This is Pride and Prejudice in the 21 century.

[Mathis]

What a delight! delight! delight! This book was an enchanting read. Here's Pride and Prejudice turns vampiric in the 21 century.

The story is about a tomboy teenage girl by the name of Bella, who becomes interested in a new guy in her class, whom seems to have it all: flawless good looks, smarts, style, strength, and wealth. However, as she holds him under her scrutiny, she builds up resentment and prejudices against him due to his reserved behavior and lack of interest in her, which she perceives as arrogance. What she doesn't know is that Edward has secrets which he can not bring himself forth to tell or he will suffer consequences that involves losing Bella.

The love and hate relationship that Bella and Edward had experienced in twilight, was the same for Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy in Pride and Prejudice. And if I'm not mistaken, I believe the author mentioned this classic in Twilight, which I think was the inspiration for the book.

This is one of those books that you either love it or hate it. I loved it!!! Only because I accepted it for what it was.

Okay, I wasn't going to do any in depth comparison between Pride and Prejudice and Twilight. But since most of you don't see the parallels, I guess I will lay them down. Lets begin with the similarities between Edward and Mr. Darcy, shall we?

1. Mr Darcy was a guy that people saw as a snob, which was not his true character at all. He was a man that possessed: wealth, rugged good looks, dignity, and masculinity. But out of these merits, there was one weakness,and that was, his difficulty conversing with strangers. This was his flaw, his handicap, his secret. This was the reason he came a cross as being standoffish and cold. He was a diffident man that hid behind his status and wealth. The movie doesn't stress this weakness of Mr.Darcy, however, the book does. His shyness is what held him back from expressing his love for Elizabeth. He did things for her without her even having a clue. For example, he paid off his con-artist, devious half brother from jilting Liz's gullable sister and disgracing her family. Darcy's heart was in a good place, but he had serpents working against him, vilifying his character; keeping Liz and him further apart.

2. Edward, was a good looking, wealthy, strong, polished guy, who had hidden feelings for Bella. Her scent drove him wild deep within, a feeling that he never encounter before. He couldn't bear to be in close proximity to her, and to pacify these feelings and urges, he would abruptly leave whenever she came around. This behavior came across as arrogant and rude in Bella's perception. And to make matters worse, Edward's character was being vilified by Jacob's dad, to keep him and Bella apart. However, Edward couldn't stay away. He watched her, protected her from harm's way, without her even knowing it at times. Being a vampire was Edward's secret, his handdicap, his shame, in a predominately mortal society within which he was trying to assimilate.

3. Elizabeth, was a girl that didn't take BS from anyone. She was a girl that stood her ground. She was born in a lower class family, that gave her humble beginnings. Her looks were ordinary compared to her lovely sister, Jane. Elizabeth was a complete daddy's girl, to whom she looked up to for advise and approval. Her mother was a meddlesome woman that dipped in her daughters' affairs, and said anything that came to mind. The whole ideology about women marrying rich to live comfortably eluded and vexed Liz. She was a woman that wanted to quash the status qou. She was tenacious, witty, assertive, gutsy, opinionated and classy. I would go so far as to say, she was a tomboy at heart in some sense, given the fact, that she wasn't a slave to fashion, nor cosmetics. She was much happier being in solitude with a good book. When she first laid eyes on Mr.Darcy, she immediately conjured prejudices against him, just based on his reserved manner, and malacious hearsay. This was her flaw. She let her pride blind her to true love.

4. Bella, was an average looking girl with tomboyish attributes. Girly things did not appeal to her. A prom dress was out of the question. She was a jeans kinda girl. She was more content staying at home in her room with a good book, or just hanging out with the guys fixing bikes and cars. She is a modern day Elizabeth. She lived a humble life with her father, with whom she has a close relationship with. Her mother was a flippant, eccentric woman who said outrageous things. Bella's character exuded: confidence, decisiveness, tenacity and fearlessness. She didn't let anything stand in her way. When she first met Edward, she couldn't figure him out. His reservations had given her the impression that she repulsed him in some way, and built up the notion that he was an arrogant snob.


At the end of the day, Edward and Mr.Darcy were just two wealthy men that were misunderstood by the women they loved. This I believe was the key theme in both books. I'd like to point out, that by no means, am I comparing all of theTwilight books to P&P, just Twilight in itself. Nor am I comparing them from a literary stand point or the setting of the story. We all know nothing can stand up against Jane Austen's superfluous proses. I was simply comparing the lead characters

[[deleted user]]

No. No. No. No. No. Just no.

Twilight is NOTHING compared to Pride and Prejudice.

Pride and Prejudice is about looking past adversity and first impressions to discover who the face behind the mask really is. It's about finding true love in the most unexpected places/circumstances/people. It's about testing family bonds and learning to see past peoples' flaws, and so much more.

Twilight is about a whiny-unoriginal-teenage girl, who gets into a completely unhealthy relationship with her sadistic-controlling-stalker-like boyfriend.

You're right, you have to accept Twilight for what it is, but it is NOT, nor will it ever be Pride and Prejudiced.

Not trying to sound harsh or anything but... It's the truth.

[[deleted user]]

Oh yeah, and do me a favor:

NEVER COMPARE EDWARD TO DARCY, AGAIN. EVER. Haha

... Seriously though, don't. Just... Don't. No, ew. No. Please? Thank you :)

[Mickey]

Darcy is much more of a snob compared to Edward. Remember his first proposal? What an insulting way to propose to someone. And then he was so blind as to be surprised when she wasn't flattered.

I'm not really sure why EDWARD SHOULD NEVER BE COMPARED TO DARCY. I think they have a lot of similarities as characters. Both are aristocratic and restrained with a strong sense of personal morality. Their issues were completely different, though.

I think the issue of prejudice was taken care of much quicker in Twilight and so, I wouldn't call it a major theme. There wasn't any issue of pride.

[Amy]

I don't find it insulting at all to compare Twilight to Pride and Prejudice. We all get that the quality of writing is not even close to the same league as the great Miss Austen, but the undercurrent of Pride and Prejudice is there in Twilight. I'm a high school English teacher, and I've had several non-readers pick up the Twilight series and after I tell them the connection to Pride and Prejudice, they read Pride and Prejudice just to see what's its all about. I see so few teen readers anymore, so I love and appreciate any book that can get them hooked into reading. I had one sophomore girl who used to never read at all, and now because of Twilight, she reads more than I do. She often crashes into people and objects in the hall because her nose is in a book while she walks between classes :) Right now the reading craze in my school is The Hunger Games.

[Rusalka]

Jane Austen is rolling over in her grave now and punching herself in the face no doubt.

Ignoring the abysmal writing, the sparkling boy and the horrible story, let's look at the female protagonists. Lizzy is strong, self assured, intelligent, and never looses herself in the entire book. Bella however, is vapid, pathetic, one dimensional, whiney and completely looses herself and lives only for a boy. I believe (but I admit I only struggled through the first book, so correct me if I am wrong) that even contemplates suicide at one stage as she doesn't have Edward any more. A horrible role model for any girl.

Twilight teaches kids that they need to be with a sparkly, moody man to be complete. P&P and Lizzy at least shows that while a (granted, still moody) man can be fun, that she is a complete, healthy human being without one, even in a society where women were actually considered nothing.

[Mikaela]

in the official illustrated guide to twilight, stephanie meyer actually mentions Jane Eyre as one of her inspirations. And for Breaking Dawn she said The Merchant of Venice and A Midsummer Night's Dream was her main inspirations.

[BubblesTheMonkey]

I really didn't think it was all that like Pride and Prejudice. If anything was, it was more likely an accident. (even though SM says it's supposed to be like that)

[Mickey]

Rusalka wrote: "Lizzy is strong, self assured, intelligent, and never looses herself in the entire book. Bella however, is vapid, pathetic, one dimensional, whiney and completely looses herself and lives only for a boy. "

I don't think Elizabeth Bennet was a role model. Jane Bennet played more that role. Elizabeth has an epiphany about midway through the book, realizing how shallow and superficial she was in her judgement of Darcy and Wickham. I think the fact that she conforms so much to the things that are held up as virtues in our culture, we actually do not read her character like Austen intended. She's not meant to be an admirable or exemplary character.

[Molly]

I have to disagree. This book isn't like Pride and Prejudice at all in my opinion. Edward and Bella never really hate each other and they don't really change to be together in this book. Pride was never an issue in this book between the two main characters, and the only prejudice going on was between Bella and Rosalie, and it plays almost no real part in the story.

I can see some similarities between Edward and Darcy, but not a lot, and I don't see any similarities at all between Bella and Elizabeth. What little the two stories do have common is more a coincidence than anything else.

[Samantha The Escapist]

Mickey wrote: "Elizabeth has an epiphany about midway through the book, realizing how shallow and superficial she was in her judgement of Darcy and Wickham. I think the fact that she conforms so much to the things that are held up as virtues in our culture, we actually do not read her character like Austen intended. She's not meant to be an admirable or exemplary character. "


It's been an awfully long time since I've read it but I'll take a shot here.

I know that every silver screen, small screen, book, and other adaptation sees a surprisingly different incarnation of Lizzie. I think the audience is supposed to appreciate her enigmatic nature (proven by how easy it is to interpret her in many ways)

To be sure, Jane is meant to be the role model of a perfect person, but it does not do to expect one to never make a mistake.

And is it not one of the greatest challenges to admit a mistake? I think the true proof of character is how a person reacts when things go badly or how thye make amends when they act poorly. Jane is great and we should all respect her but she is unattainable. Pride and Prejudice in part about realizing your faults and coming to terms with them. As well as accepting the faults of another and seeing past them.

Now to the topic at large Twilight does not focus on any matter of pride or prejudice, Bella's only fault about which she could even HAVE an epiphany is her crippling self esteem (apparently anyway, I can list a mutlitude of faults but they don't seem to exist in Meyers' world) Edward's only fault is a habit of stalking and also his crippling self esteem. Also they both spend a great deal of time dealing with a crippling lack of communication and a crippling presense of plot devices.


I can see the most vague points other posters have tried to make regarding the similarities but I move that we try to justify exactly that with any other girl-meets-boy style romance.


I'd also like to point out that Twilight frequently references Romeo and Juliet which makes considerably more sense to compare. It also compares well to pride and prejudice except for most of the details in the storyline which is apparently sufficient by the logic of the discussion.

[Catherine]

Ummm NO it is not like Pride and Prejudice. That is just an insult to Jane Austen

[Diane]

Mathis wrote: "What a delight! delight! delight! This book was an enchanting read. Here's Pride and Prejudice turns vampiric in the 21 century.

The story is about a townboy teenage girl by the name of Bella, who..."
Ooooh, I never really thought of it that way.
Thanks for sharing. :)

[Erin]

Rusalka wrote: "Jane Austen is rolling over in her grave now and punching herself in the face no doubt.

Ignoring the abysmal writing, the sparkling boy and the horrible story, let's look at the female protagonist..."

My theory is that Bella is flawed not because she is a woman, but because she is human. In the story arc of the Chronicles of Narnia, the Pevensie children and the others undergo a transformation, from self-centered to the perfected beings of The Last Battle. In the story arc of Twilight, Bella overcomes all her human flaws when Edward makes her a vampire. Edward is not just a sparkly boyfriend - he's Aslan. On another level, then, he's Jesus, a supernatural being who, after we die, can purge all our mortal grossness (someone else threw in A Midsummer Night's Dream; thence the Shakespeare paraphrase). It's a lengthy religious metaphor, and incidentally a teenage vampire romance.

[Erin]

Edward Cullen and Fitzwilliam Darcy - two of my favorite fictional boyfriends.

[Rula]

vampires and werewolves vs. Pride and Prejudice. vampires wins hands down. i have never read Jane Austen's works. i am enjoying reading book 4 of twilight and i don't think that these are whiny because can you imagine being a vampire or a werewolf? i have seen three of the twilight series and i have seen part 1 of Breaking Dawn. i love these books and films. i really admire Bella for marrying Edward.

[Kagama-the Literaturevixen]

Rula wrote: "vampires and werewolves vs. Pride and Prejudice. vampires wins hands down. i have never read Jane Austen's works. i am enjoying reading book 4 of twilight and i don't think that these are whiny bec..."

How can you tell if you never read it?

[Kagama-the Literaturevixen]

Catherine wrote: "Ummm NO it is not like Pride and Prejudice. That is just an insult to Jane Austen"

Agreed!

Dont mess with the Austen ;)

This however is an insult to her...

“Every girl I know says Pride and Prejudice. Or some other Jane Austen tale of class-obstructed love, conflict, and—insert longing sigh here—marriage.’

‘I’m not the Jane Austen type.’”

-Nightshade by Andrea Cremer

There was more before that with the implication that Jane Austen was for the more "common" reader.

I got so mad >_< that I had to take a break before skimming through the rest of it.

[Kagama-the Literaturevixen]

Rusalka wrote: "Jane Austen is rolling over in her grave now and punching herself in the face no doubt.

Ignoring the abysmal writing, the sparkling boy and the horrible story, let's look at the female protagonist..."

She cant live without her sparkly man.

While Mr Darcy can brood with the most sparkly vampire at least he swallows his pride and allow for him and Elizabeth(and she her prejudice) for them to begin again.

Thats a mature healthy relationship.

[Kagama-the Literaturevixen]

Mathis wrote: "What a delight! delight! delight! This book was an enchanting read. Here's Pride and Prejudice turns vampiric in the 21 century.

The story is about a townboy teenage girl by the name of Bella, who..."

I question the need to repeat the word delight three times. Its just an ok book in my opinion.

I will admit though it can be said to be a Romeo and Juliet based story.

But Pride and Prejudice? Never.

[Mickey]

Samantha wrote: "I know that every silver screen, small screen, book, and other adaptation sees a surprisingly different incarnation of Lizzie. I think the audience is supposed to appreciate her enigmatic nature (proven by how easy it is to interpret her in many ways)"

Are you calling Elizabeth Bennet a blank slate character?

Personally, I find the attempts to update Lizzie in order to make her palatable to a modern audience to be more of an insult to Jane Austen's memory than comparing her work to another author's. You usually end up with a cardboard cut-out Lizzie with the right clothing and some of the original dialogue, but without the core of her personality. (And I think assigning a turning point other than the epiphany section, which usually happens in adaptations, to be ridiculous. You lose so much of her depth when doing so.)The entire story tends to get an overhaul to match reigning ideas and norms. How else could someone write that 'Lizzie shows us that a man can be fun, but is not necessary'. Doesn't that trivialize the entire idea of the importance of picking the correct mate, which is a main tenet in Jane Austen's works? Doesn't the modernization process also rob us of much of Austen's characteristic subversiveness?

I think books from a different time should be read in the spirit of that era. To modernize something is to weaken the impact of the book and to stay stuck in your own culture's narrow mindset.

Samantha wrote: "To be sure, Jane is meant to be the role model of a perfect person, but it does not do to expect one to never make a mistake.

And is it not one of the greatest challenges to admit a mistake? I think the true proof of character is how a person reacts when things go badly or how thye make amends when they act poorly. Jane is great and we should all respect her but she is unattainable. Pride and Prejudice in part about realizing your faults and coming to terms with them. As well as accepting the faults of another and seeing past them."

I think a mistake is much different from a fault. A mistake can be an anomaly or aberration, a fault is an ingrained habit. I've often said that Elizabeth was written to be more like Emma Woodhouse or Catherine Morland. They all had serious faults. There certainly isn't anything wrong with heroines like that, but the problem is that Elizabeth happens to have the characteristics that we've been taught to judge women by (that she is strong and independent), so we don't really see all that Austen put into her. How can someone claim to understand the book without being able to see the prejudice in the title?

Samantha wrote: "Also they both [Edward and Bella] spend a great deal of time dealing with a crippling lack of communication and a crippling presense of plot devices."

I thought they were actually a pretty communicative couple, except when Edward was outright lying. What they didn't discuss, they were in tune with each other enough to guess at.

There was not much of a question of internal problems in the relationship (such as in Pride and Prejudice). It was mostly external threats (like Romeo and Juliet). One type is not more reputable than the other. You can have a personal preference, but you can't say one is more literary.

[Samantha The Escapist]

Mickey wrote: "Samantha wrote: ..."

First I appreciate how people can talk on this site and disagree (quite thoroughly I see) without turning it into an argument with any real vehemence. There IS a great deal of caps-lock-fangirling and full-on-hating on this site but it's still no imdb.

*pleased sigh*

Anyway it actually has also been a little while since I read the twilight books as well but when I said the lack of communication I was refering primarily to the story arc of the second novel. And the constant misunderstandings that stem from both of their self esteem issues. You are right, they DO communicate a great deal more than many characters that form the standard of the YA genre but one of my strongest memories of reading this series was how frequently one of them was reacting incredulously to how the other said they felt for a certain amount of time. "I thought you didn't love me" "I thought you hated me" etc. Admittedly the communication thing may have been a low blow comparatively.

Once again it's been ages lol please remind me how Jane reads in the novel. Is she given any flaws? (aside from being a little too passive or gentle which, as you said, when reading in the mindset of the time doesn't read much as a flaw at all) I would still argue that a flawed character who makes reparations is a better role model however. I suppose once again taking your point about reading something in the mindset of the time - the idea of a role model would lean a little more towards perfection though wouldn't it.

And I wasn't calling Lizzie a blank slate by any stretch! Maybe to keep with the metaphore I was suggesting her more as a rather large and scribbled-upon slate where most adaptations only manage to zoom in on a couple portions. There is a great deal to.

I suppose I shall have to go reread the novel now though. I feel wildly unprepared for this discussion! I've been indulging in a lot of re-reads lately so it's a good time.

[Molly]

Kagama wrote: "Catherine wrote: "Ummm NO it is not like Pride and Prejudice. That is just an insult to Jane Austen"

Agreed!

Dont mess with the Austen ;)

This however is an insult to her...

“Every girl I know..."

I don't really see how that's an insult. The character doesn't like Jane Austen and doesn't think that the books are for her, or that she fits her characterization of Austen fans.

I'm also a bit confused about the "common reader" part. Does that mean the books are easy to read? Or does it mean they are widely read? Or is the character simply being pretentious or something?

[Anna]

Maybe not Mr. Darcy....perhaps Mr. Collins. However don't compare Twilight to Pride and Prejudice, it's simply isn't the same on any length: characters, plot-line or even the author. Please don't do it!

[Treece]

Mathis wrote: "What a delight! delight! delight! This book was an enchanting read. Here's Pride and Prejudice turns vampiric in the 21 century.

The story is about a townboy teenage girl by the name of Bella, who..."

Twilight has more in common with Shakespeare. Namely Romeo and Juliet. The Wolves and Vampires are Capulets and Montagues. The young first love. The willingness to die for/or on behalf of the the beloved. The starcrossing and dangers involved. The chemistry and sexual tenison between Edward/Bella and Darcy/Elizabeth is the only thing I see in common.

[Kagama-the Literaturevixen]

Molly wrote: "Kagama wrote: "Catherine wrote: "Ummm NO it is not like Pride and Prejudice. That is just an insult to Jane Austen"

Agreed!

Dont mess with the Austen ;)

This however is an insult to her...

“Ev..."

Eh...could just be me...but it was such a random thing to put in the book.Like the author didnt like Austen but then again I didnt like the authors book.

Also a rabid austen-fan...ahem

[SarahO]

I was actually just talking about this the other day. I see NO connection between P&P and Twilight (I am a huge Austen fan and get slightly annoyed with the comparison). Not in plot, characterization or style. Twilight is more Gothic and Edward the Byronic Hero. I'm taking a class on Charlotte Bronte and I would say that if Twilight took a style from anyone it would be her but it's less "taking from someone" and more of following the Gothic/Byronic style of writing.

[Treece]

SarahO wrote: "I was actually just talking about this the other day. I see NO connection between P&P and Twilight (I am a huge Austen fan and get slightly annoyed with the comparison). Not in plot, characterizati..."

Yes, I totally agree. Edward does exhibit all the Byronic traits. Excellent point!

[Molly]

Kagama wrote: "Molly wrote: "Kagama wrote: "Catherine wrote: "Ummm NO it is not like Pride and Prejudice. That is just an insult to Jane Austen"

Agreed!

Dont mess with the Austen ;)

This however is an i..."

Ok, I see. I didn't know the context, so I kind of figured there would be more to it than just what you put there and the bit about Austen being for common readers.

But yeah, that does seem like a very random thing to put in a book.

[Amy]

I think where people see any connection to P&P is the fact that for a while at the beginning of Twilight, Edward was rather aloof and rude to Bella, making her think he hated her and was too good for her - that he was way out of her league. Much like how Mr. Darcy was rude and aloof to Elizabeth at first, acting like he was much too good for her. Bella tries to snub Edward for his behavior toward her by trying to ignore him, trying to not let herself get obssessed (but fails). This is similar to how Elizabeth tries to snub Mr. Darcy for being too proud.

[Mathis]

Okay, I wasn't going to do any in depth comparison between Pride and Prejudice and Twilight. But since most of you don't see the parallels, I guess I will lay them down. Lets begin with the similarities between Edward and Mr. Darcy, shall we?

1. Mr Darcy was a guy that people saw as a snob, which was not his true character at all. He was a man that possessed: wealth, rugged good looks, dignity, and masculinity. But out of these merits, there was one weakness,and that was, his difficulty conversing with strangers. This was his flaw, his handicap, his secret. This was the reason he came a cross as being standoffish and cold. He was a diffident man that hid behind his status and wealth. The movie doesn't stress this weakness of Mr.Darcy, however, the book does. His shyness is what held him back from expressing his love for Elizabeth. He did things for her without her even having a clue. For example, he paid off his con-artist, devious half brother from jilting Liz's gullable sister and disgracing her family. Darcy's heart was in a good place, but he had serpents working against him, vilifying his character; keeping Liz and him further apart.

2. Edward, was a good looking, wealthy, strong, polished guy, who had hidden feelings for Bella. Her scent drove him wild deep within, a feeling that he never encounter before. He couldn't bear to be in close proximity to her, and to pacify these feelings and urges, he would abruptly leave whenever she came around. This behavior came across as arrogant and rude in Bella's perception. And to make matters worse, Edward's character was being vilified by Jacob's dad, to keep him and Bella apart. However, Edward couldn't stay away. He watched her, protected her from harm's way, without her even knowing it at times. Being a vampire was Edward's secret, his handdicap, his shame, in a predominately mortal society within which he was trying to assimilate.

3. Elizabeth, was a girl that didn't take BS from anyone. She was a girl that stood her ground. She was born in a lower class family, that gave her humble beginnings. Her looks were ordinary compared to her lovely sister, Jane. Elizabeth was a complete daddy's girl, to whom she looked up to for advise and approval. Her mother was a meddlesome woman that dipped in her daughters' affairs, and said anything that came to mind. The whole ideology about women marrying rich to live comfortably eluded and vexed Liz. She was a woman that wanted to quash the status qou. She was tenacious, witty, assertive, gutsy, opinionated and classy. I would go so far as to say, she was a tomboy at heart in some sense, given the fact, that she wasn't a slave to fashion, nor cosmetics. She was much happier being in solitude with a good book. When she first laid eyes on Mr.Darcy, she immediately conjured prejudices against him, just based on his reserved manner, and malacious hearsay. This was her flaw. She let her pride blind her to true love.

4. Bella, was an average looking girl with tomboyish attributes. Girly things did not appeal to her. A prom dress was out of the question. She was a jeans kinda girl. She was more content staying at home in her room with a good book, or just hanging out with the guys fixing bikes and cars. She is a modern day Elizabeth. She lived a humble life with her father, with whom she has a close relationship with. Her mother was a flippant, eccentric woman who said outrageous things. Bella's character exuded: confidence, decisiveness, tenacity and fearlessness. She didn't let anything stand in her way. When she first met Edward, she couldn't figure him out. His reservations had given her the impression that she repulsed him in some way, and built up the notion that he was an arrogant snob.


At the end of the day, Edward and Mr.Darcy were just two wealthy men that were misunderstood by the women they loved. This I believe was the key theme in both books. I'd like to point out, that by no means, am I comparing all of theTwilight books to P&P, just Twilight in itself. Nor am I comparing them from a literary stand point or the setting of the story. We all know nothing can stand up against Jane Austen's superfluous proses. I was simply comparing the lead characters.

[Amy]

Mathis wrote: "Okay, I wasn't going to do any in depth comparison between Pride and Prejudice and Twilight. But since most of you don't see the parallels, I guess I will lay them down. Lets begin with the simila..."

Exactly. Well said! I understood exactly where you were coming from with your first post :) I thought it was a "delight"ful read as well.

[Kagama-the Literaturevixen]

Molly wrote: "Kagama wrote: "Molly wrote: "Kagama wrote: "Catherine wrote: "Ummm NO it is not like Pride and Prejudice. That is just an insult to Jane Austen"

Agreed!

Dont mess with the Austen ;)

This howeve..."


There was more before that but it would have taken up quite abit of space so i cut and copied the important bit.

Before that we get to know that the girl´s favorite books is "Watership down" And the fact that its supposed to be so meaningful and full of symbolism pertaining to the main characters life.

Its an YA urban fantasy with werewolves.

When reading those particular pages I felt like the author was literally looking down her nose at Jane Austen and her readers.

But I dont know the author..maybe it wasnt her intent..but it came across as that.

[Licha]

Heck no! Who in the world came up with this comparison? Twilight could never come close to being the great book that Pride and Prejudice is. All you Twilight fans need to stop trying to make people believe that Twilight is some kind of great classic.

[Diane]

Licha wrote: "All you Twilight fans need to stop trying to make people believe that Twilight is some kind of great classic. "
That wasn't the point of this thread.

Plus, OP (Mathis) already said "I'd like to point out, that by no means, am I comparing all of theTwilight books to P&P, just Twilight in itself. Nor am I comparing them from a literary stand point or the setting of the story. We all know nothing can stand up against Jane Austen's superfluous proses. I was simply comparing the lead characters. "

[Natalie]

Licha wrote: "Heck no! Who in the world came up with this comparison? Twilight could never come close to being the great book that Pride and Prejudice is. All you Twilight fans need to stop trying to make peo..."

It always baffles my mind as to why people react so foolishly when we dare hold two works up together for comparison. Literary scholars, critics, and academics do this all the time--as their job. It doesn't matter how much merit the piece of work holds: if its published it is deemed to be compared and contrasted with other works. Why do people seem to think that just because we want to compare and contrast that we are committing a sin against classic novels? I'm pretty sure this discussion was based on a comparison of the two works, not saying Twilight holds a greater value over the classic P&P.

Also, if someone wants to have a discussion about the similarities about P&P and Twilight, let it be. Simply because writers are inspired by what they like and whats around them. Heck, Austin was inspired by something wasn't she? God forbid Meyer was inspired to create a parallel or any similarities to the characters...ohhh...better call the lit. police on her for comitting such a sin.

[Minnie]

oh please! don't compare this teenage oriented rubbish with such a classic as Pride and Prejudice! I don't particularly hate this series but I can't say I like it much. I'm not saying it has no inherent value to whoever enjoys it.
That being said, "Bella" is a lousy role model for teenage girls,she is a drama queen and intentionally irresponsible. She can't be compared to Elizabeth who is a family oriented girl, mature and has logical and critical thinking. A novel like Pride & Prejudice was ahead of it's time in the portrayal of strong women characters comparing it to twilight is near sacrilege.

[Kagama-the Literaturevixen]

Minerva wrote: "oh please! don't compare this teenage oriented rubbish with such a classic as Pride and Prejudice! I don't particularly hate this series but I can't say I like it much. I'm not saying it has no inh..."

People are always talking about how fangirlish the Twilight fans are but they are nothing to us Austen lovers.

But we are mostly peaceful...until someone makes a comment comparing it with Twilight. Grrrrr

[Amy]

Why don't people get that this is not comparing the WORTH or VALUE of Twilight to Pride and Prejudice??? The OP was comparing similar plot/character points - that is all. Calm down Austen fans. I love Austen as well, but I don't take offense from a comparison or freak out about it. Meyer herself has said many times she is a major Austen fan and is inspired by Austen's writing. Is Jane Austen so untouchable that no writer is allowed to attempt to emulate her stories into a new concept?

[Gerd]

Minerva wrote: "oh please! don't compare this teenage oriented rubbish with such a classic as Pride and Prejudice!
..."

And yet you do exactly that when you point out that:

"Bella" is a lousy role model for teenage girls,she is a drama queen and intentionally irresponsible. She can't be compared to Elizabeth who is a family oriented girl, mature and has logical and critical thinking. A novel like Pride & Prejudice was ahead of it's time in the portrayal of strong women characters...

How else could we evaluate a work if not by drawing up comparisons?
There's little point to compare "twilight" to the "Vampires Diary" series because that can't tell us much beyond the point that they are likely interchangable.

Besides, there's a point to it, I found Darcy in the end just as unlikable as Edward and can see neither ones appeal to women/girls.
Both to me appeared as typical products of a terrible society, of which both show a modicum of awarness (meaning both are aware that there's something terribly wrong with how their society is build up, and of the subsequent wrongness of their own actions necessarily following from that).

(But let me add that I would agree that the thread title is far off. "twilight" hasn't much of a "Pride and Prejudice in the 21st Century"; while one can find "twilight" using some similar concepts they are never integral to the story.)

[Natalie]

Minerva wrote: "oh please! don't compare this teenage oriented rubbish with such a classic as Pride and Prejudice! I don't particularly hate this series but I can't say I like it much. I'm not saying it has no inh..."

and why can we not compare it? Give me some good reasons why two pieces of work cannot be held together to compare and contrast?

Go find any lit scholar and ask them if they have never compared or contrasted different works:they will laugh in your face. It doesn't matter how much merit a work holds. If it is published and has 'similarities' it is deemed to be discussed. Accept it. This will never change.

[Eirinn]

As people have said before NO NO NO NO NO and oh my lord HELL NO!

This book, and the remainder of the series is a sadly contrived love story gone unrealistic. The author gives her characters everything they wanted and everyone ends happily. Its actually pathetic considering the subject matter. Love doesn't end pretty with everyone getting something. And the good guys don't always win.

As to the question of why the two can't be compared... one is a work of classic fiction, the other (twilight) is ... just... so wrong! Its tween fascination at its worst. Smut romances are written better!

[Natalie]

As to the question of why the two can't be compared... one is a work of classic fiction, the other (twilight) is ... just... so wrong! Its tween fascination at its worst. Smut romances are written better! ..."

I'm guessing you have never met any real scholars that do this for a living...or even heard of that this is done all the time?

People are so silly when it comes to relating Twilight with a classic. Sure Twilight is not an outstanding book, is not a classic, nor does it have any of P&P's outstanding qualities, but it will be discussed in a comparitive manner whether you like it or not. The fact that Meyer was inspired by various classic works immediately calls attention to the books. I personally know scholars/professors/writers who have only read the book to produce written articles about the comparisons or to see them for themselves (for curiosities sake, not to praise it) on how someone in the 21st century is putting a spin on Renaissance works and classic novels. Next time you say "oh, this book reminds me of ___book" or "this movie reminds me of this book/movie" remember that you are drawing similarities between the two. ahhhh people, stop being so silly and realize that it is deemed to be compared and contrasted. Just because one work (P&P) is outstanding and Twilight is terrible doesn't make it wrong, bad, or unscholary to notice parallels. Heck, if I was told I wasn't suppose to draw these parallels between works I would be out a job.

[Diane]

Natalie wrote: "Ahhhh people, stop being so silly and realize that it is deemed to be compared and contrasted. Just because one work (P&P) is outstanding and Twilight is terrible doesn't make it wrong, bad, or unscholary to notice parallels. "

[Sarah]

Mathis wrote: "What a delight! delight! delight! This book was an enchanting read. Here's Pride and Prejudice turns vampiric in the 21 century.

The story is about a tomboy teenage girl by the name of Bella, who ..."

DO NOT COMPARE THIS JUNK TO THE GENIUS THAT IS PRIDE AND PREJUDICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Diane]

Sarah wrote: "Mathis wrote: "What a delight! delight! delight! This book was an enchanting read. Here's Pride and Prejudice turns vampiric in the 21 century.

The story is about a tomboy teenage girl by the name..."
Did you not really read the thread at all? Seriously, we've been over this.

[Eirinn]

Natalie wrote: "As to the question of why the two can't be compared... one is a work of classic fiction, the other (twilight) is ... just... so wrong! Its tween fascination at its worst. Smut romances are written ..."

Pardon, I was only offering my opinion on the matter, the two can not be compared as far as literary works. Basic plot aside (boy meets girl, they fall in love the end) you'd be comparing apples to ... well... mouse turds. Yes both are books, both written by women, and both on the subject of love... that's where the comparisons should stop. Pride and Prejudice offers up a look at an era long gone of gentry love and affection, the building of relationships that are deep and long lasting, between both friend and lover alike. It takes up social issues of the time, as well as social graces and station. Twilight is a tween girl with a hard on for a dead guy. There is no depth of character, no development of the people around the couple, nor real development of their relationship at all! (and no I don't qualify the half paragraphs on other characters 'development') It's "ooh shiny he's hot.. I LURVE HIM!" How did she realize she loved him, what brought her through the conflict with his affliction? there is NO development past a plain girl getting a sweet@ss boy. Seriously...

I'm sorry if you disagree, but I can not fathom a comparison made between these two novels ever being worth study or thought.

[Natalie]

Eirinn wrote: "Natalie wrote: "As to the question of why the two can't be compared... one is a work of classic fiction, the other (twilight) is ... just... so wrong! Its tween fascination at its worst. Smut roman..."

I have read the book myself, so yes I understand the greatness of P&P in comparison so you just waisted five mins of your life writing that analysis. It's not a question of "opinion" of whether one can compare the two works because it has been done. Whether it was criticizing Twilight, or drawing comparisions, etc, it has been done. So, in that case, you not being able to 'fathom' it being done is no argument when there is written or oral proof. I don't mean to come off as an ass or anything, I really don't, but when people act so blind to the fact that everyday people discuss these things, or write about it, or criticize it, etc, it gets annoying. I myself am one of these people. I don't study literature to just write/discuss one work by itself.

Also, if we can't compare the two then we are getting rid of the delight one gets from readng books. By comparing books we are able to see what is better or worse, are able to have the discussion of similar motifs, characters, etc. There are minor details that transfer-over with twilight, but that does not mean we cannot talk about it nor can we deny it. Just because they are miles apart (yet close because meyer has been influenced by classic works) does not deem it incomparable.

Its not a matter of 'disagreeing', its fact. It has been done and it will continue to be compared and contrasted: to show similarities, or how it does not have similarities.

[Amy]

"I have read the book myself, so yes I understand the greatness of P&P in comparison so you just waisted five mins of your life writing that analysis. It's not a question of "opinion" of whether one can compare the two works because it has been done. Whether it was criticizing Twilight, or drawing comparisions, etc, it has been done. So, in that case, you not being able to 'fathom' it being done is no argument when there is written or oral proof. I don't mean to come off as an ass or anything, I really don't, but when people act so blind to the fact that everyday people discuss these things, or write about it, or criticize it, etc, it gets annoying. I myself am one of these people. I don't study literature to just write/discuss one work by itself.

Also, if we can't compare the two then we are getting rid of the delight one gets from readng books. By comparing books we are able to see what is better or worse, are able to have the discussion of similar motifs, characters, etc. There are minor details that transfer-over with twilight, but that does not mean we cannot talk about it nor can we deny it. Just because they are miles apart (yet close because meyer has been influenced by classic works) does not deem it incomparable.

Its not a matter of 'disagreeing', its fact. It has been done and it will continue to be compared and contrasted: to show similarities, or how it does not have similarities."


Natalie, You're awesome. Thanks for the laugh in your first couple of sentences.

[Natalie]

Amy wrote: ""I have read the book myself, so yes I understand the greatness of P&P in comparison so you just waisted five mins of your life writing that analysis. It's not a question of "opinion" of whether on..."

thank you :)