"Twilight": The Subject of Widespread Blind Worship
Stephenie Meyer's new series "Twilight" has topped the "Best Sellers" lists for months now. The books are raved about by the media and by every female reader who has ever craved a romance novel with a fantastical twist. Meyer has been hailed "the new J.K. Rowling" and has enjoyed incredible fame and fortune in the wake of the staggering success of this series.
And I do see some similarities between the two deified authors of popular young adult books -- similarities that lie mainly in the juvenility of their writing styles.
While I may well be opening myself up to attack for having the gall to publicize my criticisms of the "Twilight" series, I feel it is my duty as an avid reader to do what I can to stop the blinded masses from mindlessly worshiping this drivel. If I can make even one person apply reason to the love they lavish upon these books and admit that, while they are enjoyable, they are not, by any means, great works of literature, then this lens will have been a success.
Please note that this critique is of the original book, "Twilight". While I have read the others in the series as well, the same complaints I had had about the first book carried into the others, so I will focus on only the original novel for the purposes of this lens.
Table of Contents
Wait -- I'm A Fan, Too!
Fun reads, for sure... but great literature? No way!
That aside, these books were beyond terrible on a number of other levels: writing style, plot points, character development, et cetera. I will address each of these in turn. As I do so, bear in mind that there's nothing wrong with liking a book that is not the equal of Tolstoy or Shakespeare; potboilers are fun -- there's no denying it! But I want people to comprehend why hailing Meyer as one of the greatest authors of our time is simply laughable.
PLOT SPOILERS AHEAD!
If you have not yet read "Twilight"
but are looking forward
to doing so...
STOP HERE!
Terrible Thing #10
It's sort of like, "She came home and put her clothes in her dresser. [End of chapter.]" The flow of the book was often interrupted by this. It got slightly better in the later books, but in the original "Twilight", at least, it was a common occurrence. It may sound silly that such a minor detail could interrupt said flow, but trust me: it's jarring.
Terrible Thing #9
Edward is beautiful. This is made clear from Bella's description of him when she first lays eyes on him.
A reminder of his hunkiness is given us the next time she sees him.
And the next.
And the next.
And we continue to hear it, over and over and over again. Purple prose abounds as Meyer forces the character Bella to focus solely on Edward's appearance. I would be so bold as to estimate that there are no fewer than fifty mentions of his beauty throughout this rather small novel... and by "mentions", I mean "full paragraphs". Ridiculous.
Other points are hammered into us as well, such as those tense scenes between Bella and her father. We get it, Meyer. She's a bratty teenager who doesn't like her dad and would prefer not to live there. Do we need to witness the same exact scene over the same exact dinner table twenty times?
Really, it might behoove Meyer to give her readers a little more credit than that.
Terrible Thing #8
Example: toward the end, Bella's heart stops when Edward kisses her in the hospital. She's on a monitor, and when the nurse comes in five or ten minutes later to check on her, she looks at the readout and says, "Are you feeling anxious, honey? Your heart rate got a little high there." Okay, I'll let the heart stopping thing go in respect for the needed suspension of belief that it takes to even get through this book; that being said, she's on a heart monitor because they're monitoring her heart. Her going into tachycardia and then momentary arrest would have set off the alarm and sent hordes of nurses instantly running in there. Second, since when is "arrest" equivalent to "heart rate got a little high"? You don't need medical training to know that that's literally incredible bullshit.
Terrible Thing #7
My favorite author is Orson Scott Card; compared to his character development, every author is a second-rate wannabe in that department. But Meyer's attempts -- or, rather, lack thereof -- are severely disappointing. So much could have been done with these characters, but they're the same filler characters that can be used in any book to fill any purpose. Very disappointing. (Again, though, maybe I've just been spoiled by OSC.)
Terrible Thing #6
She claims to be ordinary and second-rate, and that not a single boy in her big-town school was interested in her; but the minute she moves to Podunk Nowhere, suddenly all the boys want her, as if they're a sub-breed of human or something and she's their goddess -- like Yasmine Bleeth to every lonely man ever. I know that the main character is supposed to be the best of the best (else why write about her?), and I know that it supposedly gives her a kind of appeal, to be the innocently naïve beauty who is bewildered as to why so many guys like her. But, seriously -- every young male character she comes across? Really? And by the fourth guy, she's still surprised? All that tosses any sense of realism straight out the damn window.
Bella has been referred to by critics as a "Mary Sue" -- an empty shell, more or less, onto which the reader imprints his or her own personality. But to a reader who expects characters to have their own personalities (gasp! I ask too much!), Bella is a severe disappointment as the protagonist.
Terrible Thing #5
Again re: Bella: she glares way too much.What the hell. Every time she doesn't get the response she likes, or doesn't get a response fast enough, she "glares" at the person. Apparently, Meyer seems to think that this is the only reasonable facial expression to don when you're not getting exactly the answer you want exactly when you want it. Either the main character is a bipolar raging bitch, or Meyer is just a pretty crappy author. Since the former would signify an inconsistency unparalleled in any bestseller I've yet read, I'm banking on the latter theory.
Terrible Thing #4
Again re: Bella: she represents all that those who fight for feminism are battling to demolish.Bella is timid, meek, and not terribly bright. She latches onto a guy she barely knows because of how pretty he is, and then she proceeds to crumble in book 2 ("New Moon") when he leaves her, giving no thought to the possibility of lifting herself up and moving on with her life. She lets him do everything for her: drive her, cook for her, save her life, tuck her into bed, sing her to sleep, even carry her places on his back (and while there is a plot connection to this that speaks to a need for him to do these things because of his vastly greater strength and skill in all areas, the image is a demeaning one). She has no actual interests or hobbies outside of "loving" him. She looks at him like she's a whipped puppy and he's the human who's come to feed her, if she agrees to behave.
I don't think "sickening" is a strong enough descriptor of just how abhorrent her anti-feminist behavior is.
Terrible Thing #3
Edward is completely devoid of anything actually resembling real, human characteristics.Edward was meant to be perfect... and so he is. In every way. Not only is he drop-dead, "mind-scramblingly" gorgeous (as Meyer sees fit to have Bella point out more than fifty times throughout the novel), but he's a shiny diamond statue on the inside, too. He has no weaknesses, except for Bella's love (d'aww). He has no moral scruples. He's always insanely polite and always says the exact right thing at the exact right time. His IQ must be through the roof. He speaks multiple languages and plays the piano, and his only concerns are to make the girl he loves happy and to protect his family.
How about a flaw or two, Meyer? Something to actually bring him to life? As it is, he's a cardboard cutout of [insert your favorite male daydream here]. Perfection does not make a character feel real. An example of his balance between good and bad -- that same balance that each of us struggles with every day of our lives -- is needed to lift him off the page and into our hearts.
But Meyer prefers her cardboard cutout, which is, in the end, really too bad.
Terrible Thing #2
Edward is, by his own reckoning, over 100 years old, as he "died" (read: became an immortal) at the age of 17 in 1918. Yes, he's forever trapped inside the body of a seventeen-year-old boy. But his mind certainly hasn't stayed that young.
Yet with whom does he fall in love? "Plain Jane", been-a-million-just-like-her-since-1918, seventeen-year-old Bella.
It's one thing to make an allowance for the physical attraction; after all, there's nothing wrong with one 17-year-old body liking another 17-year-old body. That makes sense. But there is something darkly frightening about a man who is mentally, emotionally, and experience-wise well over a century old falling in love with a mere child.
There are other vampires of his age with whom he could carry on a relationship and to whom he could have a deeper, more meaningful connection, as they would share age, wisdom, and experience. Then again, the whole love story doesn't make sense at all anyway... which leads me to Terrible Thing #1.
Terrible Thing #1
The "love" that Bella and Edward share is nothing more than shallow attraction that neither of them is willing to fight, despite the fact that his instinctual drive to drink her blood might at any point override his physical desire, resulting in her death. Because there is nothing concrete to either character, there is nothing concrete on which true love might be built. They don't share any interests, because neither of them have any interests. They don't have the same views on philosophy, because neither of them is any deeper than a teaspoon. In fact, the only "real" reasons we plainly see for the mutual attraction are that he's pretty, and she smells good.
As one blogger so aptly put it, it's "[l]ike if you fell in love with the best brownies you have ever smelled but you can't eat them."
This is not a soul-crushingly beautiful tale of romance and love. It's the story of two incredibly shallow, underdeveloped characters who like each other for superficial reasons and childishly refuse to let go of that, even for the sake of the physical safety of one of the two. It's disgusting.
Duel
Do you disagree?
Let everyone else know your opinion of this critique of "Twilight"... good or bad! My opinions are not necessarily right or wrong, and I want to know your thoughts in response to my review.
What do you think of this critique of "Twilight"? Do you think I hit the nail on the head, or do you think I'm a crotchety pessimist who doesn't believe in true love?
Fetching blurbs now... please stand byThis is dead on!
Jodelle says:
I how I wish I could declare these things from the mountain tops! Especially #2 and #1!
Posted June 29, 2009
I judge you when you use poor grammar says:
I have to agree with you.
I would also like to point out how many critics of your article not only have some of the most atrocious grammar skills I have ever seen, but also posted on the wrong side.
Posted June 19, 2009
yeppers says:
You are so right, I enjoyed Twilight the way a lot of people enjoy soap opera, you know it all sucks but you are still entertained by it.
Posted June 05, 2009
the #1 twilight book hater says:
I think that it’s a shame that teenage girls need something to obsess over this badly. Being one of those teen girls, I kinda liked the books. But as soon as I read the first chapter of Twilight, I knew the book was going to have a fake plot that wasn’t believable. I mean seriously, come on people! You really think a girl, who has never had someone to love before, is going to come to a crappy town and suddenly every guy who looks at her practically passes out because she’s just that beautiful? I mean, it’s a nice thought, but not something that should be made into a story, let alone 4 books. So, I definitely can say that I agree with this review. I hope more people will realize that the books are unrealistic because of this review. BTW Lizzy Cullen, ur comment is on the wrong side AND, FYI, I’m on team Jacob because at least he doesn’t look like he’s gonna kill someone!
Posted May 02, 2009
Temp_Girl says:
Oh. My. God. We wrote the SAME REVIEW! Mad props! I think that we noticed the same thing -- the wretchedly obvious Mary Sue-ness of the writing worked my last nerve (probably why it took me two weeks to get past page 20). The idea isn't bad. Even the plot in itself isn't that bad. But how this book got off an editor's desk without some serious rewrites? I'm gobsmacked.
Posted April 17, 2009
Lizzy Cullen says:
Everyone is too there own opinon, but GOD man who do you think you are I mean who really gives a crap on your opinon.
And everything you think is 'the worst' is like the WHOLE point so shut up and if you didn't agree or like the first book [TWILIGHT] you shouldn't have read on know what your probably a TEAM JACOB person thats why you suck.
Posted April 14, 2009
Twiglight fan! says:
oops
Posted April 10, 2009
Twiglight fan! says:
shut up! everyone is a critic! ( by that i mean u)
Posted April 10, 2009
tash says:
As a firm Anti-Twilighter, I say...RIGHT ON! You've mentioned and exposed every infallibility (besides imprinting, teen pregnancy and marriage) in this shitty book. I applaud you. The only thing I disagree with you on is the subject of J.K. Rowling and Harry Potter (though I don't know if you were pointing out her writing style as a good or bad thing.) Twilight is an overrated piece of purple trash with the most generic and Sue-tastically predictable "plot" I've ever seen. End. Of. Story.
Posted April 02, 2009
blah says:
haha ya i think that you are right about this. It wierd how i still like the book. I realized since the first book that there is no character developement, no theme (not really),and the plotline is pretty terrible. Haha I kind of think of it as a brain-rotting book- you read it cause theres something about it that lures you in, but it really had no point. (I also find the book similar to a movie like, perhaps, "Dumb and Dumber" haha well atleast I saw there was no point to it... just me though lol)
Posted April 02, 2009
This is all wrong!
jasiska says:
The only thing I agree with in this article is the fact, that Edward is too perfect - I have always liked Jacob better:-)
Posted June 08, 2009
Tigerlily says:
I dont agree. Because if you were to find out the age group that was the most into reading twilight, it would most likely teens and young adults. They dont read to much inot the story they just go by what it says. They just try to read somethin different from their normal life becasue they get tired of everythin that goes on in their lifes. if you no what i mean. Twilight gives them a way to believe that there is somethin more to life than growin up, that maybe they will find the one person they really love. Teens dont care about wether he loves her cuz she smells or not.
Posted June 06, 2009
Rose Lillian says:
I know this sounds horrible,but I have a prob with the twilgiht series. I'm totally sorry if I just offended anyone out there. I stayed up for days, mabey weeks even, without sleeping just so I could read the books. I luved them so much. I couldn't put them down at all. Then came breaking dawn. I couldn't stand the end. It tore me apart. That just can't be the end. Stephy has to write a whole new book about Renesmee growing up and being with Jacob, and the challenges they face. It can't just stop with "And so we continued blissfully in our small but perfect piece of forever." It just HAS TO CONTINUE! I have been crying and crying over this for months now. I don't understand. Am I missing some thing? Is that why I don't think it should end like that? Other than that, I didn't even notice anything wrong with the books.
Posted May 25, 2009
I says:
This is BULL CRAP! EDward loves Bella.
Posted April 19, 2009
Julia says:
I think you are a lier they are in love for real when Bella is turned into a Vampire he still loves her just the same.
Posted April 19, 2009
BlondeBelle says:
On a lot of points, I don't necessarily disagree. I can spot bad writing. I agree with a lot of the inconsistencies. I was one of those teenage girls with a sick obsession with Twilight. Now I see them as books I like. So... I agree, but I still can't help but like the books.
About J.K. Rowling, on the other hand. I will always stand by Jo and the Harry Potter series; she is an amazing writer and extremely creative in her plots.
About "my choice," well I'm in between, so I'll just go with wrong.
Posted April 10, 2009
Twiglight fan! says:
shut up! everyone is a critic! ( by that i mean u)
Posted April 10, 2009
edward fan says:
BULL CRAP
Posted April 10, 2009
TwiTwi says:
Some good points but I still love the book.
The book still have its selling points
Posted March 06, 2009
kate griffiths <3 says:
This chick is a dickhead she is not very bright and is very cricitical and is an ugly werewolf. She is a fucking whore, bitch. we love your stupidity ayy !! (:
Posted March 03, 2009
Buy "Twilight" and Its Companion Books
Reader Feedback
NAIZA wrote...
Wow, what can I say. I've been a fan of the book and movie too. But there are some areas I have to agree with you. There is some inconsistencies with the writing and all of the stuff. Terrific lens! :)
Posted December 31, 2008
Photo Credit
Linkbacks to Flickr Photostreams
- John Coke Pemberton
- Picture for introduction.
- Ness301
- Picture for "Terrible Thing #5".
- Mindless~Infernal~Romance
- Picture for "Terrible Thing #4".
- Elphiegirl95
- Picture for "Terrible Thing #3".
