Twilight Summary: In Chapter 13, Edward and Bella spend the weekend alone together in the woods. Twilight, Chapter 13: Confessions
Where were we?
He smiled, but his face was ashamed. “I think we were talking about why you were afraid, besides the obvious reason.”
“Oh, right.”
“Well?”
I looked down at his hand and doodled aimlessly across his smooth, iridescent palm. The seconds ticked by.
“How easily frustrated I am,” he sighed. I looked into his eyes, abruptly grasping that this was every bit as new to him as it was to me.
I mentioned before that I like Chapter13!Edward and Chapter13!Bella so much more than the Edward and Bella we've received over the previous twelve chapters, but I'm going to mention it now again.
I like this. I like that instead of haranguing Bella to share her unedited thoughts and hassling her to share them now-now-now and imperiously ordering her to forsake any sense of mental privacy and sulking fiercely any time she fails to speak stream-of-consciousness style the moment Edward demands it, I like that here he's just honestly and openly stating that this is hard for him -- and that he's not handling it as well as he would like.
I'm a fan -- a big, big fan -- of communication in relationships. Not necessarily the kind of communication Edward would like; not the kind where each party has no mental privacy whatsoever and feels morally bound to blurt out every thought, no matter how painful. (Nothing good can come, I think, from my randomly announcing unbidden that I think that guy over there is sexier than Husband. Nor can anything helpful come from him verbally noticing that my hair just didn't come out right today because of the high humidity. These thoughts are better kept private.)
But I like the kind of communication that openly notes the things one is struggling with, and which notices when one is doing badly, and why. I'm sorry, I know I'm not being very patient right now, conveys to Bella that Edward is trying -- and it conveys the framing that his frustration is his fault, and not hers. She's not to blame for him being frustrated and impatient and snippy; he is. And he's aware of it and working on it, and he's sorry in the interim that he's doing so poorly. This isn't a panacea to salve over any and all relationship issues -- the onus is still on Edward to actively improve, and Bella has the option of walking away at any time if she decides she doesn't want to deal with this shit anymore -- but it's a good start to communicating why things aren't as they should be. And I like that.
“I was afraid . . . because, for, well, obvious reasons, I can’t stay with you. And I’m afraid that I’d like to stay with you, much more than I should.” I looked down at his hands as I spoke. It was difficult for me to say this aloud.
“Yes,” he agreed slowly. “That is something to be afraid of, indeed. Wanting to be with me. That’s really not in your best interest.”
This is a Vampire Romance, so Edward is talking right now about the fact that he feels a constant urge to murder Bella for his own sustenance. But placing that to the side for a moment, there are other reasons why it's not in Bella's best interest to be with Edward.
For one, it's unclear what kind of a future they have together. Bella hasn't said so far if she's ever wanted children, but Edward assumes that he can't give her any. (Certainly he won't be able to give her more than just the one, since the Vampire/Human hybrid trick can really only work once per couple -- the pregnancy, as far as I can tell, inevitably results in the death of the human mother, one way or another.)
Even if Bella doesn't want children, it's going to be difficult to live as an established couple in a relationship where Edward can only come out at night (unless they're in Forks) and where Bella will eventually outpace him age-wise. "I'm Bella, and this is my younger boyfriend Edward" will work for an introduction, but they'll have to continually revise and re-memorize a realistic "How We Met" story as Bella moves from A Little Bit older to Moderately older to Noticeably older to Significantly older. The alternative -- that Bella becomes a vampire and matches Edward in age -- will allow them to live together in harmony with regards to daylight hours and age-matching, but will be an end to Bella's life in its own way, and will certainly alter her future.
Incidentally, I will take a moment here to note that Buffy and Angel do grapple with these questions in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and it's interesting to see that I feel that the show handles these issues both better and worse than Twilight does. On the one hand, it's nice to see an acknowledgement of these problems that would beset a Human/Vampire couple. On the other hand, given the realities of the Buffy-verse -- a world which is vastly different from ours and Bella's -- these problems seem laughably moot. In a world where vampires are one clever idea away from burning Buffy's house down at night in order to get rid of her, I don't think eventual child-bearing and facial wrinkles can possibly factor very high on the Importance 'o Meter.
(At least when Piper of Charmed was pregnant, her Whitelighter baby was capable of healing her instantly, which more than made up for the lost combat prowess while gravid. And at least there is, or has been, some concept of heroic retirement in that universe and the passing of the Chosen One mantle on to a new group. I don't get the impression that there are retired ex-Slayers in the Buffy-verse.)
But setting aside the usual stuff like Babies and High School Reunions and whatnot, staying with Edward is not in Bella's best interests because eventually we will retroactively introduce the Volturi: the violent ruling vampire clan who murder and/or turn any humans who know about the existence of vampires. No matter how careful the Cullens are, Bella is eventually going to pop up on the Volturi radar. For Edward to neither consider this, nor to warn Bella of this eventuality is pretty shitty of him, though I can possibly forgive him on the grounds that I kind of doubt they existed when Chapter 13 was written. But still.
“I don’t want you to leave,” I mumbled pathetically, staring down again.
“Which is exactly why I should. But don’t worry. I’m essentially a selfish creature. I crave your company too much to do what I should.”
“I’m glad.”
“Don’t be!” He withdrew his hand, more gently this time; his voice was harsher than usual. Harsh for him, still more beautiful than any human voice. It was hard to keep up — his sudden mood changes left me always a step behind, dazed.
“It’s not only your company I crave! Never forget that. Never forget I am more dangerous to you than I am to anyone else.”
And then there's this. Edward is extra-special-super dangerous to Bella because she sets off all his scent-tingles in a way that no one else can.
It's a staple of the romance genre for a heroine to be so irresistible that the hero is overwhelmed by her wonderfulness. In Old Skool romances, this could manifest as a rape fantasy: she was so irresistible that he just couldn't prevent himself from doing what he did, even over her objections and his own morals (assuming he started with any). That was how overriding her presence was to him. In New Skool romances, the power of the irresistible woman can be felt in the fact that no other woman can satisfy the hero after he's had a taste of the heroine. In Beyond Heaving Bosoms, Candy Tan and Sarah Wendell write:
In some ways, the myth of the irresistible women is appealing: even though it exonerates the man of the responsibility (He couldn’t help himself! Her blazing beauty addled him! Her Magic Hoo Hoo could not be resisted!), having the ability to drive men mad with desire gives the heroine considerable power, even if it’s not a power that can ultimately be wielded for her own ends. Significantly, the Old Skool hero is unfailingly portrayed as being completely in control of all his responses—jaded and cynical, in fact—except when it comes to the heroine, which in turn infuriates him. After all, he’s the premier cocksman in all the land, and here comes this insignificant little chit who’s making him spooge prematurely, even though all she does is move her body with shy, clumsy inexperience during the dance as old as time. Even worse, after getting a sample of the heroine, he finds that no other hoo hoo in the land will do, because lo, she is in sole possession of the Magic Hoo Hoo. Women he formerly found luscious are now overblown and undesirable. This leads to more anger and even more highly charged interactions, until he’s forced to acknowledge his feelings for the heroine and eventually gentles his treatment of her. The heroine, in being raped and having her will overborne, gains power because the hero himself is no longer in full control of his actions. The fact that the hero Loses His Shit every time he’s around the heroine is an indicator of True Lurve instead of a True Need for a Restraining Order. [emphasis mine]
So it is perhaps not surprising that Bella's magic
Twilight is an abstinence romance: a great deal of the tension revolves around the resolution of the Will They or Won't They question. But unlike non-paranormal abstinence romances, the question isn't whether or not they will have sex. Bella and Edward do grapple with sex and abstinence from it, and this being a fantasy they are able to beat the odds despite abstinence having arguably the highest failure rate of all contraception methods available.
But the other half of the Twilight abstinence romance revolves around whether or not Edward will lose control and murder Bella. If he slips up, Bella will either die permanently or (in the best case scenario) die and become a vampire. And this abstinence choice isn't even presented as consensual most of the time: the question isn't so much "Will Bella and Edward do It?" (and risk pregnancy! and loss of social standing! etc.) but "Will Edward do it to Bella?" (which will end in her death). There's very likely an intended implicit rape metaphor here (coupled with the Irresistible Woman as explored above), but it's a nevertheless extremely deadly rape metaphor.
Edward and Bella rely on their -- or, rather, Edward's -- willpower because Twilight is a modern romance that is supposed to appeal to modern teenagers. Most mainstream American teenagers aren't going to be interested in or familiar with the forms of chaperoned courtship. (Despite the face that, ironically, Edward should be aware of and reasonably well-versed in that, by virtue of his age and telepathy.) And being abstinent while your Strict Dad is in the room staring at you both, yardstick at the ready to measure the difference between you, obviously packs a little less literary-erotic punch than private sojourns in the local picturesque meadow while you twine fingers together and longingly long at each other. I get that.
But. By not dating in public places, where Edward would be more motivated to stay on good behavior, or with chaperones such as Carlisle or Alice or Rosalie (all of whom have excellent track-records re: blood-abstinence, and all of whom are thoroughly committed to the masquerade), Edward is placing Bella in mortal peril in order to satisfy his own romantic whims for privacy and finger-twining. And because there is a difference between Literary Motivations (they don't double-date because then the story would suck) versus Character Motivations (they don't double-date because then Edward wouldn't have his fantasy romance the way he's always envisioned it), the end result is to make Edward look extraordinarily callous and careless: willing to risk and lose the woman he loves and the future he craves in order to have a fleeting private stroll through the forest with her.
The ideal, of course, in writing is to make Literary Motivations link nicely with Character Motivations, such that a literary necessity doesn't even appear behind the scenes to the reader because it merges so seamlessly with the character. And I think that you could possibly make this work, in the case of Edward, if we removed the points that (a) one bite is apparently venomous enough to kill-and-turn Bella and (b) the other Cullens have (for the most part) tremendous self-control. If Edward thought that, in the case of his blood-lust overwhelming his love for Bella, he might be able to stop himself after a moment or two, but that once her blood was spilled his nearby family wouldn't be able to stop feeding, then it would make sense to keep solo-dating with Bella rather than inviting Carlisle along. (Although we would then still have the issue of them not dating in public, coupled with new unfortunate implications every time Edward takes Bella home for a visit.)
But to do so would be to sacrifice some of the perfect perfection that is the Cullen family, and presumably that was too crucial to jettison. So instead we just have Edward being so stupidly selfish that he's willing to risk Bella's life not in order to date her -- because there are ways for them to safely date, or at least to date more safely than they are now -- but in order to date her in a very specific kind of way. And despite that way of dating being new enough that old-school Edward might well find it strange and unusual, were he not so busy greedily sniffing Bella's hair or whatever.
65 comments:
empowering Bella to protect herself in any way would spoil the Perfect Dominant Boyfriend
This is one thing that frustrates and angers me about these books. Edward is a terrible dominant. Absolutely atrocious in every way. And if he were a good dominant, he would not want Bella. Because 1) she's a complete and utter mess who should not be in any romantic relationship, let alone a sub to a dom and 2) dominating her is hardly any great feat. Whoop-de-doo, you can dominate a teenage girl who has zero sexual experience and hates herself passionately. What's next, learning to pee in the toilet?
Good dominants do make their subs more empowered. Bad ones make them feel like Bella.
There's a trope that I see occasionally. It goes like this: man and woman are mutually attracted, hitting it off, and sex seems likely. Then the man finds something out that makes her consent questionable - she's underage, for instance, or far more drunk than she originally seemed. Despite the fact that he still desires her, and she obviously desires him, the man turns down sex - sometimes incurring her wrath in the process. Occasionally it's used to show that the man, who may have been presented as a jackass earlier, is in fact a decent guy when the chips are down.
This trope does have a number of Unfortunate Implications, but all in all I'm ok with it - it's good to have the message sent, in pop culture, that Good Guys Respect Consent, and that in certain situations, one may not be able to meaningfully give consent.
However. I worry that the message being taken away is less that "you shouldn't take advantage of someone who is currently unable to give consent," and more "it's ok - and even proper - to police women's decisions, because the poor little things can't make good decisions on their own." It's one thing to imply that a woman can't give consent because she's drunk/high/sixteen, but quite another to then infer that she can't give consent because she's, y'know, a woman - emotional and irrational and doesn't understand what's best for her. And yet Edward's constant denial of Bella's sexual agency "for her own good", and the fact that hordes of adoring fans think this makes him just as much a chivalrous gentleman as the guy in the above trope, makes me wonder if that second, nasty message is the one most people are receiving.
There's a trope that I see occasionally. It goes like this: man and woman are mutually attracted, hitting it off, and sex seems likely. Then the man finds something out that makes her consent questionable - she's underage, for instance, or far more drunk than she originally seemed. Despite the fact that he still desires her, and she obviously desires him, the man turns down sex - sometimes incurring her wrath in the process. Occasionally it's used to show that the man, who may have been presented as a jackass earlier, is in fact a decent guy when the chips are down.
This trope does have a number of Unfortunate Implications, but all in all I'm ok with it - it's good to have the message sent, in pop culture, that Good Guys Respect Consent, and that in certain situations, one may not be able to meaningfully give consent.
However. I worry that the message being taken away is less that "you shouldn't take advantage of someone who is currently unable to give consent," and more "it's ok - and even proper - to police women's decisions, because the poor little things can't make good decisions on their own." It's one thing to imply that a woman can't give consent because she's drunk/high/sixteen, but quite another to then infer that she can't give consent because she's, y'know, a woman - emotional and irrational and doesn't understand what's best for her. And yet Edward's constant denial of Bella's sexual agency "for her own good", and the fact that hordes of adoring fans think this makes him just as much a chivalrous gentleman as the guy in the above trope, makes me wonder if that second, nasty message is the one most people are receiving.
Well, that's my point - in order for someone to really, truly believe in abstinence as the best policy, they have to really, truly believe that hormonal teenagers have enough willpower to resist some pretty compelling temptation. They have to believe that a truly good person will not make mistakes, will not lose control, will not have a moment of weakness, will not rationalize that "well, it's ok this time because X." Ever. No matter how strong their physical desire is. There's no need to plan for safe sex, to carry a condom just in case, because you can and should rely solely on your willpower.
And if the belief in the power of willpower is that strong and ingrained, I wonder if that influences how you see people's actions in other contexts. I speculate that Meyer may not have included Bella and Edward planning ways for them to see each other safely, not because she thought of it and decided against it for romance/plot reasons, but because it honestly didn't occur to her as an author to seriously doubt Edward's willpower. Yes, he's tempted and that temptation leaves him tormented (in that woobie appealing way that makes half the audience want to comfort and reassure him), but he knows hurting Bella is wrong and he cares for Bella, so of course his willpower will never slip. How could anyone doubt that? Building in safety precautions, then, is pointless because the danger, no matter how much Edward may worry about it, isn't really real.
And... for obvious reasons, I think the mental framing of "good people never mess up, so since I'm a good person I shouldn't worry about taking precautions to keep from messing up" is dangerous.
Bit of a tangent, but my least favourite part of all the books was when Edward makes Bella convince him she wants to wait until marriage until sex. He's been refusing to have sex with her until after marriage, and she agrees to a marriage she doesn't want just to get access to his junk, and finally he agrees that they can call off the wedding and have sex. Only he does so in enough of a passive-aggressive manner that she says "No, I want to wait." AND HE MAKES HER CONVINCE HIM SHE'S SERIOUS.
She's not even allowed to want her own desires! That's too much autonomy for a woman ... not only does she have to do everything you want, she has to tell you she agrees while she does it.
I don't know why this post of Ana's reminds me so much of that section, but URGH.
Bit of a tangent, but my least favourite part of all the books was when Edward makes Bella convince him she wants to wait until marriage until sex. He's been refusing to have sex with her until after marriage, and she agrees to a marriage she doesn't want just to get access to his junk, and finally he agrees that they can call off the wedding and have sex. Only he does so in enough of a passive-aggressive manner that she says "No, I want to wait." AND HE MAKES HER CONVINCE HIM SHE'S SERIOUS.
She's not even allowed to want her own desires! That's too much autonomy for a woman ... not only does she have to do everything you want, she has to tell you she agrees while she does it.
I don't know why this post of Ana's reminds me so much of that section, but URGH.
"... what exactly are we supposed to be thinking Bella is doing while she's all alone most of the time having no hobbies and very few outings with friends and a nice comfy bedroom?"
Even more damning...Bella doesn't like company and hates to be interrupted. Her father doesn't see much of her, even though she's living in the same house. She's got pasty skin, a dull affect, and is lacking in vivacity. Any 19th-century GP would have known what to think of that. (The medical advice back then would have been that Bella should get married right away.)
"But somehow I doubt the message of Twilight was intended to be: masturbate a lot."
FWIW, there are lots of Mormons in western Washington State. I grew up around Mormon kids, and found out from them that...there are certain activities...upon which the Mormon church sternly frowns. So I guess the moral of the story (if there is one) is that it's a good thing Bella isn't a Mormon.
“But don’t worry. I’m essentially a selfish creature. I crave your company too much to do what I should.”
Is it a trope of romance novels to compare the love interest so explicitly to a drug, while actually talking to hir? When “I’m a man, I can’t help it” isn’t enough, add a bit of depersonalisation to taste!
Edward is placing Bella in mortal peril in order to satisfy his own romantic whims for privacy and finger-twining.
How much do you want to bet this is also because they’re Special and hanging round the other Forksians would tarnish their love? (Also because Edward fears Jessica’s flaming silver stake.)
staying with Edward is not in Bella's best interests because eventually we will retroactively introduce the Volturi: the violent ruling vampire clan who murder and/or turn any humans who know about the existence of vampires.
Could this be Edward’s plan? He’s godsawful at taking responsibility for his desires, maybe he’s more comfortable with the thought of manipulating events such that someone else (someone else he already dislikes, in fact) will force his hand and let him convince himself that oh, he didn’t want to corrupt such delicate innocence, but they made him do it! (And this book ends with Edward being forced into doing what he’s wanted since he first saw Bella, doesn’t it?)
“But don’t worry. I’m essentially a selfish creature. I crave your company too much to do what I should.”
Is it a trope of romance novels to compare the love interest so explicitly to a drug, while actually talking to hir? When “I’m a man, I can’t help it” isn’t enough, add a bit of depersonalisation to taste!
Edward is placing Bella in mortal peril in order to satisfy his own romantic whims for privacy and finger-twining.
How much do you want to bet this is also because they’re Special and hanging round the other Forksians would tarnish their love? (Also because Edward fears Jessica’s flaming silver stake.)
staying with Edward is not in Bella's best interests because eventually we will retroactively introduce the Volturi: the violent ruling vampire clan who murder and/or turn any humans who know about the existence of vampires.
Could this be Edward’s plan? He’s godsawful at taking responsibility for his desires, maybe he’s more comfortable with the thought of manipulating events such that someone else (someone else he already dislikes, in fact) will force his hand and let him convince himself that oh, he didn’t want to corrupt such delicate innocence, but they made him do it! (And this book ends with Edward being forced into doing what he’s wanted since he first saw Bella, doesn’t it?)
At least, that has been my experience. Complicated.
This, yes - and very individual, and incredibly varied sometimes even as an individual. Knowing that I have a diagnosis and a treatment plan helps me personally sometimes; but just as often, it can also make things worse. Especially since my depression is very cyclical, and low points often lead to constant haranguing from my internal auditor of "you have medicine! Why are you not happier? What's wrong with you? How broken are you that even medicine can't fix it?" Bootstraps Theory does not work for me, I just feel worse that I can't force myself to feel better. :-(
At least, that has been my experience. Complicated.
This, yes - and very individual, and incredibly varied sometimes even as an individual. Knowing that I have a diagnosis and a treatment plan helps me personally sometimes; but just as often, it can also make things worse. Especially since my depression is very cyclical, and low points often lead to constant haranguing from my internal auditor of "you have medicine! Why are you not happier? What's wrong with you? How broken are you that even medicine can't fix it?" Bootstraps Theory does not work for me, I just feel worse that I can't force myself to feel better. :-(
Echoed.
I was something along the lines of asexual for a long time into my teens. I'm going to try to post this without oversharing, but I've been uncomfortable with this idea that girls with lots of time on their hand, and no religious convictions, figure out their sexuality at any sort of rapid rate, since I didn't at all. And despite being in a very liberal atmosphere, and quite well-read, I didn't really have the resources to understand myself, which I regret (about society more than about myself - I was trying.)
Echoed.
I was something along the lines of asexual for a long time into my teens. I'm going to try to post this without oversharing, but I've been uncomfortable with this idea that girls with lots of time on their hand, and no religious convictions, figure out their sexuality at any sort of rapid rate, since I didn't at all. And despite being in a very liberal atmosphere, and quite well-read, I didn't really have the resources to understand myself, which I regret (about society more than about myself - I was trying.)
Amarie. That was the best. I think I learned something about myself with that, as well as sexuality in general. Thank you.
Back on the topic of vampire-depression. Yeah, I thought there would be aspects, patterns of thought, that would need therapy. Therein lies the story. At first, she would likely castigate herself for the depressed thoughts. As she goes through her first cycle of Highschool&College, she, being of a curious mindset and an appreciation of literature, would probably take literature courses, along with math and biology. The literature and biology would have students who also take psychology. Perhaps not on her first go, but her second or third trip through higher education, she'll take psychology courses, if for no other reason because it would shed new light on many great works of literature.
When learning about depression, she'd notice some parallels to her old life, to her own thinking patterns. Freed from the biochemistry of depression, she might even (with multiple trips through higher education) devise her own therapy. She'd learn some patterns that are both common and, given her own history, unnerving.
It would involve coming to terms with what had been done to her, what she had done to herself, how she had treated Jacob (and the incredible creepiness of him falling for her daughter and her family so completely dominating his life).
In the end, whether Edward learns with her or tries to continue his own controling patterns, she'll come out the end of it with a more complete comprehension of humanity, vampirity, werewolfity, hybridity, and, just to throw something else she'll meet along the way, dragonity.
@ everybody:
It's true that Edward hangs out (not in a batlike way, one presumes) in Bella's bedroom for hours and hours and weeks and months, unbeknownst to her. In all that time he never sees anything especially noteworthy, at least not that he's willing to admit to later. So maybe I'm wrong. But I suspect the existence of an in-text joke, b/c Bella (in terms of demeanor, complexion, behavior, everything) perfectly fits the mid-to-late 19th-century profile of an adolescent who has Grown Addicted to a Secret Practice. Whole manuals were written on the subject at that time, with the objective of warning unwary parents, and most of them could have had a picture of Bella on the cover.
Remember the vampire in Nosferatu? He conforms so totally to the early 20th-century idea of what a syphlitic "should" be like that he's a parody of the stereotype. In other words, he's a joke about the idea of syphilis (syphilis in particular and "degeneracy" in general) which the original viewers of that film would have understood perfectly. Well, as the Nosferatu vampire is to syphilis, so Bella is to masturbation. We don't appreciate this immediately because, for the most part, jokes of kind I've just described have taken a steep dive off the radar screen. (Which is no great loss.) There are a couple of reasons for that: first, we're no longer familiar with the typology on which satire of this kind is based (thank God). And second, these kinds of jokes usually deal with things we no longer dread (once again, thank you Jesus) so the aggression connected with the dread no longer has to be dispersed through humor. But a person deeply read in the literature of the appropriate time period would still be capable of the same kind of snarkery the people of that time period engaged in themselves. We no longer get the joke or the point of the joke, but we sense that something is going on, and clock in a lot of comment time discussing what is or isn't there. (JMO.)
@ everybody:
It's true that Edward hangs out (not in a batlike way, one presumes) in Bella's bedroom for hours and hours and weeks and months, unbeknownst to her. In all that time he never sees anything especially noteworthy, at least not that he's willing to admit to later. So maybe I'm wrong. But I suspect the existence of an in-text joke, b/c Bella (in terms of demeanor, complexion, behavior, everything) perfectly fits the mid-to-late 19th-century profile of an adolescent who has Grown Addicted to a Secret Practice. Whole manuals were written on the subject at that time, with the objective of warning unwary parents, and most of them could have had a picture of Bella on the cover.
Remember the vampire in Nosferatu? He conforms so totally to the early 20th-century idea of what a syphlitic "should" be like that he's a parody of the stereotype. In other words, he's a joke about the idea of syphilis (syphilis in particular and "degeneracy" in general) which the original viewers of that film would have understood perfectly. Well, as the Nosferatu vampire is to syphilis, so Bella is to masturbation. We don't appreciate this immediately because, for the most part, jokes of kind I've just described have taken a steep dive off the radar screen. (Which is no great loss.) There are a couple of reasons for that: first, we're no longer familiar with the typology on which satire of this kind is based (thank God). And second, these kinds of jokes usually deal with things we no longer dread (once again, thank you Jesus) so the aggression connected with the dread no longer has to be dispersed through humor. But a person deeply read in the literature of the appropriate time period would still be capable of the same kind of snarkery the people of that time period engaged in themselves. We no longer get the joke or the point of the joke, but we sense that something is going on, and clock in a lot of comment time discussing what is or isn't there. (JMO.)
The fact that she would have to stumble upon it suggests a possibility that she would... not stumble upon it.
I have never in my life known any woman who did not stumble upon masturbation between the ages of 8 and 12. (With whom I was close enough to talk about sexual things, and that's a lot of women and girls.) The only realistic way Bella doesn't masturbate is if she has been taught exactly what it is and that it is wrong. It is at least as improbable that a girl does not masturbate as that a boy does not masturbate.
The fact that she would have to stumble upon it suggests a possibility that she would... not stumble upon it.
I have never in my life known any woman who did not stumble upon masturbation between the ages of 8 and 12. (With whom I was close enough to talk about sexual things, and that's a lot of women and girls.) The only realistic way Bella doesn't masturbate is if she has been taught exactly what it is and that it is wrong. It is at least as improbable that a girl does not masturbate as that a boy does not masturbate.
Edward is placing Bella in mortal peril in order to satisfy his own romantic whims for privacy and finger-twining
This is not only Edward's whims. Bella desperately wants to be alone with Edward at all times. She hates everyone else, especially herself, and adores him. She wants this at least as badly as Edward does. If he decided he'd not give this to her, but didn't break up with her, I'd hate him even more than I already do, if that's possible.
I can't fault either of them for wanting to be alone with each other most of the time. I fault them for hating everyone else, but not for wanting each other's company, and not for wanting a romantic relationship with each other. I want to be alone with my husband most of the time. I have also never liked public dating. Edward is a vampire, so that makes this dangerous, which can be terribly sexy (in fantasy). There's nothing wrong with the basic idea in a romantic fantasy novel. Meyer just can't execute it. If Bella and Edward were different people -- if they weren't both colossal jerks -- and if Meyer could write her way out of a wet paper bag, and didn't have hugely creepy ideas about pretty much everything, and didn't claim that Edward was the perfectest person imaginable, we could have ended up with an enjoyable, sexy little fantasy. But then it would be a completely different book.
Edward is placing Bella in mortal peril in order to satisfy his own romantic whims for privacy and finger-twining
This is not only Edward's whims. Bella desperately wants to be alone with Edward at all times. She hates everyone else, especially herself, and adores him. She wants this at least as badly as Edward does. If he decided he'd not give this to her, but didn't break up with her, I'd hate him even more than I already do, if that's possible.
I can't fault either of them for wanting to be alone with each other most of the time. I fault them for hating everyone else, but not for wanting each other's company, and not for wanting a romantic relationship with each other. I want to be alone with my husband most of the time. I have also never liked public dating. Edward is a vampire, so that makes this dangerous, which can be terribly sexy (in fantasy). There's nothing wrong with the basic idea in a romantic fantasy novel. Meyer just can't execute it. If Bella and Edward were different people -- if they weren't both colossal jerks -- and if Meyer could write her way out of a wet paper bag, and didn't have hugely creepy ideas about pretty much everything, and didn't claim that Edward was the perfectest person imaginable, we could have ended up with an enjoyable, sexy little fantasy. But then it would be a completely different book.
Lliira: I didn't find my clitoris until I was eighteen, and I wasn't expecially sheltered. I didn't have any interest in sex or feelings of sexual attraction until I was fourteen. I find it entirely plausible that Bella doesn't know how things work.
Lliira: I didn't find my clitoris until I was eighteen, and I wasn't expecially sheltered. I didn't have any interest in sex or feelings of sexual attraction until I was fourteen. I find it entirely plausible that Bella doesn't know how things work.
I was 21. I had heard the concept of masturbation and I understood that it was a thing that people did, and had the understanding that there was nothing wrong with it, but I didn't know the mechanics of it and didn't bother to self-explore to find out. A friend of mine only started into it last year and she was 27 at the time. In her case she had heard of it but assumed that it just wasn't that great and didn't put any effort into checking it out.
Lliira: just because you haven't met us doesn't mean we don't exist.
I was 21. I had heard the concept of masturbation and I understood that it was a thing that people did, and had the understanding that there was nothing wrong with it, but I didn't know the mechanics of it and didn't bother to self-explore to find out. A friend of mine only started into it last year and she was 27 at the time. In her case she had heard of it but assumed that it just wasn't that great and didn't put any effort into checking it out.
Lliira: just because you haven't met us doesn't mean we don't exist.
The fact that she would have to stumble upon it suggests a possibility that she would... not stumble upon it.
My Doylish explanation is that, if masturbation was a possibility in Bella's mind, it would have made it onto the page.
Watsonionly, it could have been tried and found to simply not be her thing. In fact, Edward may be the first sexual feelings Bella has ever had.
I'm starting to see Bella/Edward's realtionship to have a basis similar to Justine/Michael's relationship in The Dresden Chronicles. When we first meet both, we find out that Michael is a vampire that feeds through emotional energies and Justine actually benefits from this feeding because she has manic episodes and he levels her out by syphoning off this excess energy.
Similarly, I imagine Twilightened vampires, among their many other powers, being walking anti-depressants. That would be a good way to explain Renfield and the like. People who are mired in depression or subject to paranoid delusions, etc. They catch glimpse and/or some form of signifigant contact with a vampire and... low they are freed from the biochemistry that has cursed them and they attribute this freedom to the vampire that allows them moments of joy or calm.
This also, by the way, would explain why the mindreading works on most but not on Bella and, of course, why she hyperfocuses on Edward. Her brainchemistry just doesn't fit what his power is used to reading. And, being effectively drugged on his presence, he's the only joy she really comprehends, really the first time her brain has ever been able to feel that.
The fact that she would have to stumble upon it suggests a possibility that she would... not stumble upon it.
My Doylish explanation is that, if masturbation was a possibility in Bella's mind, it would have made it onto the page.
Watsonionly, it could have been tried and found to simply not be her thing. In fact, Edward may be the first sexual feelings Bella has ever had.
I'm starting to see Bella/Edward's realtionship to have a basis similar to Justine/Michael's relationship in The Dresden Chronicles. When we first meet both, we find out that Michael is a vampire that feeds through emotional energies and Justine actually benefits from this feeding because she has manic episodes and he levels her out by syphoning off this excess energy.
Similarly, I imagine Twilightened vampires, among their many other powers, being walking anti-depressants. That would be a good way to explain Renfield and the like. People who are mired in depression or subject to paranoid delusions, etc. They catch glimpse and/or some form of signifigant contact with a vampire and... low they are freed from the biochemistry that has cursed them and they attribute this freedom to the vampire that allows them moments of joy or calm.
This also, by the way, would explain why the mindreading works on most but not on Bella and, of course, why she hyperfocuses on Edward. Her brainchemistry just doesn't fit what his power is used to reading. And, being effectively drugged on his presence, he's the only joy she really comprehends, really the first time her brain has ever been able to feel that.
Okay, I've been leaving a bad message there about the difficulty level of depression. I didn't see that until you pointed it out so, thanks and appologies in equal measure.
Question: Does the biological aspect of depression follow Bella into vampireness?
Either way, Bella learning about the nature of her own depression would be, at the very least, a starting point of a story of struggle, anger, guilt, fear, and redemption. Thus making all four books a disturbing prologue of troubles.
Okay, I've been leaving a bad message there about the difficulty level of depression. I didn't see that until you pointed it out so, thanks and appologies in equal measure.
Question: Does the biological aspect of depression follow Bella into vampireness?
Either way, Bella learning about the nature of her own depression would be, at the very least, a starting point of a story of struggle, anger, guilt, fear, and redemption. Thus making all four books a disturbing prologue of troubles.
I'm not suggesting a couple psychology books would clear up Bella's depression, but they might give her some understanding, that would lead her to a better comprehension of what was going on in her own brain than what she had before.
The story would go that she would, because she has to go along with the repeated Highschool and College along with everybody else, discover, in one of the college runs, that she is in an abusive relationship. Sure, Edward might have multiple medical doctorates, but how many of them took, say, women's studies on a go? Or human sexuality? Or even psychology within the past, say, 3 decades?
I'm not suggesting a couple psychology books would clear up Bella's depression, but they might give her some understanding, that would lead her to a better comprehension of what was going on in her own brain than what she had before.
The story would go that she would, because she has to go along with the repeated Highschool and College along with everybody else, discover, in one of the college runs, that she is in an abusive relationship. Sure, Edward might have multiple medical doctorates, but how many of them took, say, women's studies on a go? Or human sexuality? Or even psychology within the past, say, 3 decades?
Thank you for that.
That takes away the supernatural aspects regarding Bella's depression relief, but seems to make it even more tragic. All it would take would be for her to find a couple psychology books, develope an interest and...
That could actually make a good 5th book.
Thank you for that.
That takes away the supernatural aspects regarding Bella's depression relief, but seems to make it even more tragic. All it would take would be for her to find a couple psychology books, develope an interest and...
That could actually make a good 5th book.
That's food for thought. But, to my understanding (lacking though it may be), Edward doesn't seem to show personality traits that would help break someone out of their depression. They don't start talking, really having conversations, until she's already obsessed. About the only interaction they've had to spark her obsession, is that she notices he exists... and the obsession begins.
That's food for thought. But, to my understanding (lacking though it may be), Edward doesn't seem to show personality traits that would help break someone out of their depression. They don't start talking, really having conversations, until she's already obsessed. About the only interaction they've had to spark her obsession, is that she notices he exists... and the obsession begins.
I'm not sure we can distinguish traits that can or cannot be helpful in mitigating depression. It could be as simple as a scenario in which Bella sees Edward and her mind latches onto him like an anchor and uses him as a justification to haul itself up. Even when they do start talking, I'm not sure there's any hint there that the quality of Edward's character would be what supports Bella's improved outlook.
I'm not sure we can distinguish traits that can or cannot be helpful in mitigating depression. It could be as simple as a scenario in which Bella sees Edward and her mind latches onto him like an anchor and uses him as a justification to haul itself up. Even when they do start talking, I'm not sure there's any hint there that the quality of Edward's character would be what supports Bella's improved outlook.
Well, the responsible, mature head of household that holds the family together requires a specific educational set. Masturbation isn't in that specific set.
Is it likely? I'll agree that it's incredibly unlikely. She grew up around cities, so must have come into contact with, you know, movies and TV that've mentioned it. She reads classical literature for fun and, if Chaucer had been in there, there must have been some reference. But, none of that, even with her seeming levelheadedness, necessitates this knowledge.
And, her level-headedness, when seen in conext of her inability to see others as really liking her or of her to really like other people suggests a level of depression that, were it taken to a psychiatrist, would have been treated with medication. That means she's not really level-headed, but going through a domestic ritual somewhere between pure ritual and the hopes that being good enough will make her feel... Thus, her adherance and faith in the ritual of domestic service would provide a focus and blinders keeping her from knowledge that would, otherwise, be obvious.
I don't know if this has been brought up before, but this does put a new spin on Bella's attraction. Around Edward, looking at his face, thinking about him, she's not depressed anymore. Sure, he looks nice, but the real thing she's attracted to is the same thing she could get with propper medication. Her nervous system says "I'm free, I'm free to feel good things!" but she interprets that as "Edward must be so sexy to cause me to feel things."
Back to the topic, if masturbation had been an activity of Bella's at all, with reference to her attraction to Edward, I think Meyers would have mentioned it. It would have been another layer of "look how great Edward is" in the prose. Even if Bella only was tempted but didn't go through with it. If Bella knew such things existed, it's likely that temptation would have come up in the text.
Well, the responsible, mature head of household that holds the family together requires a specific educational set. Masturbation isn't in that specific set.
Is it likely? I'll agree that it's incredibly unlikely. She grew up around cities, so must have come into contact with, you know, movies and TV that've mentioned it. She reads classical literature for fun and, if Chaucer had been in there, there must have been some reference. But, none of that, even with her seeming levelheadedness, necessitates this knowledge.
And, her level-headedness, when seen in conext of her inability to see others as really liking her or of her to really like other people suggests a level of depression that, were it taken to a psychiatrist, would have been treated with medication. That means she's not really level-headed, but going through a domestic ritual somewhere between pure ritual and the hopes that being good enough will make her feel... Thus, her adherance and faith in the ritual of domestic service would provide a focus and blinders keeping her from knowledge that would, otherwise, be obvious.
I don't know if this has been brought up before, but this does put a new spin on Bella's attraction. Around Edward, looking at his face, thinking about him, she's not depressed anymore. Sure, he looks nice, but the real thing she's attracted to is the same thing she could get with propper medication. Her nervous system says "I'm free, I'm free to feel good things!" but she interprets that as "Edward must be so sexy to cause me to feel things."
Back to the topic, if masturbation had been an activity of Bella's at all, with reference to her attraction to Edward, I think Meyers would have mentioned it. It would have been another layer of "look how great Edward is" in the prose. Even if Bella only was tempted but didn't go through with it. If Bella knew such things existed, it's likely that temptation would have come up in the text.
CN: murder, rape
Oof. Today's post really drives home the Edward-controlled aspect of their relationship. As you've said here, everything hangs on his self-control. Bella's self-control (or lack thereof) has no real impact on the shape or progress of their relationship or her personal safety. Even if she chose to avoid spending time alone with him he still feels completely comfortable sneaking into her bedroom while she's asleep.
In a very strange way it seems like replacing the danger of rape with the danger of murder makes the rape metaphor setup more acceptable somehow. If this were a story about a man and a woman in a relationship where the man was constantly stressing that the woman could be raped by him at any moment, that he thought about raping her, dreamed about it, yearned for it, it would not be romantic. Cloaking it in a fantasy setting and a metaphor, even a violent and horrible metaphor (murder) gives it distance that allows the reader (if they are so inclined) to read romance into the abstinance. We are not particularly impressed by a man who resists raping a woman he is attracted to (at least, this shouldn't be an impressive feat that deserves praise), but maybe we are impressed by a vampire resisting eating a woman because he is attracted to her. This setup requires that Bella and the audience both know that Edward is a vampire, that he is strongly attracted to eating her, and that he is fighting against eating her in order to spend more time with her. I think it also requires Bella to not resist. If she is resisting the situation, or working proactively on her own safety then it diminishes Edward's heroism in his abstinence. It would also make the situation more horrifying again if Bella was actually concerned about the consequences. Her lack of true fear or horror is like some sort of implied consent* in the situation.
*edited to say: I don't believe in implied consent, I do not support the notion of it. I bring it up here as something that seems to be an aspect of the problematic story.
CN: infertility
"Bella hasn't said so far if she's ever wanted children, but Edward assumes that he can't give her any."
It's unfortunate that vampire stories keep missing the opportunity to really address this aspect of a human/vamp relationship. I would love to see a teen-accessable story that addressed a relationship dealing with infertility in a way that didn't get solved with a magical handwave. I think it's a very present fact of life that many people deal with and it deserves to be addressed.
Her consent doesn't seem to become any more important after they're married though. It's still entirely up to Edward within the story. Bella is in a default state of consent that Edward must police and resist for her own good (to avoid injuring her). The one time that Edward agrees to accept her consent (sex post-wedding pre-vampire) it leads to pain and death for Bella, reinforcing the need for Edward to be in control. Married or unmarried, her consent is not really important.
There are many places in that paragraph that I want to stick up quotation marks so that it's clear that these ideas are not good ones that I support, but I'd use so many that it would become meaningless :P
Side thought: Can Bella's ability to give meaningful consent be considered impaired by Edwards vamp powers? Isn't she effectively drugged by his weird attraction powers all the time? It isn't said outright but it could be read in Edward's predator-prey comments about him being such an effective hunter by being attactive.
When I think about "sexy danger" in a romantic interest, I often think of Inuyasha. For those who don't know, it's an anime/manga in which the title character initially wants to kill the female lead Kagome (in this case it's not a biological drive, but several layers of misunderstanding involving reincarnation and betrayal and manipulation by a shapeshifting villain) but, for plot reasons, they have to go on a quest together. This ends up being enabled by a magic necklace that throws him to the ground whenever Kagome says the magic word.
I always thought it was an interesting way to have a love interest be interestingly dangerous while protecting the heroine. In Inuyasha it had to be imposed from outside, but then Inuyasha was intentionally deeply flawed- surely an Ideal Hero would provide Bella with some vampiric weakness or other, just in case? But actually having a weakness of any kind would spoil the Perfect Invulnerable Vampires, and empowering Bella to protect herself in any way would spoil the Perfect Dominant Boyfriend. Sigh.
When I think about "sexy danger" in a romantic interest, I often think of Inuyasha. For those who don't know, it's an anime/manga in which the title character initially wants to kill the female lead Kagome (in this case it's not a biological drive, but several layers of misunderstanding involving reincarnation and betrayal and manipulation by a shapeshifting villain) but, for plot reasons, they have to go on a quest together. This ends up being enabled by a magic necklace that throws him to the ground whenever Kagome says the magic word.
I always thought it was an interesting way to have a love interest be interestingly dangerous while protecting the heroine. In Inuyasha it had to be imposed from outside, but then Inuyasha was intentionally deeply flawed- surely an Ideal Hero would provide Bella with some vampiric weakness or other, just in case? But actually having a weakness of any kind would spoil the Perfect Invulnerable Vampires, and empowering Bella to protect herself in any way would spoil the Perfect Dominant Boyfriend. Sigh.
I'm of the impression that Bella is completely ignorant of such things. Considering her general ignorance of other things, that's not much of a stretch.
Perfectly possible. A friend of mine told me that she was in her mid to late teens* before she realised that she was masturbating. She'd been told that masturbation was wrong, but the concept had been so poorly explained to her that she had no idea that what she was doing was, in fact, masturbation.
What that says about the state of sex ed ....
TRiG.
* I can't, off hand, remember the specific age she mentioned, but it was somewhere thereish.
I'm of the impression that Bella is completely ignorant of such things. Considering her general ignorance of other things, that's not much of a stretch.
Perfectly possible. A friend of mine told me that she was in her mid to late teens* before she realised that she was masturbating. She'd been told that masturbation was wrong, but the concept had been so poorly explained to her that she had no idea that what she was doing was, in fact, masturbation.
What that says about the state of sex ed ....
TRiG.
* I can't, off hand, remember the specific age she mentioned, but it was somewhere thereish.
Building in safety precautions, then, is pointless because the danger, no matter how much Edward may worry about it, isn't really real."
Except that this is author knowledge influencing character actions in really character-problematic ways. Meyer knows Edward would never slip, but Edward can't - he wouldn't be worrying about it unless he thought he could. So what's being demonstrated is probably the worst version of "good people never mess up" ever. (Or one of the worst.) If Edward were actually a good person, he'd take precautions, but he doesn't just not take precautions, he goes out of his way to risk Bella. The message practically becomes "good people never mess up, so I don't have to worry about anything because all of my actions will be protected by a magical good field." (There's actually a lot of that in Twilight - Edward's driving, as well as his behavior with Bella, Bella's failure to think about the issue of driving on ice she can't walk on...I'm pretty sure there are other moments where characters just completely don't consider (or dismiss the possibility off) bad consequences when they really should. It's not just that they don't have to worry about loss of willpower or making a mistake, they're protected from any and all unintended/bad consequences.)
The weird thing is, given the various vampire powers, Edward could probably arrange for sufficiently distant chaperon that they wouldn't intrude on the romance of hanging out in the meadow, say, but would be close enough that they could interfere should Edward lose it.
Or, better still, the entire rape/murder-threat angle could be dropped and Edward could have other vampire related reasons (the Volturi, the fact that many vampires don't object to nomming people, the fact that he's a hundred years old, the fact that they can only sort of be part of human society, etc, etc (hell, invent a threat to vampires or some sort of actual conflict!)) for being concerned about having a relationship with Bella. The magical blood/hooha murder/rape threat (or worse) is not actually romantic! (At least not to me.) It is a huge pile of Do Not Want. It also adds nothing to the story. (Heck, given vampire strength, you can have - and they do have - more standard abstinence porn to your hearts content.)
I feel like part of the problem here is that Bella's lack of ability to give consent is because of her position as an unmarried woman. I enjoy in literature when a man says "I want to sleep with you, but I want to wait until you're sober to be sure that you want it too." (Dave the cop and Leslie Knope in Parks and Rec come to mind, with bonus points for "And I won't hold it against you that I saw you stupid levels of drunk.") But I don't recognize "out of wedlock" as a position that denies a woman the ability to give meaningful consent, and Edward is presenting it as if it does.
I feel like part of the problem here is that Bella's lack of ability to give consent is because of her position as an unmarried woman. I enjoy in literature when a man says "I want to sleep with you, but I want to wait until you're sober to be sure that you want it too." (Dave the cop and Leslie Knope in Parks and Rec come to mind, with bonus points for "And I won't hold it against you that I saw you stupid levels of drunk.") But I don't recognize "out of wedlock" as a position that denies a woman the ability to give meaningful consent, and Edward is presenting it as if it does.
In college, I played a roleplaying game called In Nomine. In one of the storylines a Malachite (the warrior angels that can't fall to become demons) fell in love with a demon and was punished by other angels by being ordered to serve a bunch of demons, causing him discord (a whole bunch of in-game concepts). The storyline I played in was where that Malachite was thought to have fallen, but later found to be trapped in Hell, bound and chained. Once in chains, though, he was free to no longer bind himself by will and laugh and chortle about how he wanted to kill all the demons around him.
That strikes me as the fantasy Meyers is indulging here.
The onetime boddice rippers had an element of keeping the woman pure by having her be, in her very soul, free of evil temptation. She didn't want to have and enjoy sex, that was forced upon her. Thus, she was allowed to have sex but not allowed to want it.
Meyers flips that over here in a... yeah still quite wrong kind of way. This fantasy says "Oh, yes, now you have the right to desire what it is quite natural to desire, because you have these chains right here, in the form of a controling boyfriend who makes abstinence some strange form of anti-rape that has all the halmarks of rape but doesn't leave you impure from having had any genital interaction."
What does this show? In the old way, the fantasy was that it all happened in a way to make what happened to the body unimportant because the soul was still pure of desire/choice. In this new way, Belle is free to be as wanton as she wants with the desires of the flesh, because her soul is unimportant since her body is still untainted. It shows that who the woman is has become even less important in the eyes of an abstinence-only obsessed culture.
"There's a trope that I see occasionally. It goes like this: man and woman are mutually attracted, hitting it off, and sex seems likely. Then the man finds something out that makes her consent questionable - she's underage, for instance, or far more drunk than she originally seemed. Despite the fact that he still desires her, and she obviously desires him, the man turns down sex - sometimes incurring her wrath in the process. Occasionally it's used to show that the man, who may have been presented as a jackass earlier, is in fact a decent guy when the chips are down."
When this is done right (for values of "right" that are "I find myself applauding the guy, rather than being annoyed at him"), it's framed not as something wrong with her desires, but with him wanting something other than what's being offered. He doesn't want a woman whose intoxication will make him question whether they would have slept together without the booze. He doesn't want sex as a way for the woman to "prove" her love, or a means of revenge against her ex. Etc. When it's put in those terms -- him wanting different circumstances, so that he can be sure they're both getting what they want -- I'm okay with it.
But as with many aspects of characterization, there's a fine balance in making sure the behavior comes across that way, rather than as its closely-related jackass cousin.
"There's a trope that I see occasionally. It goes like this: man and woman are mutually attracted, hitting it off, and sex seems likely. Then the man finds something out that makes her consent questionable - she's underage, for instance, or far more drunk than she originally seemed. Despite the fact that he still desires her, and she obviously desires him, the man turns down sex - sometimes incurring her wrath in the process. Occasionally it's used to show that the man, who may have been presented as a jackass earlier, is in fact a decent guy when the chips are down."
When this is done right (for values of "right" that are "I find myself applauding the guy, rather than being annoyed at him"), it's framed not as something wrong with her desires, but with him wanting something other than what's being offered. He doesn't want a woman whose intoxication will make him question whether they would have slept together without the booze. He doesn't want sex as a way for the woman to "prove" her love, or a means of revenge against her ex. Etc. When it's put in those terms -- him wanting different circumstances, so that he can be sure they're both getting what they want -- I'm okay with it.
But as with many aspects of characterization, there's a fine balance in making sure the behavior comes across that way, rather than as its closely-related jackass cousin.
Smilodon: I think you're dead on with the Really Problematic implications of "I want this!" / "I won't let you have it" overtones of Bella's and Edward's situation.
Kristycat: Writers sometimes talk about how it's important to laugh at your own humour, or feel sad at the tragedy in your story, or whatever, because if you don't feel the emotion you're writing, then nobody else is going to, either. Obviously I have zero idea what Meyer was feeling as she wrote this stuff, but she persistently fails to make me feel any of the tension that's supposedly there, because she so diligently defuses it before it can go anywhere. I never feel the slightest risk that Edward will actually flip out and attack Bella, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's because Meyer never seriously entertained the possibility. She certainly doesn't provide anything more than some bad dialogue to support the idea that it is a possibility.
There's just . . . no CONFLICT in this story. Like, ever. Edward and Bella sneaking around would be great if somebody other than Jealous Jessica and Purity-Police Charlie had any reason to oppose their relationship. But no, we can't have the Cullens trying to keep them apart, because then the Cullens wouldn't be perfect and wonderful! The only conflict here is "what we want is Wrong" -- but even there, the characters' willpower is perfect (otherwise the abstinence fantasy fails), ergo the conflict is fake.
Smilodon: I think you're dead on with the Really Problematic implications of "I want this!" / "I won't let you have it" overtones of Bella's and Edward's situation.
Kristycat: Writers sometimes talk about how it's important to laugh at your own humour, or feel sad at the tragedy in your story, or whatever, because if you don't feel the emotion you're writing, then nobody else is going to, either. Obviously I have zero idea what Meyer was feeling as she wrote this stuff, but she persistently fails to make me feel any of the tension that's supposedly there, because she so diligently defuses it before it can go anywhere. I never feel the slightest risk that Edward will actually flip out and attack Bella, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's because Meyer never seriously entertained the possibility. She certainly doesn't provide anything more than some bad dialogue to support the idea that it is a possibility.
There's just . . . no CONFLICT in this story. Like, ever. Edward and Bella sneaking around would be great if somebody other than Jealous Jessica and Purity-Police Charlie had any reason to oppose their relationship. But no, we can't have the Cullens trying to keep them apart, because then the Cullens wouldn't be perfect and wonderful! The only conflict here is "what we want is Wrong" -- but even there, the characters' willpower is perfect (otherwise the abstinence fantasy fails), ergo the conflict is fake.
man and woman are mutually attracted, hitting it off, and sex seems likely. Then the man finds something out that makes her consent questionable - she's underage, for instance, or far more drunk than she originally seemed.
There's also a risk with this trope of promoting the idea that women trick men into having sex with them that seems to play nastily into the whole "false rape accusation" thing.
There must be a way to present "you shouldn't take advantage of someone who is currently unable to give consent" without the unfortunate implications. I'm afraid that gender swapping it or making it same sex just gives it a different pile of unfortunate implications. (Man is our society screwed up when it comes to sex and relationships. And gender portrayals. And... *sigh*)
man and woman are mutually attracted, hitting it off, and sex seems likely. Then the man finds something out that makes her consent questionable - she's underage, for instance, or far more drunk than she originally seemed.
There's also a risk with this trope of promoting the idea that women trick men into having sex with them that seems to play nastily into the whole "false rape accusation" thing.
There must be a way to present "you shouldn't take advantage of someone who is currently unable to give consent" without the unfortunate implications. I'm afraid that gender swapping it or making it same sex just gives it a different pile of unfortunate implications. (Man is our society screwed up when it comes to sex and relationships. And gender portrayals. And... *sigh*)
I'm of the impression that Bella is completely ignorant of such things. Considering her general ignorance of other things, that's not much of a stretch. She doesn't understand how waitresses make a living and get tips, the implications of invading another person's home to watch them sleep, etc. So, it seems like Bella would have a lot of pent up energy and very little knowledge of ways to accomplish release outside of the only one she's been told, time and again, can't happen until marriage or else she's impure.
I'm of the impression that Bella is completely ignorant of such things. Considering her general ignorance of other things, that's not much of a stretch. She doesn't understand how waitresses make a living and get tips, the implications of invading another person's home to watch them sleep, etc. So, it seems like Bella would have a lot of pent up energy and very little knowledge of ways to accomplish release outside of the only one she's been told, time and again, can't happen until marriage or else she's impure.
Is the livestock powerful?
So am I the only one thinking of the Red Bull of Connaught? That too was a symbol, and a causus belli, but not powerful in itself. (Except insofar as a bull is powerful. Physical strength, yes.) Now Maedbh was powerful. Very much so. (There's a naked statue of her in Dublin. Apparently she was also quite sexually aggressive. We didn't cover those legends in school.)
TRiG.
Is the livestock powerful?
So am I the only one thinking of the Red Bull of Connaught? That too was a symbol, and a causus belli, but not powerful in itself. (Except insofar as a bull is powerful. Physical strength, yes.) Now Maedbh was powerful. Very much so. (There's a naked statue of her in Dublin. Apparently she was also quite sexually aggressive. We didn't cover those legends in school.)
TRiG.
I get that Edward's consent matters too. But I wonder if it does/should make a difference whether his reluctance is based on his own wishes, or on a misguided attempt to protect Bella from her own wishes?
In my opinion, I have to say that it doesn't make a difference, but it should make a difference, and I hope my whys make sense....
Why it doesn't make a difference: because he really is entitled to withhold consent for whatever reason - wrong time of day, bad headaches, gut-wrenching moral conflict, etc. and if that moral conflict involves helping someone else to sin, it's still a legitimate reason to say no.
Why it should make a difference: because his reasons aren't fashioned as "I would be guilty if I help you do this thing that I believe is wrong;" they're fashioned as "I have to make the choice for you because you won't know you're making the wrong one." So I see it as something Edward should ruminate on for a while and realize that the motivation behind his decision is ultimately objectifying and controlling of Bella, and then decide how any other reasons against it (like his own potential culpability) balance in the scales with the reasons for it.
Yeah, I kind of hate guys like that. (Frr nyfb: Natry ng gur raq bs Ohssl F3. Neebtnag qvpx.)
It's one thing to say that you don't want to be part of sex with underaged people/drunk people/potential drama/etc. It's another to frame it as "...and you don't know your own mind, little girl, so I'm gonna do what's best."
And likewise, if Edward doesn't want to have sex with Bella because he doesn't believe in premarital sex, sure, whatever. He has the right to do that; she has the right to break things off and get satisfaction elsewhere; sexual incompatibility is sexual incompatibility, and it's very sad, but that's how things go sometimes. Presenting it as For Her Own Good, on the other hand, is just...hey, dick move.
"...If this were a story about a man and a woman in a relationship where the man was constantly stressing that the woman could be raped by him at any moment, that he thought about raping her, dreamed about it, yearned for it..."
...spent all night every night hidden in her bedroom barely managing not to do it...
Yes, and this goes back to a point about modern vampire stories I've made before: the vampire might go on and on and on about how losing control is almost inevita>ble in even the best circumstances, but it will never actually happen.
I don't get the feeling that the author is ever concerned about pregnancy or STI's or anything like that. The danger of sex seems to be that sex will happen. Pregnancy is off the table since Edward (as far as he understands the world) is incapable of impregnating anyone. STI's are never brought up. I think that the emphasis on the author's moral view of sex makes contraception a moot point. Condoms won't preserve the characters "purity," hormonal birth control won't maintain their virignity. So discussing it (contraception) is unnecessary in the story because it would only do two things: 1) make the will-they-won't-they question of sex less dire because they're obviously planning for it to happen eventually and 2) make the "icky" aspects of sex intrude on the wonderful abstinence glow.
Also there's the notion that virgins getting it on with virgins never have to worry about STI's. Fits with the abstinence view of virginity as pure and sex as corrupting that purity.
Can't comment on whether or not the author thought any of that through though, or if, as you suggest, it just never occured to her to consider it.
I wonder if we could frame Edward's actions in the construct of manliness as it relates to head-of-household, sole provider/protector, etc. - all the stereotypes that tell us what "Real Men" are supposed to be like. Relying on his own sheer willpower not to kill Bella puts her at jeopardy; but if he's supposed to be her staunch protector and sole reliance, then accepting outside help such as a chaperone or dating only in very public locations means that he is a failure in meeting that "Real Man" standard because his strength isn't sufficient in itself to keep her safe.
Of course, this would also mean that he places his self-image above her well-being. :-/
Looking at the turning as a rape metaphor makes it even more angering for me, because Bella wants to be turned and Edward doesn't want to turn her because it's against his morality. So if biting is a metaphor for sex, their conversations go like this:
Bella: I want to have sex with you.
Edward: No, because despite my overpowering desire for you, rape is wrong.
Bella: But I want it!
Edward: That's not a decision you're qualified to make.
Post a Comment