Twilight (The Twilight Saga, #1) Twilight discussion


180 views
For Fans Only! Common Misconceptions about the Series

Comments Showing 1-41 of 41 (41 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

Mickey Recently, I corrected a poster who had a common misconception in the Harry Potter threads about Snape's turning. (view spoiler) There was also a discussion a while ago where some people were claiming that Bella was suicidal at different times in the series. (When asked to give textual evidence of such, they couldn't.)

There are so many misconceptions that get propagated through repetition. The one that comes to my mind most readily is the one that Bella is passive and Edward controls her. You have only to look back at the story and see that in key situations, Bella is the decision maker.

What are some of the misconceptions people have of the series that irk you the most? How should one deal with these constant repetitions of misconceptions?


message 2: by Amy (new) - rated it 5 stars

Amy Right now, I've seen a lot of posts/threads saying that the imprinting is pedophilia/child grooming. No matter how many times the nuances are explained, they don't get the distinction. I think it is nearly impossible to get them to see the light. They are so completely set on finding fault that they stubbornly stick to their position even when provided with textual evidence that proves they are incorrect. I sort of gave up trying to fight the negativity.

I know what you mean about the "passive" Bella. She is the one who always gets her way in the end.


message 3: by Olivia (new)

Olivia Amy wrote: "Right now, I've seen a lot of posts/threads saying that the imprinting is pedophilia/child grooming. No matter how many times the nuances are explained, they don't get the distinction. I think it i..."
ok


message 4: by Olivia (new)

Olivia how strange or odd.


Allison It seriously irks me when people continue to fault Bella for being "suicidal" even though she never was, yet they never fault Edward for his actual suicide attempt when he thinks Bella is dead. When I corrected this misconception I either got no response or they state that her self-destructive behavior is just as bad as suicidal behavior and it makes her a "bad role model". I'm sorry, but since when is any main character required to be a role model? I also always hear people say that she is whiny, which doesn't at all fit with my perception of her except for the one hilarious instance where she is talking with Jacob about being the only one who is aging and she stamps her foot quite petulantly lol. But after a few months of following many of the Twilight discussions here I have realized that it doesn't really matter what textual evidence there is, people have their opinions and usually don't want to hear that they are wrong.


Nichola Amy wrote: "Right now, I've seen a lot of posts/threads saying that the imprinting is pedophilia/child grooming. No matter how many times the nuances are explained, they don't get the distinction. I think it i..."

A lot of these are posted to be deliberately inflamatory but I know what you mean. I'm a psychologist in my more serious day time moments (full time profession) and I can see why Meyer chose the term imprinting but, either she didn't fully understand it OR it was the closest thing she could get to the phenomenon she created in her books. Try as I might neither me nor another professional could convince people that what is described in the book is nothing like grooming or paedophilia. Form a professional perspective they are completely different. :( I find it sad at times that people who read a lot (I think it's a safe assumption that serious members of GR are avid readers) are often really closed minded and ignorant despite being well read.


message 7: by Olivia (new)

Olivia Nichola wrote: "Amy wrote: "Right now, I've seen a lot of posts/threads saying that the imprinting is pedophilia/child grooming. No matter how many times the nuances are explained, they don't get the distinction. ..."

ok


message 8: by Olivia (new)

Olivia :)


message 9: by [deleted user] (new)

Common misconceptions:
1.) Bella is a good role model and decent female character
2.) This series is actually good and worth the time


message 10: by Olivia (new)

Olivia Mademoiselle Catherine le Troll d'Internetz wrote: "Common misconceptions:
1.) Bella is a good role model and decent female character
2.) This series is actually good and worth the time"


yeap


message 11: by Olivia (new)

Olivia i wonder what does other ppl will say?


message 12: by [deleted user] (new)

Also, the "no textual evidence" part does not prove you right... people don't own most of the books they read, and also, most people are too lazy to waste 20-40 minutes of their life searching through a book they don't even like to prove a random Internet stranger (who isn't inclined to believe them anyways) wrong.


Brittany With the whole "bella trying to commit suicide misconceptions", I think a lot of people are thinking about when she does all stupid things like the motorcycle without a helmet, going into shady areas (i think she did this, not 100% sure cause i forgot) And also, jumping off a cliff.

To me that's suicidal, I don't care if it to hear my ex-boyfriend's voice or not.


Mickey Amy wrote: "Right now, I've seen a lot of posts/threads saying that the imprinting is pedophilia/child grooming. No matter how many times the nuances are explained, they don't get the distinction."

One has to wonder what would happen if they read a book that featured actual pedophilia or one that actually featured an abusive relationship. If they've read the series (and sometimes that's a big "if"), they have read of an actual suicide attempt (Edward's), but they have no feelings on it. Instead, they insist on dreaming up suicidal tendencies where there were none.


message 15: by [deleted user] (new)

Mickey wrote: "Amy wrote: "Right now, I've seen a lot of posts/threads saying that the imprinting is pedophilia/child grooming. No matter how many times the nuances are explained, they don't get the distinction."..."

Jacob falls in love with a newborn baby.
Bella participates in highly dangerous activities in order to see schizophrenic hallucinations of her boyfriend telling her that what she's doing is stupid.

Need I say more?

Also, in all sane books, pedophilia iand abusive relationships are shown as evil, painful, destructive, wrong, etc. and not justified like it is in the Twilight Saga.


message 16: by Olivia (new)

Olivia Mademoiselle Catherine le Ninja Coréen wrote: "Mickey wrote: "Amy wrote: "Right now, I've seen a lot of posts/threads saying that the imprinting is pedophilia/child grooming. No matter how many times the nuances are explained, they don't get th..."

hum ok..


message 17: by Olivia (new)

Olivia i guess almost that abut what everyone got 2 say on here, cant say very much about it thuogh..:(


message 18: by Lyra (new) - rated it 5 stars

Lyra Mademoiselle Catherine le Ninja Coréen wrote: "Mickey wrote: "Amy wrote: "Right now, I've seen a lot of posts/threads saying that the imprinting is pedophilia/child grooming. No matter how many times the nuances are explained, they don't get th..."

I am not going to argue with you about Bella participating in dangerous activities, but I'd like to defend Jacob x Renesmee part.

Jacob fell in love with a newborn baby because that's what imprinting will do to them, but it doesn't necessarily mean that he's a pedophile. As said in the book, when a person was imprinted to someone, he will fall in love with her and be anyone she wants him to be. A father, brother, friend, and finally, a lover. So, when the subject is still a baby, the werewolf imprinted on her would take care of her as a father, her brother or her baby-sitter.
Being a lover for the subject would only come into the werewolf's mind later, when the subject could decide about the matter.


Mickey Lyra wrote: "Jacob fell in love with a newborn baby because that's what imprinting will do to them, but it doesn't necessarily mean that he's a pedophile. As said in the book, when a person was imprinted to someone, he will fall in love with her and be anyone she wants him to be. A father, brother, friend, and finally, a lover. So, when the subject is still a baby, the werewolf imprinted on her would take care of her as a father, her brother or her baby-sitter. "

Exactly! In no way is imprinting primarily sexual. People fall in love with babies all the time, particularly mothers and fathers. That's another love bond that isn't sexual in nature.


Mickey General note: This thread is not another "What I find objectionable about the series" thread. I don't know why people are coming in here who have rated the books one or two stars and want to air their objections. Go find a thread that caters to that. There are plenty of them around. Or start your own thread. You don't have anything of value to contribute to this discussion.


message 21: by Gerd (new) - rated it 4 stars

Gerd Mickey wrote: "Exactly! In no way is imprinting primarily sexual. People fall in love with babies all the time, particularly mothers and fathers. That's another love bond that isn't sexual in nature."

Yeah... but they won't eventually become their lovers.


Layla Payne Mickey wrote: "General note: This thread is not another "What I find objectionable about the series" thread. I don't know why people are coming in here who have rated the books one or two stars and want to air th..."

I think its because people who claim to hate the books like to talk about it more than people who like the books. That I don't get. You would think it would be the opposite


Mochaspresso Bella is often characterized as a damsel in distress when she is actually the one who is running off to save people several times throughout the series. Bella in Twilight reminds me of the children's story "The Great Big Enormous Turnip". For those that aren't familiar with it....a farmer grows a huge turnip and can't get it out of the ground on his own. Everybody joins in to help and they still can't get it out. A little mouse offers to help several times and everyone keeps telling him no because he is too small and too weak to help. At the end, it is only with the mouse's help that the turnip comes out. The character that everyone thought was weak turns out to be the one that saves the day for everyone else. That's Bella in the Twilight series, imo.

The series is also often accused of being anti-femminist and I personally think that was probably the furthest thing from Stephanie Meyer's mind when she wrote Twilight. That argument is still one that baffles me.


Mickey Layla wrote: "I think its because people who claim to hate the books like to talk about it more than people who like the books. That I don't get. You would think it would be the opposite"

I think it has to do with the fact that such people have gotten used to conversations revolving around them and their opinions, and when they see an attempt at a different conversation, their first reaction is to derail it.

It's sort of like, "Oh, you want to talk about something involving Twilight besides how I reacted to it? You can't do that! I won't let you! Twilight is stupid because ...". I think they worry that if there are choices in conversations, most people will choose not to engage with them (and this would mostly be because those conversations are highly repetitive. I've had dozens of conversations about Bella's non-existent death wish. Other fans have as well. It's not interesting anymore, mostly because it is the same old thing: no textual support and illogical reasons.)

People need to learn how to respect boundaries around here. You want to talk about your objections, there are threads for you. Start a thread for people who hated it only. I wouldn't even be curious enough to open it.

It's a question of these threads being around to serve everyone's needs: those who didn't like it and those who love it and all points in between.

This thread is for fans. It's not another rehash of why you don't like Twilight. Move on.


message 25: by Mickey (last edited Dec 22, 2012 05:02AM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Mickey Gerd wrote: "Yeah... but they won't eventually become their lovers."

Parent/child relationships usually evolve throughout its span. Some even get to the stage where there is a complete reversal of roles at the end of the parent's life, with the child performing care-taking duties. As people grow and evolve, their relationships to others change significantly.

To say because Jacob fell in love with a baby is pedophilia in and of itself is a bit hysterical. Pedophilia is simply sexual. Love is not, particularly if it has no sexual component (which show me where there was a shred of evidence that there was). One of the best short stories I've ever read comes at the end of Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried called "The Lives of the Dead" in which he talks about his first love at the age of nine. That didn't have a sexual component either. Would it eventually? Maybe. Does that mean we label it with what it will become decades from now? It's a failure to understand and separate what is now and what something will become, not to mention a misunderstanding of the whole idea of soulmates. Soulmates are often thought of to be fated from birth to be with the other person. That's not unusual. Usually, there isn't an age difference, but this changes when you have supernatural creatures who don't age and some who are aging at an accelerated rate. To throw an accusation of pedophilia, you'd have to show a sexual component between an adult and a child, which is something that doesn't happen in the series.


message 26: by Mochaspresso (last edited Dec 22, 2012 05:37AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Mochaspresso Lyra wrote: I am not going to argue with you about Bella participating in dangerous activities, but I'd like to defend Jacob x Renesmee part.

Jacob fell in love with a newborn baby because that's what imprinting will do to them, but it doesn't necessarily mean that he's a pedophile. As said in the book, when a person was imprinted to someone, he will fall in love with her and be anyone she wants him to be. A father, brother, friend, and finally, a lover. So, when the subject is still a baby, the werewolf imprinted on her would take care of her as a father, her brother or her baby-sitter.
Being a lover for the subject would only come into the werewolf's mind later, when the subject could decide about the matter. .."


I actually agree with you but at the same time, I can also see why that argument may not work with some people because...

1. most people see something wrong with a person developing a romantic relationship with someone that they grew up regarding as a "father figure" or as a "big brother". (ie Woody Allen?)

2. The fact that the object of this affection is a child is (mistakenly, imo) thought of as child grooming. They (mistakenly) think of it as a male raising a famale child from infancy to become his future wife and that is creepy.

Imo, that isn't exactly what is actually happening in Twilight but that is how it is often percieved. I think Stephanie Meyer probably should have downplayed the romantic love possibilty more in the depiction of imprinting. I thought of it as more of a "guardian angel"/"protector" type of love that doesn't always have to become romantic. In the case of Sam and Emily, it became romantic but they were also relatively close in age. I don't think she stressed the fact that it doesn't have to always be romantic enough in the books.


Mickey Another book that shows this sort of evolution of relationships throughout the span of the story is Charles Dickens's Bleak House. In it, Esther's guardian, Mr. Jarndyce, ends up wanting to marry her. Does this mean that their prior relationship was sexual or pedophilic?


Mickey Mocha Spresso wrote: "Imo, that isn't exactly what is actually happening in Twilight but that is how it is often percieved. I think Stephanie Meyer probably should have downplayed the romantic love possibilty more in the depiction of imprinting. I thought of it as more of a "guardian angel"/"protector" type of love that doesn't always have to become romantic. In the case of Sam and Emily, it did became romantic...but they were also relatively close in age. I don't think she stressed the fact that it doesn't have to always be romantic enough in the books."

I think Meyer stressed several times how imprinting on a child is not sexual. As usual, people who are looking to find fault with the books ignore this evidence completely. Look at the discussion between Jacob and Quil about Claire. Look at Edward's non-reaction to Jacob's involvement in his daughter's life when he can read his mind. Look at the explanations that Jacob gave to Bella when she first found out he had imprinted. That's a lot of explanation, but it doesn't matter. People are going to believe that it's sexual and creepy the same way they believe that Bella was suicidal or that Bella never saved anyone.


message 29: by Mochaspresso (last edited Dec 22, 2012 05:55AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Mochaspresso Mickey wrote: I think Meyer stressed several times how imprinting on a child is not sexual. As usual, people who are looking to find fault with the books ignore this evidence completely. Look at the discussion between Jacob and Quil about Claire. Look at Edward's non-reaction to Jacob's involvement in his daughter's life when he can read his mind. Look at the explanations that Jacob gave to Bella when she first found out he had imprinted. That's a lot of explanation, but it doesn't matter. People are going to believe that it's sexual and creepy the same way they believe that Bella was suicidal or that Bella never saved anyone ..."

This is all very true. I just think people overlook it because it seems like more attention (in the form of actual story time) was devoted to the romantic relationship aspect of imprinting. More time was given to Sam and Emily than Quil and Claire. In other words, the focus on the one romantic example of imprinting probably colored how people percieved the other examples that were not necessarily romantic in nature.


message 30: by Gerd (new) - rated it 4 stars

Gerd Mocha Spresso wrote: "1. most people see something wrong with a person developing a romantic relationship with someone that they grew up regarding as a "father figure" or as a "big brother". (ie Woody Allen?)"
People see something wrong with people that develop a romantic/sexual interest in a minor, especially a minor towards they had a father role or something akin to it.



2. The fact that the object of this affection is a child is (mistakenly, imo) thought of as child grooming. They (mistakenly) think of it as a male raising a famale child from infancy to become his future wife and that is creepy."
Not to forget that the idea of "free choice" is put in question by Jacob's admission that the person imprinted on is expected to fall in love with the person that imprinted on her. If you grow up in a society that puts this kind of pressure on you, how much freedom remains to your choice?

It may not have been Meyer's intention to put that spin on it, but then that part of the story certainly wasn't well thought through on her part and it's easy to see where people come from criticising this.


message 31: by Stéphanie (last edited Dec 22, 2012 06:52AM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Stéphanie I agree with many of you. although i am not really a twiheart anymore. i still find it frustrating that many people are hating on something that they obviously don't fully understand. i was actually angry when i read about that imprinting = pedohilia bullshit!! bella ain't a rollmodel and doens't have to be one. people should just stop complaining.

i think it is best to ignore, because it doesn't matter how often you try, most of them will stay stubborn.
(sorry for my bad english)


message 32: by Gerd (last edited Dec 23, 2012 02:56AM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Gerd One point that continually baffles me is when people insist that Jacob gets "lead on" by Bella in new moon.

I never once got that feeling from the book and am quite at a loss to understand where readers get this impression from.


Siobhan Re: the Jacob and Renesmee thing ... I think people compare that to paedophilia because of how Renesmee's growth is explained by Nahuel (it was piss poor). You guys have all read it a billion times right? I've read it maybe twice. When Nahuel says 'I stopped growing after the age of seven' most people read this as 'I am biologically seven/I consider myself seven despite being born 150 years ago.

Which then leads to the imprinting thing. So Jacob is going to forever be in love with a seven year old/someone who looks seven for the rest of their eternal lives (because why would Jacob resume ageing when Renesmee won't?) ... so ewwww, paedophilia.

I got it in the second read through, Renesmee would be a fully grown adult at the age of seven, and then be preserved as an adult ever after (suck it, Jane, you eternal 15 year old) ... thus it isn't paedophilia, as both Jacob and Renesmee could have an adult relationship within seven years of the end of the book.

There we go, all cleared up! Although, ewwwww, Jacob tried to bang his seven-year-old-lady-child-wife's mom!


message 34: by Mickey (last edited Dec 23, 2012 04:55AM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Mickey Siobhan wrote: "Re: the Jacob and Renesmee thing ... I think people compare that to paedophilia because of how Renesmee's growth is explained by Nahuel (it was piss poor). You guys have all read it a billion times right? I've read it maybe twice. When Nahuel says 'I stopped growing after the age of seven' most people read this as 'I am biologically seven/I consider myself seven despite being born 150 years ago."

This is the exchange you are talking about?

"Nahuel, you are one hundred and fifty years old?" [Aro] questioned.

"Give or take a decade," he answered in a clear, beautifully warm voice. His accent was barely noticeable. "We don't keep track."

"And you reached maturity at what age?"

"About seven years after my birth, more or less, I was full grown."

"You have not changed since then?"

Nahuel shrugged. "Not that I noticed."

I don't see how this leaves the ambiguity you claim it had on your first reading. We are already aware that Renesmee is growing faster than an average baby. Bella refers to Nahuel when describing him as a young man, not a child. I think it's another case of "I'm going to willfully misunderstand this section," or "I've never read this part and am going to get my information from elsewhere."


message 35: by Olivia (new)

Olivia Siobhan wrote: "Re: the Jacob and Renesmee thing ... I think people compare that to paedophilia because of how Renesmee's growth is explained by Nahuel (it was piss poor). You guys have all read it a billion times..."

its bit odd, but what can u do when he already imprinted oh her daughter from the beginning, type of thing.


message 36: by Olivia (new)

Olivia :)


message 37: by Amy (new) - rated it 5 stars

Amy Mickey wrote: "Siobhan wrote: "Re: the Jacob and Renesmee thing ... I think people compare that to paedophilia because of how Renesmee's growth is explained by Nahuel (it was piss poor). You guys have all read it..."

Yep, I had no trouble with this part either. Maybe people skim read and therefore miss important parts?


Mickey Amy wrote: "Yep, I had no trouble with this part either. Maybe people skim read and therefore miss important parts?"

I think, in this instance, the fault is with the reader and not with the author.


message 39: by [deleted user] (new)

Jacob gets the Pedobear Stamp of Approval, for "justified" pedophile love for a baby. Score!


Mickey While I was looking for Nahuel and Aro's conversation, I stumbled across this in the last chapter when Edward and Bella were discussing the outcome of the Volturi meeting:

"I have to say, I'm thoroughly impressed with Jacob right now," Edward told me.

The wolves make quite an impact, don't they?"

"That's not what I mean. Not once today did he think about the fact that, according to Nahuel, Nessie will be fully matured in just six and a half years."

I considered that for a minute. "He doesn't see her that way. He's not in any hurry for her to grow up. He just wants her to be happy."

"I know..."

This is one of many, many, many excerpts that support the view that imprinting when one partner is not mature isn't sexual. There's no evidence of any sexual feelings toward either imprinted girl. In fact, there's so much said about there not being any at all. Perhaps these were "skimmed" as well.


Shawn All in all what irks me the most is the passionate hatred of the series. If you don't like it, that's no problem for me but do you really have to trash it over and over? There are books that I don't care for but I don't feel the need to "hate" on them all the time.


back to top