Thursday, July 10, 2008

Why I Think Twilight Sucks, and Other Important Thoughts





Jessica (who I found through Stephanie) just confessed her true feelings about Twilight, and because of her bravery, I am ready to come out of the closet.

I read it last week. EVERYONE I know has read it, and most of them loved it. Since I'm a total romantic sap, I was expecting to love it too.

You guys... I SO didn't get it. I thought it was very meh, starting with the main character, Bella (otherwise known as the Queen of Meh).

(Ooooh, do you hear that sound? It's me, getting delisted from 50 Twilight loving blogs at once. But I CANNOT BE SILENCED.)

Ugh. She was so boring and stilted and dead inside. I kind of wanted to slap her. My theory is that Bella actually has Aspergers Syndrome and also a really bad inner ear infection that destroyed her sense of balance. Because, come on. She can't consistently WALK without falling? She should go see a specialist or something, right? Why didn't she do that? Why didn't her parents have her checked out?

She was very annoying and I didn't get the whole martyr thing. She's on a date with a guy who has admitted that he isn't all that sure whether or not he's going to SLAUGHTER her as the capper to their date, and she thinks it's exciting and romantic? The girl has some serious issues.

I thought she was dull. I didn't get why Edward would be interested in her in the least. I mean, other than his preference for her biological fluids. Which seems kind of a shaky basis for a romance. Plus, she kept reminding us how he was all cold and dead. Gross.

And then there was Edward himself. Pompous, stilted, fatally unhip Edward. I get that the author was going for a 1911 language vibe, but come on. He hasn't been in a COMA for the last hundred years, he's been hanging out in high school. I don't know if it's a good thing when the romantic lead reminds you of Kelsey Grammar. Or rather, would remind you of Kelsey Grammar if Bella weren't constantly reminding us about his topaz eyes and his muscled chest. Did you know he had topaz eyes and a muscled chest? Because he did have topaz eyes and a muscled chest. Did you pick up on that? It was subtle, you might not have caught it.

I hated how he told her what to do all the time. He was so controlling and kind of ambivalent about whether or not he was going to eat her. I was like, dude, take a stand. Just go ahead and eat her, put us all out of our misery. But he didn't. (Maybe that's book three, I don't know.)

There was no build-up to their romance. One day he hated her (because he was trying not to eat her), and the next day they were both in TRUE TRUE LOVE with extra stalking. I thought the whole watching outside her window thing was incredibly creepy. If he was human, Bella would be filing restraining orders all over the place.

I think the main thing that annoys me is this: I don't like it when the heroine is stupid. And Bella is. If I knew my boyfriend was a serial killer, and he invited me to come over and look at his knife collection, and I said yes, would that be amazingly romantic? Or just kind of stupid? But Bella repeatedly says she doesn't care if he kills her, because she loves him. Wuh?? Wuh in the wuh wuh?

I also didn't understand why her dad wasn't raising holy hell about letting her see Edward at the end. If my daughter freaked out after a fight with her creepy boyfriend, took off, disappeared and then reappeared with said creepy boyfriend in Phoenix, where she just happened to fall through a window and end up in the hospital - I don't think I would be encouraging my daughter to continue to date him. You know? Is it just me? Is her Dad supposed to be delayed?

Jessica thought it got better near the end, but I didn't. It was like Stephanie Meyer got tired of writing about their romance and just threw in a random evil vampire. Random characters who hop in late in the novel - not so scary. (I thought it would have been more scary if they would have pulled in the space vampire from Buck Rogers. Because that episode gave me nightmares for YEARS.)

I get it, some people like the whole bad guy thing, the whole "my love makes you dangerous" vibe. I guess I can sort of see it. I mean picture it, if you were married to someone completely sexless, like Mitt Romney or something, fantasizing about dangerous-romantic-vampires might be just the ticket. But for ordinary women? What is the appeal?

Clearly, there IS appeal in the whole dangerous vampire-romantic-fiction genre. I just don't understand it. (Other than Buffy and Angel. THAT I get. But they're completely the exception. I think it helps that he doesn't want to eat her.)

So please enlighten me. Did you like Twilight? If so, WHY? Why why why why why?

UPDATE: I've had to close comments. Not because of the conversation you see in the comments, but because I got a few pretty obnoxious anonymous comments (which I ruthlessly deleted, because I'm drunk with power) from people who obviously have even MORE feelings about Twilight than I do, and I'm not in the mood to deal with them.


  1. I didn't like Twilight, either. NOTHING happened in that book until the last two chapters with the creepy vampire guy. They just...go to school. You can tell she wrote it with intent for sequels, but come on!-a bit more than "I woke up today, tripped down the stairs, ate breakfast, then drooled over Edward at school". Blah. No desire to read the others.

  2. Anonymous1:16 AM

    Well, I suppose everyone can have their opinion and hey one less person to fight over my copy of Breaking Dawn with in 23 days...

  3. You may be blacklisted from 20 Twilight-loving blogs, but I for one salute you. I didn't dislike the books as much as you did, but I read all 3 in a row and by the end was SO DONE with Bella, for all the reasons you mentioned. I know she's supposed to be a teenager but come on! My desire to read the last book fades every day, although I will probably eventually read it out of a sense of obligation. (Plus, I want to know what the other mommy's are talking about on Park Day.) :)

  4. You made this up, right? You had to have made this up.

    And, wonderful readers of Sue, don't vote for her - vote for me! She's winning! I'm the underdog! Woof!

  5. They may take my temple recommend away, but I totally agree. I don't get it. I think it is her helpless, pathetic "Ew, I am in love and if that means you suck my blood, so be it" that I don't understand. It's so creepy Angelina Jolie.

    I never read the last one. Thanks for saving me from the boredom.

  6. I was so excited to read your blog! I thought I was the only mormon woman on earth who didn't like Twilight. I read it and never continued to book 2. It was a boring unsophisticated read. I would rather sink my teeth (pun intended) into some of the great literary classics. This book was lame and I agree, it did suuuuck!!!

  7. I read and I guess liked all three, although I'm no where near the counting down to the fourth whose (which's?) title I don't remember is out, But I completely agree about Bella meh, and Edward ummm hard and cold doesn't do it for me and then there's the question of his personality or lack thereof.
    I think her writing is weirdly engrossing though. In the second book (new moon? eclipse? can't remember) I hated, HATED all the characters but I kept right on listening (audiobooks rock my world) although now that I think about it I was painting at the time, there may be a correlation.

  8. Sing it, sister.

    I read all three books because I wanted to see what had so captivated my female high school students. I became so frustrated with Bella that I wanted to throw the book at all of the girls who raved about it - and her. I finally said, "You know why Edward can't read her mind? Because THERE IS NOTHING TO READ."

    The second book is worse. The third - worser.

    Oh, and there is yet another version coming out. This one is from Edward's perspective. I'm bored already.

    AND, Stephanie Whatshername wrote an "adult" book called - I think - "The Host." It was WORSE than the vampire/werewolf books.

    What really bothers me about this whole Twilight thing is that people are falling in love with bad writing. The characters are one-note, it's all terribly predictable, and it's STUPID.

    But, of course, that is my never humble opinion.

  9. Have I ever told you that I'm in love with you? I mean that in a creepy, stalkerish, internet sort of way. I didn't totally hate the book. I read the next two, and when I was done with the third, I heaved a sigh of relief. It's over. Then I heard there was a fourth, and that must made me mad. I don't think I'll read it, because, yeah. Not great writing. The premise was imaginative, but the characters were dumb, contradictory, blah, blah blah. Plus, not enough action.

  10. I have a friend who has Asperger's and she thought the same thing about Bella (in a good way, though).

    One review of the series described it as embodying "the erotics of restraint," and I think that's the key to the books' appeal. If you're a sucker for the erotics of restraint (as I am) you'll spend the whole novel in a swoon that basically disables critical thinking. So yeah, there's nothing special about the prose style, the characters are implausible, and the relationship is basically unhealthy, but the thing is my brain has been taken over by my libido and it's running around with its hands over its ears saying, "La la la I can't hear you!"

  11. Finally! I am not alone in this big-scary-Edward-loving world!

    Bella bugs-- big time. She is so needy. Edward is creepy. He is 108 or some such thing... thats just gross. Bella loves an old creepy Grandpa that is controlling and wants to eat her.

    I found myself banging my head with the book while chanting "why why why".
    I did read all three of them just because I wanted to see if he really would eat her-- Dang it. There's 4 of these craptastic things.

    I am always surprised when grown women say they love these books. I understand 12yearolds-- but grown women? Come on!

  12. OK, I'll bite (Hah! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH I slay me! HAHAHAHA! I'm a punning FIEND.)

    I think I fall into the category of reader Bea describes. When I actually sit back and THINK about the plot and the characters I'm all, "girlfriend, take some tai chi, I hear it does wonders for your sense of balance." Plus, I totally would've picked Jacob. Also, you're right, he's too bossy.

    Thing is, while I'm reading it, I don't CARE.

    I sort of see it the way I like a lot of "romantic" music or movies or art. If I were to encounter these situations in real life I would be horrified at the stalking, emotional manipulation, etc. But I cut it some slack because it's exaggerated. Just for instance, I really liked PS I Love You in which the dead husband arranges all these letters to arrive after his death helping his wife to live and laugh again. In real life: Hello bossy jerk-face. In the movie: Totally sweet.

    OH, and I want to read book four because I thought the ending of book three was really lame and I am hoping she leaves the next one on a better note.

  13. Here's another Mormon woman who absolutely hated this book. I never would have read it but it was put on my book group's reading list. And then, I only read it because of all the rave reviews the other women were giving it. I couldn't understand why grown women (over 40) would think it was SO FABULOUS!

    I skipped the review night on this one. I couldn't possibly imagine what there was to review.

  14. k - I totally agree with you (except about Mitt Romney, I think he's hot in a Donny Osmond kind of way). I read all 3 books hoping it would get better because everyone I know loves loves the books (our ward book club just read it!!!!). Really, they just got more annoying.
    I was rooting for Jacob - at least his blood was hot. That's way sexier than a cold, stinky (?), pale, marble of a boyfriend.

  15. I have no problem suspending disbelief, if I like the characters. But I thought the characters were so unlikeable.

    I haven't read books 2 and 3. Maybe someday, if I'm going to be trapped under a bus for a long time, and there's nothing to do but wait for the firefighters to cut me loose, and I feel like doing a little light reading, and someone happens to hand them to me? Then I might read them. Maybe.

  16. Mo here. (Mo is for Mormon in case you've never heard that)

    All I have to say is THANK YOU!!! The first time I told a group of women how much I hated this book and how ridiculous I thought it was, I thought they would banish me from relief society! I read the books too- all 3 of them hoping they would get better, however they don't. Bella gets more clumsy and dumb, and Edward gets more controlling and is still dead...oh, but he still has topaz eyes and a muscley chest. *rolling eyes*

    I just hated how she was so freakin' helpless all the time. So dull and lame. And like you said, they have nothing in common except for the attraction. Him to her blood and her to his topaz eyes and rock hard chest.

    Plus, I'm going to be honest here. They're in high school and they can't even make out!?! Everytime they'd kiss, he'd almost kill her!

    So thanks Sue, for posting this!

    P.S. IF you do read the next 2 books, I'm rooting for Jacob. She can actually be physical with him, her dad loves him, he's tall, manly, and ALIVE! Oh, and he's not controlling. Bravo Jake!

  17. I'm giving you a HUGE holy roller AMEN!!!!

    Your description was great. I give you props for hanging in there through the whole book (and another? if I'm' reading you right)

    I only made it just over half way through the first book, never to go back. Dumb.

  18. i liked the books, but i can see where you are coming from. i just recently re-read (i know you are gasping in horror) the series and bella bugged me a lot this time. i didn't get the whole bit about edward the first time either. my mom was sooo in love with him, quite frankly he freaked me out with his whole i'm so in control of myself and so much better than you business. what i did like most about the books was the idea of being head over heals in love, i'm a sucker like that. even if it had no merit, i still enjoyed it. yea for you for coming out about them!

  19. See, now I thought I was going to get disowned from the relief society just because I haven't read it yet, and really have no plans on ever doing so! It just never sounded that interesting to me. So I'm glad there are people in the world who AREN'T obsessed with it!

    Buffy and Angel on the other hand, I will TOTALLY watch over and over and over again! Their love sooooo makes sense!

  20. I'd gotten so used to the chirping crickets every time I said I didn't like the book . . . who knew all these people agreed? Yippee!

    FYI, I was setting up Google Reader for a friend yesterday, and I added my blogs, her brothers' blogs, a bunch of families in our ward, etc., etc., etc., and when I showed her the list, her first question was, "Hey, where's that really funny lady?" (meaning you . . . in case that wasn't clear)

  21. "someone completely sexless, like Mitt Romney"

    Oh, Sue, that was your best line ever.

    And, you know, I don't mind these novels as escape reading, much like I think, "Hey, if Harlequins are your thing, you keep reading, sweetheart," but I hate that so many people are so GAH-GAH over them, like they are the next great American novel. Really, let's call Edward the teenage Fabio, and get one with it.

    Because they are not the next great American novels, for all the reasons you mention and then some. Like how Edward thinks Bella is hilarious, when she is actually the most boring human girl in the whole world. Fascinating.

    Sorry, I still think The Great Gatsby is better.

  22. Haven't read it. Doubt I will. (Because free time? I have none.)

    But reading your description, I can't imagine I would enjoy it any more than you. I'm so annoyed by stupid or pathetic heroines.

  23. Anonymous8:43 AM

    I ahven't read this book, but I LOVE Buffy and Angel!!!

  24. ps. and speaking of sexless politicians....can you imagine being married to Gov. Huntsman? I mean, come out of the closet already!

  25. I have not read the books yet and usually receive a *gasp* reaction when I tell people. When I heard the books were about vampires it kind of turned me off, but maybe someday I will read them just to see what all the hype is about.

  26. Well, I wouldn't put them into the category of great literature or anything, but I thought the premise was so interesting that I kept going.
    I liked them.
    The only thing that creeped me out is the fact that when you think about it, Edward is a hundred years old or whatever, and dating a 16 year old is just wrong.

  27. Anonymous9:06 AM

    I have liked one vampire novel: Robin McKinley's Sunshine. It's great, but her heroine is energetic and smart and very frank about how the vampire is both creepily attractive and really, really gross at the same time.

    As far as attraction for a vampire - I've never quite understood it. Why would I want to kiss someone whose breath probably smells like my period? Ew.

  28. Read it. I am a sci-fi/fantasy fan, but I didn't care for Twilight at all. For all the reasons you mentioned.

  29. You're going to hate me, but I really, really love Twilight and the rest of the series. I am not counting down to the next book, but I'll definetly be buying it. For me, it's mindless, harmless, and fun....and by the end of the day when I have time to read that's what I'm looking for.

    I think of them as Jane Austen for the 21st century - I don't know, maybe Jane Austen was huge with the mommies of her time, but I kind of doubt it. I'm betting her fan list was teens. And that's who these books were meant for.

    I love Jane Austen - she's fantastic. I've tried reading Wuthering Heights and that's one that I. Don't. Get. I can't even get through the stupid thing...that probably makes me a bad person in some people's eyes, but that's where I'm at.

    Getting off the soapbox now.

    I totally love your blog anyway, and I'm going to re-vote for you. :)

  30. Yes, yes, yes! I agree with every word ("Wuh in the wuh wuh" sums it up SO beautifully!).

    I will admit that Meyer is a smooth writer in that I read Twilight quickly--I'd get through 30 pages w/out realizing I'd read that much. BUT NOTHING HAPPENED IN THOSE PAGS.

    Bella is stupid. Edward's a controlling jerk.

    Yet all these ladies in my neighborhood swoon over him. One even rereads the books whenever she's mad at her husband so she can pretend she gets to be with Edward. (Are you KIDDING me? He's a freak!)

    I love finding out I'm not alone.

  31. I'll gladly proclaim to the world that I HAVE NOT READ THESE BOOKS! Which is actually really kind of strange for me. I love to read, I read everyday, a new book every week. But not these. They are on my "to-read" list, but I have not yet read them. And the more people talk about them, the more I DON'T want to read them. So much good is said, but there is even more NOT GOOD said.

    So kudos for you.

  32. Twilight can take a hike for the most part. Being reminded constatly that Edward was like a "Greek God" is just unhealthy!!! Talk about potential for abusive relationship! and besides... I would FREAK if my daughter was sleeping ith a guy under my roof... besides the fact that she totally tries to seduce him... as you said.. "Wuh?" besides those books are WAY too predictable.

    I did read Stephanie Meyers other book "Host" just for a kick. Much better. Not so many dunderheads and Meyers actually TRIES is put in a couple of twists. Unfortunately I saw through most of them... due to the plethora of unpredictable books I have read in my lifetime :) but at least there are no grecian gods in that one.

  33. Meh, I'm a Spike fan. Angel is too brooding-ish. And puffy.

    Mitt Romney. HA!

    A lot of women I know hated the book(s). Those are just the circles I run in, man. But honestly, I found the book entertaining. Not well written, and terribly frustrating, but still entertaining. It helped knowing that I would have problems with it beforehand; it seemed that what I already knew would suck I forgave the book for before even cracking it open, leaving a lot less irritation once I finally started to read it. The contrived romance was still sickeningly cheesy, but I tried to see it through the eyes of a girl Bella's age, and honestly, that's just how stupid we were at that age. I'm not proud of that, but if I'm honest with myself, I was just that stupid (but not with the same kind of boys). I also was pretty clumsy as a teenager myself (not falling down two flights of stairs and out of a window clumsy, but clumsy), and I was horrible at any sport imaginable. In college I only took three PE classes and I was at the bottom of every class, skillwise, by far. I only wish my teammates had prevented me from making a fool of myself, but alas, no. So on that level I can relate to Bella as a teenager. On any other level, no.

    Now Edward on the other hand I don't get at all. He's been around for a century and she's the best he's come up with so far? I find that a bit...unlikely, to say the least. He obviously enjoys being in a relationship where he gets to be as condescending as possible, and honestly, she deserves it given her intellectual aptitude. So I guess whatever floats his boat.

    The stalking I found perfectly normal. Vampires do that. No big deal. I'm reminded of a Chris Rock routine where he talked about the Clarence Thomas debacle with what's-her-face. He said that if Thomas had been Denzel Washington, none of this would have ever come up. Instead of screaming sexual harrassment, she would have been, "Oh Denzel! You get out of here with your fine self!" Something like that. He defines sexual harrassment as ugly men just trying to get some. When you're in the throws of new love, stalking seems cute. At any other time? Creepy. So I don't see a problem with that.

    All in all, the romance is not surprising to me that much given the players, but it is terribly superficial and in that I can't see how it can possibly be defined as true love or anything beyond simply temporary. She essentially only "loves" him because he's breathtaking and she loves the attention, right? And he "loves" her because he can't read her mind (presenting a challenge for him) and she tastes good. Solid basis for eternal marriage there.
    The book should have ended when the second started--when he left her for good and told her to get on with her life already. Now THAT was believable. Just turn her into a vampire and get it over with, or move on already.

    Oh, and I HATED the James/tracker plot. I agree with the other comment that it was just thrown in there randomly to spice things up. It showed just how completely stupid Bella had become/was all along (I complained about that very thing on my own blog).

    Does that help?

  34. Hee hee...I officially adore you, Sue. Way to fight the hype!

    I haven't read it yet, because I'm a rebel like that. But I hope I don't like it. =P

  35. Oh, Valerie. I was with you, totally getting the desire for light, fun reading (although for me, this wasn't it) until you compared Twilight to AUSTEN. HERESY.

    Yes, Austen writes romance, but she writes clever, insightful, observant romance. Brilliant romance. You, Stephanie Meyer, as talented as you may be, are no Jane Austen.

    Excuse me, I'll be the one over there in the corner fanning myself.

  36. This be why I haven't read any of those books yet - because my friends LOVE them and I know instinctively that I will hate them, and then there's just one more thing for me to tick people off with.

  37. The thing is, I'm not a literary snob. I like all kinds of stuff. I loved Harry Potter - I thought it was brilliant writing and I totallly squealed when Ron and Hermione finally kissed in book seven. So - I'm not made of stone or anything.

    And I agree that it was well written. I just don't like what she wrote.

    "He obviously enjoys being in a relationship where he gets to be as condescending as possible, and honestly, she deserves it given her intellectual aptitude." AMEN!

  38. Oh, I forgot one point. I've noticed something with books with romantic plots like these. If the author is female, the girl in the book will be flawed while her object of desire will be as perfect as possible. Same with a male author: flawed male lead with the perfect woman. One of my favorite authors, Ken Follett, is an excellent writer and story teller. Pillars of the Earth is one of the best novels I've ever read. However, he has the fantasy woman thing going on in every novel. His leading ladies are always strong, intelligent, insightful, caring, and can kick any guy's ass if needed. Their only "flaw" is their self-consciousness over their huge boobs. Yeah. His leading men are always ordinary Joes with either a wooden leg, missing ear, partially deaf, amnesia, or some other malady. The same thing is what Meyer has done. She is living out her teenaged fantasies of being the idiot who not only has a boy madly in love with her, but the best looking boy in the school/county, and he is physically perfect in every way (if you don't mind the lack of a heartbeat), intelligent, doting, and sensual. Personally I don't like to be in a relationship that feels so lopsided, but I guess some people are into that.

    Speaking of looks, if Robert Pattinson is supposed to be the embodiment of the most gorgeous man west of the Mississippi, then I have severly overestimated the definition of "gorgeous." Same goes for Peter Facinelli. Meh.

  39. I can't stand these books, and yet, I'm strangely drawn to them. I think it's part of my OCD nature to never leave a story unfinished because I read your post and thought, "I can't wait until the fourth one comes out in August so that I can get this over with already!" A glowing review, I know. And then there's going to be the fifth one that will be a retelling of the first one, only this time from Edward's perspective.

    I wrote briefly about this Twilight phenomena ( or just Google search "Twilight Fold My Laundry Please) and while I only got a few comments about it, I heard an earful about it in Relief Society when the one lady in our ward who read my blog told all the other ladies about and they flooded my site so they could ambush me all at once the next Sunday. Good times.

    Also, my MIL is a teacher at an elementary school in Rexburg, ID and she read the books to see what all the hubbub was with the girls at school. She has declared it porn for teens what with all the laying together at night and such.

  40. Thanks, Sue. Thank you so much. See, I love to read. It is my escape from the teeny little mommy world I live in. And everyone always says I have to read these books. HAVE to, mind you. So I pass them at Costco. My sil offered to loan me hers. Then I'm told I WONT be able to put them down. Like I need that.
    I've never picked them up. I just can't for some reason. Now I know why. It is to save me from harming my surroundings by throwing a book at them.
    You just saved my lamp I bet.
    Oh, and I voted for you. Again.
    And my dad started reading you. He was talking about your blog, but couldn't remember the name. He described it as the one by the woman who is the great writer. And he's been a teacher for 40 years. Wow, eh?

  41. Anonymous11:33 AM

    Mitt Romney rocks my world.

  42. It's been awhile but yeah I liked it although I share some of your criticisms, particularly the "Edward had topaz eyes and a muscled chest," because, yeah, I didn't think she'd shut up about how beautiful he was. And the cold stone thing bothered me to0 - half the fun of cuddling with DH is that I get WARM not freeze my tush off!

    But, I bought all three and will be standing in line for book 4. I'm addicted. I really do think it's the whole vampire thing. I have a secret love for them. And yes, I do have a bad boy complex. DH is a reformed (sometimes not so much reformed) bad boy and he super fabulous.

  43. Thanks for the spoiler warning...I'm not reading this post, because I am planning to read the books. I'll try to remember to come back later and read it.

  44. Oh yeah and I totally voted for SC - twice. Not because of the Twilight thing (really, I think your critique was well done) but well, she whined first and long and loud and I'm a sucker for that (ask my 4yo).

  45. WHAT?!! You voted for SC?!!!! That's it woman, I'm voting you OFF THE ISLAND.

    boo hoo

  46. Anonymous11:56 AM

    Not only haven't I read it, I've never heard of it.

    Thanks for saving me some time. In case, y'know, I ended up hearing about it. Sometime. Maybe.

  47. I found my group!!!

    I've read all three....and honestly have not decided if I'll read the next one (I'm sort of a series addict...and not reading a book in a series I started...even if I don't like it is difficult...puzzle that one out)

    BUT for the most part I didn't get Bella either. She was just kinda we were suppose to think her layered or some such.

    I kept waiting for something more to her Dad was really the head of a secret den of vampires here to over throw Edward and crew and Bella actually had powers that were way stronger then the holier then thou Edward. Cause he I really did NOT like. He just bugged me. A lot.

    But nope. nothing happened. For a good chunk of the book(s). Nothing happened accept Edward didn't kill her.


  48. I didn't hate the books, but I did feel like that I might like them more if I was 15. The decisions she made about her boyfriend, etc, etc were the kind of things that parents read and go "YIKES! Are you NUTS?" but teenagers read and go "wow, that is so brave and cool." KWIM? The tiny part of me that remembers what it is like to be 15 could relate..but they were kind of boring....

    Then again, I ever even saw Titanic because everyone was talking about it....

    WELCOME HOME! Is it wonderful to be back to your HOME? I doubt people think you are a flake. Wouldn't we all love to live where we love?

  49. Anonymous12:36 PM

    I SO AGREE with you one every point you made about Twilight. I thought maybe it was because of my age (53), but nice to know that younger folks think it sucks, too.

  50. I haven't even heard of the book...and in case I ever come across it and get the urge to read it...I thank you for saving me the $10.

  51. I just want to slap Bella! She has to be the most boring character in the history of literature! I too read all 3 books and OCD issues.

    Host sucked! The ending was a real let down...then after 2 blank pages the story continued...WTH! Here's my ending, but oh wait incase you didn't like it (Or think that it total sucks!) here's a TOTALLY different ending for you. If you're going to go for the sad ending atleast have the cahones to stand by it, NOT totally rewrite ANOTHER ending. (Not that I am upset about, not at all, but darn it that is 10 hours of my life that I will never get back)

    By the way, your Aspergers comment not so cool.

  52. I'm not kidding about the Aspergers. I really think Bella acts like someone who has it. It wasn't a joke.

    Are we so politically correct now that we can't even use the names of illnesses to describe people who exhibit the symptoms?

  53. Hm. I see what you're geting at with the Aspeger's, but I don't think it totally fits. Instead, I'd have to go with the earlier inner-ear disorder theory. Oh, and the extreme stupidity theory.

    I thought you'd get a kick out of this, the second response in particular:

  54. I've read all three books. I like them in a brain candy, relive teenage stupidity kind of way. I did not find bella to be inherently stupid, but rather saw her as an unhappy girl who finds herself getting attention and an extreme reaction from an extraordinary person for the first time. I think her response to Edward, while not "smart," is realistic and compelling. Come on, you never had a fatal attraction?

    I also didn't find edward to be stilted and boring. Maybe to like these books, you had to be the girl that i was in high school--the Sylvia Plath reading, black wearing, jock-and-cheerleader hating emo girl. I would have eaten Edward up with a spoon. Although I do love me some Jacob Black, now.

  55. Umm...I have Aspergers, as does my oldest son...I totally don't see it, but ok.

  56. I enjoyed them. I didn't LOVE them, but I enjoyed them. I think the reason is because they made me feel like I was fifteen again, only this time I could be clumsy and stupid and still have the hot guy lust after me. But then again, I ENJOYED being fifteen, so revisiting it wasn't bad for me. I agree with Bek's comment.

    (It's kind of like reading Pippi, did you ever read those books? How COOL! No parents! What a life! And then you read the books as an adult, and are like "WILL SOMEONE GET SOCIAL SERVICES OVER TO THAT HOUSE STAT!!!!")

    I do have issues, however, with the sleeping in the same bed every night and the cluelessness of both parents. Not just her father, her mother was practically a toddler who could be distracted with a cookie.

  57. have not read it. not interested in reading it. that's all. the end.

  58. I have to agree that you are off as far as Aspergers goes... my mom is a high functioning Aspie, (which Bella would have to be to go undiagnosed for so long)and while I know that the Syndrome manifests in MANY different ways for MANY people...


    But I will have to agree with you that there is something "non-neurologically-normal" about the girl. She lacks a "danger-danger-this-ain't-cool" button that most humans have... possibly one of two points that could be figured into an Aspergers diagnosis. The other point being her difficulty in telling when a guy is totally grooving (inability to read social cues)on her... example: Tyler, Jacob Black etc... But you need more than two simple points to call an Aspie.

    And speaking of Jacob Black... gosh! You haven't gotten to the REALLY annoying portions of the saga yet!

    All that said... I loved! loved! loved! Twilight!

  59. Oh... and as far as the "danger" portion relates to AS... it's not that an Aspie does not appreciate danger or dangerous situations once they understand them... it's simply that an Aspie may not be able to pick up danger cues (again social cues) as immediately as a NN (Neurological Normal) would be able to.

  60. Yeah. Grumble. Everything you said - just exactly the way you said it.

    Oh, wow! I just read some of the comments - and you're LDS!! I KNEW you were. HA!! And what makes me the maddest is that the significant fact about the author, that she's LDS makes the thing so TERRIBLY ironic.

  61. I'm embarassed to admit that I actually liked the books - all three of them and I'll probably read the 4th one as well.

    Why? I don't really know. I just liked them. I think one thing I liked was that Edward and his brothers were so protective of her. Jacob too. I like that in a man, probably because I never managed to attract that in a man - mine tend to be the "sink or swim" variety.

    That's why I like that movie Chain Reaction - Keanu Reeves is very protective of the girl in it (can't think of her name). I also liked that there could be cuddling without sex - how often does that happen any more, particularly in books?

    PS: Why is this a Relief Society thing? Is there some kind of Mormon connection in the book that I missed?

  62. That's IT, I'm on my way over with a flaming bag of poop for your doorstep.

  63. Mea culpa. Obviously, I know relatively nothing about Aspergers. Most of what I know comes from a friend who has a son who is very high functioning, but constantly walking into trouble because he has a situationally inappropriate sense of what is dangerous. He thinks he's made of iron, basically. And he has a hard time interpreting emotions. Those two things seemed to very much match Bella.

    So my point in saying she seemed like she had Aspergers was to say that she wasn't a character who had normal responses to emotion and danger.

    Also, just to be clear, I absolutely was not saying that people with Aspergers are annoying or dumb or stupid. I was saying I thought she might have had Aspergers AND she was annoying and dumb.

    You know what? Never mind. I take it back.

    I'm gonna go lie down now and ponder new and exciting ways to put my foot in my mouth.

  64. Wow, Rachel!

    Them's fightin' words!

    Sue, best post by far! Well, except for the ones that make me laugh so hard I pee a little.

    Seriously though, if these are "young adult" novels why are the only people I hear talking about them 35+?

  65. I'm closing comments guys. Thanks for playing.

  66. Sue, don't apologize. It's your blog, you can say whatever you want, and it was fairly clear to most of us that you weren't ripping on Aspergers.

    Now, if you were ripping on Harry Potter characters, I'd have to get all up in your business. As it is, I was really excited to see in one of your earlier comments that you're an HP fan. Brilliantly written is right!