Why My Fellow Christians Need to Embrace Twilight
God used an ass to make His point. Stephenie Meyer used a vampire.
January 5, 2012 - 8:00 pm
Page 1 of 4 Next -> View as Single Page
Nightmares plagued my childhood. The Wizard of Oz terrified me. I could fathom no creature nastier than the Wicked Witch’s flying monkeys. And so I learned very early in life that what my mind consumed would ultimately embed itself deep within me.
All of which makes me one of Twilight’s most unlikely champions.
I usually don’t care for science fiction, romance, and certainly not horror novels. As a Christian, I don’t believe filling my mind and spirit with evil is ever a good idea.
So why do I consider Christian conservatives who berate the Twilight films as misinformed or hypocritical?
Page 1 of 4 Next -> View as Single Page
Point taken. I have not watched TV for many years, except 2008 when we watched the election process and disaster, but, as a pastor i appreciate the cultural heads up.
Bless your little heart! Honey, there are no vampires. And if there were such vicious creatures they would not be serial murderers on the one hand, and sexually pure on the other. What sane woman would want to give birth to a vampire? This silly, nutty flick is the work of somebody smoking funny cigarettes, or a victim of organic brain syndrome.
With “UP”, Pixar made a better and more touching love story in the first 5 MINUTES than Twilight could do in three movies.
Just because you think it has a ‘good message’ doesn’t mean the movie is worth watching.
I absolutely love UP. We saw it in the theater and bought it the day it came out and had all the grandchildren over to celebrate. Twilight is not that kind of movie. Twilight smuggles a message to an audience unaware– I simply want to give credit to her for that.
‘The “good” guys are the vampires who despise their bloodthirsty nature, understand their innate potential for evil, and continually battle self-loathing. I might add further that vampirism was not a conscious choice. They spend “eternity” (although they can be killed) trying to serve mankind rather than destroy it.’
I can see your point on some of the issues but in this one I have to wonder if this feeds into the idea that prevails in our society that bad guys can’t help themselves, that they are victims of circumstance (bad childhoods, drugs etc) and deserve our pity and a second chance. Our so called justice system lives in a fantasy world where criminals are given multiple chances to ‘battle their innate evil’. Some ‘bad guys’ do change but romanticizing a few vampires as ‘good guys’ falls right in line with the liberal culture in which every ‘bad guy’ is a potential Edward and we fail to see the ones who aren’t and never will be and unleash them to do their evil deeds over and over again.
Actually, no they don’t. They don’t use the fact that they are vampires and therefore their behavior should be accepted at all. They deny their hardwire tendency toward evil, and despise the “monsters” they have become. They call evil evil- and they don’t excuse it.
I see I was not clear in what concept I was trying to find out about. I’m not arguing that the characters don’t tolerate evil or against the metaphorical aspect of the vampires. That the series shows characters committed to resisting their own potential for evil is certainly a Christian message. Perhaps I should have said that I’ve never watched it or read the books. When I first heard of it I wondered how characters based on something so traditionally evil could be portrayed as protagonists, as romantic figures. My comments were coming from our tendency to be optimists and romantics. Was Twilight just another message that people really are good at heart and that all a bad man needs is a good woman? I think a lot of people who haven’t read or seen this particular series, assume these vampire characters were once ruled by their evil nature and have only changed their ways because they fell in love with a mortal not because of their own desire to rise above their inherent nature. One would then also assume that the love interest was the catalyst for his transformation which would leave naive fans, particularly women, to think that they too can change a bad man. Too many women think they can change a bad man only to find themselves in very bad places.
We certainly can plant the seed of change in someone, but sometimes when we think we are nurturing that seed, all we do is enable a person to continue in their bad behavior. If Twilight also encourages viewers to keep their eyes wide open, to realize that not every one is struggling to overcome the evil within him, that there is a difference between supporting someone who is committed to choosing good over evil verses unwittingly enabling bad behavior then more power to them and to fans who realize it to.
I can see this still might be misunderstood. Let me rephrase that last bit:
..that there is a difference between supporting someone who is committed to choosing good over evil (by using his inherently violent nature for good)…
Eva, as I read this, I thought about Colonel Grossman’s treatise “On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs”
http://www.mwkworks.com/onsheepwolvesandsheepdogs.html
In it, he explains that the difference between a wolf and a sheepdog is essentially that while both are capable of lethal violence, the sheepdog focuses his deadly skills on taking out predatory wolves and protecting his flock of innocent sheep.
Nevertheless, those who claim they eschew violence (like gun control fanatics) look upon both wolves and sheepdogs with equal fear and loathing. They consider the sheepdog a monster, hating him when the wolves are gone, but clamoring for him when wolves are near. Nevertheless, the sheepdog protects sheep so they can continue keeping their head down eating grass and pretend violence is irrelevant.
We all have this penchant for terrible violence. Some deny it, projecting their inner reality on others and then castigating and banishing them like some Biblical scapegoat. Some think they are more spiritual because they prattle on about how they are for peace, not realizing that by foisting their responsibility on others, they tear the fabric of Liberty.
I think these are points Rhonda is trying to make.
Howard, I do get the vampire as a metaphor for the inner struggle of good verses evil, evil as a tool that can actually help us survive. I like the idea and I wasn’t trying to make a point that somehow the vampires should be rejected as purely evil with no redemptive qualities if that was your take on my comments. I was looking at the non-vampires and how fans may be identifying with the friends or love interests of the vampires. I hope I’ve clarified that in my reply to Rhonda. Her article has helped me wrap my head around what I have thought of as a romantic vampire trend we’ve been seeing lately.
I think I’ve been misunderstood in another way. As the daughter of a career soldier, having spent my child hood around rough men who would do violence on those who would do harm so I can sleep safely (to paraphrase Churchill, I believe)and having lived in third world countries where my safety could easily have depended on such men, I am familiar with the colonel’s concept and am grateful for those sheepdogs. I don’t like to think of myself as a sheep though but not being in the military or other protective force, in a way I am. However, if I came under direct attack, there’s no way I am just putting my head back down just because the sheepdog showed up. I’d keep fighting right along side him.
You are quite right about the anti-gun crowd. Self defense by proxy is preferable to defending themselves. Some how it absolves them of the sin of fighting back I guess. Not really but that’s what they think. Pacifism is easier said then done. Being dead is one thing. Dying is another. As Christians we ask ourselves if we are ready to die but what we really mean is are we ready to be dead. We don’t ask ourselves if we are ready for the manner of our death. How many are truly prepared to passively face a painful, horrifying death? Not I, that’s for sure.
Nicely thought, and nicely written. I’ll have to look more into this.
Thank you Dean. That was all the article was meant to do.
Rhonda, since you are a self confessed Christian, I wonder what you think about the scene described in Genesis 6. I caution you trying to take a story out of the Bible that God used to teach us all a lesson and trying to use it to justify a story of good v. evil. I am not going to be dogmatic, I just wonder what your take is. Most people calling themselves Christians either ignore this chapter in Genesis or explain it away with tortured rationale. I certainly support the values you say the show promotes without issue. But just as the end never justifies the means, I am not sure that the message justifies the venue. I’m just sayin…..
The Nephilim? What about them. Totally different subject.
Not really. supernatural meets natural…good vs. evil. Was not a good situation and it really didn’t end well. In fact, it’s a very sensationalistic story if you follow it. In the end, there was NOTHING good about it. Anyway, I was only curious.
You’re right, Bob. The sons of God were in all likelihood fallen angels (demons). The idea was to create a race that would live forever without the need of God’s redemption. At least that is what the women thought.
I truly get the point you are making about the themes in the books (I have only seen the first movie, but I have read all four books, so my comments are about the books), but there are two problems: the story is terrible and Edward Cullen is a bad ideal for girls to desire.
I think it’s great to see a young adult urban fantasy (one of my favorite genres) that doesn’t obsess with sex and imply that teens should be running around having it. In fact, that is why I recommended the first book to all of my friends as soon as I finished reading it. How refreshing, I thought. The second book is also good for the first three quarters, and in fact uses some interesting story-telling devices. But from the last quarter of the second book to the end of the series, well, it’s not good. At all. The plot is a rambling series of exercises in wish-fulfillment and simplistic conflicts, some of which are outright ridiculous, and don’t even get me started on the end of Breaking Dawn, which is perhaps one of the WORST climactic “fight” scenes I have ever read.
My bigger pet peeve, though, was Edward’s portrayal as some kind of ideal boyfriend. He is essentially a controlling stalker! I would be horrified if my future daughter brought home someone who lurked around the house at night and physically disabled her vehicle so she couldn’t see friends he didn’t like. That is classic abusive behavior, which is why it literally gives me chills when young girls display their love for him.
(I say this as a Christian conservative non- (perhaps even anti-) feminist, by the way. I APPROVE of the pro-life themes whole-heartedly. However, I don’t think we should sacrifice quality story-telling for good themes. I am not going to sit through garbage just to say at the end, “Hey, at least it’s pro-life!” I am an avid urban fantasy reader, and I simply cannot stomach such a terrible plot and flat characters. Domestic violence is also a huge issue for me, and the Edward Cullen cult is absolutely terrifying. Stalking and controlling someone is not romantic!)
I apologize for the rant, and please don’t take it personally–I just really despise the Twilight Saga. I find that very sad, because I honestly did like it at first.
” I am an avid urban fantasy reader, and I simply cannot stomach such a terrible plot and flat characters. Domestic violence is also a huge issue for me, and the Edward Cullen cult is absolutely terrifying. Stalking and controlling someone is not romantic!)”
Thanks for your comment. Points well taken. I don’t read this genre at all– and still wouldn’t read the books. The first movie was best as well. I have said, that she probably should have ended it there. The current movie, I still wouldn’t classify as a great movie, and don’t plan on buying it. It has a place.
“I apologize for the rant, and please don’t take it personally–I just really despise the Twilight Saga. I find that very sad, because I honestly did like it at first.”
No apology needed. You make some great points. Thanks
this gets “controlling boyfriend” bit gets aired out a lot on fan sites. It’s a pretty good education for the readers and debaters. It’s an interesting dance close to a dangerous line. However, he’s upfront about what he’s doing- protecting her from dangerous supernatural predators. Of regular guys- he’s a pussycat. She hangs out in places he can’t go, she works with guys he deeply disapproves of, and he says not a word. Once she’s supernatural, herself- he lets her go everywhich where, amongst all sorts of people and creatures. She’s best friends with the most dangerous creatures he knows, for instance.
Her father disables her car, as well, toward similar ends. Nobody snarks on her dad for doing this. Nobody disables her motorcycle, which everyone agrees is dangerous on wet roads.
What gets shown is a young man vetted by society around him- teachers, friends, classmates, parents, doctors, emt’s. When he appears dangerous- people tell Bella. When he appears average- they tell her that, too. I’m more worried about the girl who has to figure everything out on her own, with no feedback. It seems to be the first few paragraphs of every women’s magazine scary story- the girl moves across country to work for a corporation- doesn’t make friends, has no life outside of work- and gets swept away by bluebeard. Everybody in Bella’s life has an opinion on Mr Cullen. She knows their many opinions. She’s getting the “surround sound” view of him.
I’d be more creeped out by the nightly vigil, if it weren’t glossed over in, say, Hunger Games, or the documentary on Amish teens. Or if it were corrupting, like, say every vampire bedroom haunting prior to this story. It’s a trope of the genre.
this is not a kitchen-sink social realist drama. It’s just not. It’s a horror-genre story.
Very well said. As a youth minister and at the same time a mom to teens, I saw that look in a kids eye when I met them where they were at, not where I wished they were or where their parents thought they were. When I knew the music, knew the tv shows and didn’t act like I was just too good to honestly look at it all, then we could talk. Then we could agree on some points and disagree on some points. I remember my mom doing the same thing with me. She could honestly ask my opinion on a song on the radio and make me actually hear the words. Words she wasn’t going to forbid me to listen to, Words she wasn’t afraid of so Words we could actually discuss. Kids want to know what the adults they admire think about their world, it’s just so many of the adults they admire, don’t ever give that world a chance and can’t talk rationally about it.
Good job, Rhonda.
I enjoyed Anne Rice’s Vampire Chronicles until she jumped the shark on the last couple of books in the series, and Twilight has always come off to me as a cheap, Harlequin romance knock-off geared toward adolescents. Maybe I’d change my mind if I actually read the series, but I have other things I’d rather do – I’m not that interested.
I appreciate the points you are making, but, speaking for myself, my negative opinion of the Twilight series has nothing to do with religion. Then again, I don’t think I have ever gone out of my way to bash it…so I guess your post isn’t really aimed at me, anyway.
I am so glad to find I am not completely alone on this hill!
Pastor BMoon, you will find there are many, many more teachable points in the Twilight Saga!
Like the author of this post, I read the books reluctantly because my friends kept insisting. Before I finished the series I found myself using scenes from the books to explain Biblical points to these same friends.
Right now an entire generation speaks “Twilight” and, like missionaries in a foreign country, it behooves us to speak the same language. To dismiss Twilight because of the vampire characters is like dismissing the entire Chronicles of Narnia because of the White Witch.
Jane Wells,
Author of Glitter in the Sun: Finding the Truth in the Twilight Saga
Believe it or not, I have had those conversations with Christians over CS Lewis. Sadly too many have dismissed his work due to his use of “pagan creatures”. I dared not compare Meyer with Lewis, because frankly, he is way out of her league. But they both have captured the culture through fantasy.
J.R.R. Tolkien also gets that rap. What’s obvious is that people with that attitude forget something: Nothing in the Creation exists without God’s permission. We may not understand why certain things exist, thus the “Mystery of Iniquity”. But everything that exists is there because God created it. And then He turned it over to us. Can we misuse anything in the Creation? Absolutely. But the sin of misuse is ours.
If a vampire did exist, it would be because God allowed it. It then becomes Edward’s responsibility to resist his Fallen nature, just as we have that responsibility.
Quoting Tolkien: “Nothing was evil in the beginning. Even Sauron was not so.”
Hey! You’re book is really good! I’m glad you wrote it!
I’ve never read the books, although my daughter has. But I appreciate the values and lessons taught in an unusual way. Just as an FYI, the author is LDS, (as am I), a religion that sometimes gets slammed by Christians as not being Christian. It tends to produce the fruits of Christianity though, no?
Here! Here!d Absolutely outstanding piece with persuasive points. Thank you Rhoda for giving us new lens with which to view this movie as well as the whole genre. Great job!
It is my opinion that you are correct. I have watched the first movie and have seen the evidence which you address here. I felt the same about J.K. Rowlings “Harry Potter” books which are still being banned, burned and maligned.
That said, I’m not a fan of the stories but only because teenage angst gives me heart burn. I also hate that they teach Romeo and Juilet in schools. While I love Shakespeare I do not think teaching 14 year olds they can find their true love and if it doesn’t work kill themselves is an appropriate message (there other of his plays, fun ones to study) for that age group, seniors might be better. My children maintain that Bella is not the whiney, immature pre teen she’s portrayed in the movie, so one day I’ll probably read the books but for now I’m just content for people to be able to read, watch and consume what they want. . Some people find evil in the Bible but that’s what they want to find. Choice and accountability is what it really comes down to, free will and choice.
No, she’s just as awful in the books, IMO. I read the first one and it took me a while to get into it, but once I did I was like “Okay, enjoyable read.” So I saved the second one for when I would be in the hospital having my second baby. Ugh…Bella is horrible, but having once been a teen (so many years ago!) I can see why the girls relate to her.
That aside, this is a great post for Christian parents who are worried about letting their kids read/see the Twilight series. The series showcases some great moral values in a package that is very attractive to teens in todays ambiguous (to say the least) culture.
Great analysis, Rhonda.
I think if you thought of horror movies and stories as on a similar level as a roller coaster ride you’d be closer to the truth.
You know, like when you’re a kid camping with other kids and the oldest ones tell you the story of the couple stranded on a country road in their car and one leaves to find a phone. Right away the one left in the car hears scratching noises on the roof of the car and assumes it’s branches. Eventually they learn it is the fingernails of the other passenger who is dead and hanging upside down from a tree.
Think that opens you up to evil? I’m not sure I’d want to be in a car with you stranded if you think you’re so easily swayed by kids stories.
Fools rush in where angels fear to tread, last time I got involved in one of these “Twilight” posts, it got ugly ,but what the heck. Rhonda, you correctly analyze the issue in your second page with “this cocktail of evil and lust has the potential for wickedness” Gee, you think?
Paul said “God has chosen the foolishness of preaching to save the lost”…not the foolishness of pop culture or the foolishness of ancient myths and horror fantasies. God doesn’t need the trendy and profane to touch lives, but is quite capable of doing it Himself by His Spirit. Maybe, the problem with Christian apologists using vampires, etc. to attempt to touch a generation is that they themselves need to contend for spiritual reality and power to influence young lives.
“The “good” guys are the vampires who despise their bloodthirsty nature, understand their innate potential for evil, and continually battle self-loathing. I might add further that vampirism was not a conscious choice. They spend “eternity” (although they can be killed) trying to serve mankind rather than destroy it.”
Point taken because, well, as far as good guys go, ain’t it the truth? I’m no interested enough to see one of these films but hopefully you’re right and it will convince a few young men and women to act a little better and others to have the baby.
Correction, please: The current installment, Breaking Dawn, is the FOURTH movie, not the third.
Pastor BMoon, you could cruise over to the IMDb forums or any mostly unmonitored Twilight forum on the internet and see all these issues avidly discussed — well, not now so much since Breaking Dawn Part One is almost out of theaters and everyone’s onto Snow White and the Hunter and Bel Ami, but you could easily resurrect the topics. Look at Amazon as well.
This author makes a case, but . . . . Author, do you really buy all that talk about self-restraint and vampire vegetarianism? I call it having your cake and eating it too. The real attractiveness of the vampires is their mortal danger to humans, their hunting skills, their eternal youth, their movie-star grace and beauty. Meyer gets by the Christian censors by saying “Oh, but this particular clan of vampires just eat mountain lions and bears.” Snicker, okay.
The baby thing? It’s an excuse to write a couple hundred words, an episode of “Diabetic and Pregnant” or “Paralyzed and Pregnant” or whatever. In this case the fetus is a mysterious half-breed that’s killing the heroine — in fact, it does. Bella spends her time curled up over it because she’s in agony, being munched from the inside out. She gets to have her cake and eat it too by giving birth to this weird kid (which is immediately chosen by a werewolf as his life mate) and then being reborn herself so to speak as a full vampire. In the Twilight mythology, a parent never has to lose a night of sleep, change diapers, pick a good school, or go through 18+ years of sacrifice; the freak kid reaches full maturity in seven years and then it’s off to her werewolf husband. Talk about having your teen parent cake and eating it too.
At the forums I’ve mentioned above, you can see teens themselves protesting the “Mary Sue” heroine who is a passive, sullen, bitchy ingrate. Many teens hate her and consider her a bad-natured human who gets her way where more deserving girls actually have to work for a boy’s respect and affection. A few have noted that Edward has seemingly learned very little in his hundred years! As for him, remove the vampirism and you have a human boy who stalks Bella, sneaks into her bedroom at night, and abuses her psychologically and emotionally — which makes him even more attractive to her. He is also unexplainably rich, like a drug dealer. (Vampires don’t have to work for a living. They engage in insider trading.)
I admit I’m oversimplifying as much as the author, but there are a few legit reasons to say that the Twilight phenomenon defines deviancy down. It certainly dumbs down. That is the major reason I was sad to see my teen cousins gobbling these books up instead of say Wuthering Heights, which is packed with teen passion, dreams of the afterlife, and discussion of orthodoxy.
There are some interesting defenses of Twilight at http://insidemovies.ew.com/2009/11/26/new-moon-why-its-good-for-the-future-of-movies/ and http://ideas.time.com/2011/11/21/the-harsh-bigotry-of-twilight-haters/.
I’d like to add one thing in the “against” column: It’s poorly written.
THANK you. As a C.S. Lewis fan and a practising Christian, I don’t care how Christian the series is or not. The fact is, “Twilight” is one of the most horribly written pieces of dreck in modern literature. And I use “literature” VERY loosely.
For a witty take on the series, I highly recommend http://reasoningwithvampires.tumblr.com/ and http://cleolinda.livejournal.com/602881.html
There is also a brilliant video mocking of the first book, chapter by chapter, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L253VLwH3w
Some of the language in the links isn’t G-rated, but if you can let that slide, it is WELL worth the laugh. Enjoy, all!
I saw the first movie, haven’t read the books, and feel not the slightest desire to know more. However I have to agree that Ms. Meyers has pulled a Lewis or Tolkien, putting ancient myths and mythic themes into settings more approachable to a modern reader.
It would be wonderful if everyone would just read Homer and Jane Austen and Charles Dickens, but as the Bible says, milk before meat. These are books and movies for teenagers, particularly girls, and may function as a sort of entry drug for their eventual literary addiction. That’s fine with me.
I’d much rather see kids reading these books than the more common romance novels, but I’m afraid there’s always the possibility that they’ll get hooked on Harlequin instead of classics. Still and all, we each have to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling; Jesus deals with us all individually.
Thanks for the insightful thoughts, Rhonda Robinson.
The description of the “good vampires” touches on original sin (or the break of man from his animal drives to embrace something greater).
Very interesting thoughts.
Best
EV
you get that there’s a ghost in Wuthering Heights? and implied infidelity? and that Twilight encourages reading Wuthering Heights? And the entire Jane Austen ouevre? All of it? and multiple shakespeare plays? and criticizes Romeo and Juliet for exactly the same reasons?
It might not be your box of candy, but it is a big, heart-shaped box of chocolates for many, many, many people. I’m a bigger fan of it than, say, Out of Africa, which romanticized infidelity among syphilitics. That was the big sigh movie a few destructive decades ago. or, Endless Love, with the pyromaniac stalker. Or Thorn Birds, with the priest who can’t keep himself zipped up. Or Risky Business- whoremongering and pimping. I’ll take married, faithful and impossible, over well-lit social decay.
Less well-known but an even better representative of the vampire-genre-as-Christian-themed-literature is this little gem, V-Squad: http://www.amazon.com/V-Squad-Pamela-Marcantel/dp/1466375558/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1325874537&sr=8-1. It’s a shame that it hasn’t gotten more notice, given that its target audience is college age and older, and that it’s much better written than the Twilight opus.
What Twilight really accomplished was muddling the understanding of many viewers’ understandings of what a vampire is by its very nature. It is a sentient creature which desires to drink the blood of humans or animals, an act which is absolutely irreconcilable with the Jewish and Christian religions.
Drinking blood was mentioned in the Council of Jerusalem (Book of Acts, if you need to look it up) as one of the only facets of the Old Testament law that applied to gentile Christians. It is an unholy and unclean act that by its very nature is spiritually on par with severe sexual sin in terms of impurity.
I am curious if you would have taken this tone if the characters were fallen angels, demons, jinn or similar creatures. How about a chaster succubus? How about a lamia who is now pro-life?
there are books like that, published, on the shelf, right now.
I’d like to see the author write a similar review of Suzanne Collins’s “The Hunger Games.” The book is an entierly different genre (dystopian, post-apocalyptic YA fiction), but I think Katniss is a much stronger, kick-ass heroine. She acts, unlike Bella who merely reacts. And the book has some interesting thoughts about gaining/losing one’s humanity. I think there will be more discussions about the books when the movie comes out in March.
Hunger Games has better marketing and support. For one.
For a second, she’s a more acceptable current heroine- her sister, who is more conventionally nurturing, is shoved to the side as a supporting character. So, it’s more of the same-new, same-new, that’s been on offer since Title 9 starting shaming unathletic girls.
For three, I’d like it better if the author wasn’t such a complete supercilious twit. Stephenie Meyer is gracious and kind and positive at all times.
For four, HG is desperately, thoroughly, entirely a non-christian slurring of America’s national character. The main character is in Appalachia- famous for each house having a Bible. and wealthier houses having a Bible and a Shakespeare. The only comforting element of culture the protagonist has is a WPA song. It’s really hard to wipe out all the Christians in a region, or get rid of all knowledge of the Bible. It really is- it’s what makes books about martyrs almost black comedy. WPA songs? Are on government-supported radio and tv, right now. they aren’t viable living social constructs.
The hive of communists is what is now the NORAD mountain complex. Colorado- given over to Communists!
And, the planned economy and forced hunger, with a capital rolling in technical goods? That’s the Ukraine. That’s North Korea. That’s any place a graduate of Moscow’s Patrice Lumumba University lands as ruler. It is what we, as Americans, are the OPPOSITE of. That’s why we’re trying to get rid of the current president, b/c that’s his world. That’s not America.
and, yo, the characters spend the night together in bed, frequently. the girl uses her body to manipulate the guy, who honestly adores her.
I find it appalling. My kid had to read it for school. I’d rather he’d read Twilight.
While I respect your opinion, I think you are a little hard on the book. First of all, it is fiction–a post-apocalyptic fantasy that could be seen as a critique of everything from totalitarianism to reality tv. Post-apocalyptic stuff seems to be en vogue now (think “Book of Eli” and “The Road”). I think it offers some good lessons in the contrast between Katniss and her sister Prim, as well as Katniss and Peeta. I didn’t see the interactions between Katniss and Peeta to be quite so sexual–they are in survivor mode in the last half of the book. And the point is: the totalitarian government manipulates even one’s desire to love. I think it is going a little far to make assumptions about Collins’s own political/religious views based on where she sets her heroes vs. villians (i.e. NORAD vs. Appalachia).
No, I don’t think a reviewer could make the case that HG is a “Christian book” in the way that one could about “Twilight.” But that doesn’t negate some of the interesting character development and potential topics for discussion. These are topics we see elsewhere, such as in Shirley Jackson’s short story “The Lottery.”
I normally don’t read YA fiction, or apocalyptic/dystopian fiction, but I was taken in by the book. It gave me a lot to think about. I found it much more “meaningful” than than the “Twilight” narratives. But I know other readers (young and old) who found Katniss to be cold and flat as a character. I guess–to each his/her own.
I looked up her interviews. I went from being “eh- so she’s trying a modern HGWells,” to ” worst book ever.”
And, yeah, I am serious about my critique of her book. It’s being sold as better and more high-minded than Twilight. It’s not. It’s far more conventionally plotted, far more conventionally written- that over-lit first person forgiving herself for everything- that goes from Mary Karr to- well- Hunger Games.
Twilight has a very stylized form of address, which people take as “poorly written.” It’s less similar to post- 1955 literature than other books, which is one reason it is panned, and also why it has such intense fans. It is wildly different than most other books right now, at the level of sentence structure, metaphor palette, objective correlatives, reference range, all sorts of things.
I’d be okay if Hunger Games were being sold from one excited reader to another. But it’s not- it’s being foisted off on schoolkids, as a big think book. I’d rather they were reading Percy Jackson, which really does have a big discussion about the value of Western Civ, than the ridiculous vapours about totalitarianism dressed up in Greek drag that is this series.
Other than the upcoming movie trailer, I wasn’t aware of it. But now you have my curiosity up… I will do just that. Thanks.
although, seriously, I’d rather they had classes on Treasure Island and Mr Klavan’s books. Even Chronicles of Narnia. And Lord of the Rings. Harry Potter…
There’s been this really concerted effort to make all books about girls, and specifically, violent, kickass, athletic girls. I’m thinking of the Entertainment Weekly movie guide, where they show Bella, a virginal, healthy young lady headed off to her honeymoon with her new husband, and they commented about how sick and retrograde it was. In the same issue, they had shots of the actress from Girl with the Dragon Tattoo- pierced, tattooed, mentally unstable- mutilated in mind, soul and body- and they were calling her the heroine for our times. And then a photo of Katniss from Hunger Games- an explicitly pre-christian, and no way around it- totalitarian fantasy- an emotionally stunted girl who gets mutilated in soul and body through the story- as a heroine for our times.
What if I don’t want “our times” or ” our future”? What if I want my grandmother’s past- or my mother’s- they both beautiful, healthy young virginal women who married the most beautiful guys they’d ever met, right out of high school. I might quibble on timing (college), but I’m not aspiring to have my daughter tat up, get raped, suffer physical violations and “modifications” and live in a barbaric non-Christian wasteland of despair. The save yourself, fall deeply in love, get married, have kids thing worked long enough to get me here. I don’t see why I have to give up that notion, just b/c fashionable people in New York gave up.
And, well, Hunger Games is pretty much the dressed up cognate of Diary of a Wimpy Kid, or any other appalling sitcom. A physically competent, athletic, not-very-reflective- girl bosses around helpless, sensitive guys. It’s not funny on that show with David Spade and Putty ( rules of engagement) and it’s not funny when it’s trying to be serious. I am trying to raise competent, healthy, athletic young men who are patriotic, heroic grown-up young men, and right now, published literature isn’t helping me. And neither are their teachers or librarians, and this is a big, big problem.
They have required reading lists during the summer, b/c I guess they need the kids to put on the red and blue glasses at least once a month to get their beaming from radio pravda re-programming guides. Every last book on the list is white guys are bad, guys in general are bad, tender,sensitive moments when you discuss your problems with your mother or therapist ( where’s the dad? where’s the priest?) or totalitarian nightmares. I’ve read most of the books b/c I want to know what’s coming down the pike. There’s a series where families have licenses to have kids- set in America. We don’t do that: the Vietnamese Communists do, the Chinese communists do. Why are my kids supposed to be inoculated with totalitarian nightmares? Why can’t they be lit with American freedom comedies? We’re a joyous nation, overall.
I asked a friend who is a professional writer. He said writers like writing this, but that editors really are trying to engage in major social engineering. Nobody even likes writing this stuff, apparently. And then it doesn’t sell, except under force, or with marketing.
Thank you, Ari, for your comments re Twilight. They are right on target.
Also, as to ‘terrible writing’, well, a good writer is one who can make me want to turn the page and find out what happens next. Meyer does that.
And just a response to #43, Jezebel, she says she is not (first) financially and (second) emotionally, prepared for a child at this “stage of my life”. Well, finances tend to work themselves out, if the father sticks around and grows up to be a ‘husband’; and you may be amazed at the emotional maturity that appears with your child (you know, that mass of cells you don’t abort.)
Honestly, the storyline itself isn’t the problem I have with Twilight. My issue is the very idea of the perfect male (an image that no guy can ever meet) in Edward. Strong, handsome, completely supportive, and other than the vampire bit the perfect white knight stereotype. But then, I’ve never liked the white knight stereotype to begin with.
Oh yea, and the sparkling in daylight thing had me banging my head on a desk.
I am actually a big fan of normally evil creatures seeking redemption (vampires, werewolves, etc). Just as every human isn’t evil I have a hard time believing that all of the various cursed individuals would be given that they were all human at one point, and most did not become those beasts of their own free will. Even written a few short stories with that idea in mind.
Why not like the white knight thing? You can’t live up to it, so no one else can dream? I hope not, b/c I bet you are selling yourself short. I hope.
As far as I can tell, any basically decent guy is the white knight for some girl, some where. The guys might not think that- but seen through the eyes of a besotted, loving girl, the right guy is perfect, perfect, perfect. It’s part of what Rhonda Robinson, the author of the essay here, wrote. Teenage girls see the best in a guy, and good ones grow into that trust.
I mean, Edward Cullen, the fictional character? Is a ginger with strange-ish speech patterns, old man shoes, big circles under his eyes, weird mood swings, and this bookish, physically awkward girl thinks he’s the greatest thing ever created: and for her, he was. as she was, for him.
The book is full of manly, competent men. That’s a big part of the charm: women look at all the men getting respect and love in this series, and they reflect on their own knight in shining armor, and fall more in love with the one they are with.
The book has a medical doctor, auto mechanics, police men, teachers, reservation Indians, a guy who is in a wheelchair from diabetes, and each of them is given the respect due him. The women are given respect for their love and devotion and skill, as well.
I mean, it has a wedding set in someone’s back yard. The father’s minister is the minister. The girl gets a chi-chi honeymoon, at her mother-in-law’s vacation place. She marries the local doctor’s kid. He’s got a trust fund. So- how is any of this stuff impossible? My friend married a trustafarian when she was 18, and went to London for the honeymoon. How is she impossible? Another friend married a doctor’s son. How is that impossible? My best friend got married at her dad’s backyard. I was in the wedding. That’s not impossible.
My friend from the park married the single most gorgeous guy she had ever laid eyes on. Are you saying her marriage isn’t real?
Kudos to Rhonda Robinson…This is a tough article to post in any conservative website, but its well written and makes salient points. For some reason the Twilight series has touched a nerve in a large percentage of the population…but if it makes people stop and reflect then the author has accomplished a great deal.
Original Sin was a creation of St. Augustine , who lived from 354-430 AD, It did not exist before then. The writings of Augustine created and influenced much of contemporary and puritan Christian theology and doctrine such as original sin, Just War, Humanity is inherently evil, etc, etc. As the Western Roman empire began crumbling Augustine created and influenced christian theology and blended pagan and Christian beliefs to insure some of it survived.
It is from St. Augustine’s writings that modern Christians are taught most theology, not from teachings Christ left us. This is an important distinction and should be made again and again until Christians research teachings of the actual Christ and not a man trying to save an Empire or his own imagined mis-spent youth.
There are great rewards for these efforts.
Modern religion including contemporary Christianity is not what Christ intended, it is a creation by common men in the early middle ages and left a patchwork of belief and theologies which make little sense. In this context it makes more sense why Twilight would cause the reaction it has in Christian communities.
Original sin a creation of St. Augustine) No, it wasn’t.
Because of Adam’s eating the forbidden fruit, both he and Eve were driven out of the Garden of Eden because of the SIN of disobedience to G-d’s decree, “Do not eat of (it).” Every person born from that time forward was affected by Adam’s rebellion, and the resulting judgement. “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.” (King David writing) and various sacrifices and rituals had been previously established to atone for the sins as described in Levitical law.
This was the Covenant of Law that existed between G-d and man until the perfect atoning death of Jesus Christ, a sinless and acceptable G-d man sacrificed upon a cross, thus establishing the new covenant by authority in His blood, and in His name.
As to the subject of vampires, and how wonderful they can be, Ephesians 5:11 states, “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.” 2Corinthians 6:14 “…what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?” 2Corinthians 11:13-15 “…for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.”
2 Timothy 4:3 “For the time will come when (people) will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”
Philippians 4:8 “Finally,(Christians)whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, THINK ON THESE THINGS.”
2Corinthians 10:5 “Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ…”
We all at one time or another have been lured by ‘fleshly lusts’ into some or other fantasy mind-set of escapism. Scripture admonishes believers to resist this, because it’s idolatry, and SIN. A handsome, romantic, gentlemanly, even virginal vampire story character is a foolish flight of fancy and a lie; a delusion unable to sustain a yearning human heart.
I don’t completely disagree with you, but in some ways you have it backwards.
The fact is Meyer is pandering to, and encouraging, the foolish appeal to young girls of the bad boy — here it is the dangerous fantasy of the ‘bad boy with the heart of gold’ underneath. Or as an older female acquaintance put it “the bad boy only you can tame.”
This encourages bad choices by girls.
In reality the vampire/bad boy very likely WILL bite you.
You are correct, but that is part of the plot: that of redemption and to not judge by appearances. In Christianity, as in all religions, or philosophies for that matter, there is always the tension between seeing the good in everybody and being careful of evil.
So the vampires are consigned to a life of misery and self-hate because that is just the way it is? No one questions this? It’s honorable to fight the natural urges you were born with and have no control over? So self-abnegation is an honorable philosophy? Rand and Nietzsche would be appalled. Twilight is childish twaddle.
I don’t really care to embrace a vampire soap opera…but, thanks for offering.
A very thought provoking article. Though I am at a loss as to how people can be so afraid of getting their faith “poisoned” just because of vampires and the like. Is their faith really so weak that it crumbles at the slightest challenge?
Vampires, like devils, always included a great deal of ourselves in them. The question is not whether there is an evil potential in all of us, but whether we accept it.
As for getting faith “poisoned”: yes, faith WILL be poisoned by “vampires and the like” — if one is bombareded with it 24/7 for years. The liberal idea that those who object to, say, porn shops or violence in film are “prudes” misses the point of their objection: it’s not that one porn shop will cause everybody to become a sex maniac, it’s the culture that it signifies.
I dislike Twilight because of a few issues.
1: No one is going to go 110 years without sex. Period. No disease, no prison to hold you, and no rules to tie you down means that someone is going to missbehave at some point.
2: The portrait of a vampire is equal parts noble gentleman and animalistic apex predator. The mix of noble anachronism and predatorily seductive is what makes vampires interesting to begin with.
3: The entire thing reads as a soap opera. No male is going to cling to a girl who is stringing him along unless he has the self-respect of a flea. Especially if it’s with another male.
The books may have a message but it picked the worst species to use. If you like vampires Twilight grabs them and fluffs them into mere shadows of their true selves.
No! Nein! Nyet! Non! Are Christians so hungry for societal acceptance that one would invoke this trash as Christian allegory? Meyer is no CS Lewis. Or is that you are so guilt ridden about your entertainment choices that you are now attempting to justify them in front of all the PJM readers? Twilight is indulgent wish fulfillment littered with such poorly written characters that they give cardboard cutouts a run for their money. They are in no way examples of how Christians should act.
The whole veggie vampire angle is just that, an attempt by the author to marry her own personal beliefs, i.e. vegetarianism, with fictional apex predators. I hadn’t been that insulted since Disney portrayed Simba eating grubs instead of dining on pork chops and Buffalo bbq meercat. Should I fight against my instinct to eat meat? Should a lion?
And Bella, oh Bella, my, aren’t you the picture of a Christian bride, throwing yourself with much chest heaving at this “bad boy” who chivalrously won’t give in to your lascivious advances? What an embarrassing picture to Christian girls who work to keep their own lust in check. Are you telling them the litmus test of an eligible bachelor is his ability not to be seduced? “Will you walk into my parlour,” said the spider to the fly. And then, when Edward leaves, Bella becomes psychotic, screaming like a detoxing heroin addict at night, and is a depressed recluse by day, when she’s not trying to summon Edward’s telepathic apparition by attempting to kill herself. Of course this is a Christian allegory, how could I have missed it?
Yes, Rik. Yes they are.
Timon and Pumba saved Simba’s life, and he was too small to eat them when he first met them. And FYI, real lions do eat insects when there isn’t anything else available.
Seems like a most peculiar, sly defense of evil to me. Author’s “fellow Christians” need to embrace a story about ‘good evil doers’ and ‘bad evil doers?’ Isn’t “good evil” a contradiction in terms; isn’t “bad evil” redudant? Is there anything in the Scriptures, Old or New Testaments, in defence of evil? Are anti-hero stories of any genre, of value, helpful to the understanding of goodness? Or do they contribute to the acceptance of the philosophy that “Nobody is all good or all bad?” To the idea that “there’s some good in the worst of us, and some bad in the best of us?” Has anyone identified yet any goodness in Charles Manson and his followers? Mother Teresa may not have been perfect; I couldn’t know, but she surely wasn’t evil, was she?
We throw rotten apples out of the fruit bowl, lest they cause the balance of apples to rotten. Why should we imagine that a story of bad rotten apples, and good rotten apples, will improve, rather than rot, the understanding of those who develop a taste for them?
The author wrote:
“c) The “good” vampires — in spite of understanding that they are doomed — adhere to a strict code of family loyalty, sexual morality, and self-denial of the evil pleasures hardwired into them.”
So is he saying that guilt wipes out the harm that evil doers do? Is he saying that the ole “honor among thieves” myth eliminates their crimes against humanity and God? Is he saying that it’s logical that any of us can be “hardwired for evil pleasures?” Where does he find that in the Scriptures? Were it possible for any to be “hardwired for evil pleasures,” it would mean that some are born condemned to be “bad seeds,” with their redemption forbidden by God, ergo no free will.
“d) Evil is portrayed as it truly is. Not with horns and scales that anyone can recognize, but as it is in the real world: beautiful, seductive, and deadly.”
What a dreadful premise! One can agree that evil can be seductive, to those so inclined toward or habituated to it, and assuredly it can be deadly, but is it ever beautiful? I think not! And, this is why, precisely why, vampire chronicles, or any other stories that glorify evil, attempting to normalize it, are anti-Christian. We cannot have it both ways: we either create (or enjoy reading and seeing characters portrayed in action) who dramatize goodness as the blessing it is, and evil for the ugliness it is, so that there can be no confusion over what is right, and what is wrong, (and why); or we contribute through dramatization to confounding the minds of others, who may be seeking reasons for betraying their own best possibilities, their only paths to the opportunities for life as a human being under God.
When Bonnie and Clyde, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, or Thelma and Louise are presented in such a way that they can possibly be seen as attractive role models, their stories help to say, “evil is OK and has its rewards.” Furthermore, the author must be speaking for himself if he views goodness as “self-sacrifical,” Goodness is beautiful, joyfully satisfying, and is “goodness” only when there is no element of self-sacrifice to it: when it is an expression of love, not duty, obligation, or any form of sacrifice, as can be seen in little children.
However, since his title began with a false premise, the balance of his essay could go nowhere but down.
“If you do well, you may hold your head up; but if not, sin is a demon lurking at the door: his urge is toward you, yet you can be his master.”
-Genesis 4:7
What was God telling Cain here? He was warning Cain that his natural inclination was toward evil, but that it is possible to overcome it. Cain chose to ignore that warning and listen to the lurking demon telling him to murder his brother.
Best article I’ve read in a long time! Your case is airtight: “If this film is as persuasive as its opponents fear.” *High five. But the best is your brilliant challenge–throughout (will we toss it for a vampiree-as if there are no monsters in life!) and at the end (um…and what are we ourselves doing with the very important issues and conversations of life and destruction around us–and our youth). Thanks for this! I have remained somehow truly unaffected and untouched by the world of Twilight, but this gives me an intelligent big picture (which is always more appealing to me than the fiction thrill-ride itself)–as ithis topic will undoubtedly be a cultural conversation piece for some time to come. Very glad I read.
I think what we are forgetting with the Twilight series is not it’s themes, which are not new, but it’s popularity with a certain age group and gender although horrific date movies for young people have also been around a long time.
We have seen the evil guy refusing to be evil before: only 6 years prior to the publication of “Twilight” Peter Hamilton had the character of the revived soul of Fletcher Christian in The Neutronium Alchemist who was so moved by his 18th century morals he went against his evil fellows and appointed himself the protector of a young and naive pair of sisters.
In fact the theme of the “evil” one who goes against the grain of his evil fellows in a fit of shame and conscience or love or even fundamental morals is quite common in fantastic literature. What is not common is the perfect storm that finds you pleased that this exact issue is being presented where it will do the most good.
As someone who has loved fantastic literature and film in all its forms, you might be surprised at how moral it is generally speaking. The depravity of films like “Saw” and others of its ilk which are simply excuses to depict gore and not evil is a cheap but not enduring thrill with the realm of the fantastic.
Within that realm, contrary to the film trends of the last half century, the anti-hero is rather rare as it is not needed in a genre where the bad guy is conspicuous and generally not seen to be misunderstood but to be fought. Naturally there are exceptions but exceptions don’t make the rule.
Generally speaking, I’d say the lessons of horror literature are conspicuously moral since it is that very morality and lack of it that are front and center from Stoker’s “Dracula” to Chaney’s “Wolfman” to the film “The Exorcism of Emily Rose.”
What adults have argued for decades is that horror stories lead one astray and what kids always say is that you don’t know what you’re talking about. The morality of rap music is more horrific than the last 100 years of horror fiction not only because of an utter lack of morality but its confusion with a real world; in horror, the good guy wins, in rap, the bad guy wins and cops are evil zombies roaming the world to discomfit and humiliate black youth.
“and every life is precious – even when it “wasn’t supposed” to be.”
Enoch stated the Sons of G-d took wives of the daughters of men, and had the earth born, or Niphilim. The Niphilim are an abomantion of G-d’s created human DNA, and were the main reason for the flood of Noah. Noah, and his family was fully human.
It is written the spirits of the Niphilim are evil, and wander the earth until judgement day. Christ drove a lot of them out of the wild man into swine which ran to the water.
Christ the word of G-d made flesh, lived a perfect life, was murdered, and rose from the grave for all human sin. So, Christ was dead, yet gave life. Something ordained by G-d.
That which is not ordained by G-d the Father is not precious, even if it is alive. Having offspring between humans, and non-humans is evil, and as it was before Noah’s flood. Very New Age.
What kind of Christian are you?
This says a lot about conservative Christians…remember they didn’t like the Harry Potter series either. It is also a reason why candidates for president endorsed by them will probably not be elected.
The above post is why men don’t take women, and particularly Christian women, seriously. The post was about as disingenuous as it gets.
Twilight is female porn. In fact, it is arguably worse than porn made to appeal to men. Twilight encourages everything awful, immature, and stupid in women’s characters, and nothing that is noble within them.
Twilight posits that a girl can “tame” some bad boy dominant A-hole Alpha. The kind that every woman yearns for, if she admits it or not. Twilight produces contempt for the 90% of men who don’t meet the criteria of uber-Asshole Alpha male. Twilight reduces girls to the status of whatever guy they can pull, transiently.
In real life, uber-alpha bad boys don’t reform because of a magical sex appeal pull of some girl. In real life, they don’t devote themselves to such a girl, even Swedish Supermodels, famous actresses, and the like get cheated on. In real life, a woman’s beauty fades VERY FAST, not stays forever. In real life, some guy won’t take care of her for the rest of her life. In real life, it takes two incomes to produce a middle class family living status. In real life, throwing ones self at uber bad boys makes a girl or a woman unsuited for anything but pump and dump.
Christian women are as in thrall to their own sexual desires as every other woman. Meyer’s novel is nothing more than female porn over an object of desire — an uber Alpha asshole who dominates every other man, but is in her thrall. It is as ugly and degrading to see tweens and their moms lusting after the Twilight glittery gay vampires as it is to see tween boys and their dads lusting after say, underage actresses.
Twilight is certain to produce, not a monogamous marriage and a nuclear family, but a generation of single mothers with kids by different fathers.
Because the nuclear family and marriage REQUIRE FEMALE SACRIFICE. In sexiness of their men. It requires choosing a man who will be faithful, over a dominant, alpha asshole player. With fancy cars, wealth, physical power, lust from other girls/women, and the ability to kill people at a drop of a hat. Men can no more approach the uber-Alpha assholery of Edward Cullen than women can resemble the airbrushed models of Playboy or porn videos. It is reasonable to demand every woman become as lean and as surgically enhanced as porn starlets as it is to demand that guys live up to Edward Cullen’s assholery. Only drug dealers, thugs, criminals, and sports-thug-stars and celebrities can do it.
And unlike men, who have to compromise (because 90% of them are as desired by women as a cold bowl of oatmeal) … women CAN play out their Twilight fantasies. In real life all the novels and movies will do is push women and girls to sleep with tons of bad boys. Making them unfit for any real marriage worth the name and saddling them with a bunch of illegitimate kids.
sorry you’re the dog’s breakfast, and your wife “settled” on you.
Have you ever seen a Mormon wedding announcement? or read a Mormon mom-blog? They marry their favorite guy, usually pretty young. The guy works at a good job, and usually gets promoted. I’ve never seen one not be beautiful, pulled-together, deeply in love with her handsome young husband, proud of her beautiful, talented children, in an immaculate house. I don’t know how they do it, but it’s a deeply attractive family package.
Mitt Romney is unusual in Mormon-land b/c he’s running for president, not b/c he’s clean-cut, patriotic, good at his job, and married to a beautiful woman who really loves him.
And have you ever read that pile of theological feces known as Doctrine and Covenants? Or The Book of Mormon? Or, A Marvellous Work and a Wonder? Or, Pearl of Great Price? Some septic tanks will throw them right back at you!
No one really believes in mormonism. Not even Mittyboy.
okay, I’m thinking maybe you are confusing the actors with the characters? B/c the actors? have all been working since childhood. The main guy paid his own high school fees from his own work. The girl has been working near forever. The other young man competed in martial arts contests, until setting out on his career. These are not spoiled brats. These are people who have traded their early youth for a paycheck.
The older actors are remarkably uniform in being good people- involved in charities, married, stable, happy, positive, good role models, etc etc etc. Nice,worthwhile, hardworking, humble, decent people.
The characters: are kids who do their homework, do part-time after-school jobs, and associate with other clean-cut kids. The main girl’s two best friends are the class valedictorian, and the local preacher’s daughter. When she’s sad, she studies calculus. When she’s happy, she reads Shakespeare, or Jane Austen. For her birthday- she wanted to do extra homework. So, I’m not seeing any reason to froth.
The main guy wears a Wal-mart tee-shirt and a leather wrist-cuff. Since the check-out clerk at the local grocery wears a teeshirt and a leather wrist-cuff, I’m thinking maybe this isn’t too far of a reach,style-wise, for anyone. The girl wears a flea-market Mexican embroidered blouse. They’re, maybe, ten dollars around here. One character has a nice car, the others are driving used cars or their parents cars. So this isn’t the story about materially splendid rich kids buying up the mall. This is about the audic-visual club kids, the calculus class kids, the biology class kids, the yearbook committee.
I am thinking the fault is in yourself, not in the story at hand.
And EWWW. ran across your rant about blacks, whites, bussing and so on. There is not enough money, sportscars, looks or talent to cover that level of ugly. Mel Gibson can’t even persuade the mother of his children to overlook that much ugliness.
The fault is with you, not the women you disparage so thoroughly.
You clearly do not understand what an ‘alpha’ male actually is.
Why are y’all so focused on the anal? And aren’t you projecting when you state that it takes two incomes to live even modestly?Two of whose incomes? Or perhaps one fourth of someone elses?
Our world is filled with #43 Jezebels. You are a bright person. Please try to straighten her/them out.
Your abhorrence of alpha males provokes curiosity. Why do you detest George Washington, Audie Murphy, Apostle Paul, et sim?
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that most(not all) women want a man who is physically attractive, able to protect and provide abundantly, and who can be either controlled or conned by them. And there’s the rub. True Alphas cannot be controlled by their ladies- or by anyone else. So the battle begins. She wants a predator CEO to stalk from the house in the AM, conquer the known world, and hand it to her her when he returns in the PM- and converts to a four year old boy she can order about- until bedtime- when he must morph into a tall, dark, handsome caveman intent only on her sexual satisfaction. When that just doesn’t happen- and it can’t- the trouble begins. The analog is the robber who says, “Give me $100 or I’ll kill you.” And the victim says, “But I only have $20″. Something has to give, no?
I want to read the article, but I’m only halfway through Eclipse. Are there any spoilers?
Whiskey is absolutely right — see my shorter post farther up.
I’m sorry, but no he is not. He has had obvious relationship problems and clearly doesn’t like women.
Sorrier, but yes, whiskey is right. And no, I don’t have relationship problems.
um. every vampire in the series is married. the story is about the youngest kid in the family getting married to his true love. He plays the piano, respects his parents, drives the family car to school, does his homework. Unless there is this MASSIVE Down-Low subculture in Mormon-land, I’m thinking maybe you guys don’t have a leg to stand on. Piano-players get really gorgeous girls- page six has full-color ads of michael bublie’s wife in tarty underwear.( yes, inspect away. he gets to tap that. you don’t. he practiced his scales. just sayin’) yiruma married miss south korea.
and, statistically, you’re slinging bs. the most satisfied with their intimate life women- are long-term married, religious women. Protestant scores a little higher. with conservative, protective parents. there are two groups of people doing a lot of writing about sex and intimacy. one group is catholic theologians, and the other group is, well…kinsey/guttmacher trained. in other words- not religious, not married, probably not from protective, religious families. Ann Coulter has a lot of fun profiling people who teach sex ed- it’s this hash of people from broken families with morally disorganized parents who couldn’t protect a gerbil, much less their daughter. Which means what’s being printed as advice is not written by people who know what they are talking about.
No, I’m sorry, but you are the one who is mistaken.
What ‘Whiskey’ has written happens to be the unromantic truth regarding this topic, and the evidence is clear to see on every single day, in every single city of our nation.
I don’t read “obvious relationship problems and clearly doesn’t like women” in what he posts, I think he threw a verbal stick at a pack of petulant, partying poodles and the one who got hit, yowled.
well, since stephenie meyer has written a fairly obvious mormon-style guy, I’m thinking maybe there ought to be more Mormon missionaries bicycling around your neighborhood.
I’d like to point out there are any number of Mormon mom-blogs, and they all look pretty much like la vida twilight- young, healthy, sheltered, virginal women marry beautiful, talented men. The kids all seem to play piano, harp or guitar. Even South Park noticed that Mormons have great families. I don’t think I’m pointing out anything secret or undocumented.
as for fidelity- any reputable, repeatable survey places it in low fractions, hovering around 10% total, over the course of a lifetime. Most other surveys show long-term married women as happy, and satisfied. So I’m not seeing any basis for ranting on about “settling” “betas” “cold oatmeal” or any nonsense like that.
And since the main event in the Twilight series is a big wedding, I’m not seeing how that is a big advertisement for women to NOT get married.
That’s quite a grandiose statement. You see this every single day in every city all across America? Are you omnipresent? Are you omniscient?
No, not omniscient…just have a computer. Nifty little device; you should get one.
A lot of the things you’re bringing up to be ‘Christian values’ seem to me to just be basic literary elements of conflict and the battle of good and evil: tropes that exist throughout the world, in many different religions.
So now Bella semi-flirting with Jacob while being married to Edward is a Christian thing to do? Bella is mean and ungrateful most of the time, except when she’s surrounded by the “Elite”, the Cullens, and she still gets whatever she wants. Also, she fell in love with Edward because of his looks. He was intrigued by her smell. That sounds like superficial, physical attraction to me, and not like true love.
The Twilight novels are overall awful pseudo-literature written by an obviously deprived housewife with some… kind of twisted morals for what I can see. Just read the sex scene if you want to know what I mean, that’s just nasty porn sprinkled on sado-masochism and a slight hint of mysoginism. If you want some good, well-written, Christian literature, just go ahead and read the Chronicles of Narnia. Way more satisfying, infinitely better executed, and 100% kiddy-friendly.
What sex scene? the one where she’s married and walks out to him on the beach and then wakes up happy? B/c my copy must be missing some pages. The movie might have more- but the book? just emphasizes that she’s really, really happy.
You forgot the part where they break the bed and she totally forgot what happened, waking up all bruised. Of course, having your first time totally rough and forgetting about it because you pass out is totally the way to go, right?
I will love a man who can give me an orgasm,
and will stand by me if he knocks me up and I decide to get those undeveloped cells aborted. Why? Because I am not financially or emotionally prepared for a child at this stage in my life.
I read the Twilight books, and was 16 at the time when I read them. They did nothing to change me.
The future looks bright for Western Civilization.
Dude, haven’t you heard?
Hedonism, it’s the wave of the future.
If you do “choose”, however, to grow that human, you’ll of course be more than willing to use the police power of the state to steal that guys money for the next 18 years, won’t you?
Them’s the rules. Don’t want to support a baby, don’t participate in making one.
“If you want some good, well-written, Christian literature, just go ahead and read the Chronicles of Narnia.”
Or, you might want to consider cutting right to the chase, and reading the Gospels…if all else fails.
Might not be as exciting as teenage vampire sex/romance novels, but you’ll probably get a better idea of what Jesus was all about.
Going out on a limb here, I think Hollywood is counting on Hunger Games to be a reprise of Twilight, ie, girl hero. But, I am willing to take bets that they lose money, because a ‘kick ass heroine’, a miserable ending, all this just will not jell with Twilight fans. Bella is definitely not ‘kick ass’. And her love for Edward is conscious and absolute from the beginning of the story. She is not the cynical and hopeless Katmiss.
Actually, if the Cullen Family is the one vampire family in the world that does not want to be monstrous, then Bella’s and Edward’s romance is actually fore-ordained to save the Cullens from their carnivorous enemy, the Volturri.
thanks for the nice comment, earlier. you found the right words for katniss-cynical and hopeless.
Why is everyone recommending Narnia? For teenage girls? For kids, yeah, but teenagers?
Twilight is up against other YA fiction. Which, right now, includes “luminous” “tender” descriptions of incest, rape, suicide, sexting, drunk driving, meaningless random hookups, gang violence….and that’s just reading two pages here and there down the line of titles at the bookstore. The Twilight books- at the library- right next to them, and sort of formatted on the cover, so it looked similar? Is a book series that when I googled it- came up as a “press to enter” on google- b/c it was listed between Playboy costume ads and swinger’s clubs. I’m crossing my fingers that it collects so much dust that they retire it, quickly.
The books they are required to read, at a young age, are pretty much PC without the sugar-coating of big words. They’re blunt-force brainwashing instruments. They are required readings, for any school in the district. I don’t think sixth-seventh, or eighth graders ought to be exposed any of these books. We let our kids read the least objectionable- and they were bored stiff.
So, Narnia was written in the fifties. Andrew Klavan has written three books. There is, obviously, a LOT of room for interesting, compelling, well-written books for teens that celebrate Western values.
I, fairly obviously, am fine with Twilight- I think it’s the James Bond-ing of a girl getting married right out of high school. For whatever reason, that’s the neighborhood I live in- I can think of five couples, right now, that fit that profile: young, beautiful, married right out of high school, happy, now with adorable children. It’s not stopping their lives- they’re getting nursing degrees, or joining the military, or becoming dental assistants, or headed to college, or pulling wire for high-speed internet access. George Smiley is probably more like what British spies are like- grimy, sad, with NHS dental care, and awkward-fitting eyeglasses and suits, but that doesn’t mean we can’t watch Mr Bond at the movies, as well.
I’m quite cynical of the YA publishing industry myself, as a writer who hangs out with writers (although I don’t write YA). Agents and editors are looking for “edgy” books with a “strong voice.” This often translates into the kind of bad-taking, cynical hero/heroine that you find in “The Hunger Games” or in a movie like “Juno.”
I myself prefer a heroine like Kate in “The Witch of Blackbird Pond”–a strong young woman who projects her strength not through edginess, but through her actions and convictions. She goes against the grain of the society in which she lives, but in a different kind of way.
“But it’s time we learn how to engage with the culture — so we can take it back.” Precisely.
As for your comment that “I usually don’t care for science fiction, romance, and certainly not horror novels. As a Christian, I don’t believe filling my mind and spirit with evil is ever a good idea.” We shouldn’t fill our mind and spirit with evil, but not all myth is evil. This is a bugaboo of mine that I’ve posted on more than once but take any Bible story, one heard over and over again from Sunday School. From familiarity, the stories sometimes have as much power as an microwave manual. How often do you even really listen to them? Then some modern myth comes along and does something similar but in a different way and makes you realize the depths of sacrifice or the inequity of some event or the silliness of some idea. You can revisit the real story with renewed awe. That is, some myth allows us to see Truth with fresh eyes.
FYI, there is more to the Breaking Dawn pro-life story. The pro-choice screenwriter tried to edit it out: http://americanhousewifeinlondon.blogspot.com/2011/12/han-shot-first-self-serving.html
oh, how did I miss this? Thank you! for the link!
“I could fathom no creature nastier than the Wicked Witch’s flying monkeys.”
They’re all lurking on the internet now, you know.
Modern women – there’s so much to hate. Selfish, decadent, self-indulgent, spoilt, unstable, incredibly wasteful (How much of the GDP is now directed towards decorating – or outright pointlessly pleasuring to no altruistic end – women’s bodies?) Oh yes, ‘God wants you to have it all’ You go girls! Indulge yourself, you deserve it. Godesses all!
Perhaps you are hanging around the wrong kinds of women? There are many of us out there working our asses off to contribute to our families and communities. We look nice and have pleasantly-decorated homes–but on a strict budget–and not for the sake of personal indulgence but for edification of our families and guests.
That’s gotta be a troll.
A Christian Mt.12.46-50, is one who does the will of God: NOT just says, “Lord, come into my heart”, or some other manmade phrase. Millions misidentify themselves, deluded into thinking that they are “saved”, when they are still in their sins. We are justified, Jas.2.24-26, by what we DO- not just by what we believe. Why must one suppose that the writer of this absurd article is not clear on that point?