Breaking Dawn
discussion
Basically, this book sucked. It was practically saying the same thing throughout the whole book. *May contain spoilers*
message 1:
by
[deleted user]
(new)
Aug 04, 2008 02:08PM
Bella being pregnant? I mean. Really. Thats all they talk about. That and her being good at hunting. I mean, couldn't they talk about something else? No. They have 500 pages about her being pregnant. 100 about her being so tame as a vamp. 50 about gathering the people for vulturi. 5 about the actual fight. Couldn't Stephanie Meyers say something besides those three things. Really. And they all have something to do with fighting the volturi, which was about five pages. Or maybe its just me getting paranoid.
reply
|
flag



The book was ok...but what really got me confused was bella's pregnancy. I thought vampires couldn't have kids.Well, at least everyone got their happy ending, including Jacob when he imprinted on Renesmee.

Oh wow...

http://www.twilightlexiconblog.com/?p=34
She says, and I quote:
"And since we’re talking physiology…I’ve had tons of people ask if vampires can have babies. The answer is no."
Although she discussed why female vampires couldn't become pregnant, she made it pretty clear that neither gender could reproduce.
I'm still wondering why no one has called this woman for kicking a big hole in her own fandom.



And I agree, she breezed right thru the wedding...it was so anti-climactic.
Bella becoming a vampire was also somewhat of a disappointment. It completely changed the dynamic of Bella & Edward's relationship; that was the thing that always defined them & made their attraction so forbidden & exciting.
I spent most of this summer eagerly waiting to read this book & I seriously feel funk'd out!


come on! u cant have a fight scene in every other book and when the biggest and 'final' fight comes up, u just say 'o u kno what? i think ill make her use her retarded power and protect everybody. no fight.'
r u kidding me?

So, I was okay with this enough to finish the book. Until the other half vampire came into the picture and said he had three sisters. Then it didn't make sense to me any more because males are producing sperm all the time. Therefore, once the frozen sperm was released, there would be none left. Meaning only one sexual encounter could have produced a baby. Every other sexual encounter he basically would be shooting blanks, so to speak.
I liked that Bella had a baby. Maybe because I'd thought about it before. But I really didn't like the name - not even the nickname. I liked Carlie, however. That has nothing to do with the book, though.




-Vampires cannot have children
-Vampires do not experience change or growth
Science tells us that sperm GROWS inside the male.
Now, if Meyer wanted to write a story about vampires who can reproduce, fine. But to justify it by saying that men don't NEED to grow and change to reproduce is just silly. She should have either not touched the subject at all, or else extended her fantasy world to include fantasy vampire sperm of some kind


NO VAMPIRE HAD A BABY IN THIS BOOK. That seems to be the point everyone is missing. Bella was not a vampire when she had this baby. This is what SM stated. 'Vampires cannot have children'. And NONE DID. She did not contradict herself. And sperm does grows continually in a male. However, this is just my theory, Edward's sperm stayed frozen for 90 years. It was never released in order for more to grow. After that sperm was released, of course, he could not produce more because he is a vampire and in a frozen state.
The only problem I have with this theory is this, however. When the boy, Nahuel, told of his sisters, that contradicted my theory. Because there is no way for more sperm to develope. So I am in need of some more explanation. I'm sure SM has thought this through. If that were left out of the book, I would have no problem with this.
I really enjoyed the book. Like I've said before there were some things in it that made me put it aside to think about before continuing. But the more I think about it, having finished it, I want to read it again.
Did no one find that fact that Bella and Edward could do things together that they never could do before exhilarating? Not just being intimate. Running, Jumping, etc.

And... Uh...
Haven't you read LOTR, POTC? Those movies/books were set up for fights at one point.
AND GUESS WHAT!
They happened, didn't they?
So, um, you know... Another book? Didn't you get the clues about there being a fight and the Volturi being overthrown? So, maybe in another book about it, there will be a fight or something.
As far as the science goes... Well, men get told they're 'shooting blanks' and get something pregnant, and people are told they can't have kids and they do. Things happen that can't be explained, especially in science. It really is not that big of a deal.
Geesh...

Jenn - Things don't happen that can't be explained in science. Things happen that we haven't yet figured out HOW to explain. And if that had been the answer, I would have been fine with it:
Edward: Wait, how did I manage to get Bella pregnant?
Carlisle: Well hell, I don't know!
This is unsatisfying, but it is better than:
Bella: Oh, I get it. Edward was able to get me pregnant because men don't need to have changing bodies in order to reproduce.
(...statement goes unchallenged, despite its making absolutely no sense.)
And yes, Meyer is entitled to change the rules if she wants to, but I'm saying that she should have included some explanation of what the new rules were, and why.
An example, borrowing Lori's theory since I think it's pretty good:
Edward: Wait, how did I manage to get Bella pregnant?
Carlisle: Well, I never really thought about it, but you know how the hair you had on your body when you were bitten is still there? Maybe the sperm you had at that time was still there too.
Edward: Can that happen?
Carlisle: I don't know, I'm guessing. I'm also guessing that Bella's body warmed it up to the point where it was able to be active again. You probably couldn't conceive a second child.
Bella: But shouldn't that have been human sperm? And the baby have been fully human? Since it's left over from Edward's human days?
Carlisle: Yeah, maybe the venom did something to it. I dunno. This is all guesswork. But at least we're trying!

I LOVE it. Your whole dialogue. I agree that it should have been addressed more in the book. But, like I said, I was okay with it until the end with the boy and his sisters. Don't get that.

Meyer makes a point of always going on about how Edwards not human...he has no heartbeat, he can't cry, blah, blah, blah. That's what defines him & Bella's relationship thru-out the 3 books...she's human/he's a vamp.
SO.....if he has no bodily fluids how r we supposed to believe that he's got any "swimmers"...sorry, i don't mean to b crass, but like, WTF?!

But if the author is going to bring science into it, which Meyer DID, then that discussion does have to make sense.
Honestly I'm getting tired of people saying "it's just a book, it doesn't have to make sense!" Good books DO make sense.
Janet - YES, EXACTLY!

she clearly abused all her beliefs,rules, and character personalities in BD. i mean bella and edward didnt even seem that much in love after she got pregnant. she loved the baby even more than him! WTF. and somehow, miraculously jacob and bella werent in love with each other any more.??!? another easy excuse SM used to get out of the love triangle that edward, jake and bella had.
its like it was a different author who wrote the book. this isnt SM's writing!
and honestly, i have no problem with the sex parts either. BUT, bella alwayys wants to have sex with edward now. they have sex and then dont talk the rest of the day. is that all they are about now??! sex and nothing elsE? what happened to all the love that SM was always so eager to show to the world?

I can understand that this is SM's story and she wrote it because she wanted to share that story, but to me, the fact that she is changing her own rules in the 11th hour to make the story turn out the way she wants, it's just poor writing.
Sure, it's a book, it's fiction, but think of all of the other fictional stories that would be resolved neatly and cleanly if the author stopped following conventions laid out throughout the plot? What if Harry Potter had an elixir of life and went and poured it on everyone's limp bodies and tombstones at the end of that series? What if Claire Frasier drove a hummer through the stone circle in the Outlander series and eliminated the need to trek around on horseback? It's just stupid and I was disappointed, I expected more.


i totally felt the same way

Sure, it's fantasy. Sure, I can suspend a lot of disbelief. But your book has to make sense. Just because it's fantasy doesn't mean you can throw anything in there and expect people to believe it. It has to be believable in the context of the world you've built. I didn't think this book was. I still don't believe Bella could have a baby. To whoever said 'no vampires had babies in this book,' do you not consider Edward a vampire? Because when a couple gets pregnant, the man says 'we're having a baby' too. SM didnt say 'vampires can't give birth.' She said they can't have babies. That would lead ppl to believe that none of them can, male or female.
I also agree w/ the ppl who didnt like the easy out w/ Jacob. First, it's creepy. By the time that kid's ready to marry, he'll be weirdly old, even if she does grow fast. And it would be weird and awkward all around for everyone involved. This is one book where it seemed like the author was trying to make everyone happy instead of writing to the characters and the story. It seemed like instead of writing the truth about what would really happen, she tried to do what she thought everyone wanted. Everyone just wanted to know the truth of what happened, not be pacified.
Or at least that's what I wanted!

Right, vampires can't have kids. But humans can. So a vampire and a human would logically have a half-vampire half-human kid.



You mean a half-vampire, half-human kid? No, because vampires aren't dead and humans aren't dead, therefore their kids would be alive. :p



There is a difference. Reading fantasy requires you to suspend more disbelief than realistic fiction. But an author still has to make the story believable to the world she created. And for a lot of people, SM didn't do that.



I did think that Stephenie wrote good romance novels with Twilight series but she better stays away from fantasy.

Caroline.. You have to admit that it was a little weird that Jacob imprinted on Bella's daughter.. Right? Or am I the only one thinking this. I'm still Team Jacob!

all discussions on this book |
post a new topic
Breaking Dawn (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
New Moon (other topics)Breaking Dawn (other topics)