I also think you have to take “mad” into context-he’s British. Who knows what he’s saying?? His perspective on what he meant by “mad” is is most important, right?
How could a character written in a book be “factually true” or not? His behaviors are “demonstrably flawed” according to whom? Again, who made you the arbiter of the book’s internal reality?
And insisting over and over that he is not perfect because you say so doesn’t make you right and her wrong. It makes your opinion one of about a ba-zillion.
“Clearly she failed to do that” for you. And in your opinion, which is worth as much, and as little, as any other reader’s.
Nor is his imperfection universally recognized, which is my point. Look, the one arguing for one universally correct opinon here is you, not me. You’re the one saying Meyers “didn’t create what she thought she created.” You’re the one decreeing what is “factually true” regarding her book. The existence of a “universal paradigm” is your argument, not mine. The arrogance is in the assumption that your opinion is the one that is correct, for anyone other than yourself. And certainly an assertion of univesal correctness is what is implied, if not stated, in pronouncements as to what the author actually created, and what is or is not factually true in her work. As far as I can tell, that’s your position. It sure as hell isn’t mine.
Gosh, thanks! I see you haven’t said anything else that’s new, so I just forego re-stating my opinon in turn under the assumption we both understand each other.
Well, thanks for giving me “impolitic.” :rolleyes: If that’s the pronouncement you’re comfortable with, fine.
Oh, so you can get back to me on whether my “accusations” are “warranted”? Do your own work.
ETA: And just so we’re clear as to what is pissing me off at this point: You didn’t even see any of the interviews. You don’t know what the fuck he said. So why the fuck you are choosing to bust my chops over my own personal interpretation of his statements is beyond me. Just to have an argument of argument’s sake? Or just out of some bitchy general assumption that I must be wrong? I obviously don’t mind a good argument myself, but I try to limit it to occasions when I know what the fuck I’m talking about.
“Throw you a link”? What, from my folder of “Favorites” marked “Pattinson Twilight Interviews”? You seem to have vastly overestimated how much I care about this whole topic, much less your attempts to sit in judgment on my opinions.
I am not the arbiter of anything. Neither is Meyer. That’s my point. Clearly, my view is subjective… but so is hers. And trying to create a character who is perfect is a fool’s errand. There is no universal standard of perfection. It’s really not possible to write a character who will come off to all readers as perfect. The fact that Twilight has so many detractors would seem to prove that.
How is he demonstrably imperfect? Well, Edward openly prevents Bella from seeing her friends. He physically grabs her to stop her from walking away from him. He is cruel to Bella, says hurtful thing, ignores her, flagrantly trespasses on her privacy without permission. He abandons her and leaves her suicidal. If these behaviors are reconcilable with perfection, I’d like to know how. Even in the context of the book, these things cause Bella pain and confusion, and she is angry with him because of it, though forgives him because she loves him. Other characters in the book call him on it too. Yet the contention still is that he’s perfect. I don’t get it. Perhaps you can explain it to me.
Since I don’t privilege my view over hers, me saying it doesn’t make it so, even though of course I’m partial to my reading and think it’s actually more fact-based and text-based than Meyer’s. Surely you will call that arrogance, and that’s fine with me. Mine is just one view in a bazillion. BUT SO IS HERS.
If you’re trying to create the “ultimate” or “perfect” anything, and a significant sector of your readership doesn’t find it so, then clearly you failed. That doesn’t mean that all the screaming tweeners and their moms don’t think so, but Meyer’s stated goal was to depict (and this is the view that you’d privilege over all others) that this guy is the ultimate, perfect romantic hero, then she failed spectacularly, considering the backlash the books have gotten. That doesn’t privilege MY view in any way, it’s merely an observation of the book’s reception. A hell of a lot of people don’t privilege Meyer’s reading over their own. That’s because the text doesn’t solely support her view.
Where is this universally correct opinion? What is factually true is that Meyer did not create the perfect man in Edward. This is not even true within the confines of the novel, much less in the mind of every reader. That’s what I’m disputing. There are many views of Edward and several of them are supportable depending on your POV, but none that are text-based are more valid than any other, including Meyer’s.
Yes, I think an author can be wrong about her own work. The better the writer, the closer the reader’s interpretation will be to the authorial intent. Meyer is a pretty terrible writer, and that’s why there’s so much divergence about her creation. Simply creating a work does not mean that you are able to view it with objectivity or critical faculty. Meyer has said that Bella is a feminist. Do you give that interpretation primacy? Her merely saying so doesn’t make it so, and in fact, there’s ample textual evidence to soundly refute that. She said it to deflect criticism of the message that Bella’s choices send to girls, so is there a chance she’s spinning things to defend her work, even if there’s little to support that reading?
No need to get all snide about it. This is lit crit, not an attack on you. I think I said plenty that’s new. You haven’t addressed my point about HOW an author’s view could possibly be privileged over a reader’s, if a reader does not have access to the author’s intent via some extra-textual medium. When I first read Twilight, it was given to me by the school librarian who said, “You’ve gotta read this, it’s going to be BIG.” (This was before all the hype). I came to my conclusions about it, and THEN the craze hit, and we all read what Meyer meant. Should I then have revised my view because of hers? I don’t see how I could have. I found her view rather bizarre and in contradiction of what she actually wrote. That failure to communicate is hers, not mine.
Jodi, do you really need to swear at me over this? You say you really don’t care, but you’re f-bombing me all over the place, which seems like an overreaction. If this is really pissing you off so much, you need to take a step back.
This is all I could find on Pattinson “dissing” Meyer. I find nothing false in what he said, just as I said, impolitic. He didn’t say the book was crap or any of that. His take on how it felt to read those books is spot on. If that’s what you got your panties in a bunch about, then really, you need to take a couple of more steps back. Is Meyer your cousin or something?
Quick reminder here, folks - we’re talking about a book series about sparkly vampires, which is possibly the sillient thing ever written or conceived. Let’s have all sides dial back the intensity by a couple of notches.
Just so you know, I didn’t report Jodi’s post.
Well, Edward has a powerful and barely contained desire to kill Bella and drink her blood. His literally bloodthirsty impulses aside, before they’re even dating (heck, before they’ve even had a real conversation) he’s stalking her around the greater Forks area and breaking into her room at night while she’s sleeping. I feel pretty confident in calling such behavior “flawed”. Indeed that’s far too mild a term for it – “creepy”, “psycho”, and “criminal” are all better descriptions.
That Meyers intends for all this to be romantic is clear enough, and she calls Edward “perfect” enough times that I think she must really mean it, but by any reasonable standard this is a disturbed and disturbing character.
Any attempt to create a “perfect man” in fiction is going to fail to satisfy everyone (maybe A’s perfect man is the strong silent type, while B’s is more a sensitive poetic soul), and people can certainly express their love in different ways, but the big proof of Edward’s love for Bella is that he doesn’t brutally murder her. Meyers may think she’s portraying an ideal romance with a perfect man, but the book she’s written describes a very unhealthy relationship between two deeply flawed individuals.
Optimist.
Anyone up for a game of vampire baseball?
An excellent response to a bizarre question. Bravo.
Only if you bring the snacks!
Also, what Sleeps With Butterflies said.
Make sure there’s something vegetarian for me.
And by “vegetarian” I of course mean “animal blood”.
(Hey, did anyone else ever read the Bunnicula books? Now THERE was a vegetarian vampire! Count Duckula was too, come to think of it.)
[Beavis & Butthead]VAMPIIIIIIREEE BAAAAASEBAAAALLL!!![/Beavis & Butthead]
Basically, Jodi, he mostly said:
And really, I think, when he told Rupert Grint to read them, I don’t think he was dissing Meyers so much. Let’s face it: Twilight isn’t really written for men in their twenties. He isn’t the intended audience. I don’t think it’s being rude to admit that. What is he supposed to say-“I loved the books-they’re my favorite!”
I don’t think it’s any different from the actors from Star Wars poking fun at the dialogue. Hell, Harrison Ford famously said, “George, you can write this shit, but you sure as hell can’t say it.” And yet, they aren’t seen as being rude, or “dissing” George Lucas.
(And confession time: as much as I’m loathing the books, and as much as Edward creeps me out, if I were ten years younger, I’d be all over Pattinson. Dude is yummy!)
I think it is entirely possible for a author’s opinion of what is going on in their work to be wrong. All it takes is for the author to have a wrong view of the real world. I had a friend who was abused and it really gave her a confused view of families. We’d be telling stories about our childhoods and she’d come out with something that happened to her that was just horrific and then be surprised when we were all horrified. She thought her awful experiences were how families worked. If she’d written a novel about a family she’d have included things like that while calling them a normal family and she would be wrong because they would be in no way normal. She could call them normal all she wanted but it would in no way change the truth.
Exactly! As everyone mentions-Edward sneaking into Bella’s house every night to watch her sleep. That’s not the behavior of someone who’s supposed to be your true love-that’s the behavior of someone who’s obsessed.
And obviously, Meyer can’t see it.
Just be thankful that this scene was deleted from the movie version. Talk about creepy!
What’s really creepy is that the parody Bella in that video seems a lot smarter and more assertive than the character in the book.
She also managed to walk away without falling over, another big hint it wasn’t the “real” Bella.
Midnight Sun is the icing on the cake of Edward’s creepiness. At first, all he can do is think about how delicious it would be to drink Bella’s blood in science class, and even thinks about how he’d have to kill every student in the classroom to get away with it. Then, somehow, this transmogrifies into “love” which is all-consuming, since he had nothing much to think about before, by his own admission. That’s when we get the breaking and entering. Edward admits to reading the thoughts of everyone Bella talks to, trying to figure out what she’s thinking because she’s immune to his telepathy. When he reads Mike’s thoughts (which are, let’s face it, less creepy than his own), he fantasizes about murdering him. In one scene, Bella tries to walk away from Edward and he grabs her by the neck of her coat and pulls her back, then locks her in his car.
The novel is in first person and it reads very much like the internal monologue of a mentally ill person. I’m not being hyperbolic. And THIS is the perfect man of Stephenie Meyer’s fantasies.
Another thing I found that Pattinson said in Empire Magazine’s October 2008 issue:
I can see how that could be seen as insulting to Meyer, but it’s a fact-based description of how often she describes Edward as beautiful and perfect. I also think his characterization of Edward is a reading fully supported by the text, and it is in no way hypocritical of him to choose to play him that way, or admit to it. Jerkish? Eh, maybe. Also, the natural reaction of a 20-something man to the Twilight saga. Impolitic to admit it, definitely.