The Politics of Wizards and Vampires

by Guest Contributor Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez, originally published at Write.Live.Repeat

Twilight, the movie, comes out this week. It is based upon the bestselling novel by Stephenie Meyer, and, like the book, is said by many to be the “next Harry Potter,” meaning it is the first young-reader book series to come close to the astronomical sales of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series. Meyer still has a lot of catching up to do, having sold “just” 17 million books worldwide, compared to Rowling’s 400 million.

While both sets of books deal with children and their adventures with the supernatural, that is where the similarities end. Potter is aimed at a slightly younger demographic (9 to 12) and is loved by boys and girls alike; Twilight appeals mostly to older girls (14 to 19) and their sexually frustrated mothers.

The most startling difference between Twilight and Potter, however, is not demographical; it is ideological.

Put simply, Rowling and Potter live on the left; Meyer and Edward dwell on the right.

Both sets of books are popular in the United States, but I believe it is for drastically different reasons, however subconsciously those reasons may reside. Just as the nation continues to more of less split into the red and the blue (with high hopes that our President-elect can change this), the fundamentalist and the forward-thinking, so too does the world of children’s literature.

In the character of Harry Potter, and in the characters of his friends, teachers and associates, Rowling has created an essentially progressive “green” (and possibly agnostic) universe where people and wizards are good and kind by nature. Here, compassion and goodness are the norm, and students are taught to be ever-watchful for those few among them who make the unusual and shocking choice to be bad.

Harry is a goofy, bespectacled everyman, a reluctant geek of a hero who is out for the collective good of his community. He is champion of the little guy, the discriminated against, and the outcast. He basks little – if at all – in his own glory, and often shrinks from attention. He is frequently aided by animals and nature, because he is a respectful part of the natural world, which is perfect and loving.

By contrast, the lead male character in the Twilight series is Edward, a “vegetarian” vampire. Edward is heroic not because he is good by nature, but rather because he makes the choice to be good, against all his “natural” instincts. In this way, Twilight is the ideological polar opposite of Potter.

Edward, like all vampires, is by nature sinful – a human-killer. But with incredible effort and an endless thirst, he manages to live off the blood of “inferior” animals, a nod both to the Bible and to the assumed superiority of human beings in the natural order. In the Twilight universe, as in many fundamentalist religions, the default state of the soul is to be sinful, and the challenge of its characters is to be led not into temptation. To be saved from their evil natures.

Both books deal with the notion of heredity and ancestry, but they treat it very differently. In the Twilight books, fate is determined by birthright. In the Potter books, birthright is presented as purely a social construct designed to oppress. Think Jacob and the Native American werewolves in Twilight, doomed to their fate through blood ties, versus Hermione and the other ‘half bloods’ or children of ‘muggles’ at Hogwarts, who are continually shown to be deserving of their place at the school in spite of elitist snobbery from Malfoy et al.

No surprise, then, that Rowling herself is a progressive. She was a single mother when she wrote the first Potter book, living on welfare. Now estimated to be worth $1.1 billion, she gives massively to progressive causes the world over. No surprise, either, that her books terrify Christian fundamentalists. Potter books have been banned by many far-right Christian groups.

No surprise, either, that Meyer is a devout Mormon, a graduate of Brigham Young University who says on her Web site that her religion colors everything she writes. She describes herself as “very religious,” and her series ends with the female protagonist, all of 18, marrying Edward, becomming a vampire, and bearing his monster child.

There are many examples of Mormon theology flooding Meyer’s work, some of it racist against Native Americans, Latin Americans and anyone with dark skin, much of it sexist in the sense that Bella does not exist but to love Edward. (Meyer’s adult novel, The Host, is essentially a retelling of the Book of Mormon, set against a sci-fi backdrop.) The constant criticism the Twilight books have received is that Bella is not much of a character; there is no core to her, other than her adjective-laden obsession with the vampire.

By contrast, the main female character in the Potter books is painted as the smartest pupil in school, devoted to her studies, assertive and opinionated; again and again Hermione is said to be the brightest witch of her generation, destined for greatness. It is unthinkable that Hermoine would go the Meyer route, and drop out of school to marry Ron and bear his child at 18.

It will be interesting to see which book and series, and which ideology, comes out on top.

At the moment, US bestseller lists fabulously are dominated by Meyer. The movie will certainly help push the books more. However, as of this writing, Obama is our next president, and Rowling is still far out ahead.

But, every good wizard or progressive knows, we must be ever-watchful for that to change.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Current
  • email
  • Print

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Blog@Newsarama » Blog Archive » My Views on Twilight: Part 1 on 11 Dec 2008 at 1:35 pm

    [...] too young, Twilight is a love story with horror-film elements that’s all about holding back. (Alisa Valdez-Rodriguez has a piece up today about the essential conservatism of Twilight, which I plan on arguing later, [...]

  2. Links from the Mind of Genevieve | the Hathor Legacy on 21 Dec 2008 at 1:35 am

    [...] and maddening), but reading the analyses of them is fascinating. From Gategrrl Stoney321 Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez of Racialicious Mz Bitca (She has a whole series on Twilight, but this is one of the [...]

  3. End of the Week Links — 12/21/08 « on 21 Dec 2008 at 6:53 pm

    [...] of hearing about Twilight, check out this interesting article at Racialicious that examines the ideological differences between Harry Potter and Twilight. Bet you didn’t think these books were that deep! (Okay, I still don’t…) Still, a [...]

  4. Linkbucket Etc. « Bloggity Blog Blog Blog… on 08 Feb 2009 at 5:44 pm

    [...] Filed under: Uncategorized — thirdxlucky @ 9:40 pm The Politics of Wizards and Vampires – comparative analysis of the politics implicit in Harry Potter vs. Twilight on [...]

  5. Guillermo del Toro Looks Toward The Future at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture on 15 Jun 2009 at 8:13 am

    [...] novel, The Strain, written with Chuck Hogan and which presumably doesn’t include shiny skin * The film adaptation for The Hobbit, a two-film project he was selected for by Lord Of The Rings [...]

  6. The Politics of Wizards and Vampires « 100% Juicy Juice on 02 Aug 2009 at 12:09 pm

    [...] The Politics of Wizards and Vampires August 2, 2009 Filed under: Uncategorized — rociorayo @ 4:09 pm by, Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez original post here [...]

Comments

  1. hexy wrote:

    What an interesting comparison! I’ve heard of the twilight books, but never read them.

  2. Persephone wrote:

    I think this is a really good analysis, and points out a lot of things I hadn’t thought about before, particularly the question of whether people have to choose to be good or evil. It’s always nice to wake up to a good piece of lit crit with my blog feed.

    I don’t get, though, why Rowling being a single mother on the dole gives her liberal credentials and Meyer dropping out to have a baby makes her a bad role model. Both are circumstances that happen primarily to women who don’t have a lot of social or financial resources to support them, or any kind of support network in their communities. The time and circumstances under which a woman becomes a mother have little to do with her political ideology and lots to do with economics and social pressures.

  3. Eric Grant wrote:

    It’s worth noting that, from what I understand, the Meyer books are very poor in terms of writing style and actual story, the Potter books are at least passable for style and pretty gripping for story. That’s more likely to predict what succeeds rather than the alleged politics, I think.

  4. Rachel wrote:

    Great post. I’ve been a Potter fan for ages, and I love that I was able to identify the subtext you mention here.

    I haven’t read the Meyers books yet (though I likely will now), so it’s interesting to see the metaphors you’ve drawn out here for them.

  5. jen* wrote:

    When I first heard about this series – a few months ago – I wanted to check it out and see what all the hype was about. What I found was that all the books were checked out of my local library, and it seemed to be some kind of story about a girl and a vampire. That seemed cool enough. Then I saw trailers for the movie.

    I got the vibe that the vamp was the star and the girl was a prop. And the look of the vamp character was weirding me out.

    I read more about the series, and came to the conclusion that this stuff was not for me. I want mystery, adventure, and action – with a possible romantic sideline thrown in. Not the other way around – for that, I read the so-called “chick lit”. [That stuff can be HILARIOUS]

    This post really brings my uneasiness with the series [which I haven't and probably will not read] to a peak. I don’t have a problem with the ‘overcoming sin’ motif – I don’t believe everyone is truly good deep down on the inside. But I have a huge, HUGE, problem with all the sexism, racism, colorism [and all the other -isms] encouraged in the story.

    Sarah Haskins did a cute piece on the vampire-mania on last week’s Target: Women. (current.com/items/89591135/target_women_vampires.htm) And I noticed the vast majority of the crazed masses were white. Coincidence?

  6. TJade wrote:

    Finally! Someone breaks it down. I’m a 35 year old Black/African-American *whichever you like* female that still very much enjoys reading fantasy, horror, sci-fi, paranormal/urban fantasy novels/short stories, etc.

    I got through the Harry Potter series, and although I’m not a diehard fan. I enjoyed it for the most part and the way things wound up at the end of the series, at least made some sort of sense to me. Even if Rowling were to have killed off Harry, the books still would have made sense to me. The revelation that Dumbledore is gay, I’ll admit, I don’t quite get, but to each his own.

    Meyer on the other hand, lost me at New Moon. I kept reading the series though, hoping at some point where she was going with the story would eventually make some kind of sense to me, it never did. I also didn’t like how Jacob starts off just as good a candidate as Edward for Bella’s affections and then winds up being demonized. I don’t want to give away the ending of the Twilight series, but that just turned my stomach. I didn’t even want to bother with The Host after that.

  7. Tara wrote:

    Thanks for this great analysis. I enjoyed HP a lot and was totally blah about Twilight. I thought it was just because it was bland adolescent wish fulfillment fantasy but it’s good to see a little deeper.

  8. Ailurophile wrote:

    I love and adore the Potter books. One of my besties (30 something) and me (40 something) held a “read-in” for the last two Potter books when each came out. And we both cried when Dumbledore died. Heck, MOST of the Potter fans I know cried when Dumbledore died. And we cheered for Neville, the shy, clumsy, chubby boy who comes spectacularly into his own at the end (and winds up, as we know from the epilogue, the beloved Herbology professor at Hogwarts).

    Another thing about Hermione: she’s not shown as conventionally beautiful, but she is the one who gets the date with the international Quidditch star to the Yule ball. In book 6, she gets a prize date to the “Slug Club” party (much to Ron’s jealousy!). Hermione is attractive to boys because of her intellect and personality, not her beauty, slimness, demureness or (God help us) her “waist-hip ratio.”

    I mention these because they are yet more signs of Rowling’s progressiveness: 1) Brains and personality are what is really attractive. 2) The shy and awkward can find their own inner strengths and talents – in Neville’s case, Herbology (or botany, in Muggle terms!) – and succeed spectacularly. Heroes are made, not born.

  9. AM wrote:

    FWIW, I’m 30 and definitely not either sexually frustrated or a mother, and also a fan. And I think you’re reading way too much into it. Angsty teenagers like drama and danger — you can’t have this kind of tension and drama and angst in a happy world where the default is goodness and warmth and kindness. I’m also a die-hard liberal and all about subliminal messages from the right, and I just don’t think this is it. They’re novels. They’re crappy novels. They’re influenced by the author’s worldview and beliefs because they are *her fantasy*. Clearly, that fantasy is also appealing to others — liberal and conservative, old and young. They’re not propaganda. There’s being watchful and then there’s being paranoid.

  10. Jason wrote:

    Did I mis-read, or does this article call eating non-human animals, rather than human animals, a vegetarian act?

  11. Allison wrote:

    The juxtaposition of Hermoine of “Harry Potter” and Bella of “Twilight” is really apt — I haven’t read anything quite as succinct about the topic as I have in this post.

    Well done!

  12. Natalie wrote:

    Nice to read commentary from Alisa! I read the Dirty Girls Social Club and enjoyed it thoroughly…. now onto Twilight.. as someone who saw the movie and read the entire series in 6 days I must say that its always interesting to hear various takes on the book. The blogosphere has been on fire since the movie came out last month!

    I honestly got wrapped into the story and I saw it as an over the top cheesy romeo and juliet with sci fi aspects… what actually drew me to the book more was the fact that it was written by a mormon housewife. I wondered what the hell would have possessed her to come up with such a story. Meyer will never live up to the success of JK Rowling but she’s definitely making a dent in her supernatural domination of the ny times best seller list.

    “much of it sexist in the sense that Bella does not exist but to love Edward.”

    All too true and you absolutely see more aspects of that in the 2nd book New Moon… I was definitely irked on more than one occasion while reading only to wonder why on earth Meyer would make her lead female character so submissive and weak… especially targeting the such an influential demographic. I guess that’s the irony in the final book… the weak character ends up being the strongest hence the pawn and queen chess pieces on the cover of Breaking Dawn.

  13. Jenn wrote:

    Actually, J.K. Rowling is far from left-wing, I mean people at Hogwarts might be looking out for the good of humanity, but it’s based on the model of the British Public School, hardly a left-wing institution, and you have to be part of an exclusive elite and be born special to belong to it.

    Main difference between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ here is how explicit people are about it, and whether you blame the muggles for being inferior or just find them rather charming and rustic. Note the ressemblance to a lot of colonial and orientalist narratives. Also, she propagates some very xenophobic stereotypes in a couple of her books. I mean, the guy from the German wizard school is practically a nazi, and the French girl is cantankerous, snobby and hyper-sexual.

    Plus, she sees herself in the same tradition as the Inklings – CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien among others – which is, for all the good you can say especially about JRR Tolkien, a right-wing tradition. Doesn’t make it bad – just not left-wing.

    In fact it’s kind of over-simplifying to say that left-wing people want to do good whereas in a right-wing vision people are bad, don’t you think? (Course, I’m over-simplifying your views now I guess).

    And, just because there are only white people involved, that doesn’t mean you can view something outside of its cultural context. And, I mean, god, did you see the bits about house-elves?

  14. Eva wrote:

    I’ve heard the Twilight books are awful. I have no desire to see the movies, yet I want to see all the Harry Potter movies, I’m J.K. Rowling’s age so go figure.

  15. Eva wrote:

    One more thing, I once read that Hermione in the Potter books was based on J.K. Rowling herself.

  16. Jaya wrote:

    God, thanks for reminding me why I love Potter so much. I’m totally rereading the series when I get home for Christmas. It just makes me feel so fucking warm and fuzzy inside. Wholesome YA lit ftw!

  17. sejw wrote:

    For anyone looking for an intriguing take on the vampire story, read Octavia Butler’s “Fledgling.”

    A description/review from the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/27/AR2005102701789.html

  18. AM wrote:

    And I really, really, REALLY don’t see racism or color-ism in the books. I also don’t see Bella as submissive or weak. The books are poorly written, but I notice that most of these particular complaints (racism especially) are written by essayists who start out by admitting that they haven’t read the book. How can you criticize something you haven’t read? Especially based on the trailer? Good grief.

  19. AM wrote:

    AND… (I’m sorry, I’m just tired of all the hating on Twilight from the enlightened left)… Bella did not drop out of school to marry Edward and bear his child. Bella graduated from high school, married Edward because of his 1917 old-fashioned values (with which there is nothing wrong, even if you don’t agree), and then *accidentally* got pregnant. Prior to the pregnancy, they had planned to go to college as soon as Bella finished being a newborn. All of the vampires, including the women, are highly educated, because they have immortality to go to college, there’s no particular rush, and they’ve accrued multiple degrees each. And after Bella becomes a vampire, she’s the most powerful one of all! In what way is that weak or submissive?

    It’s like the argument that Bella’s having the baby means it’s a coded pro-life message in the books. I’m really frustrated by that argument. I’m pro-choice, but that means I’m actually pro-choice, not pro-abortion. At the rate that fetus was growing (a year a week! the pregnancy was only a month long!), she felt very attached right away. This plot is stupid and totally lost me, but that’s not the point. The point is that because I believe in choice, I can allow the character of Bella to *make a choice*. She’s married, to a fabulously wealthy immortal, and knows she has the rest of eternity to do what she wants. What on earth would have been the point of terminating the pregnancy, from her point of view? And she stands up to Edward and everybody in insisting on keeping the baby — weak and submissive as you claim she is — and, again, endures incredible struggle to become the most powerful vampire in the bunch. Yeah, that’s definitely not a message I’d like my daughter to get. //end sarcasm//

  20. thesciencegirl wrote:

    I’m sort of a sheepish fan of Twilight. The writing is crap. The heroine has few redeeming qualities. There are some icky parallels to abusive relationships in Bella’s interactions with Edward. I could go on. But for mindless entertainment, it’s amusing, you know? But maybe I’m biased since I am sexually frustrated. ha. I don’t know that I’d want my young niece reading it, but for me as a adult, I know that Bella is not a character I’d want to emulate, and their relationship is not an accurate portrayal of love (but then neither is Romeo and Juliet, and I still loved that story as a teenager).

    In terms of actual talent, Meyer has nothing on Rowling.

  21. Mangomo wrote:

    Oh MY God, I’m SO happy someone FINALLY wrote this analysis! I deeply enjoyed Harry Potter but could not stand the Twilight series because of the above reasons. Bella is the most annoying, flimsy, lacklustre character I have read since Sweet Valley High (and I think even those girls had some punch to them).

    Furthermore, Meyers acknowledges bands like Linkin Park in each of her books for “inspiring” her writings. Really? That makes a whole lot of sense.

  22. allheavens wrote:

    I saw Twilight and Meyer’s heroine Bella is so weak, submissive and spineless I swear I do not know how she managed to walk upright.

    Meyer should have called the series Edward and Bella, The Mormon Story, Parts I, II, III, and IV.

    Sexism, racism, colorism are prevasive in the book series. I read them just before the movie came out. Definitely written for the 14- to 17-year old demographic. Not a lot of critical thinking going on there. When I think about the trees that had to die to produce these books…

  23. ursala wrote:

    I recently started reading the first Twilight book, because I do enjoy vampire stories from time to time and also to see what the fuss was about. I didn’t know the ending of the trilogy, but now that I do, I’m kind of disgusted. I actually can’t believe it. Compared to Buffy or even Sookie from True Blood (or, more correctly, the Sookie Stackhouse book series,) this is really disappointing from a feminist perspective.

    I’ve never given Rowling that much credit for being progressive politically; maybe I should, but for ages I’ve been kind of miffed at her for not making Harry a girl.

  24. Brittany wrote:

    I have no constructive comment to add to this, but the Potter-nerd in me wants to point out that a great part of the Potter series is in fact about the choice between good and evil.

  25. Rose wrote:

    Ah, I think I love you for making the Hermione and Bella comparison. Not about the having a baby at eighteen thing (which wouldn’t have bugged in in Twilight had it not been for the fact that it was obviously carrying a very much pro-life message) but for the fact that Hermione is so much less of a shallow character. Hell, all JKR’s characters are.

    All that appears to matter in Meyer’s books are the ‘right’ choices, heavily influenced by religon, and beauty. Hermione is described as not particularly beautiful, bushy haired and with big teeth, but people notice her personality instead.

    I have to say I didn’t feel the connection to Twlight that more conservative Americans girls seemed to have. It appeared to me to be very much religiously motivated, right wing and slightly odd.

  26. Asada wrote:

    It seems relatively good and tame, alot of stuff today is written for adults to get away and feel ( without the baggage and ethical corruptness found in books aimed them) good. I like the differences we see in these works.

    Now if you could explain the Wests’ fascination with the sorta-dead, blood sucking, fanged human-like beings turned into hawt dating material I would be well pleased. At one point weren’t vampires SCARY?????

    Alot of Mormons are intelligent, savvy, and make life decisions that don’t suit many who are not Mormon. That’s not to say its easy but that it is. I’m not surprised Bella leave to marry and have a child at 18. Looking at the trailer, she made a big life decision to follow something/(one?) that is scored and shunned. She became one of them , I guess out of love, companionship and safety. What else could she have done?

    @ Jason
    and , yes, eating animals in Twilight is called vegetarian. When your a vampire of course! =D

  27. Asada wrote:

    The comic in the link pretty much sums up how many people feel after reading the book:
    http://tiamitbs.wordpress.com/2008/08/15/reading-reading-reading/

  28. Miz JJ wrote:

    Stephenie Meyer is a conservative mormon, so it goes without saying that her characters are going to behave a certain way. I am not going to slam her personal views just because they do not match mine.

    I think the real question is why is the Twilight series, so interesting to so many girls and women? That is what made me pick up the first book. Well, that and the fact that my niece was obsessed with them. They are poorly written, but the story is “compelling”. It takes an “ordinary”, “plain” girl and makes her the object of affection of an “attractive”, “intelligent”, “older” man. A lot of young girls find that interesting, romantic and exciting. Instead of mocking them for it I think we are better off trying to understand it and offer them better, more well-rounded stories (anything by E. Lockhart comes to mind).

  29. b wrote:

    I love the choice Rowling made to have Dumbledore be gay, and a bunch of other things about the books, but there are a few other elements in the Harry Potter books that aren’t as clear-cut progressive as it might seem. I for one was always bothered that Hermione was portrayed to be kind of silly in her vehement defense of the rights of house-elves, WHO, I might add, were depicted to embrace and love their status as lowly servile beings. I mean it was kind of funny that the organization was called SPEW and everything but that paints a rather negative picture of activism and worker rights movements, don’tcha think?

  30. Pheagan wrote:

    This was interesting, especially since you point out how well Twilight buys into that “born sinners” thing certain Christians focus on– certain being the operative word.

    I’ve gotta point out I’m totally not a Christian here, before I go into this. Your article seems to equate Christianity with conservative values and it carries this latent reasoning of: well, since JKR’s values don’t focus on sinning as a natural state, and since it paints bloodlines as social constructs, it must not be Christian– possibly agnostic. And I’ve gotta argue with that.

    JKR is a Christian. Harry Potter totally has Christian imagery– I mean, he’s resurrected in the last book after sacrificing his life for the good of mankind. JKR has said in interviews that the sad thing about the fundamentalist Christian opposition to her book has been that it’s a missed opportunity to discuss Christian values.

    I would say what’s actually going on is a difference in Christian viewpoints. Some Christians focus on sin– sinning is a natural state, the world is full of sinners that Christians have to battle or convert, nothing you do will make you a good enough Christians. And there’s where Stephanie Meyers is, and also the Christianity she represents– Mormonism.

    But some Christians really take Jesus’s teachings seriously. Tolerance, compassion, love, and charity. I mean, the guy saved a prostitute from being stoned. I don’t think the real Jesus would condone the virulent homophobia is some Christian communities. And I think JKR is there. Christianity first of all seems a lot different in England, and second of all I believe she’s Anglican, which is a pretty laid back and secular form of Christianity.

    I think in America a lot of people who have seen the first type of Christianity tend to rebel agains Christianity as a whole. And I certainly had that tendency for a bit. When I went to Cambodia I gained a whole new respect for Christians, because they were Jesus Christians, people who believed in tolerance and love and doing good. Not every Christian I met was like that– there were lots of silly Americans who insisted on praying over sick devout Buddhists. But, for instance, one of my friends had been sort of rescued by a Christian orphanage– they’d fed and educated her when her mom couldn’t. So she took it as a part of her life as a Christian to reach out to everyone around her that needed help. One of my friends visited and we got into talking about George Bush, and Somaly was all like, “Oh, I really pray about him, that he won’t do any more harm in the world.” And my friend thought it was so funny that here’s this devout Christian praying against all the actions that have been engendered by Bush’s fundamentalist Christian priorities. But I think it’s actually a difference between religions.

  31. Pheagan wrote:

    @ Jenn– yeah, the House Elves bothered me so much. I thought that somewhere in the books Hermione would find some secret curse that made them obey and reverse it. But she didn’t. Still, (spoiler) Dobby’s death is the only one in all the books that made me cry. Here lies Dobby, a free elf. Sob.

    Some other things– bloodlines DO matter a bit, since Harry ends up being descended from the Peverells and that ends up being very important in the whole Hallows thing. I think there was something about Ginny being a seventh daughter of a seventh daughter or something, too.

    And as great as it is that Dumbledore is gay, I seriously don’t understand how she couldn’t have worked that into the damn book. Like, for real.

  32. PUMA John wrote:

    Jason waaaaaaaay above: No, you heard right, but it’s not this article that states that vampires eating non-human animals are vegetarians, it’s Stephenie Meyer herself who wrote that. Edward tells Bella that he’s a “vegetarian” vampire, and only sucks the blood of animals/non-humans.

    Just that alone should tell you how sucky the books are.

  33. JP wrote:

    @sejw: YES! Thank you!
    One thing I love about Fledgling (and I am so depressed about Butler’s death because she was one of the most amazing writers I’ve ever had the pleasure of reading) is that the main character (NOT any sort of side kick!) is a vampire of color. I mean, how come all vampires have to be white all the time? Butler answers that question by saying, “Well, they don’t.”

  34. Safiya Outlines wrote:

    This post smacks a bit too much of finger pointing at unprogressive religious people, compared to their superior secular counterparts.

    “as in many fundamentalist religions, the default state of the soul is to be sinful”.

    Really? Firstly, what exactly is a fundamentalist religion?

    Secondly, if that statement is a veiled dig at the “Big Three” (Judaism, Christianity and Islam), you should be aware that in both Judaism and Islam, there is no concept of Original Sin, humans are believe to possess a pure nature, that even though they may sin, our natural inclination is towards all that is good. Within Christianity itself, there are many different viewpoints concerning human nature and the soul.

    Also, I’m failing to see how being an unemployed single mother automatically makes you progressive. We know people are more complex than that.

  35. Samantha wrote:

    Twilight and the Harry Potter series are like apples and oranges. They appeal to different demographics so I wish people would stop comparing the two. They’re both guilty pleasures many people enjoy. If you haven’t bothered to read the books series please don’t offer shorts sighted analisys.

  36. Samantha wrote:

    Also the “sexually frustrated mothers” dig was uncalled for. It’s the same crap that romance writers and readers have to deal with from people who never read the books.

  37. Natalie wrote:

    @ AM… you really don’t think that Bella possessed any submissive or weak aspects at all? I mean come on.. the girl couldn’t function or do anything once Edward left in New Moon.. her father even said that she was an empty shell of her former self.. its as if her life ended the minute he left. All I kept thinking was get a grip girly.. DAMN it aint that serious!!… I’m sure we’ve all been in relationships when the other person does end up taking too much of your time but this was just a wee bit over the top… I was pretty disgusted with Bella for a good duration of the book… its also my least fave of the series because I couldn’t deal with the oh my life is over now that my obsession has moved on.. hell the girl starts hallucinating and hears voices just so she can hold onto her last memories of Edward… that’s just c-r-e-e-p-y

  38. Natalie wrote:

    oh and kudos to the person who mentioned Flegdling… Octavia Butler was oh so fly. *sigh*

  39. brownstocking wrote:

    I couldn’t get past the first book for either Sookie or Bella’s characters. I’m not in love with LA Banks’ writings, either, but she’s at least 1) of color, and 2) not saying too many stupid things so far.

    I also like how spirituality is talked about in Banks’ books, as opposed to whatever Meyer was trying with her stuff. I can’t believe she makes money off that dreck.

  40. Mars wrote:

    Thank you for pointing out all the things that drive me crazy about Twilight! As for the people asking why you would consider Bella an overly submissive character, how about the fact that she did marry him? Or the scene where she tries to kill herself because Edwards not there. Or the opening scene of the last book where he’s taken away her car because its not “safe” enough. Bella is supposedly a rebellious character..but all you ever see her do is run towards boys and get rescued doing obviously stupid things!

  41. Lizz wrote:

    That was great.

  42. Ergane wrote:

    I want to point out that “colorism” and “racism” are not the same thing. Racism, indeed, is not merely about “the color of one’s skin.”

  43. L.F. wrote:

    I agree with the comments made about Bella. She lacks every aspect to make a sufficient character. As I was reading the Twilight books I too found a bit of colorism and the books are obviously sexist. Before I read the books I had heard a lot of good things about them;but, as I read them I was just unimpressed and I thought the books lacked a plot. I know The Twilight books are geared for the my age group (I’m 17), but forgive me for wanting to read something with a little bit a substance. I really don’t understand the fuss about Twilight; I would say I want to like them, but I don’t want to lie. Jenn, the German Nazis wizards you are referring to are actually Bulgarian.

  44. Phrone wrote:

    A lot of people have made a big deal about Stephanie Meyers being Mormon, but I think it’s possible to be Mormon and progressive. She just isn’t.

    Also, a lot of people read abstinence messages into the book, but Bella really wants to have sex with Edward. It’s Edward who is putting off having sex — which is a nice reversal of the assumed “woman-guarding-her-chastity” dynamics. I think it’s incredibly popular among woman because it’s basically the reversal of the fantasy that Hollywood has been delivering to men for a long time: Female is normal, Male is stunningly gorgeous, Male is inexiplicably attracted to her anyway. (The only difference is that, in Twilight, Bella is acknowledged by both to be undeserving — while in Hollywood cases, there’s just this understanding that It’s Because Beauty Is More Than Skin Deep, Provided You Are A Man.)

    What I do find most disconcerting about Twilight, though, is how the “perfect” man is portrayed. Edward is a stalker. He is emotionally manipulative and, at least in the beginning of Twilight, there is a constant threat of physical violence against Bella. I would call him an abusive boyfriend, even though he does not physically harm Bella.

    This is an interesting analysis (although I disagree with some parts of it), but would it be possible for Racialicious to post some sort of analysis of the racial issues in Twilight? In the movie, one of the main characters is Asian — there was no indication that he was in the books, so I thought that was interesting, but he was also just automatically Not a Possible Love Interest. (I forget if he was in the books — I read it a while ago and forgot all the names.) Also, the whole issue of Native Americans — I’m glad Jacob was a main character and a legitimate romantic possibility, but some of the portrayal of Native Americans seemed really stereotypical.

  45. Rebecca wrote:

    As a post-Mormon feminist, I just wanted to say that I agree with Safia’s comment about this post’s “secular superiority.” It’s fine and dandy to compare Meyers and Rowling and I think this was an interesting analysis, but some of your assumptions make me very uncomfortable.

    For a site that I love largely for its attention to detail and nuance, I felt like this post did a disservice to that aim. I would have liked to see evidence of the “racism” against Native Americans, Latinos, and anyone with dark skin, especially when this racism is seen as part and parcel with Meyers’ Mormon background. I’ve read the Twighlight series books just recently (curious about the anti-feminist hype) and, while I strongly agree about the ideological differences between characters like Bella and Hermione, I would definitely take issue with the whole “racism” card without seeing more detailed evidence. I’m not saying that it isn’t there, I’m saying that throwing these sorts of claims out, especially when they are thinly veiled hits at the LDS religion, is offensive.

    Additionally, and as a side note, I have also read The Host, and, as a former Mormon, I’ve got to ask- where the HELL are you making Book of Mormon parallels. Other than the post-apocalyptic semi-religious aura, there are few if any comparable stories/plots/concepts. You do a disservice to yourself disregarding what 11+ million people consider a religious text as simple fodder for a marginally talented author’s fiction.

    Mormons are taking a lot of shit right now for their anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-progressive values stance and they deserve much of it. However, these people are my family members and my community and even though I no longer stand with them ideologically, I think it’s a low-blow to call them racist without reference and refer to their sacred religious text as if it was common fiction.

    Please do a better job next time. Thank you.

  46. Whitney wrote:

    I’ve read your other posts on your blog about Twilight and have disagreed with some of what you wrote, but this post, I agree with everything you wrote. I read both Twilight and Harry Potter, and consider the latter to be incredibly superior both in writing and in plot, characterization, etc.

    I hated Twilight for one huge reason: Bella. You are right, she exists only for the purpose of being Edward’s other half, and it really bothered me in the end, where she gets everything. She is immortal, she has a child, and she gets to live forever with the love of her life, with endless wealth (and have incredibly hot vampire sex, natch). I’m 23, so I know this is unrealistic, but what kind of message does that send to 12-year-olds? I know it’s totally unrealistic, I know that relationships take extra hard work, I know what it’s like to be in dire straits financially, and what Meyer’s novels teach young girls is that somehow this kind of fate is possible. Or that it should be desired.

    Another thing that differs between Twilight and Harry Potter is *sacrifice.* Bella doesn’t have to sacrifice ANYTHING, she gets to keep everyone that she loves in her life, without questions. She has no close friends so it’s not a loss for her. Harry Potter, however, sacrifices himself in order to save everyone. He knows this and accepts it, and in the final chapters of book 7, he welcomes his sacrifice. His parents sacrificed as well in order to save him. He has to sacrifice his relationship with Ginny, Dumbledore was sacrificed as well. It’s about giving up what you love most in order to essentially save the world. And I think that is the most important lesson that young readers can learn. Other characters sacrificed their lives in order to save others, and that’s worth noting.

    Meyer’s story is ridiculous because there is zero sacrifice with her characters. It’s melodramatic, and there is nothing that the characters are fighting for. It’s not challenging in the least bit.

    I’m also glad that someone mentioned Fledgling, a book I read while doing my undergraduate degree in English, and I think that Butler’s version of vampire lore is more compelling than Meyer’s. Not only is it incredibly well-written, but it challenges her readers and makes them question the nature of relationships. I recommend it to anyone.

    Someone above mentioned feminism, and yes, Bella did make a choice, but at the same time, her choice does not require any kind of sacrifice on her part. She did not lose anyone close to her with her sacrifice. She did choose to marry at 18, have a baby, yadda yadda yadda, but what bothers people is that it’s “too perfect.” There are no struggles in her relationship with Edward…. only that he desires her blood. Like that’s a real struggle in the real world. The problem is that it’s an unrealistic choice. Many people who get married at 18 and have a baby struggle, even with help from their families. She did not have to struggle. Everyone is happy in the end, everyone gets paired off, even Charlie, her father, even Jacob (who “imprints” on her daughter…. CREEPY). That’s a whole other can of worms.

    Thanks for this analysis. I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head.

  47. genq10 wrote:

    I knew the author was a devout Mormon and it was easy to spot the Christian subtext in Twilight, but what I found especially hilarious was how the entire series amounted to soft-core porn for preteen girls.

  48. Gothic Guera wrote:

    O. k Hermione was actually is the only one of the trio to complete her seventh year. and Jen her boyfriend was actually Bulgarian not German! I need to saw this, I found the H and r romance a little to clique. Is it me or the Hermione’s activism for House elves reminded me too much of W.M.B?

  49. Lauren wrote:

    I completely agree with this article. THANK YOU.

    I forget who said something about how Bella IS a strong character, but here is my opinion on that topic: Just because Bella turned into the strongest character in the end proves nothing. She didn’t cause that. It just happened to occur. She had no control over what her power was. It was not a conscious decision or an effect of a conscious decision — IT JUST HAPPENED. Therefore, that argument is basically void. When Bella was human, she was weak-minded but the author tried to cover it up by TELLING everyone how strong of a character she was. Her shoulders would literally droop when Edward wasn’t around to hold her hand. She had no life outside of him and whined constantly about people who were nice to her. She did nothing to rehabilitate herself after Edward left, which I find quite astonishing.

  50. genq10 wrote:

    And one more thing: was anyone else creeped out that Bella, a 17-year-old girl, fell in love with a 100-something-year-old man. Talk about a double standard! Had Edward actually looked the way one would expect a man who had miraculously lived since 1917 (or whatever the year was) SHOULD look, every reader–indeed, probably the author herself–would have been scandalized. But, because he looks like a 17-year-old boy, there is nothing wrong with his marriage to Bella. Gross! This is statutory rape at its worst!

  51. sporkfoo wrote:

    when i read the twilight books several months back to see what the fuss was all about – and not knowing the author’s religious background – I totally pegged Meyer as LDS. Don’t know what exactly clued me in, but there you go.

  52. Luis wrote:

    The colorism is rampant. All you read, for pages and pages, are adjectives about how gorgeous Edward’s white, semi-translucent skin are. Over and over and over again. Everyone beautiful and great and desirable is pale as hell and everyone incidental, unimportant, and expendable has even a modicum of pigmentation (including non-translucent White folk).

    Also by the middle of the book she totally sheds any interest in the mythology that, honestly, is a bit interesting, and spends the rest of the book just worshipping her pale monster god.

    Awful. Stick with Harry.

  53. NancyP wrote:

    Butler did the best vampires, hands down. I consider the series Wild Seed, Clay’s Ark, and some others I can’t remember at this time, to be vampire stories even though blood isn’t taken. She does a lot of biological parasitism, generally not entirely consensual on the part of the host, and I (and most readers?) assume that these are variations on the theme of slavery.

    I am fond of Jewelle Gomez’ The Gilda Stories – black lesbian vampire 1820ish to present.

    I haven’t gotten around to Tanararive Due’s vampire books yet.

    Vampire books have to have some unique twist to interest me. The stereotypical sexual fantasy of a good-looking male vampire seeking passive female human just doesn’t cut it for me.

  54. Clara wrote:

    Just to clarify, where exactly did Alisa the original poster state that she hadn’t read the books in her post? Did I miss something?

    I think Harry Potter is unquestionably the superior series to Twilight in terms of plot substance and writing, but then again, these books were written for completely different audiences and for very different reasons. For this reason, I don’t think it’s fair to compare them, although I do see where Alisa’s analysis is coming from.

    I do think Rowling was making a statement with the Harry Potter series, but I’m not sure Meyers had similar aspirations. It seemed to me that Meyers was just writing to please herself and her friends, not to send a deep message.

    One thing though– I’ve read an interview somewhere that Catharine Hardwicke (the director of the Twilight movie) made a deliberate effort to diversify the cast. She talked to Meyer, who said she basically envisioned all her characters (except the Quileute tribe) as white. I don’t know if she grew up in a very white neighborhood or something, but I’m very glad that Hardwicke chose to correct this.

    On colorism and racism– I think these opinions on colorism at least come from the emphasis on the Quileute legends in the Twilight novels. The issue is that Meyer only framed the Quileute tribal members in Twilight within the context of their legends of werewolves, not as members of modern society, which is a very antiquated way of treating them. Also, they cast Taylor Lautner, who is white and only discovered that he had some Native American heritage after he was cast (how convenient), which is problematic in quite a few ways.

    Taylor Lautner said in an interview that he researched Quileute legends and even made a binder for his research. When he actually met with Quileute teens, he said that he asked them about their legends and to his disappointment, they didn’t know them. He also said with glee, “they’re just like regular teens!” (To which I internally replied, “Well, DUH, what did you think?” Then again, he’s pretty young, so we can’t expect a totally nuanced mind here.)

    I’m not an expert on this, so if I got something wrong there (or if I used any un-PC terms without knowing), my apologies!

  55. Dolly wrote:

    I am a huge Harry Potter fan who just read Twilight this past summer. And Twilight completely disgusted me. While I as a reader kept being told that Bella was this truly clever girl whose mind was totally caught up in books, she never said anything particularly profound or insightful. All she did was think about “Edward,” who (for the perfect guy) was utterly boring. Give me Hermione Granger over Bella any day.

  56. Mangomo wrote:

    @Rebecca: the racism is deeply embedded into Twilight. First, Edward’s white skin is constantly lauded and one page practically does not go by without Bella swooning at the perfection of his “pale beauty.” European standards of beauty are thus held way up high. When Bella encounters Leena (I can’t remember her name, the girl who used to be with Sam) she says something like, “She was pretty in an exotic way” immediately making her the Other and looking at her from a normative white gaze where white skin= standard of beauty. The worst of all for me was in the last book when they are on their little honey moon on some damn island and the black “help” appears before Bella. She actually says the words, “They appeared so dark and short next to Edward and their voices were so harsh.” REALLY BELLA? I’m sorry, there’s short and dark people in the world and you have to hurt your pretty white eyes by having to look at them. I almost hurled at the point, it was just too much. There’s really plenty more insidious and not so insidious stuff but the biggest that hit me was the white=beautiful, the norm verus dark=the other, exotic.

    I don’t believe that this racism is because Stephanie Myers is Mormon, that would be quite a ridiculous conclusion to make. However, I do believe that her upbringing, background, educational exposure and general ignorance have to do with presenting beauty in such color coded and deeply charged langauge.

  57. Zero wrote:

    Agreeing with Whitney above.

    There is no real conflict in the Twilight books, just a lot of whining about the potential for it. When it comes down to business, everyone just wants to talk it over. What’s the point of the superpowers?!

  58. Persephone wrote:

    Oops — I was seriously sleep deprived and taking cold medicine when I wrote my comment. It later agreed to me that you probably meant that BELLA, not MEYER, was a teen mom. Which kind of invalidates my comment. Sorry about that!

  59. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @All –

    Hello everyone – good conversation. I’m traveling, so I am not able to participate, but two things:

    1. Other writers have written about the racism in Twilight before. I liked Alisa’s analysis because it was a different take on the differences between two epic series.

    This post:

    http://www.racialicious.com/2008/05/05/link-love-poc-in-scifi-carnival-9-what-i-heard-about-you-and-what-it-meant-for-me/

    Second item down, describes issues with the description of Jacob and his family.

    Also, Rob Schmidt has also covered Twilight:

    http://www.bluecorncomics.com/2008/10/twilight-vs-quileute-legends.html

    And provided a round up of links where writers analyze the representation of Jacob and fam:

    http://www.bluecorncomics.com/2008/10/twilight-vs-quileute-legends.html

  60. gatamala wrote:

    I know The Twilight books are geared for the my age group (I’m 17), but forgive me for wanting to read something with a little bit a substance.

    *terrorist fist jab*

    I’m way past 17, but I find the shit geared towards your age group to be insulting.

  61. Nicole wrote:

    Twilight is a Molly Sue novel, and so your analysis is spot on. I am fan of YA novel, but this book really left a bad taste in my month. I keep telling myself to read the rest of the series, but I just can’t because it is such a piece of fecal. I can see why young girl dig this book. It’s got romance with a beautiful man who desires to protect his woman so that he can, for lack of better words, be the first one to sex her up vampire style. It’s real bull because who wants something ice cold stuck in them. Can you tell I hated this book?

  62. Renée aka Mekhismom wrote:

    I am a fan of the Twilight Series and a big fan of Harry Potter. I am also a person of color and slightly left of the middle in my politics/perspectives. When I first picked up Twilight I was immediately engrossed. I was not looking for a “deep” book but rather something to entertain me as a gift to myself for Mother’s Day. I had never heard of the series and did not know it was developing a cult following among both children and adults. I read the three books that were in the series in 3 days and waited patiently for Breaking Dawn.

    I read the books entirely for pleasure. Reading your analysis really makes me think about the series more deeply and I think that you make some valid points.

    The thing that I find most interesting is that in self-reflection I actually was on”team Jacob” and wanted him to win Bella’s heart.

    I did not particularly like some of the aspects of the books and really did not care for the last book in the series.

    The Twilight series is vapid young adult reading, nothing more and nothing less. Will I read them again? Doubtful. Am I an Uber fan? Certainly not.

    I enjoyed your analysis and come away with a different way of thinking about the series. I thank you for your perspective.

  63. Jamma Mamma wrote:

    Ok . . .

    I LOVED this post for it’s insight (the Bella/Hermione comparison was priceless) and I’m definitely a very strong HP fan. . . (cried for Dobby, proud of Harry, in love with Ron, bought and read books within a week after the came out) but I have to come out in defense of Twilight. . .

    FIRST let me say that HP is CLEARLY superior in basic writing/plot/character developments. . . I couldn’t even pay attention to Meyer’s story when I started the series because of all the structure flops in her writing. . . AND Hermione is clearly a stronger more developed character (who I like more)

    With that said. . . aside from the blatant colorism. . . Twilight is empty enjoyable romance. . . it’s popular because it gives the empty ‘it’s-meant-to-be’ crap. . . personality-wise the main male characters are easy to be attracted to . . . of course if you’re looking for deep meaningful work. . . don’t bother with Twilight… not the book and DEF not the movie (which is way more difficult pill to swallow than the book)

    I’m not one to read romances (I consider Twilight the first which is sketchy because you can’t really call it that) but I can understand the pull of it. It’s NOT the new HP and it’s nowhere near accomplished useful work like Morrison…..hell I feel like dirt even mentioning her on this post….

  64. Rebecca wrote:

    Mangomo,

    You’re right. Those are good examples. And that’s fucked up. That’s why I like reading this site- so that people on the lookout for this awful stuff can point it out to me. I appreciate you being willing to get specific on this. I had tried to think of examples of racism with Jacob and the Quilute tribe, but couldn’t come up with much other than the ridiculous stereotyping of Native Americans.

    ‘Preciate it. :)

  65. VacuousOrange wrote:

    The posters above who mentioned that the OP was unfair in stating that fundamentalist Christians tend to view humans as inherently sinful–the thing is that they do. The concept that humans are inherently selfish and unpleasant is a fairly central tenet of conservatism generally, not just the religious variety. I don’t know for sure, but my impression was that the statement about Christian fundamentalists was in reference to the influential Republican Christian right wing, not to *all* Christians. Progressives, both secular and religious, *do* tend to have a more positive/optimistic view of ‘human nature’.

  66. Roxie wrote:

    Phrone: In the book everyone who is not Native American is white. The director, Catherine Hardwicke, made the decision to inject some color into the cast. Erick isn’t rejected b/c he is Asian. He’s rejected simply b/c he’s not Edward..The same reason why Mike and Tyler are all rejected as well.

    I love Twilight. I keep up with all the news and I went to the midnight showing. I’ve met some really great people through the fandom in which I’m involved.

    However, I’d be the last person to deny its problems. Holy hell it is RIFE with them. I find it endlessly (and actually enjoy) intriguing reading the anti-Twilight arguments. I always get a different perspective to think about.

  67. Elanor Brachwasser wrote:

    I’m 19, so pretty close to the age group targeted by the Twilight books, and I have to admit I was very disturbed when reading the first book. What bothered me the most was how Bella’s incredibly submissive character and Edward’s creepy, stalker method of wooing her were considered ideal. The first scene in Twilight that threw me off was when Bella gets lost in the city and is cornered by a group of men who clearly wish to assault her. Edward saves her in the nick of time (because he happens to have been stalking her all day), and then angrily blames her for being stupid enough to get herself into danger. Victim-blaming, much? The fact that he checks up on her activities by reading her friends minds…also not what I’d call perfect behavior. And yet, there are facebook groups devoted to Edward Cullen with over 500,000 members!

    Add the fact that Meyer’s Native American characters are all mystical/live in the past, the creepy obsession with the vampires’ paleness…and I’m only just getting started.

    My favorite YA/kids fantasy books are the His Dark Materials series by Philip Pullman, but there are a lot of good young adult books with actual depth out there. It just requires maneuvering through the copious amounts of shallower literature to find them.

  68. Rchoud wrote:

    Even though I haven’t read the Twilight series, it reminds me of a Japanese anime show I watched once called Fushigi Yugi. The main character is a young high school girl who gets sucked into a book about ancient China and finds alot of pretty men (bishounen) attracted to her in particularly the king of the land and a handsome small town boy, who winds up winning her heart. Like Twilight they played up the heroine as being a Mary Sue like figure who does no wrong and who can’t help being the object of affection of so many men. I couldn’t stand this character and Bella sounds like someone else I wouldn’t be too fond of either (wide eyed innocent beauties for whom everything works out for in the end).

  69. Whitney wrote:

    @Clara: You’re right, both series were written for different audiences, but am I the only one who finds it ironic that the books written for children are more superior to the ones written for teenagers? True, both series reach wide audiences, but what Alisa was getting at was how critics and others are calling Twilight “the next Harry Potter.”

    BTW, speaking of Taylor Launtner, they’re consider re-casting him because they don’t think he can handle his role in New Moon, and they really do want a Native American actor to play Jacob. So hopefully they’ll do that because not only because he sucked in the movie, he looked goddamned ridiculous in that wig.

    The way I look at it, Twilight is good if you want fluff. It’s like a Thomas Kinkade painting. It’s nice to look at, but there’s zero substance. Reminds me of Nicholas Sparks novels.

  70. Mike wrote:

    I don’t care if it’s sexist or racist…
    The movie looks like some cheesy film
    to bring in the gullible and dare I say it but
    idiotic preteens and younger generations
    who somehow think any thing with a vampire in it must be cool.

    If they want a real vampire movie just watch Blade or Underworld

  71. uu wrote:

    I work at a Barnes and Noble, and I’ve been dreading the Twilight series and the fandom (usually white, young females and their moms) coming into the store. (I actually successfully steered a customer from buying a Twilight series book but instead getting Monster by Walter Dean Meyers, a YA book I automatically suggest to anyone looking for a YA book to get.)

    That said, I think people here have it right. The YA lit books are full of superficial crap, I don’t know what it is, but it seems that once a child is of late preteen age, they automatically become superficial, shallow, my-teenaged-”angst”-ridden-life-problems-matter-even-though-they-are-not-even-close-to-being-serious, whiny, label-obessessed, things as compared to their young counterparts and the books written for them.

    I don’t know what to make of it, and I just wonder what’s the benefit of giving this stuff to young people, they are the ones that should have lit with substance jammed down their throats so that they maybe could not cause any more damage to this country and others when they get older when they have more influence in this country.

  72. Rob Schmidt wrote:

    Back to the politics of vampires and werewolves for a moment:

    You can bet that many conservatives think minorities like Jacob have a dark, animal side. These minorities are more “passionate” and less rational than us “normal” (white) Americans. Why else would they commit so many crimes and have so many babies?

  73. MarissaAO wrote:

    I’d like to point out that Rowling has said that she is a religious Christian, and her books, particularly Deathly Hallows, have some very Christian themes and motifs. I think an interesting analysis could be done about what the two authors reveal about their understandings of Christianity. Harry is a Christ figure, he befriends the outcasts, eschews authority, and sacrifices himself to rise again and defeat evil. The Potter books are ultimately about the power of love. I haven’t read Twilight, but I get the sense that it’s more about the self-flagellating form of Christianity.

    I also have to mention that Hermione is just one of several strong female characters in the books, whether they be stay-at-home moms like Mrs. Weasley or academics like Prof. MacGonnagal, physically attractive like Ginny, or non-conformist like Luna.

    13 – Jenn – From a literary perspective I can understand the allure of placing a story firmly within a certain tradition. You place your story in dialogue with those that came before, and you can draw on all the associations readers have with that genre.
    Rowling certainly does make use of stereotypes and easy visual cues with her characters, much of the time you can tell what a character is going to be like from the first description of them. But at the same time she adds layers to them as the story progresses. Viktor Krum is a lot more sensitive and heroic than he first appears, and Fleur Delacour turns out to be very caring and loyal.
    I think the colonialism is more a product of Rowling being British than of her being left- or right-wing.

  74. kerrita k wrote:

    this conversation reminds of the conversation that swims around j.r. ward’s books about sexy, hot, built, damaged vampires who drive big black escalades, talk in what can only be called “black slang” and listen to rap music on booming sound systems yet never ever have encountered a single vampire of color (voc) in the almost 6 book series! seriously – are people of color so undesirable that even vampires won’t bite us?!

  75. em wrote:

    WORD. so i’m way late to get to this, and no one will probably read this, but i too wanted to express my deep thanks for this analysis. i kind of heart the harry potter books beyond words, and i read the twilight series hoping for a new fix. not so much. the writing sucks sexist balls, and i was also picking up on the alarming dogmatic christian overtones. not that i think all of christianity is dogmatic…but meyer’s brand certainly is.

    the only thing that kind of annoys me about hermione, though, is that she’s soooo cautious. and i find that she frequently takes on this disapproving “i’ll be the responsible girl” personality. i think my favorite white sci-fi / fantasy heroine is lyra from the golden compass books. waaaay better than the movie. and if you think harry potter is progressive, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

    but my all time favorite heroine? definitely lauren olamina from octavia butler’s parable of the sower. i’d love to see butler’s books talked about on here…she’s amazing.

  76. girl wrote:

    “Harry is a goofy, bespectacled everyman, a reluctant geek of a hero who is out for the collective good of his community. He is champion of the little guy, the discriminated against, and the outcast. He basks little – if at all – in his own glory, and often shrinks from attention. He is frequently aided by animals and nature, because he is a respectful part of the natural world, which is perfect and loving.”

    Um…did we read the same harry potter books? I’ve always thought Harry was a snobby little annoying brat who gets angry when everyone isn’t lavishing attention on him. AND his fame was due to the fact that his parents died for him, rather than through heroic acts of his own (though I admit, he DID step up in the end.) But anyways, my analysis of HP isn’t important. And I haven’t read Meyer’s novels so I can’t comment on it.

    Personally, I think people over-analyze stories sometimes. I have no doubt meyer’s novels are ridiculous and filled with 2 dimensional characters. In fact, that’s why I’m positive I would’ve liked her novels in my youth. When I was a pre-teen, I read this OTHER vampire series about this vampire guy and this human girl. I forget the details but I distinctly thinking the story was “oh so romantic”. THen of course, I grew up and simplistic, formulaic stories no longer satisfied me. My point is, whether or not Meyers wrote her novels with an agenda is moot. Most girls buying the books are buying it because they think the vampire guy is sexy. Not because they really believe in Christian fundamentalism. So don’t worry. When I was a teenage girl, I was kinda silly in that way too.

  77. CheeseCake[Carmen] wrote:

    okay so like…. i read the book “twilight” and NEVER EVER seen the movie [and im like... 15ish o.o'']because… i think the movie is really… er.. stupid? and not interesting. the book is wayy interesting..
    in my opinion. i think that if you just read the book without having a movie or anything coming out. it would give you a picture of like what the character would look like. also. i never read the harry potter books [because im really lazy~] but watched all the harry potter movies that are produced.
    I Hate Racism. because it’s just plain mean. and… i feel awakward if i became really racist towards other people… and i don’t think… that…….. Twilight and Harry Potter would be the same thing. AT ALL. it’s like “two” different worlds~ well that’s my opinion about it. and this analyst thing. bye o-o”

  78. Rita wrote:

    Interesting post. While I think you’re on to something here, I also think you’re drawing some incorrect assumptions.

    Other posters have pointed out that Rowling is also a Christian and deliberately wove Christian themes into her story.

    I disagree with your assessment that in the HP books, people are naturally good or evil, whereas in Twilight they have to fight temptation. One of the main themes of HP is that we are the choices we make, and the books do an excellent job of showing how no one, not even Voldemort or Draco Malfoy, is innately evil, and it shows the choices people make throughout the course of their lives for good or evil.

    With regard to the racism that other posters brought up, while there is definitely an issue of racism in her depiction of Native Americans, I don’t think colorism is quite a fair assessment. For all that she goes on and on about Edward’s white skin, she also goes on and on about Jacob’s rust-colored skin. It seems clear to me that Meyer intends both of them to be very beautiful/handsome and appealing to Bella.

  79. Liz L wrote:

    I do appreciate this post, but I have to say I was thrown off by the *believes in sin=unprogressive* bit that was dropped in rather willy-nilly.

    There are fascinating issues waiting to be tackled that relate to various theologies and their opinions on the sinful (or not) nature of the human being. And I do see this issue embedded in an interesting way in the HP books. However, the nature of this post (HP vs Twilight, progressive vs regressive) flattened out nuances in favor of a rather smug generalization. Not cool, IMO.

    Progressive Catholics- I promise you, we’re out here…

  80. bellatrys wrote:

    The Book of Mormon used to teach that black people were dark-skinned as a punishment by God for the sins of their ancestors (this was also common among mainstream Christianity in slavery days, although without the science-fictiony aspects of Mormonism) and that the saved were “white and delightsome” (yes, those exact words) by virtue of their ancestors’ superior virtue. The upper ranks of the clergy were closed to black men all the way up until the 1970s, when this was retconned out of the Mormon Scriptures after the LDS started to face some serious fiscal consequences for their institutional bigotry, but this stuff doesn’t go away with a handwave, or in less than a generation; there can still be found online articles by contemporary Mormon leaders advising students at BYU against racially mixed relationships, and arguing that students only date interracially to shock their parents…

  81. Brooklyn wrote:

    Bella does not exist but to love Edward.Bella is not much of a character; there is no core to her, other than her adjective-laden obsession with the vampire.

    By contrast, Hermione is painted as the smartest pupil in school, devoted to her studies, assertive and opinionated; again and again Hermione is said to be the brightest witch of her generation, destined for greatness. It is unthinkable that Hermione would drop out of school to marry Ron and bear his child at 18.

    This is really bringing me down! Okay, but before I read this post I felt like Bella was pretty strong and independent. Now I don’t know how to feel about this.

  82. Dave Godfrey wrote:

    On the subject of “Left” and “Right” in politics, it should be noted that you are comparing a European and American authors.

    There was a joke in the 1960s (iirc) -Britain has two major political parties, Labour, or as you would call them “socialists” or the Conservatives, or as you would call them “socialists”.

  83. brenda wrote:

    ok i was about to read twilight but u just told me how its going to end.

    thanks for nothing

  84. Mel wrote:

    I’ve read all 4 of the Twilight books, and don’t recall anything racist about them. I believe that some of Valdez-Rodriguez’s books do a greater disservice to races by creating a generic, cookie-cutter depiction of Latinas in her books.

  85. thebiblophile wrote:

    NancyP@ 53: Yes! Octavia Butler was a genuis – she did such good vampires. I was so upset she passed away, not only because she was such a talent (which in the face of Meyers lack of talent makes me miss Butler even more), but because we will never know how she was going to develop and grow Fledgling.

    Luis & Mangomo – thank you re: the worship of pale white skin, the colorism, and racism. Richard Dyer has a book called White where he talks all about how colorism is inferenced not only through: poc=bad, white=good, but also in the way whiteness (the color and hue) is used.

    Phegan @ 30 – thanks for such a nuanced reading, especially about this being about two Christian ideologies.

    I’m not great with vampire lore – outside of it being about the fear or death and workship of youth…so what’s the function of vampire lore draped in whiteness? Also Meyers is entering in after mainstream vampire lore like Buffyand (dare I mention it) Underworld, thoughts about those representations?

    Sort of interesting that Meyers, framed as a conservative Christian, resurrects her characters – giving them eternal life, through vampirism…Also, if Bella becomes a veg vampire, but she was a mortal who didn’t eat meat, I mean how exactly does that work…(I know, I may be a fool for asking..)

    I heart racialicious…such a great dialogue…