Actually, people might already be losing sight of good authors.

I once mentioned Charlotte Brontë to a friend of mine and he asked me if she was a football player.

>>;

What did I find? It fed the fantasy that all woman have. I don’t care if your 100. We all hoped, probably were dissappointed and in the process of life dissappointed someone in the area of romance, to find an Edward.

In the last book I had become a little tired of him as he just did not seem to be able to say, “Thats it baby, I am out of here.” Too much long suffering for me… but the first book…hmmm.

I have to admit it did kindle the old memories of being a young girl in high school and wishing with all my heart that Jud would look at me like he did this chick named Debbie.

I saw the movie Twilight first (my daughter and sister-in-law watched it on the computer – so I tarried and watched also) before I read the book. It is romance, getting what we never think we will have in life and then losing it, getting in back… thrasy… can’t go that far… just ole want what I can’t have, got it, now what do I do with it…do I want him really, or do I want him (the other guy)…

I love the first part, anticipation is always sweet.

M

But I wish to strike this horse at a slightly different angle.

I’m currently writing with hopes of submission early 2010, and a recent article in Writer’s Digest came out with some interest to me: their annual shortlist of agents actively seeking new writers.

Like half of ’em wanted paranormal romance.

I have no problem realizing the dangers of letting this dog which is Twilight loose upon the teenage girls of our morally and religiously ambiguous country. And I also have no problem realizing, that yes, Stephenie Meyer accomplished something. Personally, I think there is some (an itty bitty “some) literary merit to Twilight, even if that only amounted to say five out of five hundred pages.

What I have a problem with is what it’s doing to the market.

Knockoffs and imitations and a flood of the reawakened genre have filled the shelves at my local Sam’s Club and Walmart (the closest things to bookstores I have en route right now), and I want to know:

Where is this going?

Can a book being a self-capsulated fantasy adventure (that is, no connection with the real world) without romance of any kind, possibly set a new trend in the market? Can any sword cut the veins of this vampire artery? Is it a matter of originality or relate-ability?

Just seems such a shame.

Your daughters are fortunate to have parents who teach them what to look out for – not all girls are that lucky (if I had daughters I wouldn’t stop them reading the books, for the same reasons you mention). For a lot of girls, though, in less stable families, the messages they’re getting from books and films and their peers are the messages they use to make decisions about relationships. And in that sense, it doesn’t matter that Edward’s a vampire – what they see is a guy obsessed with a girl, and everyone finding it romantic. That’s what squiffs me out.

However, when they are old enough to read Twilight and want to, I will allow them to (although Breaking Dawn may have to wait until at least 17!). Why? Because hopefully by then I will have taught them enough to have those values instilled in them and they will be able to handle a story about an emotionally controlling vampire.

That’s the one thing that saves Edward: he’s a vampire, not just Joe Shmoe who lives down the street. He does what he does (purportedly) because he’s so not human. And as a vampire, he is not held by the traditional boundaries of humans. That is the major difference, to me, between an abusive boyfriend and an obsessive vampire.

So, while I totally agree on the abuse issue, and there are plenty of girls who read Twilight without having a strong base for who they are and what their expectations of men should be, I still think the story has some good in it. Edward may have tendencies to be all that you said (if you read into it that way), but I think you’ve overlooked an amazingly romantic thing: he holds her virginity as something almost sacred, and doesn’t want to take advantage of her, and wants to wait until they are 100% fully committed to each other.

That is something that a LOT of guys could learn from, and for those who HAVE been sexually abused or taken advantage of (most women I know have been in some way), Edward’s protection, respect and restraint are HIGHLY desireable.

Just sayin…

That is emotional abuse, and in real life it only escalates if the girl allows it. My problem with the books is that they portray these behaviors as soooo romantic, gestures that prove his true love for her. It makes me so angry that we are sending a message to our girls that these things are okay, even desirable, in a romantic relationship.

I don’t say it’s an antifeminist agenda (I don’t think Stephenie Meyer has an agenda!), but it sends messages that are harmful to women, suggesting that Edward’s behavior is romantic rather than abusive, and that’s antifeminist. We should be teaching girls about how to avoid abusive relationships, not assuring them that emotionally abusers are the ones that truly truly love them.

And where is the anti-feminist agenda? The Twilight saga a silly story of a love-struck girl who has some of her own obsessive-compulsive disorders. Is some of it weird? Is Breaking Dawn disturbing? Yes, but could the reader possibly come away thinking, “I hate Bella and never want to be like her! She is so weak and easily controlled by her hormones!” therefore learning something entirely opposite any supposed agenda against the rights of women? Is it a commentary on anything else? No. It’s not deep enough to be.

Personally, Bella bugs the crap out of me–I think she’s ridiculous. I think a lot of people agree. But girls love a knight in shining armor that is willing to do ANYTHING to make his lady love happy. Even if it is a fantasy and ridiculously flawed, they (we) still like it, don’t we?