Sexist Microaggressions

This doesn't really have anything to do with Twilight, but I wanted to share this with you guys. I found it valuable because of the Voices of Discovery group that I was in. We talked about microaggressions and how the subtle things that you say may unintentionally offend someone. Many of these microaggressions are founded in some sort of stereotype or ideal. In this example, he is talking about sexism. As it pertains to this class, I think that these microaggressions have become popular in our vernacular and within our culture. Is he being oversensitive, or bringing up a valid point? Has our culture simply become more "rude"? A couple hundred years ago, our society was all about the niceties of social graces. Now we've evolved to offensive phrases?  

Better Books?

In class yesterday, Dr. Lampert was talking about how she would sit down her child and have a talk with them about how Twilight is not a good example of a healthy relationship. A chance to clear the air and guide them towards better examples of heroines to find themselves in. I saw this post and it got me thinking. Yesterday we named some texts that were similar to Twilight.  Can you guys think of any romance books, specifically romance!!, that are better examples? A book that you find less fault with and that portrays a perfect, healthy relationship that isn't dumb? Or do we just associate most romance novels as dumb? There was the talk about liking Harry Potter, is that because, at least in the first book, there is no romance whatsoever?

Why I Fell Out Of Love With Twilight

     I’ll be the first one to admit that I’m a hopeless romantic. I love love stories. Yes, they’re generally shallow and definitely predictable. But, I don’t analyze them so much. I just read it. When I was younger, reading the books before the movies came out, I was in love with Twilight. I read New Moon in one day. (That was really hard to confess by the way.) Just like we talked about in class, I was young and besides the supernatural part, it was a love story. Being about 12 when I read the book, I didn't know what a love story was supposed to be in real life. I mean at that age how would it not be cool to imagine two guys fighting over your love?

     What changed me loving Twilight was the movie. Yes, I’ll agree that the more we talk about how boring the characters are and how the plot line is very unoriginal that the book would not be my first recommendation to someone. However, what really got me to fall out of love with the whole thing was how strange the acting appeared in the movie. I found this article called “10 Reasons People Hate Twilight,” and it mentioned the acting in the movie. The article described it as “everyone looks like they’re holding in a fart” which is actually true. (Here is a link to the article: http://reelmovienation.com/10-reasons-people-hate-twilight/)

     However, the article also points out something that I agree with but hadn't really thought about before. Everyone gave Kristen Stewart really bad reviews of how awkward she was acting as Bella in the movie. However, I don’t think Kristen Stewart is really that bad of an actress. If we think about how Bella is supposed to be in the book: clumsy, awkward, average looking, a little whiny, and somewhat passive, Kristen Stewart didn't play the part badly. (She may have overdone the awkward part a little.) I think people, including me, were upset with it because how could two guys be fighting over someone THAT awkward?

     I think the biggest problem for me was that the acting in the movie was just not what I was expecting it to be. The characters didn't act or even look how I had imagined them. I also think the movie makes it even clearer that the plot line of the book is really shallow because the movie is rather boring to watch.

Team Oz or Team Jacob

Since I brought up the Buffy comparison earlier, I decided to look through some commonalities between the two and see what Buffy fans thought of Twilight.

The comparison between Oz and Jacob was hilarious. First of all, I find Seth Green funny and a little funny looking...in a cute goofy way. But in Buffy, Oz is this tiny indie/rock boy with bright red hair who can also eat your face off if not caged up. Jacob, on the other hand, is tall, dark and disgustingly beautiful. Jacob is ripped and often shown shirtless protecting the girl he is in love with (not shirtless in the books obviously). Yet some how they are both set up to be objects of desire? In fact! Oz gets two girls and Jacob doesn't get any! ...Well until he strangely imprints on Bella's daughter and that somehow explains the years of infatuation prior...but anyway I really enjoyed this comparison.

Twilight 2.0

Mostly because I love it, below is the link to A Bad Lip Reading of Twilight. I think these videos are hilarious, but this is just one form of parody that emerged after Twilight's immense popularity. In fact, someone made an entire movie (Vampires Suck) dedicated to ridiculing Twilight. Maybe it's just because it is easy, but the sheer amount of videos or comedy sketches making fun of this novel and subsequent movie is astonishing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmxSk0wZxss

Why Twilight sucks

I have been thinking about this question for the past couple of days. Why exactly is Twilight hated so much? Yes, the writing is pretty bad, but it is also written for much younger women than college-level. Personally, I do not view Twilight as necessarily bad; I view it as something that did not provide any sort of substance or stimulation that we were looking for. I think this is where the Harry Potter comparison comes in. People really enjoyed Harry Potter because they felt that it had more substance and felt that it broke some of the conventional writings of the time. Twilight was just a normal love story of a hopeless and weak high school girl that found love where she least expected it. Harry Potter, on the other hand, went deeper than the conventional love story. It had a much deeper-rooted storyline that kept the reader coming back for more.

In addition, there is no substance to the characters; Bella and Edward seem so incredibly boring to be around. We want to read about characters with personalities, not someone that is special because she “smells good” or because Edward cannot read her mind. Harry Potter has many more likeable characters that young people can relate to and support. For example, Hermoine is the nerdy, sassy girl, Ron is the poor kid where everything seems to go wrong, Harry Potter is the ultimate protagonist with different layers to his story.  In Twilight, however, there is Bella, a shy, pale girl who moves to a new town. There is also Edward, who is mysterious….and really hot. Neither of which really develops a personality deeper than what is presented in the first 20 pages of the book. They are basically people in the book that are doing things, the reader does not have the ability for form a good personal connection with the characters.

Of course, there are other reasons people have their issues with Twilight; these are just a few of my issues. I understand the point of the story is to keep some of the characters mysterious, but you also need to help the reader to develop a relationship and proper understanding of the character. The readers were looking for some more substance from the plot line and characters that they ultimately did not get.

Anti-Nothing?

I get that as students, especially students in the honors program, we are taught to think critically and analyze pretty much everything. I understand that doing these things is important, however, I often find myself wondering if we overanalyze and search for some deep analytic meaning in things so much that we miss what the true intentions actually are. Why is taking something just for what it is not enough?

In the case of Twilight, why can’t it just be a book that involves a forbidden love story with some supernatural stuff thrown in? Why can’t it just be a book that people found entertaining? Why does it have to turn into a book that is potentially anti feminist or anti catholic or anti (insert whatever other thing people try to argue it is)?

Okay so yes, I do think that there are some parts of the book that portray anti-feminist ideals, like how Bella seems like the only person who cooks and cleans in her home, but I also think that there are some parts that support feminist ideals, like how Bella doesn’t listen to everyone who tells her to not see Edward, like her own father. Even so, I do not think that the true intentions of Stephanie Meyer were to create a book that was either anti feminist or feminist.  I think she just had a crazy dream and decided to write it down.  Yes, I think that the book clearly is influenced by her religion, but if any of us were to write a novel, I’m sure some of our own biases would end up in the book as well.  Thus, I think Twilight is just what it is.  It is a love story with vampires and werewolves, and maybe there are some parts that can be analyzed and taken to mean something grand, but that doesn’t mean that we have to go there. In fact, I think that when you tear something apart, you are simply setting it up for disaster. When tearing something apart, you are going to find something to pick at, whether it is there or not. You are going to find a way to make an argument by twisting the words of the novel because they are just words, and interpreting the meaning of words is basically up to the reader. Thus, Twilight could mean a variety of different things and none of those things are necessary right or wrong. The truth is that despite being “dumb”, Twilight was still popular. Why was it popular? Because it’s simply a love story with vampires and werewolves that young readers could relate to, and probably mostly because it was marketed effectively to that group of readers.

I know I might get some flack for this, and I welcome it! I just think that sometimes we get so caught up in being critical and making things complex that we forget what it is like to think simplistically.