviews were written to be posted on LibraryThing.com, which is not at all a Christian website. Also, they were posted individually rather than being put together in one long article. So the overdone touchdown dance is more a product of this format than the actual reviews themselves (at least I hope so). I added three paragraphs at Stephen’s request, but beyond those, these are what were posted on a secular website (and they were actually pretty well received there, interestingly enough).
Thanks everyone for your comments and for reading my reviews (they are longer than I thought, all strung together like this!). I’m certainly not THE Twilight expert, and these reviews of course represent my personal response to the series. So in conclusion: Is it sinful to read and enjoy the Twilight series? Of course not. Is it sinful to enjoy and approve the worldly ideas the series promotes? Yes. The same holds true for any other piece of fiction.
Thanks for taking the time to answer Amy. 🙂
I guess my issue on the friend of opposite genders area is that I wonder how much of our attitudes therein are based on our oversexed modern culture. I think that men and women can be friends in a platonic sense. Certainly that’s what the classical/medieval idea is, as seen in the writings of Lewis and Tolkien. Granted, they (and myself, I will admit) are over-idealizing such notions beyond what they really were.
In general, I did agree with you, as Meyer rapidly abandoned anything approaching reality, for what I think Christian rightly identified as emotional pornography.
I guess that in my views of wanting to back away from the modern fads towards a more sure standard from the past, I view myself like the late Bill Buckley said that he viewed himself. As someone standing athwart history, yelling STOP! 😀 That meaning not to change ever, but to do so in a slow, considered manner, so that if the changes be not preferable, we can “renew” the culture and standards, as the late Russell Kirk would say, into something more desirable.
Thanks again for your considered responses. God bless.
I can certainly see the points made above, but I think there may be an important opportunity overlooked in all the discussion.
What we have in our hands is an entire generation speaking the same language all at the same time, and an entire generation of young women (and some not-so-young) who are wishing for their eternal lover.
As a Christian, a writer and formerly an impressionable, avid-reading, teenage girl, I can’t pass up this opportunity to grab as many of those readers as I can and say “Hey, look… You know that longing for Edward’s eternal love, or that longing for Jacob’s unconditional love? I know where you can find that – and it’s not in some guy… Let me show you the way to Jesus.”
The fact that these four books and currently four movies are so huge, testify that at some point they have touched on a deeper need than that simply for mediocre escapist urban fantasy.
I’m not saying the Twilight Saga is the ideal evangelism tool, but it’s far too big to ignore. I have summed up a few aspects of the Twilight novels that can point a heart-hungry fan toward the only One who can help them.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/18/my-take-jesus-loves-twilight-or-at-least-5-reasons-christians-should/
[…] This article was originally published Nov. 7, 2011, based on Amy Timco’s Twilight Saga reviews at LibraryThing. We’ve made a few edits for this version. ↩ […]