Content Note: Fainting, Falling, Disordered EatingTwilight
Recap: Mike has reiterated his invitation that Bella join him this weekend down at the beach.Twilight, Chapter 5: Blood Type
"See you," I replied. He looked at me once more, his round face slightly pouting, and then as he walked slowly through the door, his shoulders slumped. A swell of sympathy washed over me. I pondered seeing his disappointed face again . . . in Gym.
I'm pleased to see here that Bella is not the only one described in the narrative as pouting: apparently Mike can pout with the best of them. It's a small victory, but I'll take it. It's also interesting to me that -- if we believe the narrative -- a "swell of sympathy" is washing over Bella with regards to Mike.
I'm not sure that we can believe the narrative. A major problem with this assertion of Bella's sympathy is the "show-and-tell" problem, by which I mean that it's simply not enough to tell the reader that Bella is feeling sympathetic -- we have to actually see Bella be at least a little sympathetic to Mike in her actions and/or internal monologue. The description of Mike's exit -- his pouting round face, his slumping shoulders, his slow gallows trudge -- is so heavily caricaturized as to almost preclude sympathy. If anything, it feels like Bella feels sorry for Mike because he is so very buffoonish, which is not really very genuine or endearing sympathy.
However! Let's pretend that the narrative means us to take this statement serious, that Bella really is feeling genuine sympathy for poor Mike. What can we take from this?
Well, for one, either the sympathy is "too little, too late" or it is expressed so spartanly here that this sudden, new-found sympathy for Mike doesn't redeem Bella from the overall characterization that many readers take away of her being negative and highly censorious of others in her thoughts. So if this assertion of sympathy is meant to soften Bella to the reader and convey a sort of neutral gosh, I sure am glad I ended up with the REALLY handsome-rich guy and not just the MOSTLY handsome-rich guy, but I feel sympathy that there's not enough of me to go around tone, then it seems not to do the trick: Bella still feels negative because of the previously-mentioned narrative caricature of Mike.
I find it telling that this is one of the few times in the story so far that Bella has expressed sympathy for anyone. At my best recollection, the only other time I can remember Bella feeling sorry for anyone besides herself was when she was contemplating the newly-noticed Cullens and thinking how hard it must be to live in a rural town where people look askance at you for dating your adopted sister. That was probably forty pages ago, and between then and now we've seen Tyler banged up and seriously injured in the hospital and we've seen Jessica's heart nearly broken by Mike's preference for Bella, but it's only now that we're seeing Bella feel genuinely sympathetic to someone. Why?
I think the text is trying to underline the idea that Mike deserves sympathy, that he really did have some kind of claim on Bella, whether it be "first-dibs" or his local social status (which would appear to be greater than that of the outcast Cullens, but in actuality is not) or his willingness to take Bella to the nurse just now. I think we're expected to buy in to rape culture narratives where Bella is a "prize" to be fought over between the boys and which should go to the "best" player. Bella's sympathy in this context strikes me less as a piece of characterization and more of a narrative commentary signaling that Bella has effectively passed from Mike's imminent ownership to Edward's de facto control. And that Mike deserves sympathy for being so unexpectedly preempted in his courtship attempts.
"Gym," I groaned.
"I can take care of that." I hadn't noticed Edward moving to my side, but he spoke now in my ear. "Go sit down and look pale," he muttered.
That wasn't a challenge; I was always pale, and my recent swoon had left a light sheen of sweat on my face. I sat in one of the creaky folding chairs and rested my head against the wall with my eyes closed. Fainting spells always exhausted me.
Well, of course Bella faints regularly enough that she can tell us that fainting spells "always" exhaust her, implying a degree of regularity and banality to the event. She's a Delicate Heroine, so in addition to falling flat on her face every couple of minutes, she also faints at the drop of a hat. /snark
Which isn't to say that I'm mocking fainting. I've fainted several times myself, due to medication conflicts, and it's pretty much completely un-fun and definitely not a laughing matter. And it's very possible that whatever mysterious disease causes Bella to trip and fall constantly while still being able to parallel park perfectly is additionally responsible for her fainting spells. So far be it from me to poke fun at Bella merely for having a disability.
But the thing is, I don't think we're meant to read this as Bella being seriously ill and/or disabled. I think Bella's casual mention of fainting is supposed to signal to the reader the same things that her casual falling-down-without-being-seriously-injured tendencies are supposed to signal: that Bella is weak, child-like, approachable, delicate, and appropriately 'feminine'. And I especially do not like the coupling of Bella's fainting tendencies, falling tendencies, and "too upset to eat" tendencies, all within the first 70 pages of the novel. I feel like all these elements are dog whistles to convey that Bella is valuable at least in part because she adheres to a very specific Weak Woman fantasy: a woman who doesn't take up space and who can barely maintain an upright position and must therefore be carried everywhere.
We mentioned last week the infamous "I'm not anti-female, I'm anti-human" quote that Stephenie Meyer has been credited with. (Credit and much thanks to Patrick for locating the link!) And this is the thing: I don't expect Bella to be as strong as immortal super-human vampires. But then, I kind of doubt that anyone ever seriously did. The problem with Bella being "weak" isn't a problem with her being less strong or less fast or less awesome than vampires and werewolves. No, the problem is that she's a very stereotypical type of weak, where she is in fact weaker than most human women, but instead of that weakness being dealt with in a realistic and meaningful fashion, it's held up as something automatically attractive and worthy of emulation.
And I find that offensive, because I don't see this narrative as the triumph of a realistically weak woman over stacked-against-her-odds. Instead, I see Twilight as the story of one woman Winning At Patriarchy because she managed to unrealistically adhere to a lot of harmful stereotypes.
"Ms. Cope? [...] Bella has Gym next hour, and I don't think she feels well enough. Actually, I was thinking I should take her home now. Do you think you could excuse her from class?" His voice was like melting honey. I could imagine how much more overwhelming his eyes would be.
We've already decided that Edward has glamour, which is good because otherwise I would be screaming in all caps about rape cultures and authority figures who see nothing wrong with letting a strange boy take a fainting girl off school premises without so much as notifying her parents or the police or her-parents-who-also-happen-to-be-the-police. You will be let off easier than Mr. Banner, Ms. Cope, but I'm keeping my eye on you.
"Can you walk, or do you want me to carry you again?" With his back to the receptionist, his expression became sarcastic.
I stood carefully, and I was still fine. He held the door for me, his smile polite but his eyes mocking.
And this... I'm not even sure how to respond to this. I spoke before about how Edward mocks the people around him in a very broad manner and that it's up to his victims to ally themselves to him and join in his mockery of others if they want to be spared. And yet here Edward doesn't seem to be mocking Ms. Cope to Bella; he seems to be mocking Bella to Bella.
And she seems to be... if not on-board with that, then at least okay enough to not really call him out, either in person or in narrative. There's no seething description of her being angry or wanting to lash out at him but biting back her impulses. Everything is just very... neutrally descriptive. He's sarcastic and mocking, but Bella's actions don't seem to notice or register what her mind has already informed us. Why? I honestly don't know.
"So are you going? This Saturday, I mean?" I was hoping he would, though it seemed unlikely. I couldn't picture him loading up to carpool with the rest of the kids from school; he didn't belong in the same world. But just hoping that he might gave me the first twinge of enthusiasm I'd felt for the outing. [...]
He glanced down at me from the corner of his eye, smiling wryly. "I really don't think I was invited."
I sighed. "I just invited you."
In the wake of Edward being sarcastic and mocking, Bella asks him out on a semi-date.
I'll be the first to confess that I don't really get the appeal of Edward as a romantic partner. Oh, I like him well enough for what he represents -- wealth, beauty, youth, security, health, and privilege -- but I think his actual personality is dreadful. I can barely read his lines without getting a powerful urge to fling my eReader across the room; I can't imagine how I'd respond to him in person. I'd probably avoid him as much as I possibly could, as the rest of Forks seems to do.
But it's obvious thus far that Bella finds him perfectly mesmerizing and I'm not sure how much weight to give that. We've talked before that the Edward/Bella attraction is almost indistinguishable from the werewolf concept of "imprinting", even if it's never defined in those terms. But if the two lovers are fated to be together and nothing can tear them apart, then Edward's abrasive personality will hardly be enough to drive Bella away. Or perhaps his needling jeers are intended to be attractive to the reader, as we've mentioned the romance trope of the Teasing Hero. Possibly Edward just takes his teases a little too far in a novel where almost every characterization detail is outlined in sharp relief. I don't honestly know.
I do know that while I completely understand Bella's sentiment that the weekend outing will be completely uninteresting without Edward along, I'm still saddened that she expresses it in this way. I feel like a hypocrite saying so -- I myself am not terribly social, and it probably would take the inclusion of my soul mate in order to get me excited about a trip to a cold, cloudy beach in the dead of winter with a bunch of my barely-acquainted peers. And yet, at the same time, I know that I have the necessary emotional safety nets that if said soul mate leaves me one book from now, I will be able to soldier on without sinking into a deeply dangerous depression. I guess what I am saying is that I wish that Bella had more interests in her life than just Edward, Austen novels, cooking, Edward, and doing the house cleaning.
"Let's you and I not push poor Mike any further this week. We don't want him to snap." His eyes danced; he was enjoying the idea more than he should.
"Mike-schmike." I muttered, preoccupied by the way he'd said "you and I." I liked it more than I should.
This is an excuse: Edward cannot go to the beach because the beach is included in the werewolf territory that the Cullens have agreed not to trespass on. It is an excuse, however, that is particularly teeth-grindingly frustrating because -- once again -- Edward is blaming his actions on false considerations for other people. He asked to take Bella to town because he couldn't bear for her to waste gas, and now he's turning down a beach invitation because he can't bring himself to "push" Mike any further with Edward's rampant impinging on Mike's territorial rights to Bella. This annoys me to no end, especially since I know that Edward's refusal to own his decisions will be a staple of this series.
Hey, Edward? OWN YOUR DECISIONS.
86 comments:
Initially I read Bella's reaction to Edwards sarcasm as pointedly ignoring him, but without any inner narration from Bella it's hard to figure out exactly what we're supposed to be reading there. (Now that I think about it, it's probably wishful thinking to assume that Bella would ever ignore Edward.)
I think we're expected to buy in to rape culture narratives where Bella is a "prize" to be fought over between the boys and which should go to the "best" player. Bella's sympathy in this context strikes me less as a piece of characterization and more of a narrative commentary signaling that Bella has effectively passed from Mike's imminent ownership to Edward's de facto control. And that Mike deserves sympathy for being so unexpectedly preempted in his courtship attempts.
I think this is exactly it. I'm reminded now of the parking lot scene, where Edward expressly sets up Mike, Eric, and Tyler to all ask Bella to the girls' choice dance. He said that they "deserved their shot."
This really is a game ("win that Bella!"), and Edward explicitly acknowledges it. But since Edward is superhuman and the designated Soul Mate, the other guys didn't stand a chance.
Not only did Mike just lose the game here, but it was also rigged against him from the start. And right now, in the fainting spell/nurse's office, he didn't even know it was on the field of play. So that's why Bella is supposed to feel sympathy for Mike; in the game of rape culture he was blindsided.
I'll be the first to confess that I don't really get the appeal of Edward as a romantic partner. Oh, I like him well enough for what he represents -- wealth, beauty, youth, security, health, and privilege -- but I think his actual personality is dreadful. I can barely read his lines without getting a powerful urge to fling my eReader across the room; I can't imagine how I'd respond to him in person. I'd probably avoid him as much as I possibly could, as the rest of Forks seems to do.
I have to say that I feel the same way. I understand that Twilight is a fantasy for people, and people should be allowed their fantasies (I certainly don't want anyone taking mine away) but I very much do not get it. Edward is never nice. Edward is constantly abusive. If there were any kind of affection showing through anywhere I think I'd be able to to get it a little, but since there isn't I just ... don't.
The impression that I get is that most people who see the appeal of Edward don't do it in terms of fantasies of abuse* so I just fail to see where it comes from. Edward is all about abuse, even when he is saving Bella's life he makes sure to laugh at her pain from an injury he inflicted, lie to her, get her to compromise her values, and try to convince her she is insane. The abuse sometimes has something good wrapped in it (like a saved life) but it's the abuse that's always there.
Edward seems to be emotional abuse personified, and I really don't get the appeal for those who aren't particularly interested in fantasizing about abuse.
-
* Which, as we've discussed at length in various places, there's nothing wrong with. If it sounds like I'm putting down those who do have fantasies about being abused, I want to be clear that I'm not in any way trying to say that. I'm instead trying to say that for those who do not have such fantasies, I really don't understand the appeal of Edward.
I've tried, and people have tried to explain to me, but there's a decent chance I'll never get it.
But the thing is, I don't think we're meant to read this as Bella being seriously ill and/or disabled. I think Bella's casual mention of fainting is supposed to signal to the reader the same things that her casual falling-down-without-being-seriously-injured tendencies are supposed to signal: that Bella is weak, child-like, approachable, delicate, and appropriately 'feminine'.
I prefer to think of it as that this is a tabletop RPG, and Bella has min-maxed her character. She's taken extremely low DEX and CON scores, so that she might pump the points into INT (a little bit) and especially (CHA). She's also left enough points spare to pick up a bonus immunity to mind-reading effects. This combination has left her essentially helpless physically, but with a natural near-glamour that makes all the men want her and all the (hetero) women want to be her. (Player-Bella's RP skills are not up to snuff in actually creating the perception of charisma, however, so it all comes down to dice rolls.)
Unfortunately for the game, the player of Bella is a munchkin, and the GM doesn't know what's about to hit them. The player heard that this was going to be a game with vampies, so her character is taking metagaming to the max and fully intends to become one -- maximizing her neglected STR, DEX, and CON, and providing a bonus to her already sizeable CHA.
This goes right against the GM's plans. The GM wants to this to be a kind of campaign against colonialism, where the players slowly uncover the pervasive, harmful, but hidden effects the imperials (the Cullens) are having on the otherwise normal town of Forks. The GM even had a couple stirring speeches planned; at the climax of the plot Charlie even had one ("We are all Quielute now..." it would start.)
Edward came into this as the only partially sympathetic vampire. His telepathic powers have given him a closer perspective on the rest of humanity. This isn't supposed to make him an outright good guy, but instead he's supposed to be the PC's "inside vamp," who knowingly or unknowingly gives away enough information to start undoing the Cullens' Tyranny.
This plot just Won't Do for the player of Bella, however. If they're fighting the vampires, how does the character get to become godlike in ability? Instead, the player is clever, turning Bella's natural (because it sure isn't RP'd) charm onto Edward. Because the GM was naïve enough to go along with it to let Edward be a proper source of information, Bella became firmly attached to Edward. From there, it was just a matter of time before godlike-powers were achieved.
I've tried, and people have tried to explain to me, but there's a decent chance I'll never get it.
The closest I can come to understanding is when someone here said -- was it Kit? -- that possibly the fantasy is that of co-opting the meaning of abuse. I.e., Edward = Abuse = Hidden Internal Love, so therefore when Bob = Abuse, he must equal Hidden Internal Love! The idea being, I think, that just because someone you're stuck with SEEMS abusive doesn't mean they're not doing it out of love. I think that would be considered a coping mechanism.
And yet... if that is the main reason why the books are as popular as they are, we are all in big trouble as a society. So there must be more that I'm not understanding. Or, at least, I sincerely hope there is.
I prefer to think of it as that this is a tabletop RPG, and Bella has min-maxed her character.
I do love this theory so much. I probably think this at least once per Twilight post.
You're right about Bella and Mike. Bella's "surge of sympathy" toward Mike is, in this passage, strictly programmatic; the sympathy she feels toward him doesn't have anything to do with her as a character, and, in fact, is out of character. Bella is obliged to feel sympathy toward Mike because, at the moment she feels it, she's the only personable young woman in sight, and because it's the job of personable young women to feel sympathy (or "empathy") toward boys who have experienced setbacks, of whatever nature. If Bella weren't forced by the narrative to feel sympathy toward Mike, she wouldn't feel it. She has no reason to feel it ; she's been faced with opportunities to feel sympathetic toward Mike in the past and has not taken advantage of them. But on those occaisions Edward was further in the background than he is at this moment. (Though he was still a factor, as has been pointed out.) This time Mike and Edward have been involved in a direct stare-down which Mike has lost, and since Bella is the only female in the area except for the receptionist on the other side of the glass door, Bella is forced into a "cheerleader" role (with the two boys* occupying "competitor" roles). Part of the business of a cheerleader is to hail the victor but her second duty is to extend the loser a supportive pat on the back, actual or figurative. That's what Bella is doing here.
Why Bella can't walk but can parallel park with no problem...I think this is one more attempt on the part of the author, the narrative, or the book (whichever you like) to show that Bella's lower-middle-class background doesn't define her and that she's really a lady at heart. Peasants walk but aristocrats ride. The more unpretentious kind of 19th-century novels were full of delicate heroines who could barely make down a staircase or across a ballroom floor but who, nevertheless, rode like angels: "Evelinda's steps were hesitating and frail yet she rode as though she had been born in the saddle", etc. The fact that Bella's truck is temperamental fits in with this picture quite well. One way for a delicate and frail heroine to prove her worth was to tame a dangerous or wild horse which frightened everyone else. She would then not only gain a reputation for physical courage, she would prove her aristocratic bona fides: "Lord Atherton had often been dismayed by his daughter's lack of enthusiam for the hunt and he was happy that she'd made the most of this opportunity to demonstrate her pluck", and so forth. GWTW makes use of some of the same tropes about 60 or 70 years after they first came onto the scene, but in GWTW they are used in the opposite way: they are used to prove that Scarlett is a peasant at heart (like her father) and not a lady (like her Mom). Scarlett has a such a healthy appetite for food that Mammy is forced to make her stuff herself before she goes to parties, so that she won't eat too much and alert the watching gentlemen that she is of low birth (which she is, on her father's side). Of course Scarlett rides well but there are several instances in which her riding gets her into trouble. Early in the book, IIRC, she is ferried in a carriage to Ashley Wilkes's barbecue when she'd much rather ride on a horse. Riding is more aristocratic than walking, but being conveyed is more feminine than conveying oneself: hence, Edward keeps getting scenes in which he is allowed to tow Bella around: either on his back or in his silver Volvo. Edward is a hazard to Bella's mobility.
*I know, Edward isn't really a boy. My bad: figure of speech.
I do think that a lot of this is simply taken direct from the common themes of many romance novels of a certain era, which, in turn, are ripped off from the romance novels of an earlier era.
Darcy ---> the scowling Earl with no shirt on ---> Edward Cullen
Referring to Bekabot's comments on horses, though, I would comment that one of the great cliches of Regency romances is that the young lady, no matter how frail and fragile she may be, tames, brings to heel, and ultimately marries, the outrageous, mocking, uninterested in marriage nobleman, who, while not a vampire, is often directly associated with the devil, whose name appears commonly in Regency titles, along with the inevitable reference to the Hellfire Club. She can tame a horse, and she can tame a man...all the while, dressed in a cute Empire gown, and flimsy slippers, pale as death herself.
But Regency Heroine drags The Devil's Disciple into her world--he must be a good husband now. Bella, it seems, is set to follow Edward into his. This sometimes happens for a while in Regencies, but it's only temporary.
I think the neutral tone of the description of Edward's mockery is the result of Edward's glamour and Bella's anger at Edward mocking her cancelling out. Given what we've seen the glamour do, I suspect that either Ed's reserves are low, or Bella was seriously pissed, and good for her.
his smile polite but his eyes mocking.
How does one DO that, anyhow? I keep trying to visualize this, but fail. Is it like the female comic book who manage to point both their rump and their breasts in the same direction (toward the reader)?
Of course, I've never figured out this whole "talking with the eyes" convention, anyhow. Sure, eyes can blink and wink and crinkle around the edges; pupil can dilate with emotion or constrict with a head injury; and eyebrows can go up and down and some people can make them do funny tricks (I can't). But that's about it.
How do eyes "mock"? Or "blaze with passion?" Or "melt with tenderness"? Or "subtly send the message that the answer to question 4 on the second page is 'Constantinople'. CONSTANTINOPLE, DAMMIT!"?
Did everyone else get a User's Manual to Optic Signalling, and the hospital where I was born ran out of them that day?
Did everyone else get a User's Manual to Optic Signalling, and the hospital where I was born ran out of them that day?
I never got any of the users manuals that everyone else seems to have gotten.
Did everyone else get a User's Manual to Optic Signalling, and the hospital where I was born ran out of them that day?
I never got one either, though "reading eye-language" has gotten easier with time and tv-watching. And also working in customer service -- you learn to force the muscles of your face into a polite smile when what you want to say is "Not This Nonsense Again Seriously Read The Sign In Front Of Your Faces", and it's hard to shake the feeling that you're still glaring.
Hey, if you go to Stephenie Meyer's site, in the extras for Mew Moon ( not the Faq), she weites: "(Side note: there are those who think Bella is a wuss. There are those who think my stories are misogynistic—the damsel in distress must be rescued by strong hero.
To the first accusation, I can only say that we all handle grief in our own way. Bella's way is no less valid than any other to my mind. Detractors of her reaction don't always take into account that I'm talking about true love here, rather than high school infatuation.
I emphatically reject the second accusation. I am all about girl power—look at Alice and Jane if you doubt that. I am not anti-female, I am anti-human. I wrote this story from the perspective of a female human because that came most naturally, as you might imagine. But if the narrator had been a male human, it would not have changed the events. When a human being is totally surrounded by creatures with supernatural strength, speed, senses, and various other uncanny powers, he or she is not going to be able to hold his or her own. Sorry. That's just the way it is. We can't all be slayers. Bella does pretty well I think, all things considered. She saves Edward, after all. Side note/rant over. Back to the story.)"
Sorry, it's in The Story: http://www.stepheniemeyer.com/nm_thestory.html
But the thing is, I don't think we're meant to read this as Bella being seriously ill and/or disabled. I think Bella's casual mention of fainting is supposed to signal to the reader the same things that her casual falling-down-without-being-seriously-injured tendencies are supposed to signal: that Bella is weak, child-like, approachable, delicate, and appropriately 'feminine'.
I keep thinking of a line which google stubbornly insists is not actually from a published book: "she took refuge in the only ____ left to her, and fainted/swooned dead away". I have a strong feeling it was victorian literature, and that the lady in question had just been overwhelmed by bad news, but I can't trace it anymore.
Definitely a long-standing trope, though. And quite possibly rooted in pre-victorian upper-class English society -- a woman couldn't do much to express strong opinions, or make demands upon her husband, or do much to control her life, but damnit, she could faint, and a properly timed fit of hysterics was a very useful tool. Hence all the talk about smelling salts, and so on. Personally, there've been times when if I could've ducked a conversation and simultaneously sent the other participants on a guilt trip by collapsing in a dead faint, I'd have done it. Especially if I'd been raised to believe that being female was basically an inherently weak, diseased state, and that everything that went wrong with me was the fault of having a uterus. Bella doesn't have that excuse, but she is *acting* like a proper Period Heroine, which seems to be the only kind of heroine she likes to read about.
Maybe it's self-inflicted. If you're convinced that Good Girls Faint, it can't be all that hard to get your subconscious to sabotage your conscious efforts to stay conscious. As it were.
This is one of those times where I wish Bella talked more about herself - her internal monologue is remarkably devoid of anecdotes and memories of the past.
It IS, isn't it? Do we ever even hear the random name of an old friend she left behind? Anyone??
@bekabot, I love love love the interpretation that Bella's immediate ability to drive a shift, handle her temperamental truck, and parallel park it effortlessly is a call-back to horse riding. I would not have thought of that on my own, and now I can't unsee it. That's so perfect.
@Makabit, fascinating, re: the tie in with taming horses and taming husbands. How do we 'marry' the fact, though, that Bella doesn't "want" the wedding but Edward does? Is that just one more fantasy element of him wanting her so much that he overrides her marriage objections?
How does one DO that, anyhow?
LOL. The only way I can imagine mocking eyes also involves a smile that is, essentially, mocking. I have a deviantArt link!! It's such a pretty link. But all that to say that the only way eyes can "mock", for me, would be involve a crinkling that would pull the lips into a correspondingly "mocking" smile. So, yeah, I feel like Edward's expressions are impossible .
http://tracyjb.deviantart.com/art/Lackadaisy-Expressions-193978013
For passion blazing, I think a wide-eyed, intense gaze *might* do the trick (ideally with the head tilted down a little and the gaze directed up a bit, even from across the room).
(I feel awkward. Hapax and Chris and everyone already know all this. Hapax is making a hilarious point, and I am using it to 'splain facial expressions in my culture. It is annoying when people do this. But it's a subject I find fascinating! How can I convey that I'm using her hilarious joke to riff off on a topic I like? I know! I will end on a joke!)
For Constantinople, I recommend singing songs by They Might Be Giants. LOL.
(That wasn't a very good joke.)
Patrick!! Thank you!! Adding it to the post now. (I'm annoyed that google did not give it to me.)
a woman couldn't do much to express strong opinions, or make demands upon her husband, or do much to control her life, but damnit, she could faint, and a properly timed fit of hysterics was a very useful tool.
Sort of like the thread a few weeks ago (the blood donation one) where we talked about appropriating sexist culture in order to preserve spoons? Interesting.
I think there's a line in "Pride and Prejudice" where Mr. Bennet says that Mrs. Bennet's nerves have been his good friends and constant companions. In the musical "Flower Drum Song", there's a gender-switch version where the patriarch of the family goes into a "weak lungs" coughing fit whenever something upsets him. His strong-willed sister calls him out on it at one point.
I love the idea of fainting dead away to avoid a spoon-heavy conversation.
Yep. In all honesty, Bella reminds me of the kind of heroine who was popularly spoofed from about 1750 on (and also Pamela, but I have a strong desire to avoid ever reading Samuel Richardson ever again). And a lot of the values she embodies through her actions are... very nineteenth century. Translated into modern times, but still: if she didn't have access to modern beauty creams and the perfect genetics of authorial fiat, this is a girl who'd own more pairs of gloves than underwear.
Aaaaaaargh. I spent my entire senior year writing a huge paper on Clarissa, Pamela, and Shamela. I couldn't decide which one I liked the least. Fascinating cultural studies, though, and the INTENT behind Clarissa was good. Now I'm thinking I should re-read them for Twilight and.... *whimpers, looks to hide*
"...his smile polite but his eyes mocking."
Edward is practicing his Vampire Stare. Vampires like to do the Stare and to smile at the same time; it's a challenge for them, the way rubbing the stomach and patting the head simultaneously is for humans. (Vampires don't meet with enough challenges on a day-to-day basis and they've got a lot of extra moments to fill up.)
But Edward (so like him) is reckoning without his audience: he doesn't realize that he looks so weird to Bella that she can't imagine he's not making fun of her.
Nooooo! Save your sanity! (There are cliff notes or coles notes or something for those, surely. And wikipedia.)
"When a human being is totally surrounded by creatures with supernatural strength, speed, senses, and various other uncanny powers, he or she is not going to be able to hold his or her own. Sorry. That's just the way it is. We can't all be slayers."
I had to write this fantasy novel the way it is because realism was at stake!
Fie on Meyer's specism (speciesim?). Even if her vampires lack garlic allergies and counting compulsions, they're still flammable and Bella has access to things that make fire. Oh, but Bella is clumsy enough that the old hairspray flamethrower trick would be as likely to hurt her as the vamp in front of her. Fair enough, even though the clumsiness is an authorial choice. Vampires can still be tricked and manipulated, especially if they're too arrogant to believe a feeble, fragile human would ever dare lie to them.
I don't understand why you'd have a protagonist completely unable to do anything against the villains unless you're going for a horror story.
---
I see Ana has saved me the trouble of linking to that Lackadaisy page. Capital.
\\Even if her vampires lack garlic allergies and counting compulsions, they're still flammable and Bella has access to things that make fire. Oh, but Bella is clumsy enough that the old hairspray flamethrower trick would be as likely to hurt her as the vamp in front of her.\\
That's actually one of my problems with Meyer's so called "vampires." They don't have any of the weaknesses associated with them. And that's key. All folktale monsters have a weakness, lest they rule humans completely.
Edwards isn't a vampire. He's a Marvel superhero. Except a dick.
In short, Meyer's sparkpires are so freakin special that weaknesses, even trivial ones, are a no-no.
Re: Stephenie Meyer:
Bella does pretty well I think, all things considered. She saves Edward, after all.
Once again, Twilight proves that the value of a woman is how much she is of aid to her man. *eyeroll*
There's no seething description of her being angry or wanting to lash out at him but biting back her impulses. Everything is just very... neutrally descriptive. He's sarcastic and mocking, but Bella's actions don't seem to notice or register what her mind has already informed us. Why? I honestly don't know.
Just to this point, it is possible to simply get used to someone who is consistently mocking, controlling, angry, or otherwise not good to be around. For me at least, once I get used to someone being a dick, it just becomes an expected part of dealing with them. There is absolutely nothing remarkable about Edward's mocking tone, so Bella does not remark on it. That's my interpretation, anyway.
I'm not sure about the balance issues, but it occurs to me that the fainting spells could be related to her frequent loss of appetite. Crashing blood sugar could cause some of her problems, notably dizziness, and potentially the fainting. Hmm, judging by the description, it might be related to her balance issues after all. In which case, the indicated treatment is to eat more frequently. And that's assuming that it's not an informed attribute which I'm inclined to suspect since this is the first time we've actually seen her nearly fainting.
@bekabot
Bella is possibly a Regency Heroine in a semi-modern world? Could that be why only the characters who could have been alive during such periods of time are the only ones she's interested in?
Also, her truck being the modern day spirited horse that has to be broken? Brilliant. What does that mean about the engine-removal bit?
@Ana Mardoll
Isn't the trope supposed to be that the mother or mother-in-law are the ones who want the perfect wedding, and that the bride is the one who is trying gently to keep them from taking over? (Plus, since Bella is supposed to be the passive, nihilistic, self-abnegating heroine, she can't overtly want someone to fuss over her. It would be out-of-character.)
@Nathaniel
Although it's DC, not Marvel, maybe Edward was the inspiration for Superdickery before Superman was?
Not sure where this came from, but a random bit of Edith and Ben has come to mind:
Think of this as being the Ben equivalent of one of the times Bella completely dismisses Jessica's words as unworthy of consideration:
It was only after the second, louder, time Jesse said my name that I realized he'd said it the first time. I tried hard not to look like a deer and headlights and figure out where we were. It didn't work. Jesse asked, "Are you ok?"
I mumbled something that was probably not convincing but was meant to indicate I was fine. I'm not good when put on the spot.
"You weren't paying attention, were you?"
"It's not that it's just..." and I really didn't know what to say, and didn't really want to talk about it anyway.
"It's just what?" he asked. His tone was one of concern, not accusation.
I looked down and sighed. "I'm not... I'm not good at following conversations. I lose track of what's being said and... the words fade into background noise and I don't realize that it's happening until I've already missed a bunch so when I do realize I'm already lost. And I can't just say, 'Hey, I have no idea what you're talking about,' because then people think I'm ignoring them and being a jerk and... stuff. So I try to catch up on my own.
"Sometimes it works, but other times I just end up missing even more in the process and I get so lost I don't even remember when I last knew what was going on and I start thinking about what I can possibly say to get out of it without letting on how little I know about what's been said, and that maybe it's obvious that I have no idea what's going on, and I wonder what people will think, and worry that maybe I'll lose all my friends, and then I'll be all alone and I don't want that but maybe it's better because I'm obviously being a terrible friend if I can't even listen right.
"And- and at that point I'm not even hearing the words anymore."
There was silence, then Jesse put a hand on my shoulder. "You know, I don't remember what I was saying either."
That got a small smile from me. I didn't want to smile, I felt like I should feel bad, but I couldn't help it.
"Next time just say something," he said. "I promise I won't get mad."
Random bits of Edith and Ben are always welcome... at least, that sounds sort of cannibalistic, but you know what I mean, I've missed them.
And you have a good heart, chris, there's more humanity in one of these little snippets than in anything I've seen from Twilight, or many another whole novel at that.
I have a fellow feeling for Ben. I tend to get distracted in conversations too.
Minor typo quibble: it's "deer in the headlights," not "deer and headlights." I admit that, like Ben, I got distracted for a moment there, trying to picture something that looked simultaneously like a deer and a pair of headlights.
Question for the writers among us: is "he was like a deer in the headlights" a phrase that you would have an omniscient, third-person narrator say? It sounds to me more impressionistic, something you'd get from a first-person or even tight third-person POV. But I ran across it somewhere recently where it struck me as a false note, where but the formerly detached tone of the narrative I'd have expected something like "frozen with confusion and fright." Because the narrator knows how the character feels, not just how he looks. Am I picking nits here?
TW: BODY IMAGE
Also, while I'm nitpicking, in a novel by a famous and critically-acclaimed author, in a third-person POV narration, the protagonist is introduced to a woman "who was struggling with her weight." And it annoyed the heck out of me: you just met this woman, Richard! You have no idea about how she feels about her weight or anything else! Presumptuous much?
Off-topic, but I was watching Phantom of the Opera last night and wondered how the fantasies and fans stack up. You seem to get the same sort of love for the Bad Boy dashing dangerous supernatural man with the obsession for the heroine (it helps that I can no longer NOT think of the Phantom as a trapped Fey who doesn't quite understand humanity beyond his lust for Christine). But Twilight fans latched onto an Edward who, while not doing a good job showing it now, was meant to be charming and heroic. While Phantom fans almost universally root for the Phantom, who was meant to be dangerous and terrifying, and bash on loving, gentle Raoul. Does Edward get to be both in one?
Random thoughts!
They don't have any of the weaknesses associated with them.
This frustrates me too. At least being a werewolf is inconvenient because of the uncomfortable shared telepathy. The vampires have all that PLUS the telepathy is lovely and warm and fuzzy because vampires are perfect all the time. Even the "hunger" stuff is largely easy for them.
Isn't the trope supposed to be that the mother or mother-in-law are the ones who want the perfect wedding, and that the bride is the one who is trying gently to keep them from taking over?
True, but in those cases doesn't the women still WANT a wedding, she just doesn't want a MEGA-wedding? (I can't keep up on my tropes, lol.)
That's so sweet, Chris. I like Jesse so much. I was going to say I like Jesse more than Jessica, but I know so little about Jessica that that's hard to say. But I *do* like Jesse!
Also, while I'm nitpicking, in a novel by a famous and critically-acclaimed author, in a third-person POV narration, the protagonist is introduced to a woman "who was struggling with her weight."
ARRRRRRGH.
I read a book for book club last year and the Protagonist waltzed into a fancy place and started verbally abusing the (sexy, thin) receptionist because she didn't just let him walk into her boss' office without an appointment. When the Protagonist flounced out, he noticed a (homely, fat) cubical woman and mentally sympathized that she must hate working with the receptionist.
I was SO upset. I'm a fat woman and my best friend is slender and gorgeous, so it was like some creep trying to sympathize with me for 'having' to work with my best friend. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO PROJECT YOUR ISSUES ONTO ME, PROTAGONIST.
Well, shaving weaknesses off vampires has been going on for a long time now. S. Meyer just removed one of the only two left in the modern vampire (sunlight).
But "Bella's hopelessly outclassed by the vampires around her" has nothing to do with anything. To give one example, Bella's impossibly clumsy, too clumsy to walk across a room, at least when S. Meyer remembers that flaw. The fact that there are vampires with super-balance around is quite beside the point.
I've seen a lot of vampire stuff where the hunger is supposed to be unrelenting and overpowering and only barely controllable, even under ideal conditions and it... never turns out to be a problem.
"Oh, but Bella is clumsy enough that the old hairspray flamethrower trick would be as likely to hurt her as the vamp in front of her."
Well, there's still chris the cynic's suggestion...railroad spikes.
"Also, her truck being the modern day spirited horse that has to be broken? Brilliant. What does that mean about the engine-removal bit?"
Whenever Lady Evelinda acts up (which isn't often, but still) her lordly father stables her brute of a horse (Tempest) with a camp of gypsies down the way. Lady Evelinda may have been born able to ride Tempest but she can't trespass amongst a camp of rough gypsies. That's out of her power.
Considered in this light, Bella's bond with Jacob becomes interesting because heroines of the Lady Evelinda variety often possess a natural affinity not only with horses but with dogs. "Lady Evelinda shuddered at the thought of the hunt but she had nestled from childhood amidst her father's pack of fierce trackers..." At the same time they tend not to be that good with people. "Lady Evelinda was of a delicate constitution but was not formed for common gossip, so that the drawing room threatened to become her abhorrence..." Last thing: it's worth bearing in mind that while these books, in their modern incarnation, usually cure their heroines with marriage, they were originally willing to consign their heroines to very bad ends. ("Dead, and never lived to call me Mother!!") A bad end, according to one reading of Twilight, is just what Bella comes to herself.
(BTW, I'm spending the weekend reading Death Comes to Pemberley. Can you guys tell?)
Hey, everyone! :D
I don't have much to add, but the conversation is certainly interesting! :D
And Ana, I have to say that I'm glad you picked out the real problem with Bella's weakness. I could never really articulate it myself. It's not that she's *human* in a supernatural world of beings that could kill her. She's so weak that Jessica or Angela could kill her! And that's just talking about the physical aspects, rather than the mental ones. >.<
Was the Protagonist ever proven wrong, or was the reader meant to agree with him? I can easily imagine the receptionist being perfectly nice to her co-workers, and only bitchy to people who think they can pull crap like interrupting her boss for something that wasn't important enough for them to bother making an appointment over.
No, it was an one-off opening scene and we never see those ladies again. The book was called "The Long Fall" and I did not like it for many reasons:
http://www.anamardoll.com/2011/05/long-fall-tangled-threads-of-series.html
That's where I'm having a little trouble with the Protagonist of the book I'm reading-- Reamde, by Neal Stephenson, not to be coy about it. We meet the woman who's said to be "struggling with her weight" in a very brief scene, and I haven't seen her again (so far, it's a long, long book).
So are we meant to believe that Richard's impressions are infallible? On the one hand, he's supposed to be a business genius, everything he touches turns to gold, always chooses the right person for the right job. On the other hand, he sucks at personal relationships, been dumped by a whole bunch of women, estranged from most of his family, business partners are colleagues but not friends. So maybe we're supposed to conclude that his author means him to be to some extent an unreliable or unlikeable narrator? Especially as there's a second main POV character, a woman at that, who seems to have a much more straightforward take on things.
Or maybe I'm just, so to speak, reading too much into things. Maybe Stephenson just used "struggling with her weight" as a synonym for "heavy-set" or "plump" or "fat" or "five pounds over the culturally approved standard for her height" and never thought twice about it. In which case, bleeah.
But there've been other little oddities in the way Richard thinks, so I'm withholding judgment, for the moment. It's a good thing I'm reading this monster in hardcover; it may be a pain to haul it around, but at least I don't have that little gauge reminding me, "only 10 percent read..."
I meant to ask, what did you think of it? I tend to avoid Austen sequels, but, of course, P.D. James must be considered with respect.. so what's your verdict?
Seriously, are you coming up with these lines yourself? They're not direct quotes? Because if you are, you are really good at this!!
I mean, it's not my cuppa tea, but... Still. Really good at it.
Don't Myerpires have enough supernatural toughness that you'd either need a lot of force or a lot of patience to get a stake into them? Or am I just conflating my "their skin has many tiny crystals embedded in it" interpretation of their sparkliness with canon.
So apparently I forgot to hit post, left the page, and as a result lost my original response.
First, thanks for pointing that out. It was actually supposed to be "deer in headlights" (no article) but somehow I replaced the "in" with an "and".
As for the use of a phrase by an omniscient narrator, to me the problem with what you describe is not so much that the narrator is 3rd person omniscient but that the phrase seems to be out of character. If the narration is come across as detached and objective and then you hit a personal touch like that I can see how it would stand out like something in color in a black and white film.
Something I was thinking about this morning when I was away from a computer, Edith and Ben discussing something involving Edith in danger and Ben refusing to run and hide.
"You should go."
She was probably right about that. I didn't care, "Maybe so, but I'm not leaving you."
I don't know that I've ever seen her at a complete loss for words before. She started to talk several times each with a different emotion attached. Anger, sadness, exasperation. Others I had trouble placing. When she finally spoke it was a soft, "That's stupid," with none of the previous emotions in evidence.
"What if it were you? What if I were the nigh invulnerable superpowered vampire who's been around for decades and uses words like 'confute'-"
"You do say confute."
That was true. She infected me. I continued, " and you were the puny defenseless human. Would you leave me to fend for myself." I paused a moment and then added, "And remember, I know when you're lying."
"How could you know that? I've never lied to you."
That was a very good point, I'd been there when she lied, but she'd never actually... except, "There was that one time-"
"That was before you knew me well enough to have developed your alleged uncanny lie detection powers."
I was going to respond to that, but then I realized something. "You're evading."
"That's because I don't want to answer the question."
"Obviously. But you know I'm not going to drop it."
"I'd do exactly what you're doing." And for the briefest of moments I thought I'd convinced her. "That doesn't make it any less stupid. I'd probably get myself killed." I started to respond but she stopped me. "It's your turn."
"What?"
"You're a vampire. I'm a human. I refuse to leave you in danger. I die. How do you feel."
I didn't respond. The silence was quite awkward.
"I'm dead. You're alive. How do you feel about that?"
It was a difficult question and one that I didn't want to think about. "I don't plan on dying."
"Most people don't. Now you're being evasive."
"Because I don't want to answer." I took a moment. "There aren't words. I'd be devastated. But say vampire-me got his way. Human-you ran and hid. Vampire-me died. Human-you lived. Would you feel any different?"
"Of course not." She looked away for a moment. "That's why I'd probably get myself killed." She sighed. "Alright, but promise me you won't die."
"Promise me you won't."
And then Edith lets Ben in on the plan which is, in fact, more likely to succeed with two people, even though she'd much prefer that he be off somewhere safe.
-
Also, I've long had a vision of Bella using her truck as a weapon against a vampire. (This is, of course, a violent line of thinking.)
I'm not totally sure if it's physically possible because I know nothing about offensive driving.
It involves driving straight at the vampire, the vampire thinking she intends a straightforward ram and waiting to dodge until the opportune moment, Bella, at the last moment, making the truck spin in a theatrical way that results in the vampire's attempt to dodge actually smashing it into the truck, Bella chaining the now stunned vampire to the truck, and driving around at high speed until she comes up with a plan on how to deal with a vampire.
Chris, I feel that you must get tired of hearing me say so each time, but your Edith/Ben writings always touch me so much. This is how I wish the characters in the books I read actually did talk. It's very real and human and... I'm not sure how to say it. It feels very gender-equal, but more than that. Just that the respect that exudes from the characters feels more like "love" than any love story I've read in a long time.
@Bekabot--The part about the gypsies makes me laugh, since it reminds me of a Black Lace novel in which the new lady of the manor (she's been living as a thief and adventurer in London, but a rich uncle left her the place), ends up inviting the ladies of the area to tea. Some gypsies she knows from an earlier adventure show up. An orgy ensues.
Black Lace novels are just delightful sometimes. Although that book did have one chapter that plain squicked me out.
Re: Bella as Regency heroine. The only real 'Regency' features I see are Edward's mockery, the fact that Bella is constantly inconveniently at her worst in front of him, and the (not Regency specific) combination of "He's yummy, but I hate him!"
I see her more as a Bronte heroine than an Austen one, or, for, more importantly for Regency, a Georgette Heyer one. (And as for Amanda Quick...ain't no way.) And even with the mocking, Edward, in his self-pitying drama, is far more a Victorian Gothic type than a Regency sort.
But I also don't see this as a book that has its roots in one specific branch of the great river of Romance.
Not only do I not get tired of it, I actually think I probably need it. Very often when I write something I feel like it's not good. I think I probably shouldn't be sharing it. Once I do I feel bad about inflicting something not-good on anyone reading the thread.
And then you say nice things and I can look back at it and see the good. If I didn't have second opinions I'd probably believe that nothing I've written was worth writing.
Well it is. So. Good.
"I meant to ask, what did you think of it? I tend to avoid Austen sequels, but, of course, P.D. James must be considered with respect.. so what's your verdict?"
It's not that good. There's lots of Trivia Fail in it, so if Trivia Fail annoys you Death Comes To Pemberley will drive you around the bend. If you like to read a story strictly for the story's sake this still might not be the read for you, because the plot is so pokily explicated. White knuckles are nowhere in evidence. The thing I liked about it is that reading it was flattering to my vanity b/c the narrative (as opposed to the surface story) makes it pretty clear who the murderer has to be early in the game. (Just follow the Holmesian rule that once you've eliminated all the impossibilities the answer you're left with, however improbable, must be the correct one, and you'll be safe.) After that it's mostly a matter of waiting to be proven right. Personally, I love to be proven right, so I don't regret the time I spent on this. That, and I'm willing to give P. D. James's attempt at Austen Prose a low pass. One thing she does differently from Austen is that she doesn't relate everything from Elizabeth's point of view; some of the scenes are recounted through Darcy's consciousness. I have no opinion as to whether or not that's an improvement. IOW, IMO: maybe not a total waste of attention but definitely not something you have to read. It can be given a pass with a clear conscience.
@JenL--yes, this. There's a lot of ways to write 'girl meets vampire' that acknowledges the power imbalance, but allows the young lady to express her personality and her, Stephanie will excuse me for using the word, humanity. Not to mention her kickassity.
There's two things I see as feeding into the encounter of a young lady with a vampire. The first, I think, has to do with folklore. I think the narrative reasons behind the traditional weaknesses of the vampire are the same as those behind the traditional weaknesses of the Devil in old stories--humans may fall victim, but they are also supposed to be able to escape, outwit, and take care of themselves. "These things just kill you, because they're stronger, and there's nothing you can do about it" is a stupid story, probably from the same mind that finishes up with "And Brer Fox ate the rabbit, and washed him down with a good Riesling."
Secondly, I see sexy male vampires as upping the stakes in a feminist world. There was a period of time in which a writer could safely assume that her readers would believe that Edward was SOOO much stronger than Bella that Bella couldn't POSSIBLY do him any harm--even if Edward was not a vampire. At some point, the social norms that made the averagely greater strength of the human male some sort of enormous and insurmountable thing slipped. Enter the vampire. He's not just stronger than a woman, he's superhumanly strong. He can hypnotize you with his eyes. He can, apparently, fly. Who knew?
I may be uninformed, but I general blame the sexy male vampire in his current incarnation on Anne Rice, who, IIRC, did not often put him in romantic situations with living women. Other authors largely responded to him by upping the ante with their heroines. Enter Buffy, enter Anita Blake, enter a host of others, all armed with stakes, holy water, and their own set of superpowers. Women now became the eternal folk heroes who bring the vampire/demon down, and, in the new order of things, could also make out with it.
And then Meyers apparently decided that this was no good, which is fair--Anita drives me batty--but apparently replaced it with nothing more than 'human woman as blank slate, who, by the way, can't get out of a wet paper bag'.
I admit to being baffled. It feels, almost, not Victorian, which is what I've been working with, but those horrible misogynistic contemporary novels from the late fifties and early sixties. Why on earth resurrect that? It's like "Breakfast at Tiffany's", if Audrey Hepburn had no charming quirkiness and the writer was undead.
Chris, these E&B scenes are wonderful. They're so heartfelt, you have such a talent for putting emotion behind words. I am jealous of your talent, and also I want to bring Ben home and give him cookies.
Thank you, thank you, thank you! You've said what I've been trying to get out for ages! What's the fun of reading a story with vampires in it if the hero can't fight back? Can't hold her own, even in social situations? I don't want to slip in to the role of a weakling, or be forced to identify with a heroine who isn't. Grrr.
I don't want to slip in to the role of a weakling, or be forced to identify with a heroine who isn't. Grrr.
I don't mind weak narrators - they can lead to interesting plots - but the problem with Twilight is that while Bella is supposedly weak, she still gets everything she wants. Which doesn't ring true.
Of course, it's a fantasy, and fantasies don't have to be true. It is notable, though, that the fantasy is about getting things without having to be strong.
I don't think Bella being weak is nearly so much of a problem as the fact that the story never really addresses it. With the exception of the solution, "Become a vampire and the physical problems will be solved," I'm pretty sure it never treats Bella's weakness as something that might be problematic.
She and the ground are in a long running war with her frequently hitting the ground, and the ground laughing and saying, "Who did that hurt?" This is treated as cause for amusement. No one ever takes it seriously, not even Bella.
She starts the story with no friends, then finds herself surrounded by people she has no affection for, most of them interested in her for purely lust based reasons, and the isolation is never treated as problematic.
She has no joy, in fact that she exhibits several symptoms of depression is one of the most consistent things in the book. Other things may appear and disappear as if David Copperfield is using the plot and characterization as his stage, but Bella is always showing signs of depression, and from what I've seen so far it looks like a pretty realistic portrayal.
This is, as far as I know, never seen as a problem by anyone. When it gets worse in New Moon I'm told that people do, in fact, notice. But I've also been told that her depressed normal is never addressed.
Apparently, she faints much more often than is healthy. Does anyone care? Nope.
I don't see the problem with Bella being that she's weak. I see the problem with Bella being that no one, least of all Bella and Meyer, takes that weakness seriously.
Thanks, bekabot! Yeah, the Trivia Fail probably would bother me, and on the whole, this one probably won't be bubbling up to the top of list any time soon.
@JenL: I know , that first chapter of Reamde is definitely a slog! It's not, though, really representative of the rest of the book-- at least, of the non-Richard portions. I said I was going to reserve judgment about Richard? Well, I'm going to have to, I haven't seen him at all in the last two hundred pages or more. Now, if Stephenson would just stop interrupting a tense moment of crisis-- explosions going off, building blowing up, people getting shot, escapes being foiled-- to give us forty pages of backstory about a totally new character -- we might actually get somewhere with this tale. This thing is tiring.
I'm thinking about more or less everything in terms of .hack//SIGN at the moment, and one of the things that that has me thinking about is weak main characters.
Tsukasa is a weak character and he comes from a very Bella Swan kind of a place. No friends, no connections, no life. In the end it's important that while he's completely ready to believe that those he loves and respects utterly despise him, he doesn't view others through excrement colored glasses. But originally he did. He did and then, over the course of the story, he changed.
In some ways I think Tsukasa and Bella started in much the same place (though for very different reason) but Tsukasa managed to get out of it. And a big part of him getting out of it involved people taking it seriously. Tsukasa has problems that are mysterious and should be impossible which is what drives much of the plot, but if you look at how some of the characters react to him before they know any of that it's pretty clear that they recognize and take seriously what's going on with him emotionally.
Also, Tsukasa being physically weak, while always true, doesn't come up very much. Yes, he's physically outclassed by just about everyone around him, but that so rarely matters. Most interaction isn't done via combat. (And he has a monster that theoretically protects him which is somewhat more compassionate than Edward and infinitely more adorable, which is saying something because it seems to be a gelatinous blob arranged in a sort of barbell shape.)
When Tsukasa falls on his face, which he does, I don't find it funny. I feel for his pain.
Mina Harker: not a Slayer. Physically weak Victorian lady. Still manages to kick some serious ass.
I'm just saying is all.
Apparently, she faints much more often than is healthy*. Does anyone care? Nope.
That's the one realistic bit, I must say. I spent a chunk of my life fainting fairly easily, which got absolutely no concern from the medical establishment, even when I passed out in their offices due to such things as tetanus boosters, and, even after tests were made (after the one time I did hurt myself fainting), they could find nothing wrong with me. Sometimes people are just really prone to vasovagal syncope. *shrug*
Until this dissection of Twilight, I'd never met anyone who was concerned about people fainting. (Now, granted, Bella reaches new heights of sensitivity when she nearly faints at the sight of a drop of someone else's blood. Hell, I did the same blood typing lab in high school and had no problem, despite being prone to vasovagal syncope.)
...whoa, fascinating! I'd never thought of that before, but I can totally see it now. Good Lord.
If you don't get tired of my gushing, Chris, then I shall continue to gush. :D
(What name did we decide for Gender Swap Alice and Jasper? I'm looking forward to them, ha.)
I don't see the problem with Bella being that she's weak. I see the problem with Bella being that no one, least of all Bella and Meyer, takes that weakness seriously.
Yes, this, a thousand times over. It's the difference between a realistically weak heroine and a cardboard cutout concept of femininity.
Until this dissection of Twilight, I'd never met anyone who was concerned about people fainting.
I have a sad now. :(
Wow, bekabot, that's AWESOME. I'm going to have a hard time unseeing it now.
Lucy, OTOH, is a flirt who is stringing along at least three men.
I love love love that in the book she comes off as actually very sweet and endearing about it (she's fared less well in the movies, which practically have her walk on-stage with a shirt saying SLUT on the front) and laments that society won't just let a woman marry all the men she wants and who want her in return. How shocking! How liberal! How polyamorous!
Interesting that the Bella incarnation is significantly more cold to her suitors.
Why do you have a sad?
(What name did we decide for Gender Swap Alice and Jasper? I'm looking forward to them, ha.)
Alex and Jasmine. I'm not sure if I remember any of the other swapped Cullens though. Emma and Ross perhaps? I have no idea what Esme would be. I should probably just try to find the thread it was discussed in.
Oh, sorry, unclear. I'm just... at how deeply entrenched our society is on the whole "not taking medical stuff seriously" problem. It's astonishing to me that people *wouldn't* be concerned about fainting, given that it's a symptom for quick a few serious diseases.
And mmy has been blogging lately about food allergies and how hard it was for her family to get the doctors to run the necessary tests on her (http://mmycomments.blogspot.com/2012/01/on-gluten-intolerance.html ). That's so sad and frustrating.
I think here?
http://www.anamardoll.com/2011/09/twilight-its-all-about-protagonist-baby.html
Ah, yes. I imagine the fact that (unlike Bella) I was otherwise healthy and had no other symptoms that might have suggested there was a problem factored into the lack of concern. Well, and the fact that it runs in the family. Granted, if I'd been a boy, they might have run the tilt-table test, etc, on me sooner. But, given that there's nothing medicine can do for someone who's prone to vasovegal syncope, that really wouldn't have made any difference.
So, in the specific, it's kind of an "eh." In the general, yeah, it's disturbing to think that there are probably teenage girls who do have serious problems that aren't caught because the medical community just assumes that teenage girls fainting is nothing more than standard, garden variety vasovegal syncope.
Best Friend Co-Worker faints at the drop of a hat, and it was only when she was in her 30s that someone figured out she has dangerously low blood pressure, so I suppose this is not uncommon now that I think of it (the ignoring of symptoms) but STILL. Wowzers.
I'm glad that there's nothing medically wrong that could be threatening.
O_o
How in hell did the medical community miss dangerously low blood pressure? They only take your blood pressure every frickin' time you go in for anything. That's horrifying. Is this as case of people being so focused on one end of the spectrum being bad that they kinda forgot the other end? Oh, blood pressure's not high, everything's hunky dory.
I mean, my blood pressure being on the low end might well be part of it for me. But I'm on the low end of normal.
Your poor friend.
Also, what the everliving fuck, medical community!?
Possible mild bodily function trigger
I fainted for the first time in fourth grade, on a school field trip. It was taken very seriously by my parents and the doctors they took me to. I had a number of neurological tests and it was concluded by the eminent neurologist I was taken to, that I just got faint about blood. History seems to bear this out. It makes me angry that not everyone with a potentially damaging health problem is taken this seriously. As a counter example, I might be in better shape now and have had a happier childhood if a pediatrician or P.E. teacher had really looked at my trouble breathing and self reported coughing till I threw up and diagnosed my oddball asthma and gotten me on some medication.
I *think* they said she was self-medicating with high salty foods and life style (she'd known when to sit down to avoid fainting without being really aware of it) enough that they didn't catch it. But I'm more inclined to think Doctor Fail. O.o
Lucy Westenra is sweet and endearing, and she's also very flirty, to the extent that she is almost polyamorous about it, which only serves to make her more fitting game for Dracula (who, remember, has three brides waiting at home). That Lucy has polyandrous impulses is strict Bram Stoker canon. Before Mina visits Lucy at Whitby, Stoker has Lucy write Mina a letter detailing the three proposals Lucy has received in one day. (Think of the way Mike, Eric, and Tyler line up to ask Bella out to dance.) Lucy knows that she will have to settle for just one dude but the thought that she can't have them all makes her pout. Where Bella doesn't want Mike, Eric, or Tyler, Lucy wants Arthur, Quincy, and John. "Why can't they let a girl marry three men," Lucy writes Mina, "or as many as want her, and save all this trouble?" (I quote directly.) "But," Lucy continues, "this is heresy, and I must not say it..."
I give Stoker credit for being able to put together a female character who, first, has the kind of appetite Lucy does, and second, remains sweet, endearing, virginal, and sympathetic. It's more than S. Meyer was able to achieve with Bella. Lucy's prodigality with her feelings makes her into a prime Dracula target, but (nevertheless) Stoker is pretty clear that it isn't a fault in itself, even though it leads to disaster for Lucy. Bella, by contrast, is miserly with her affections instead of prodigal, and even though her virginity-up-till-the-wedding-night is Edward's doing and not hers, she displays the coldness and calculation which have customarily been seen as the traits of a very chaste woman. Ironically, Lucy avoids vampiric polyamory in the end, even though Van Helsing and her fiance have to slay her to save her from it, whereas Bella, who not only successfully turns into a vampire but does so in the bosom of a coven, winds up as part of a household which most of us would describe as nontraditional. Funny how these things turn out.
@chris the cynic, re: smashing vampires with trucks -
It's doable with a sufficiently aggressive driver, and making the following assumptions:
1) Vampires are not suicidal, and will therefore choose to press themselves up against a sheer cliff face rather than jump off of the ledge to the water/rock below, for example
2) Bella's truck is in fact, old rather than restored with a vintage body, and therefore lacks modern traction control systems and anti-lock brakes in addition to having a manual transmission.
and
3)Bella can execute something resembling what racers would call a powerslide. Perhaps one of Renee's latest boyfriends was a professional, amateur, or late-night racer and taught Bella a thing or two.
The general idea of what Bella wants to do is drive hard at the vampire, then a few seconds before impact, stomp on the brakes, lock the wheels, and turn the steering wheel like she's trying to avoid the vampire (much like the Van Incident), but only enough to turn the back end of the truck toward the thing the vampire will be pressing themselves against to avoid the truck. The vampire thus dodges into the actual strike, like you wanted (and possible pin/hooking, depending on what Bella has equipped the truck with for spearing vampires) instead of away from it. Then, assuming the hit doesn't kill all the truck's momentum, Bella then has to bring the truck to a stop under control.
Doing this sequence, however, requires the driver to have an iron will and absolute confidence that they can keep the truck under control through the whole sequence. If they falter, they will misjudge the timing of the slide or not commit enough to actually achieve their hit. I don't know if Bella has the necessary willpower to pull it off deliberately, but she could potentially do it if she was mad enough and had a little backstory running through her head of the training she picked up from Street Racer Jerry.
Of course, if it's Forks in winter, then Bella doesn't need the training on how to powerslide...she just needs black ice on the road and enough winter driving technique to be able to pull out of a slide. Then she can hit a convenient patch of black ice while trying to escape the vampire that has suddenly appeared in front of her, and that turns the truck sideways and smacks the vampire, and then Bella scrambles and regains enough control to stop the truck. That would certainly fit better with the narrative decisions around Bella. Your call.
I'd kind of forgotten that aspect of her character. It certainly makes her a lot more sympathetic -- though as I recall, given her suitors want her to live in three different places and don't much get along until forced to by a common enemy, she might not get this even if it were allowed.
And now I want to go re-read Dracula. And write fanfiction for the Wes Craven adaptations.
"I'd kind of forgotten that aspect of her character. It certainly makes her a lot more sympathetic -- though as I recall, given her suitors want her to live in three different places and don't much get along until forced to by a common enemy, she might not get this even if it were allowed."
Well, what Lucy is doing is giving vent to a wish. She's not in the precess of coming up with a plan. What I give Stoker credit for is allowing her to vent the wish without condemning her for it: that must have taken guts.
Always always always re-read Dracula!!! (Squueeeeee!!!) The throwaway book I want to buy but can't b/c nobody has written it yet: Everything I Know Today I Learned From Van Helsing...
When a human being is totally surrounded by creatures with supernatural strength, speed, senses, and various other uncanny powers, he or she is not going to be able to hold his or her own. Sorry. That's just the way it is. We can't all be slayers. Bella does pretty well I think, all things considered.
But... But... Granted we can't all be Slayers, but why did you go out of your way to make it seem that her Anti-Slayerness is what makes her attractive?
Okay, yes, if Buffy met Edward, her physical abilities would allow her to interact with Edward in a very different way from Bella. But really, do you think her physical abilities would be the only difference?
Say Edward thought that Cordelia Chase smelled yummy. Well, for one, I don't think she'd think eyes that look bruised are a turn-on. She certainly wouldn't obsess over the one guy who acted like she'd forgotten to use deodorant. And whether she had a thing for him or not, she wouldn't have passively accepted his mockery or his assumption that he could make decisions for her.
She would have "held her own" just fine in all things non-physical - and frankly, aside from the Parking Lot Incident, when would Bella have needed to hold her own (physically) against supernatural creatures if she had taken up with one of the human guys?
When a human being is totally surrounded by creatures with supernatural strength, speed, senses, and various other uncanny powers, he or she is not going to be able to hold his or her own. Sorry. That's just the way it is. We can't all be slayers. Bella does pretty well I think, all things considered.
But... But... Granted we can't all be Slayers, but why did you go out of your way to make it seem that her Anti-Slayerness is what makes her attractive?
Okay, yes, if Buffy met Edward, her physical abilities would allow her to interact with Edward in a very different way from Bella. But really, do you think her physical abilities would be the only difference?
Say Edward thought that Cordelia Chase smelled yummy. Well, for one, I don't think she'd think eyes that look bruised are a turn-on. She certainly wouldn't obsess over the one guy who acted like she'd forgotten to use deodorant. And whether she had a thing for him or not, she wouldn't have passively accepted his mockery or his assumption that he could make decisions for her.
She would have "held her own" just fine in all things non-physical - and frankly, aside from the Parking Lot Incident, when would Bella have needed to hold her own (physically) against supernatural creatures if she had taken up with one of the human guys?
Post a Comment