Two Questions...

[leahbobet]

...both spawned by the never-ending parade of posts about how terrible Twilight is.*

1) So two major YA series hit big in the last ten years: Twilight and Harry Potter. In the early part of each series, you saw what can be charitably called low production values in terms of craft, plots that revolved around blatant wish-fulfillment, and wholesale rips of the tropes of already established subgenres. Potter is the poster child for mainstream acceptance. Twilight is excoriated regularly in newspapers, the internets, and local bookstores in reenactments of the Five Minutes' Hate.

What's the difference? What causes that?

I have my own theory, but I want to hear yours.


2) Where do people get the idea that exposing a child to a worldview or idea at all means the child will automatically agree with, adopt, and adhere to that worldview or idea?

Really, peoples. You met kids?


*Haven't read it, not gonna, no opinion on the matter.

Comments

[tithenai.livejournal.com]

So far as I'm concerned, I will never read Twilight because the actual books couldn't possibly be better than cleolinda's recaps of them. And even there I got bored at a point. I really enjoy the industry of mockery that's sprung up in its wake, though.

1) I enjoyed the HP series. There was often stuff to nitpick, but I enjoyed it. On the other hand, I picked up Twilight, flipped it open randomly, read two pages, and burst out laughing. The writing was just terrible. Rowling, for all her flaws, at least had invisible prose mos of the time. But Bella's first person narrative is so syrupy and ridiculous that I couldn't stand it. I may yet try to read them, but knowing how the series develops, I can't really be bothered.

2) You know, I mocked the Bible Belt's book burnings (alliteration ftw!) and their notion that children would START PRACTICING WITCHCRAFT ZOMG if they read HP. But I think there's something more insidious going on with the Twilight books. I mean, to be perfectly honest, I think 19th century novels inform my morality alot more than I like to admit. I don't think it's a reason not to read books, mind, or to keep your children from reading them; I think it's all the more reason to encourage discussion of books kids read.

(edited to provide actual link)

[leahbobet.livejournal.com]

I really enjoy the industry of mockery that's sprung up in its wake, though.

I'm sort of tired of it now. :p Which is why I am attempting to gather data/make Socratic points via LJ. My theory on why it happens has a lot less to do with the thing itself and more to do with...how groups construct their identity, I guess?

You know, I mocked the Bible Belt's book burnings (alliteration ftw!) and their notion that children would START PRACTICING WITCHCRAFT ZOMG if they read HP. But I think there's something more insidious going on with the Twilight books.

See, that's the thing. I think they're exactly equivalent. Something's shown up that rattles whatever you'd label People Like Us in the same way that HP rattles the Bible Belt. And it is not being taken very gracefully. Which I say in observation, not in harsh beardy Godlike wrathful judgment.

[tithenai.livejournal.com]

See, that's the thing. I think they're exactly equivalent.

I don't think I agree, there. What you say about grace, sure -- but I think there's a huge difference between declaring that books ought to be banned and burned and barred from classrooms on the one hand, and writing parodies and mockery and angry blogrants on the other. I've seen alot of people questioning the message in the Twilight books, but no one saying that teenage girls shouldn't be allowed to read them. I mean, maybe I haven't been reading those particular blogs, but still.

I felt the Bible Belt rattling was metonymic: zomg witches and spells therefore it's ANTI-CHRISTIAN and SATANIC. With Twilight I'm seeing people attack or question the ideology in the books as related to women's roles, marriage, pregnancy and aging. And from my perspective, I as a child would've been less likely to read HP and start questioning my religion than I would've been to read, say, Jane Eyre and think that there was no way I could marry a man who was still married to his wife because it's WRONG and LIGHTNING might STRIKE A TREE NEAR ME if I did. Or something.

I could, of course, just be weird, and I'd like to blame any lack of coherence on the fact that it's past midnight and there's a cat asleep on my lap and half a typing arm. Purring.

[leahbobet.livejournal.com]

I have seen a bunch of "kids shouldn't be reading this". I really would have more credibility on that front if I went and found it and linked it up, but I admit a lot of the Twilight discussions just blur at this point.

(Also, I admit my values are at times old-fashioned, but I think it would be perfectly awesome if lightning came down from the sky to inform you that you'd hooked up with bigamists.)

[tithenai.livejournal.com]

I think it would be perfectly awesome if lightning came down from the sky to inform you that you'd hooked up with bigamists.

AGREED!

[amy34.livejournal.com]

I've seen people express the opinion that the books are bad for kids--I've expressed that opinion myself--but I haven't seen anyone suggest they should be banned. That's because the people who think these books are toxic are the very ones who support free speech and oppose book banning. The book-banning crowd tends to favor this book.

The problem with this book isn't that it's a romance. It isn't that it conflates sex and violence. It isn't that the writing is bad, and it isn't that the protagonist is a Mary Sue. That problem is it's misogynistic. The author punishes her female protagonist whenever she shows initiative and does something independent (by making bad things happen, which Edward rescues her from), and rewards her for being passive and obedient to her boyfriend. The book's message is, "Girls, you are too weak and stupid to make your own decisions, so find a man to make your decisions for you." I don't care for this message being aimed at 13-year-old girls. That isn't an age known for particularly high self esteem. And it's a vulnerable age.

Given that I'm opposed to censorship--as are most people who are in favor of free agency and kids' steering their own course in life, which is exactly what this book opposes for girls--the only way I can attempt to counter this book's ugly message is to talk about it. So that's what I do. I've been talking about misogyny in Twilight long before it became fashionable to do so. Early on, nobody agreed with me (or they hadn't heard of the book). Then Breaking Dawn came out, the backlash happened (apparently the misogyny became much more obvious in later books--I don't know because I stopped reading after the first one), and now I find support for my view all over the place. I don't think there's anything wrong with people mocking these books and objecting to the message in them. That's just how free speech works.