[DWJ] Twilight and New Moon (Was: Discussing now: What?)
Melissa at Proffitt.com
Wed Aug 1 14:02:34 EDT 2007
I won't discuss these because I have difficulty being charitable about them.
Though we have talked about them before, a couple of times, starting back
when _Twilight_ was my pick for best new novel of whatever year it was
published. Had a long argument with a sister-in-law about them recently and
was accused, for the first time in I believe fifteen years, of being unable
to "get past" the fact that it's a vampire novel and thus can present any
kind of crap as acceptable. You know, 'cause it's not real or anything.
(See what I mean? This is as charitable as I get. Though mostly I'm out of
charity with that particular relative, who is so hard-headedly rational that
she finds it difficult to imagine that people might experience life
differently than she does.)
But I really want to agree with Deborah on this point:
>think one of the reasons the inner 16-year-old loves these books
>so much is that Bella, the heroine, is so personality-free that
>she basically acts as a placeholder for the reader. She doesn't
>have to have anything in herself, because she exists to be the
>in-story embodiment of the reader's obsession with her demon
>lover, and of the demon lover's adoration of the reader.
This is the definition of the successful romance novel, isn't it--the
vicarious experience of the main character's life. Since I seem to have
turned into the designated apologist for unpopular or marginalized
literature, I've had to explain this to people who just don't get why
bodice-rippers are so popular. (Why do I care what anyone thinks of a
subgenre even I don't like much? I don't know.) Not that I would
characterize _Twilight_ as a bodice-ripper or even a straight romance, since
there's a lot more going on, but I think this placeholder effect is at the
heart of its appeal. It does make me wonder if Bella's character or lack
thereof was by accident or on purpose....
More information about the Dwj