Alright, alright, I know it's been a long time and my public has been waiting, but for whatever reason I either couldn't think of anything to write or just couldn't be bothered - or both. The inspiration for this comes from my friend's latest blog post (that makes it sound like she's the only friend I have, doesn't it?), situated here: qwengst.livejournal.com/ I couldn't think of a damn thing to write, so I picked that - and I can't write about random BS (can I swear on here? Does it make my blog PG if I do?) like cats sitting in trees with frogs or whatever other weird stuff they do on LJ. No; when I write anything it has to be about a relevant and profound topic, which is why I am now going to knock, slag and thoroughly charcoal-burn the fangirly Twilight series and the whole 'romantic vampire' culture that has spawned it. Am I jumping on a bandwagon? Probably. Is it fun to jump on bandwagons? Hell yeah. ^_^
Now, before I start: NO, I HAVE NOT READ EVEN ONE BOOK OF THE TWILIGHT SERIES. However, if you're gonna use that single fact to dismiss anything I might say below, then I counterargue that you're being unreasonable, reactionary and prejudiced. Just because I haven't read the series and don't 'get' (huge air-quotes) it in the same heartfelt way as you do, and I don't 'GET' (even bigger air-quotes) exactly why Edward is sexy (and worthy of ravishing me in my lonely bedroom in the middle of the night in some teenage schoolgirl fantasy), that does not mean that I am therefore unqualified to comment on this topic. I'm a student of English Literature and a writer in my spare time, beotches (that's a euphemism, not an actual swearword, so I can use it... I think), so I think I am entitled to theorise on why the Twilight series doesn't deserve the praise it has got.
Yes, that's right: it deserves some praise. However, the way that its popularity has recently spiralled out of control a la Harry Potter is, quite frankly, obscene. How do I know this? For a start, I have heard about it. Take pause and think about this for a moment. I do not consider myself at all 'hip' with anything that's going in any scene (except perhaps nerdy stuff and videogaming, but that don't apply here), so for any cultural phenomena to pervade so far through our society that it actually reaches my ears means it must have quite an insidious grip on the zeitgeist of today (for those who don't know what that word means: go look it up).
'But why,' you ask, 'do you loathe Twilight so?' Unless of course you're a rabid fangirl, in which case you've either switched to another webpage in disgust or are now systematically planning my painful and humiliating assassination. Well, I have several reasons, which I shall discuss (for your benefit - don't say I never did you any favours) in point form below, split up with shiny dividers of my own devising that look like this: -x-
Number One.
I find it rather disturbing that a book which is so obviously sexist could possibly have such a large female following (don't argue with me on this point: every single person I have heard talking about it was most incontrovertibly a girl... except myself, but then I was the sole voice against). I mean, think about it: it just couldn't be the girl who was the vampire, could it?
Imagine the situation: Stephenie Meyer (yay, Wikipedia) goes to the publishers with the idea for a story in which a shy boy moves to a new town and there meets a vampire girl taken from his deepest, darkest, romantic-est dreams who then sweeps him off his feet with her forbidden/cursed/dark/evil/misunderstood-t
The publishers would instantly kick her out of the building without so much as a second look. She would be branded a rabid feminist and ordered to go home and slave away in the kitchen where she belongs and learn her proper place in society as a weakling female.
However, Ms Meyer was smarter than that. Oh yes. She realised that the best way to get a book published as a female author was by tipping her cap to the establishment and writing the male as the dominant partner. But then, that's the whole point, is it not? That's why this series is so adored by fangirls everywhere: because it tells them what they want to hear. Whatever these fangirls may say, below the surface the story is quite a different one. They have been indoctrinated by the dominant ideology of today's society, accepting at an unconscious level that their only true purpose is to serve as baby factories and household slaves for the patriarchal hegemony.
Alright, so Bella's not the vampire, but Meyer could at least have redeemed herself by giving Bella a few dominant traits which might make her, if not dominant, then at least Edward's romantic equal. But no. Bella is an absolute milksop. She's shy, passive, subservient and, let's face it - PATHETIC. What a vampire could possibly see in a weakling human like her I have no idea...
Part: The Two
The first part was about the representation of females. So, what other representation is there in Ms. Meyer's books that I could take exception to? Yes, you've guessed it (if you haven't, take a closer look at the title): these new, soppy, romantic, VEGETARIAN vampires.
And before you start saying 'Vampires don't even exist so what're you getting all riled up about?', think for a minute about what role the vampire plays when part of a couple. The vampire is the quintessential badboy (It just couldn't be a girl, could it? Sexism is everywhere, people!): it is a pariah living outside society, forced to do so because of its dangerous ways and the rumours generated about it in 'acceptable' society. The vampire isn't an entirely fictional character: if anything it represents the social outcast par excellence.
What happened to the good ol' days of vampirism, eh? The days when it was perfectly cool for vampires to rip out people's throats and treat humans with the impunity normally accorded to toys. Unfortunately, it would appear that the heyday of vampires is past: nowadays all people seem to want to hear about is the new, squeaky-clean version of vampires, tailor-made to be acceptable to today's audience. How completely and utterly BORING.
Stephanie Meyer says that the apple on the cover of the actual Twilight novel (as opposed to the series) is symbolic of the forbidden fruit that is the relationship between Bella and Edward.
...
Sorry about the gap: I had to be rushed to hospital due to a suspected busted gut after laughing at that statement. On the scale of evil fictional characters, Edward rests somewhere between Jesus and, let's say, Bambi. He is about as intimidating as a baby wearing a vampire-bat babygro. The old-school vampires like Dracula and Nosferatu wouldn't be seen undead around Edward. I think you get the point I make.
May I just ask: WHAT IS THE *POINT* OF A *VEGETARIAN* VA
Edward Cullen does not deserve the right to call himself a vampire. Alright, so he was born a vampire and wants no part of their dark heritage, which I suppose is understandable, but then at least, at the very least, he could use his powers for good, like so many other otherwise dark and tormented superbeings have done in the past (Blade springs to mind, for some reason...). Instead, poor old Eddy is having the same troubles as any human adolescent male, whining about his angst to a clingy girlfriend instead of coming to terms with his identity as a reformed vampire and turning his powers intended for evil to a new, better cause. If you're gonna defy your evil side, then go all the way: don't waste your time vacillating in the middle. There's nothing powerful, dynamic or, when you get right down to it, sexy about Ms. Meyer's vampires. Yes, so he can stop a van with one hand, but then Edward is also prey to having his legs turned to jelly the first time he sees his future squeeze (with whom he is gonna settle down and marry and have a big happy family with LOTS of children). I must be forced to end this part in a familiar format: what the fangirls see in these new romantic vampires is completely lost on me.
However, the thing that really infuriates me about what would otherwise be a mundane and little-known fangirl novel is that it has become so astoundingly popular. Yes, I am aware of the irony present in me writing about how much I hate the popularity of something and in the very same act contributing to its insidious invasion into the hearts and minds of our people.
I suppose you could say, as an aspiring novelist, I'm jealous of Ms. Meyer's success and hate her guts because of it (she's next on my hitlist right after J. K. Rollinginit). You could even say that I hate the books because I'm afraid that, should I read them, I will have my heart broken when Ms. Meyer writes a sequel so abysmally awful that it reduces the series from just stinking a bit to the Realms of Ultimate Sucktitude, much as Rowling did to Harry Potter. (By the way, for all those who ever wondered, the 'J. K.' part of her name stands for 'Just Kidding', as in: 'OH TEH NO3Z! DUMBLEDORE'S DEAD! - J. K.')
You could say all (well, both) these things, and you'd be absolutely right. And that, ultimately, is the real reason why I hate authors of her ilk. Alright, so she wrote a tolerably good story - tolerably. However, here I am, coming up with all these wizard ideas for stories, and lacking the single thing that Meyer has which I don't: the discipline to sit down and actually finish writing a novel.
And so the layers unfurl... You probably thought my ultimate reason for hating the series was gonna be something profound and greatly insightful; some deep and astute indictment of society today, didn't you? Well, if you did, you're wrong. Basically, it comes down to me wanting to be rich and famous for having my novels made into wildly successful movies, and when I become famous I'm gonna look back down at you puny people writing jealous criticisms of my work and LAAAAUUUUGH my ass off.
Writing this has filled me with hate. Think I might go and put on my turtleneck...
Now, before I start: NO, I HAVE NOT READ EVEN ONE BOOK OF THE TWILIGHT SERIES. However, if you're gonna use that single fact to dismiss anything I might say below, then I counterargue that you're being unreasonable, reactionary and prejudiced. Just because I haven't read the series and don't 'get' (huge air-quotes) it in the same heartfelt way as you do, and I don't 'GET' (even bigger air-quotes) exactly why Edward is sexy (and worthy of ravishing me in my lonely bedroom in the middle of the night in some teenage schoolgirl fantasy), that does not mean that I am therefore unqualified to comment on this topic. I'm a student of English Literature and a writer in my spare time, beotches (that's a euphemism, not an actual swearword, so I can use it... I think), so I think I am entitled to theorise on why the Twilight series doesn't deserve the praise it has got.
Yes, that's right: it deserves some praise. However, the way that its popularity has recently spiralled out of control a la Harry Potter is, quite frankly, obscene. How do I know this? For a start, I have heard about it. Take pause and think about this for a moment. I do not consider myself at all 'hip' with anything that's going in any scene (except perhaps nerdy stuff and videogaming, but that don't apply here), so for any cultural phenomena to pervade so far through our society that it actually reaches my ears means it must have quite an insidious grip on the zeitgeist of today (for those who don't know what that word means: go look it up).
'But why,' you ask, 'do you loathe Twilight so?' Unless of course you're a rabid fangirl, in which case you've either switched to another webpage in disgust or are now systematically planning my painful and humiliating assassination. Well, I have several reasons, which I shall discuss (for your benefit - don't say I never did you any favours) in point form below, split up with shiny dividers of my own devising that look like this: -x-
-x-
Number One.
I find it rather disturbing that a book which is so obviously sexist could possibly have such a large female following (don't argue with me on this point: every single person I have heard talking about it was most incontrovertibly a girl... except myself, but then I was the sole voice against). I mean, think about it: it just couldn't be the girl who was the vampire, could it?
Imagine the situation: Stephenie Meyer (yay, Wikipedia) goes to the publishers with the idea for a story in which a shy boy moves to a new town and there meets a vampire girl taken from his deepest, darkest, romantic-est dreams who then sweeps him off his feet with her forbidden/cursed/dark/evil/misunderstood-t
The publishers would instantly kick her out of the building without so much as a second look. She would be branded a rabid feminist and ordered to go home and slave away in the kitchen where she belongs and learn her proper place in society as a weakling female.
However, Ms Meyer was smarter than that. Oh yes. She realised that the best way to get a book published as a female author was by tipping her cap to the establishment and writing the male as the dominant partner. But then, that's the whole point, is it not? That's why this series is so adored by fangirls everywhere: because it tells them what they want to hear. Whatever these fangirls may say, below the surface the story is quite a different one. They have been indoctrinated by the dominant ideology of today's society, accepting at an unconscious level that their only true purpose is to serve as baby factories and household slaves for the patriarchal hegemony.
Alright, so Bella's not the vampire, but Meyer could at least have redeemed herself by giving Bella a few dominant traits which might make her, if not dominant, then at least Edward's romantic equal. But no. Bella is an absolute milksop. She's shy, passive, subservient and, let's face it - PATHETIC. What a vampire could possibly see in a weakling human like her I have no idea...
-x-
Part: The Two
The first part was about the representation of females. So, what other representation is there in Ms. Meyer's books that I could take exception to? Yes, you've guessed it (if you haven't, take a closer look at the title): these new, soppy, romantic, VEGETARIAN vampires.
And before you start saying 'Vampires don't even exist so what're you getting all riled up about?', think for a minute about what role the vampire plays when part of a couple. The vampire is the quintessential badboy (It just couldn't be a girl, could it? Sexism is everywhere, people!): it is a pariah living outside society, forced to do so because of its dangerous ways and the rumours generated about it in 'acceptable' society. The vampire isn't an entirely fictional character: if anything it represents the social outcast par excellence.
What happened to the good ol' days of vampirism, eh? The days when it was perfectly cool for vampires to rip out people's throats and treat humans with the impunity normally accorded to toys. Unfortunately, it would appear that the heyday of vampires is past: nowadays all people seem to want to hear about is the new, squeaky-clean version of vampires, tailor-made to be acceptable to today's audience. How completely and utterly BORING.
Stephanie Meyer says that the apple on the cover of the actual Twilight novel (as opposed to the series) is symbolic of the forbidden fruit that is the relationship between Bella and Edward.
...
Sorry about the gap: I had to be rushed to hospital due to a suspected busted gut after laughing at that statement. On the scale of evil fictional characters, Edward rests somewhere between Jesus and, let's say, Bambi. He is about as intimidating as a baby wearing a vampire-bat babygro. The old-school vampires like Dracula and Nosferatu wouldn't be seen undead around Edward. I think you get the point I make.
May I just ask: WHAT IS THE *POINT* OF A *VEGETARIAN* VA
Edward Cullen does not deserve the right to call himself a vampire. Alright, so he was born a vampire and wants no part of their dark heritage, which I suppose is understandable, but then at least, at the very least, he could use his powers for good, like so many other otherwise dark and tormented superbeings have done in the past (Blade springs to mind, for some reason...). Instead, poor old Eddy is having the same troubles as any human adolescent male, whining about his angst to a clingy girlfriend instead of coming to terms with his identity as a reformed vampire and turning his powers intended for evil to a new, better cause. If you're gonna defy your evil side, then go all the way: don't waste your time vacillating in the middle. There's nothing powerful, dynamic or, when you get right down to it, sexy about Ms. Meyer's vampires. Yes, so he can stop a van with one hand, but then Edward is also prey to having his legs turned to jelly the first time he sees his future squeeze (with whom he is gonna settle down and marry and have a big happy family with LOTS of children). I must be forced to end this part in a familiar format: what the fangirls see in these new romantic vampires is completely lost on me.
-x-
The Trilogy-MakerHowever, the thing that really infuriates me about what would otherwise be a mundane and little-known fangirl novel is that it has become so astoundingly popular. Yes, I am aware of the irony present in me writing about how much I hate the popularity of something and in the very same act contributing to its insidious invasion into the hearts and minds of our people.
I suppose you could say, as an aspiring novelist, I'm jealous of Ms. Meyer's success and hate her guts because of it (she's next on my hitlist right after J. K. Rollinginit). You could even say that I hate the books because I'm afraid that, should I read them, I will have my heart broken when Ms. Meyer writes a sequel so abysmally awful that it reduces the series from just stinking a bit to the Realms of Ultimate Sucktitude, much as Rowling did to Harry Potter. (By the way, for all those who ever wondered, the 'J. K.' part of her name stands for 'Just Kidding', as in: 'OH TEH NO3Z! DUMBLEDORE'S DEAD! - J. K.')
You could say all (well, both) these things, and you'd be absolutely right. And that, ultimately, is the real reason why I hate authors of her ilk. Alright, so she wrote a tolerably good story - tolerably. However, here I am, coming up with all these wizard ideas for stories, and lacking the single thing that Meyer has which I don't: the discipline to sit down and actually finish writing a novel.
And so the layers unfurl... You probably thought my ultimate reason for hating the series was gonna be something profound and greatly insightful; some deep and astute indictment of society today, didn't you? Well, if you did, you're wrong. Basically, it comes down to me wanting to be rich and famous for having my novels made into wildly successful movies, and when I become famous I'm gonna look back down at you puny people writing jealous criticisms of my work and LAAAAUUUUGH my ass off.
Writing this has filled me with hate. Think I might go and put on my turtleneck...
- Location:My hate-filled palace of spikes and blood and dark and...
- Mood:
No 'vampiric': 'emo' instead. - Music:I dunno - heavy metal, probably.
How the Hell did that title know what I was gonna write about before I did?! Ah well...
Anyway: yes, I have made a decision. And what is it, I hear you cry? Surely a person skilled in the art of succinct wordsmithing would have got to the point by now and told us what the big deal is about? Yes, well, that person is not me. I am not in the least skilled at being succinct: my talent lies in meandering on for ages about pointless or trivial details. See what I mean?
The decision that I have made is this. That is to say, I have made a decision to do something that I will now mention. Which is: since I can't seem to be bothered to keep a diary in the real world, I will try and keep it on LiveJournal. (What is up with this website trend of sticking two words together? I mean seriously: LiveJournal, YouTube, Facebook... and probably a few others, but I can't be bothered to think of them right now. Quizilla, probably. But then again that's not really two words: that's just one word stuck to the beginning of the end half of another word. Although '-zilla' has become an acceptable suffix these days for anything that is huge, reptilian, scaly, monstrous, etc. See how much I meander?)
The principal causes of me making this decision were two things, the first of which I've forgotten. I know there were two things, but I can only remember one thing. I'm not even very sure that that one thing is the first or second thing, but I think it's probably the second thing. Although I don't know for sure. Anyways.
I went to see Quantum of Solace recently, just like every other Homo Sapiens on Earth (I still hold that we should change the species name to Homo Sentiens - I see no reason why we should be so proud about being wise, which we aren't, whereas I think we could just about prove that we feel). General consensus seems to be that it was nowhere near as good as the first movie, and I was inclined to agree - at first.
I got the feeling that everybody was simply jumping on the critical bandwagon so that they could be counted 'right'. However, I wish to remind everyone that simply being in the majority does not make you correct. I think I also know the reason why people did not enjoy Daniel Craig's second rendition of Bond, for a very simple reason: it was the second time. It had, by that time, lost its novelty. The first time Craig took up the mantle of the Big Bond Man (yeah, I wrote that), everyone was impressed - as was I - by how much 'realism' he brought to the role: whereas the previous Bond, played by Monsieur Brosnan, counted entirely on the repertoire of gadgets given to him by John Cleese, Craig's Bond actually relies on his own simple handgun, cunning and - let's face it - brute strength to get him out of the many sticky situations he inevitably falls into. The beginning of Casino Royale definitely brought it home to us that this Bond was, under his refined yet raffish exterior, capable of being a complete thug when required - and yet, I am very pleased to note, he doesn't seem to treat women in quite the same way as the previous Bonds do: twice now Craig's Bond has been seen cradling a woman in distress and giving her emotional support, in the second instance leaving her without even having given the bed a good workout (gasp!).
Sorry, I got lost playing a game. And I should be playing homework. (Damn!) Yeah, that's right; playing homework, 'cuz I'm a playah! I play everything I do, even when it's work, and therefore by definition not play! I am just that awesome, homiez. (I hate it when I make mistakes.)
I don't know what it is about me, but as soon as I'm distracted by anything (and I do mean anything) I suddenly find myself reluctant in the extreme to do homework. I don't know what it is about me. I'm quite a good student in other respects: quiet, courteous, a good listener, good at writing and deductive reasoning and analysis and all that rot - but when it comes down to actually doing the work in my own time, unfortunately you shall find me rather lacking in that department. Hell, every second I spend writing this is a second I'm not doing homework. This might not be so bad if my mind wasn't burned with a brand every time I remember that I haven't done it. I feel seriously guilty about it. So I suppose I'd better do it. Except. Uh...
I think about it, and the more I think about it, the more I decide I don't want to do it. The worst way of deciding to do something is by thinking about it - then you start to consider all the things that could go wrong with it (or I do, anyway, because I hate being judged). I find the best way to do something is by just stopping in the middle of whatever sentence you're writing and just
Anyway: yes, I have made a decision. And what is it, I hear you cry? Surely a person skilled in the art of succinct wordsmithing would have got to the point by now and told us what the big deal is about? Yes, well, that person is not me. I am not in the least skilled at being succinct: my talent lies in meandering on for ages about pointless or trivial details. See what I mean?
The decision that I have made is this. That is to say, I have made a decision to do something that I will now mention. Which is: since I can't seem to be bothered to keep a diary in the real world, I will try and keep it on LiveJournal. (What is up with this website trend of sticking two words together? I mean seriously: LiveJournal, YouTube, Facebook... and probably a few others, but I can't be bothered to think of them right now. Quizilla, probably. But then again that's not really two words: that's just one word stuck to the beginning of the end half of another word. Although '-zilla' has become an acceptable suffix these days for anything that is huge, reptilian, scaly, monstrous, etc. See how much I meander?)
The principal causes of me making this decision were two things, the first of which I've forgotten. I know there were two things, but I can only remember one thing. I'm not even very sure that that one thing is the first or second thing, but I think it's probably the second thing. Although I don't know for sure. Anyways.
I went to see Quantum of Solace recently, just like every other Homo Sapiens on Earth (I still hold that we should change the species name to Homo Sentiens - I see no reason why we should be so proud about being wise, which we aren't, whereas I think we could just about prove that we feel). General consensus seems to be that it was nowhere near as good as the first movie, and I was inclined to agree - at first.
I got the feeling that everybody was simply jumping on the critical bandwagon so that they could be counted 'right'. However, I wish to remind everyone that simply being in the majority does not make you correct. I think I also know the reason why people did not enjoy Daniel Craig's second rendition of Bond, for a very simple reason: it was the second time. It had, by that time, lost its novelty. The first time Craig took up the mantle of the Big Bond Man (yeah, I wrote that), everyone was impressed - as was I - by how much 'realism' he brought to the role: whereas the previous Bond, played by Monsieur Brosnan, counted entirely on the repertoire of gadgets given to him by John Cleese, Craig's Bond actually relies on his own simple handgun, cunning and - let's face it - brute strength to get him out of the many sticky situations he inevitably falls into. The beginning of Casino Royale definitely brought it home to us that this Bond was, under his refined yet raffish exterior, capable of being a complete thug when required - and yet, I am very pleased to note, he doesn't seem to treat women in quite the same way as the previous Bonds do: twice now Craig's Bond has been seen cradling a woman in distress and giving her emotional support, in the second instance leaving her without even having given the bed a good workout (gasp!).
Sorry, I got lost playing a game. And I should be playing homework. (Damn!) Yeah, that's right; playing homework, 'cuz I'm a playah! I play everything I do, even when it's work, and therefore by definition not play! I am just that awesome, homiez. (I hate it when I make mistakes.)
I don't know what it is about me, but as soon as I'm distracted by anything (and I do mean anything) I suddenly find myself reluctant in the extreme to do homework. I don't know what it is about me. I'm quite a good student in other respects: quiet, courteous, a good listener, good at writing and deductive reasoning and analysis and all that rot - but when it comes down to actually doing the work in my own time, unfortunately you shall find me rather lacking in that department. Hell, every second I spend writing this is a second I'm not doing homework. This might not be so bad if my mind wasn't burned with a brand every time I remember that I haven't done it. I feel seriously guilty about it. So I suppose I'd better do it. Except. Uh...
I think about it, and the more I think about it, the more I decide I don't want to do it. The worst way of deciding to do something is by thinking about it - then you start to consider all the things that could go wrong with it (or I do, anyway, because I hate being judged). I find the best way to do something is by just stopping in the middle of whatever sentence you're writing and just
- Location:Sitting on a chair. Extremely comfortable, really.
- Mood:
chipper - Music:I don't have time for music! I'm doing homework!
Profile
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
strangely_blue- Kazuaki Ieuan Roach
Syndicate
