Romeo and Juliet being held up as a couple in true love? Ow. Ow ow ow.
I meant to say NOT outrageously gorgeous. She looks like how I pictured Bella in my mind, pretty much.
I agree that the books send nasty messages about women, and also about what True Love is supposed to be like. What Edward does in the first book is definitely stalking psycho boundary-trangressing behavior. Any sane woman would hate having her privacy invaded that way. But in the books that obsessive, suffocating selfhood-obliterating love is depicted as ideal, admirable, and desirable. Not very good messages to send teenage girls. The 4th book reinforces those messages like gangbusters.
Wow, so am I the only one who doesn’t think these books are a Very Bad Thing? sigh Leave it to me to disagree with the status quo where relationship stuff is concerned.
I just spent the last four days burning through the series, and I’m now working on the unpublished fifth book, Midnight Sun. (No worries, mods; it’s posted on the Twilight website by the author.) I paused in my reading when I saw this thread, and felt the need to respond. Sure, I’ll be the first to admit that Edward has stalkerish tendencies. And the happily-ever-after ending ties up the loose ends a little too neatly. But these are stories written for someone my daughter’s age, so I know I’m not “cool” enough to “get” those aspects in the way that most fans do. (Or something like that.) Anyway, the thing that struck me hile reading is that I identify quite strongly with Bella. Clumsy beyond all recognition, check. Feels rather plain and not-special, yep. Swept off her feet by her Twue Wuv, who is amazingly gorgeous and way out of her league, uh huh. Now I know some of you already think I’m a nutter, so let me just head you off at the pass and say that I don’t have any delusions that my husband is vampire, or that we will live eternally in the glory of a forbidden romance, or anything like that. I’m weird, but I’m not an idiot, mkay? 
The one thing that resonated with me the most was the concept of perceptions in these books. Vampires that don’t drink blood. Vampires being friends, even family, with werewolves. Being beautiful and worthy and special to someone when you can’t see it yourself. That last one is pretty important, I think. Like Rubystreak said above, girls want to be Bella Cullen. What girl doesn’t want to think that she will find someone who loves her and thinks she is the most beautiful creauture on the planet? Now, am I saying that these books are high art? Nope. That they send a good message to younger girls? Not unless the girls in question actually think about this in a mature way. But I do think that they aren’t quite as horrible as they are being painted in this thread. With the exception of school projects and entertaining kids who can’t read on their own, reading a (fiction) book is supposed to be a mental journey through someone else’s life. I just don’t see anything wrong with mentally journeying into the lives in question.
(Dear God, why am I still up reading this thread?)
freekalette, I’m going to spoiler this in case you haven’t read far into Midnight Sun yet, but one of the examples of Edward’s sweeping Bella off her feet is to
sneak into her room in the middle of the night and stay there watching her sleep. And when she tries to walk away from him in the parking lot in a later chapter, he grabs her by the hood of her sweater and yanks her back.
That’s not healthy romantic behaviour. That’s really, really freaking creepy behaviour.
(Stupid board timeouts…)
One quick thing before I zonk out for the night. I understand that not all of the “romantic” behaviour in the books is healthy. I’m not defending that aspect at all. (Hey, even I have my limits, ya know. I think lots of it is creepy too.) I’m just saying that the books do, in fact, have their good points. I realize now that I left out pretty much everything I wanted to say earlier about perception. Hopefully you (general you) get my drift. If not, I’ll explain when I’ve had some sleep.
Well, checking wikipedia out of curiosity, I find that Kristen Stewart was born in…1990.
::cue Nazi Wrong Grail Withering™::
I think I have some shirts that are that old.
Anyways…I just thought I’d have to share a couple of webcomics from a favorite artist of mine on the subject. They seemed relevant.
On the plus side, while I haven’t read the novels, I can at least presume that Bella, for all her Sueish tendencies, isn’t a millionaire, psychologist, Xavier-institute graduate, U.S. Marine Col., fighter pilot, artificial dhampir, sniper, astronaut, New York Times best selling author, honorary British knight. (That was all in one character, that I’ve had opportunity to read about, and apparently not a parody or a deconstruction)
Bella, however, has managed to actually star in a best selling book series, and a major motion picture…so I have to wonder how much that “Sue-cred” evens out, in practice.
Oh my, the panel with Edward and Bella frolicking has me on the floor. They have captured Bella’s vapidity perfectly! (But have made her way too perky and happy.)
The more I reflect on Twilight (I’ve only read the first book, and the Wiki synopses of the rest), the more I hate it. First, Bella’s lack of characteristics could be forgiven somewhat since she’s meant to be a placeholder for the reader. However, the fact that she’s a misanthropic, self-pitying, ungrateful asshole is harder to get around. “Oh noes, all these people are trying to be nice to me - my life is so horrible!”
Edward is just as empty, really - his characterization consists of being impossibly gorgeous and having bipolar disorder.
Then there’s the “romance.” The most positive feelings Edward exhibits toward Bella are amused contempt and lust. Aside from that there’s fury, possessiveness, and thirst for her blood. Much of this has been mentioned, but it bears repeating: Edward follows Bella 24 hours a day, breaks in to her house to watch her sleep, listens in on the thoughts of those around her to keep track of her and eavesdrop on her, physically dominates her, makes decisions for her, isolates her from her friends, and unilaterally decides when he will grant or withhold affection in response to Bella’s puppyish devotion.
And the most disturbing thing about all this is that so many adults seem to think all this is just fantastic and a good book for teen girls to read, because they don’t have sex before marriage. Yep, doesn’t matter how twisted and abusive a relationship is, as long as you’re “pure.” Great lesson.
The other thing that bugs me is there is so much wasted opportunity here. She could have made Bella just as morose and obnoxious as she is, and then introduced some irony in having Edward, who has the perfect setup to be brooding and tortured, to teach her to get over herself and embrace life. She could have explored just how much one should be willing to sacrifice for love, and how one decides when something is true love and not mere infatuation. Or the consequences of making permanent, life-changing decisions based on your deep, enduring passion with that person you met last week. I also found the bits of backstory on the other vampires tantalizing - they were much more interesting than the central characters, but we’re only teased with their tales (though perhaps she expands on them later).
Finally, it’s like Meyer realized that the romantic conflict that drives the first several hundred pages is pretty weak, so she decides to throw in some more explicit conflict in the form of a villain. But it’s such an afterthought, it fizzles out in every way imaginable. The most memorable feature of this portion is how it highlights Bella’s monumental stupidity.
So yeah, I’m pretty terrified that so many young women are ga-ga for these books. And perhaps more disturbing are the “mature” women who are equally hysterical over them. The impression this craze gives of my sex is downright embarrassing.
Please maximize this window a bit for me.
-FrL-
Just to nitpick, Bella is only a Mary Sue if she is a deliberate insertion of the author’s persona into the story. Mary Sues are usually without significant flaws - which, by description, is apparently not true of Bella (and what a hilarious, vampire-story-cliche name that is.) Bella isn’t really a Mary Sue; she’s flawed, and in any case doesn’t really sound anything like the author, who doesn’t appear to have ever been a loser.
That READERS identify with a character is not really one of the defining characteristics of a Mary Sue.
As to the book, I picked it up in the store, read about four pages, and was laughing my ass off. And it wasn’t meant to be funny.
I think Bella is a Mary Sue, as well as being a cipher for readers to superimposed themselves on. First, naming one’s protagonist “beautiful swan” is a big indicator. Second, to the extent we get a physical description of Bella, she looks like Stephenie Meyer. Third, Meyer has explicitly said that Bella’s experience at her new school is based on her own life. Fourth, Bella’s flaws as cataloged in this thread are, for the most part, not treated as flaws by the author. When Bella’s being an ungrateful bitch, we’re clearly meant to sympathize with how annoying it is to have three guys ask you to the prom. When she makes choices that a brain-damaged lemur would recognize as stupidly and needlessly self-destructive, we’re meant to think that she’s being noble and unselfish. Her one acknowledged “flaw” is her clumsiness, which is presented in such an over-the-top manner that it’s clearly a case of protesting too much. “See, she’s not a Mary Sue, she’s flawed!”
Oh, I KNOW! Agh!
Anyway, for all you Dopers out there who think Twilight is kinda creepy and/or lame, may I offer The Occupation: Girl commentaries? Near the bottom of that page are the book discussion entries, and I had a lot of fun reading them. They’re snarky commentary, section by section–(from the Breaking Dawn bit):
I haven’t actually read anything past Twilight, so this is how I learned the plot of Breaking Dawn. Much faster and more entertaining.
Oh noes! Those bastard filmmakers have cast a 17 year old actress to play a character who is 17 years old. The outrage!
Huh. If all of this is true, then it really explains the disconnect I had with my ex. No wonder she didn’t want me around anymore, if that’s the kind of man/love she’s expecting. Ouch!
Sorry, I don’t think I was clear. They think Kristin Stewart isn’t pretty enough and shouldn’t be all made up. How they expect to film someone without makeup surrounded by a fully made up cast and still be the stunning lead is beyond me.
I know nothing about these books but the movie trailers (which make the movie look merely hackneyed and unimaginative), but after reading the descriptions in this thread, it sounds like these books are even more putrid than I suspected.
I haven’t read any of these books, although I keep feeling I should because I’m a librarian and I should be on top of things like this. But my particular job doesn’t have anything to do with popular teen fiction, and they sound pretty awful, so thus far I haven’t even picked one up.
Accusations of Mary Sue-ism aside, I got sick of contemporary vampire fiction more than a decade ago. It’s played out. Maybe someone out there has some original idea for a new take on vampires, but I very much doubt it. And while authors have a pretty wide selection of established vampire cliches to choose from when writing their unoriginal books, most seem to go for the “brooding emo vampire who is so so tragically beautiful and romantic and not evil at all and doesn’t kill anyone except maybe really bad people” thing. Bleh. I HATE that, not just because it’s sappy but because there’s no real reason to make such a character a vampire in the first place. He could just as easily be an aspiring musician who the heroine’s parents think is a bum.
The whole POINT of vampires is that they’re not nice. They’ve either made a terrible choice or have had a terrible choice forced upon them. They get to live forever, but it’s not really much of a life, and they’ll lose even that if they don’t regularly kill humans. From what I’m reading here and in the Wikipedia summaries, it sounds like the Twilight series is about a vampire who is immortal but only has to kill animals for food (making his diet no more morally questionable than any non-vegetarian’s), has superhuman powers but none of the traditional vampiric weaknesses, and ultimately lives happily ever after with his wife and baby.
Is this correct? Because not only is such a character not a vampire except in the loosest sense of the term, he’s not even interesting. The idea of great powers won at great cost is thought provoking, but great powers won at the cost of having a kind of gross diet is not.
Robin McKinley’s Sunshine is different, and I really liked it: it’s set in a post-apocalyptic future, and it’s a rich, interesting world. Some people find the narrator’s voice annoying. I loved the world–it was unique and complex–and the vampires were sufficiently other-worldly and evil. There is, of course, a sympathetic vampire, but even he is pretty freaking alien.
The answer is “yes.” Though The Time-Traveler’s Wife is a very close second in shameless Mary Sue-ness.
Ah. Now THAT is a Mary Sue of the first order.
Biggest Mary Sue I have ever encountered was actually a male version (Gary Stu?). Clive Cussler’s Dirk Pitt is so very clearly Cussler’s mental picture of himself. After I caught on to that I rather lost interest in reading the books… I think this is part of why he got so angry about the Sahara movie, as they tampered with what was essentially his written down fantasies. (For the record, I loved the movie, which is why I started reading the books).
To conclude, I don’t think that the female lead in Twilight can be the biggest Mary Sue ever, as there is a male character that beats her out. On the other hand, if they were fanfictions written by a 13 year old girl, then the decision might end up differently.