Twilight Article has LKH Similarities

[dan-lian.livejournal.com]

I know we often comment on LKH's Mary Sue writing. I get Salon articles in an RSS feed, and was reading one on the Stephanie Meyer phenomenon. This passage caught my eye in particular:

"Otherwise directionless and unsure of herself, Bella's only distinguishing trait is her clumsiness... But Bella is not really the point of the Twilight series; she's more of a place holder than a character. She is purposely made as featureless and ordinary as possible in order to render her a vacant, flexible skin into which the reader can insert herself and thereby vicariously enjoy Edward's chilly charms. ... Edward, not Bella, is the key to the Twilight franchise, the thing that fans talk about when explaining their fascination with the books. "Perfect" is the word most often used to describe him..."

(full article here: http://www.salon.com/books/review/2008/07/30/Twilight/index.html)

I'm curious to find out if people think that LKH may have managed to do something similar, albeit not deliberately, with her writing. I think it's a very valid point and something to consider as far as the popularity of the books go. Anyone have thoughts on this?



While LKH won't ever admit these are her fantasies, we know it already. I'm confident there are women out there who read these books as their chance to be a strong character, loved by men and able to command/dominate them, even though they can't do it in their own lives. They can have "kinky" sex, living vicariously through Merita antics, and use these as an escape. Yet you don't see LKH talked about on the level you do Meyer, and she's been published for a much shorter time. Is it because she's unabashedly made Bella such a shell, her books are targeted at a younger audience (though with websites like Twilight Moms out there, the fan base is definitely varied), or some other reason--like better writing quality?

Comments

[supernaturalsue.livejournal.com]

The only really quality difference that I've noticed is less porn in Twilight (by less I mean none) but I think the different demographics is probably the main reason why, for teenage/"tweenage" girls it's supposed to ok to read that kind of stuff where you can "be" the main character.

[evewithanapple.livejournal.com]

or some other reason--like better writing quality?

SMeyer's writing isn't really better. They both go overboard on the description, have little to no plot, and bash characters that dislike their self-insert- the only difference is, as you said, the lack of sex.

[evewithanapple.livejournal.com]

The funny thing is, Edward is the polar opposite of the perfect man, though Meyer intended him to be one. He's controlling, bullying, freezing (cuddling with him must be akin to sitting in a freezer), and is always putting Bella/her interests/her friends down. If anything, I'd call him abusive, which is why his fangirls scare me so much.

[drho.livejournal.com]

I think LKH has the opposite problem. Anita and Bella are self-inserts. However, Bella is vaguely designed in order to be the reader's insert, whereas Anita is defined extremely as the author's self-insert.

With that said, Twilight is probably a gateway drug to Anita Blake.

[suzycat.livejournal.com]

I think it's because *her* vampires are *sparkly*.

Nah, I think it's probably a) teenage and b) no more Potter, what shall we rave about in the kiddie publishing world now?

[tooimpurenangel.livejournal.com]

Vampire Academy is 1,000,000x better than Twilight.


I don't understand the Edward thing. To me he's disgustingly selfish and whiny. Honestly, so is Jacob. They consistently put their feelings before Bella's and she just laps it up.

I really wish in New Moon when Edward threatened to off himself, Bella had said "GO AHEAD! DO IT! I'm going shopping with Jessica!"

[brightlotusmoon.livejournal.com]

Vampire Academy ROCKS. And I say this as a 29-year-old who feels that the VA books should be considered "adult reading" as well as YA.
The characters have incredible depth, which is more than I could ever say for the characters of Twilight.

[daphne-gateau.livejournal.com]

Interesting article. Even though I've never read Twilight I can't ignore the frenzy surrounding it.

((snips from the article)) ...Meyer -- a Mormon housewife and mother of three -- has always been frank about the origins of her novels in her own dreams.

Meyer and Hamilton shared similar traditional female roles before becoming published and it seems for the most part they still do(though I don't expect Laurell to admit that). This is probably where the heavy fantasy came from. Lord knows I love to use my brain and think of things to write about when I'm doing the laundry or the grocery shopping too. I say the OP is spot on.

Even to a reader not especially susceptible to its particular scenario, Twilight succeeds at communicating the obsessive, narcotic interiority of all intense fantasy lives. Some imaginary worlds multiply, spinning themselves out into ever more elaborate constructs. Twilight retracts; it finds its voluptuousness in the hypnotic reduction of its attention to a single point: the experience of being loved by Edward Cullen.

I think this also describes LKH's fantasy on paper 'obsessive, narcotic'.

I think Meyer might be more successful because she aimed her fantasy self-insert story at younger teens and has the will-power to keep them from getting porny. Girls can buy them for the romance and parents can support them in their choice to read. Most parents won't realize if Edward is an asshat or Bella is weak. Or that the 'romance' here seems to be a throwback to the Bold Jerk Hero and Cowering Victim Heroine that I thought we were all done with back in the 70's.

Hamilton seems to cater to the fantasy fulfillment of gals her own age. Which is great but there is also a lot more competition. I would like to think women and men in their 30's and 40's are a bit more discerning when it comes to writing quality. I know we aren't, but I'd just like to think so. ;)

Anyway, we can thank our lucky stars that Hamilton isn't writing directly for the tween/young teen market. I shudder to think about the effed up messages she'd be sending their way.

[easol.livejournal.com]

Meyer's a housewife? Damn. I wouldn't think that someone who had been married that long would be so bloody naive about love, lust, true love, etc.

"Anyway, we can thank our lucky stars that Hamilton isn't writing directly for the tween/young teen market. I shudder to think about the effed up messages she'd be sending their way."

AMEN! Ye gods, imagine the horrors she would produce... wait, don't suggest that. We don't want tat suggested to her.

"in the hypnotic reduction of its attention to a single point: the experience of being loved by Edward Cullen."

Hear that? It's the sound of my brain vomiting. Seriously, it sounds as teenybopperish as Meyer's own writing.

[dameruth.livejournal.com]

Here's a scary thing I saw recently: at the local Waldenbooks, there was a big front-of-the-store display that was made up of half Twilight books and half LKH AB books. o_O

Gateway drug indeed . . . and I really hope there aren't any parents out there who somehow get the idea the two series are the same sort of thing. They'd be in for a nasty shock.

RE: the self-insert thing, I just haven't been able to get interested enough to start reading the Twilight series, despite massive recs from friends of all ages, so I can't say.

All I can say about AB is that I really have no desire to insert anything into recent-vintage Anita -- least of all myself. D:

[maladaptive.livejournal.com]

Bella is a lot more like the standard romance novel heroine. She's easy for the reader to put herself into, rather than being a self-insert for the author, I think. Anita definitely has a distinct personality all her own, and if she's a self-insert of LKH it's different because LKH isn't saying "here's a character for the readers to become when they enter the story." Anita just isn't a character most readers can live vicariously through.

[mystickiwi.livejournal.com]

So I just started reading Twilight to see what the fuss was about. My initial analysis is this:
The story line itself I actually think is interesting in theory (a la communism). It's something I definitely would have adored in high school (the same time I was reading Anne Rice, LKH, and any other vampire novel I could get my hand on). I'm enjoying it a bit mostly for nostalgia purposes.
Writing wise.... it's like something I would have written in junior high, it is not refined at all, and if you were to hand it to me and say "here, this is fanfiction some 11year old wrote based off this book called Twilight" I would believe that that is what it was. Actually, I downloaded it from a free online site, so it very well may be...
In response to some of the other discussions above me: I think it's great that kids are reading because if they start reading fluff, then there is a chance they'll graduate to something better, moreso I think than if they were reading nothing at all. Who knows, maybe being bit by the vampire bug (no pun...) will lead them to Dracula, Carmilla, and some other great gothic pieces. To this day I still don't like reading stories that lack female characters, I think Jane Austen is utter drivel, and for the most part I don't enjoy how the classics were written. I'm an English major too. I enjoyed Frankenstein to an extent, but hated Jekyll and Hyde and the Time Machine. The Time Machine seems to me like the original self insert novel...
To this day, as a junior in college, I enjoy characters that I can relate to on some level. Not necessarily that I can see myself being but that I can empathize with and that I can sorta see bits of myself in. I enjoy thinking about both novels and movies in terms of what would I have done as the main character. I have written self-insert stories, but I try to avoid it, I actually find them less fun to write than creating a brand new character.

And something that is frustrating just to me: In high school I was working on a vampire story, focusing on a high school girl and a vampire that was a bit more buffy than twilight, but were I to show it to people now, they'd probably think I was copy S. Meyer too close. The working title for the piece, given to it by one of my friends actually WAS Twilight, and this was long before I'd ever heard of this book... I put that piece aside, and would like to revamp it (no pun intended) and make it so that it reflects my matured writing style and my ability to not write Sue characters, but I feel like now it's already been done.

Apologizes for being so long winded at 830 in the morning.

[deadroman.livejournal.com]

I think Jane Austen is utter drivel
--

*bows to you* Yessss, I've never been able to finish a Jane Austen novel; there is absolutely NOTHING in her stories that holds my attention. Same with the Brontë sisters (although I did force myself through Wuthering Heights). Nobody seemed to understand (or want to understand) my point of view, and for a while I thought there was something wrong with me actually, and I kept my opinion to myself... XD Anyway -- seeing another person who thinks the way I do is so so refreshing.

Harlequin formula

[graesea.livejournal.com]

I've read one book in the Twilight series, New Moon, and as far as I can tell it's recycled Harlequin nonsense with a vampire as a love interest. Older, far more experienced man with access to limitless funds, attracted to an inexperienced younger girl. In most of the Harlequin series back in the 60s the girl was 18ish and her obsession was in his mid 30s to early 40s. There's nothing new about that nor particularly interesting.

Bella is about as interesting as limp lettuce. She has no spine, no inner drive, nothing except the desire to become a vampire as soon as possible so that she is "forever 19". I wonder if this is the mentality behind the retail store, Forever 21? I doubt Meyer brings the girl to any sort of maturity - a friend tells me that the series will end at book four. That would be a mercy.

Meyer is more a talented typist than a skilled writer, along the lines of a Jackie Collins. The lack of sexual activity is almost amusing. The two main characters spend most nights together if I read this correctly. Bella will most likely remain untouched until she finally marries Edward and is turned into a vampire. She'll give up her innocence (hymen) and soul all in one fell swoop.

That's the stuff rainbows and sparkly skinned hotties are made of, right? *gives a full body shudder*

[obsidianwolf.livejournal.com]

I've said before that I consider the twilight series to be on par with Anita Blake just without the sex. Same unhealthy relationships and disturbing themes that are treated as perfectly normal.

Now thanks to the spoilers for the last book it's also on par with Merry Gentry only again minus the sex (it's fade to black not show). I won't spoil anything other than to say Loch Ness Monster.

[gothgoddessrhia.livejournal.com]

I just read Twilight for my book club. I was going to avoid it completely, but it ended up on our booklist, so I snagged a trade paperback of it and read it on the bus to work the last few days.

Though the story was full of clichés, over descriptive of things I didn’t give a damn about (I don’t need to know what every detail of every room Bella steps into), tiring in its repetitive assertion of how “perfect” Edward was, and full of too long discussions between Edward and Bella, the book was like crack. I couldn’t stop reading. Even as I was bitching about this and that, I had to keep reading!

Several of the Project Managers I work with have read it as well and they, too, had the same gripes, but also admitted it was like crack. And we can not, for the life of us, figure out why. Bella annoyed me. Edward annoyed me. The plot dragged. Some story points were just stupid. And yet, we kept on reading.

But I also feel I’m probably done with the series. I’m not sure if I will read the last remaining books or not. I really think this book should have ended with Edward turning Bella into a vampire, because that will obviously happen.

Looking back to when I was twelve, my favorite book was The Witch of Blackbird Pond. Which would I rather my tween daughter (when I have one) read? The Witch of Blackbird Pond or Twilight? Definitely the Witch of Blackbird Pond. Kit was a character that evolved over the course of the book and the story was compelling. Twilight is simply wish fulfillment. I definitely would have devoured it as a tween and loved it and not seen Edward as a jerk (as I do now). But if my daughter wanted to read it, I would let her. I would discuss it with her and see what her opinion of the characters and story were. I would recommend other books to her to read as well.

I guess I was an odd girl. I loved Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn. I never felt the need to “insert” myself into a story to enjoy it. On Mrs. Meyer’s website she even admits she deliberately avoids describing Bella in too much detail so her readers can insert themselves into Bella. When I read that, I felt pretty creeped out. Is this “insertion” stuff new? I don’t recall it before. Is this a new fad? If so, I really don’t like it.

And just when I had come to terms with Anita being LKH’s avatar…insertion happens…bah.

[skeezix74.livejournal.com]

I like Meyer's writing much better than LKH's (after a certain point in the Anita series) but I wouldn't call either literary genius. That said, I have an easier time overlooking the Sue-ness of Bella than I do the Sue-ness of Anita for several different reasons. Bella is at least likeable. Anita's just an abusive witch, plain and simple. Is Bella likeable because she's not really much of a character so I can project whatever I want onto her? Probably. But if that is the case, how can she be a true Mary Sue if she's not like the author in anyway?

And just as a general rant, it's starting to look to me that any sort of novel these days with a female lead character, written by a woman, is getting pegged as being Mary Sue/self insert by the people that don't like them. I'm curious as to why we don't see or even have these same sort of discussions about male authors with a male lead character. I don't think it has anything to do with the quality of the writing either.

[thelittlebudgie.livejournal.com]

A Mary Sue does not need to be a self-insert, though it can be one. The first paragraph of the Wikipedia article on Mary Sues (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue) sums it up fairly well, I think.

I've noticed a similar trend, myself. While I've seen Eragon called a Gary Stu and a self-insert, it does seem far more prevalent to lable female characters written by women as self-inserts and Sues. There really does seem to be a gender bias there.

[shanrina.livejournal.com]

I think Meyer's writing is better than LKH's, but I'm not sure how much that's really saying. I think part of the reason Meyer is such a hit is that she came after Harry Potter, which I think did a lot to put YA/kid's lit back in people's minds. I think the kinky sex also does limit LKH's audiences to a certain extent. Twilight is "kid friendly" in the sense that there's no sex (although I think it's a terrible model for teen relationships and I hate hate HATE

[shanrina.livejournal.com]

Erg. Accidentlly pressed "Post" before I was done. As I was saying (or trying to say, before I posted the comment too early), I hate the way that everyone seems to view it as romantic when really it's pretty creepy and disturbing. But I think the lack of sex really does widen the audience for people whose parents (unlike mine, and unlike the parents of kids I knew growing up) monitor their reading to make sure they're only reading "okay" things.

I just find myself wondering how on Earth sleeping with (as in same bed, not as in sex) a vampire who has an incredibly low body temperature could possibly be comfortable, even if that frigid vampire is the one you're in love with.

[ayako.livejournal.com]

I made a comment in a Twlight commuinity poll post just a few moments before browsing my friends page and seeing your post. Creepy. xD

http://community.livejournal.com/lion_lamb/1628556.html

I am surprised that so many people here echo some of my thoughts even I shouldn't be surprised at all. (I think I am gonna be flamed for some of my views in that community but whatever. :p )

You should check out the results of the poll just for some insights from the younger age group.

[beloved828.livejournal.com]

I personally think the "blank slate" style of character writing is a shitty cop-out. I'm still trying to read Twilight, and I just can't get through it because Bella is such a useless twit. She's not "everyone", or "anyone", she's no one. When I read a book, I have to find something likable and real about the main character in order to enjoy it. I have to be made to care about what happens to that character. Love them or hate them, I have to feel something. It makes me want to read to the end to see what happens to them. With Bella, there's nothing there to care about. While I do try to identify with the characters I come across, I don't mentally re-write the books with myself in their places. I'm not looking for a prewritten fan-fic.

As far as Anita goes, it's an interesting idea, Li Ping. I think she's the opposite of Bella, though. Anita could use less detail. Anita, whether we like her, (or as most of us do)hate her, is a fully-formed(and, perhaps over-developed)character. The author is so in love with her character that she just can't stop fleshing her out, even going so far as to constantly re-write Anita. Because of this, I can't see Anita as a person. She, and the world she inhabits, seem overblown and too fantastical due to all the tedious details. I've seen alot of that in books by new authors. They either give us way too much or far too little in the way of character development. I'm constantly suprised to find that LKH has learned very little after writing so many novels.