Paranormal Romance & Urban Fantasy discussion

The author of says so here http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainm... Do you agree?

Yes. Yes he is.

I dislike Edward--but for entirely different reasons. Yet I wouldn't say he is a wimp, but then my definition of that might be quite different.

Of that article I couldn't get past this:

In his essay, McGreevy argued that the only figure in American culture worthy of Dracula's cape was Mad Men's Don Draper: debonair, "magnetic and urbane," and a danger to the women who get involved with him. You see, "men are predators at heart," McGreevy wrote. "It is a killer's heart that is the motive force of masculinity and predation its spirit." Draper has that, McGreevy says, and what's more, we'd be right to emulate him.

What a load of utter bull and certainly one major example of what is wrong with masculine self-image in the USA and a reason for a wagonload of problems in actual society. Rape culture anyone?

I'm not even going to start on that vampires started off in Europe and that Bram Stoker was a Victorian gentleman who tried, among other things, to write about sex without calling it by its name. This is easy research for everyone who cares to look it up.

The vampire or undead of Central Europe sure wasn't the headcinema of some American writer bewailing the decline of masculinity. It wasn't about masculinity either. It was essentially about the idea of unhealthy love beyond the grave. Insofar Meyer isn't that far out.

Before McGreevy is so hot on claiming Lord Byron as an inspiration he might also want to look up on him. Hollywood and reality can be far removed from each other ;)

I do have my own problems with Edward, as said, but that's because I really dislike the changes of tradition Meyer effected and that whole zoo of paranormal creatures which lately seems to be the status quo in PNR novels. Sparkly and able to walk about in Italian sun? So not. ;)

Sort of, I mean yes, yes he is. Also he was always going on about how bad and dangerous he is for Bella but I never sensed the dangerous vibe. Of course it added to the fact that I had trouble taking him seriously because he sparkles. :))

It's not only that he sparkles - but the way he treats it like a omg-it-makes-me-so-badass. Honestly, that's the lamest reason vampires would have to hide. If you saw someone sparkling on the street, would you think vampire or body glitter?

So...um, yes, he is a wimp.

I din't get the whole sparkles thing anyway. I'd have thought "skin disease" most likely.

Wimp probably isn't the word I'd use. Pacifist is what comes to mind. The whole Cullen clan is that way. Admittedly, I don't love the Twilight books, but I read about a LOT of alpha males. It was kind of refreshing to have someone like Edward be a lead in a popular romance.

I think you nailed it in a way.

Edward is a bit like a vegetarian who decided to forego meat because of the need to kill animals for that, rather than because it's more healthy or tastes better.

Yes, agreed, and he'd probably be a nice refreshing character. Buuut...then comes the creepy stalking and controlling attitude (which paired with his pacifist ways are just plain wrong) plus his inability to make up his damn mind about what he wants (kill himself, not kill himself, be with Bella, not be with Bella) - he gives in a little too fast to be a strong character.

@Stephanie, you are very correct. Meyers may have ignored the alpha-male cliche, but she went overboard on the tortured, angsty male cliche, maybe compensating for the lack of "strong" male characteristics.

Tabitha wrote: "@Stephanie, you are very correct. Meyers may have ignored the alpha-male cliche, but she went overboard on the tortured, angsty male cliche, maybe compensating for the lack of "strong" male charac..."

Yes, exactly. He sometimes acts as if he's supposed to be an Alpha, but he's not, so it seems weird and kinda out of character.

I don't actually believe there are any alpha characters in twilight.

Tabitha wrote: "Wimp probably isn't the word I'd use. Pacifist is what comes to mind. The whole Cullen clan is that way. Admittedly, I don't love the Twilight books, but I read about a LOT of alpha males. It wa..."

Interesting question and I agree with Tabitha. I think you nailed it.

I like Edward more in the books. I think he is portrayed a bit differently in the movies, especially the early ones. He's always looking tortured.

Stefanie wrote: "I don't actually believe there are any alpha characters in twilight. ..."

That's actually the one really positive thing about this series. Personally, I hate alpha males with a passion. In fiction just as much as I detest them in real life by the way.

I wouldn't have minded the stalking if Meyer had acknowledged it and made something of it. But she simply accepted it as if it were perfectly okay. That was the problem there for me.

I agree with Shelly, he is different in the books. The "wimpy" bit might be all Patterson?

I agree with the fact that too many people are criticizing the movie Edward rather than the book Edward. I am not a Rob Pattinson fan and read the books back in 2007 before I ever heard of him. I fell in love with Edward (and I do not like a wimp) and I DID feel the danger for Bella but I had never heard of the books nor read all the criticism of them. My daughters in law and my granddaughters and everyone I knew also fell in love with him. There was something there but it is very difficult to recapture it after the movies and all the zillion discussions pro and con about the BOOKS.

Terry (Ter05 TwiMoms/ MundieMoms) wrote: "Rob Pattinson..."

Heh! Is it Pattinson? Goes to tell much about my relationship with the movie versions XD

Steelwhisper wrote: "Stefanie wrote: "I don't actually believe there are any alpha characters in twilight. ..."

That's actually the one really positive thing about this series. Personally, I hate alpha males with a pa..."
This might actually interfere with what each of us perceives as being alpha. To me, they're dependable guys who can take charge and solve problems, not the guys on romance covers, filled with muscles. Edward does not solve problems.

I read twilight before the movie came out too. True that RPatz (I hate that I used this word, but I'm too lazy to write his name - though I'm apparently not too lazy to write down this explanation) made the character a lot wimpier and more constipated than he was in the books, but it wasn't much of a downgrade for me. The only characters in the whole series I actually liked were Jacob and Emmett, but Meyer made sure to perform character suicide for both of them, so by the end of Breaking Dawn, I was left with zero favorite characters.

I like the books and movies, but they are very different for me. In the book, I can imagine much more about motivations than I'm given in the movies. The actors put their spin into the movies and change it-not wrong, just different.

I think Edward had a lot of internal struggles going on. He was alone for 100 years and basically thought he deserved to be. He wanted a normal life for Bella and his temperment reflects his age, too.

Stefanie wrote: "Steelwhisper wrote: "Stefanie wrote: "I don't actually believe there are any alpha characters in twilight. ..."

That's actually the one really positive thing about this series. Personally, I hate ..."

I dislike any kind of "alpha male." Whether they take charge and solve problems left and right, or whether they have too many muscles to walk straight and scream "me Tarzan, you Jane!".

I seriously prefer mature people able to live in a democratic kind of culture where everybody contributes and is listened to and where everyone can have their weaknesses without these being ridiculed or exploited. That sort of group has absolutely no need of an alpha male (or female).

I don't mind that Edward solves no problems, that's not what I need in an MC. I liked Jasper a lot and quite a few of the secondary characters.

To Shelly: I read Edward basically as someone who pretty much has stayed a 17 y/o for a hundred years. As that a lot of his behaviourisms made quite a bit sense and were rather logical. I also myself currently research the 19th century and Edward was born in an age of innocence in a way which is completely different from ours. Again, as such his behaviour towards Bella made eminent sense.

No. Edward is a sexist jerk who is a poor excuse for a vampire.
The End.

Steelwhisper wrote: "Stefanie wrote: "Steelwhisper wrote: "Stefanie wrote: "I don't actually believe there are any alpha characters in twilight. ..."

That's actually the one really positive thing about this series. Pe..."

True, but he is beating himself about being a vampire and his past. In some ways, he does act older than 17 would have in that time period, I think. Interesting point though!

I don't get it. So, he's stuck at 17. But he's lived a hundred years since. Did he learn NOTHING? All he did was attend high school and college over and over, mooching off his adoptive family, with no purpose. That screams WIMP in my book.

And I don't agree about people not having to take charge in a democratic society - they do. We can't all be followers. Leaders are always needed.

Stefanie wrote: "I don't get it. So, he's stuck at 17. But he's lived a hundred years since. Did he learn NOTHING? All he did was attend high school and college over and over, mooching off his adoptive family, with..."

According to current psychology a person's character is fully formed by the time they are 7. After that nothing much changes, so Edward would be and stay a person of 100 years ago in some very important basic ways. He has lacked most of the normal ways to grow up as a human being, that's a bit what I see Twilight is about--his chance to finally try growing up.

I completely disagree with that a democratic society or culture needs leaders. The worst catastrophes of the past couple hundred years were achieved by "leaders".

And especially when we talk about some basic democratic structures such as families or couples there's definitely no need for leaders. Any partner unwilling to discuss and decide together with me what needs to be done had better dress warmly.

But this topic would lead to a political discourse and hence a bit too far for such a forum ;)

I agree. No need to go there :)

Steelwhisper, if that is so, why does your country have a president, which is as much "leader" as you can get in my book (assuming you're from the US). But yeah, maybe this is not the forum to discuss that.

Edward doesn't act like someone who has lived over a hundred years. Even if you don't age, you get wisdom. and he's still screams teenager to me. And a wimpy pussy one at that.

Celine wrote: "Steelwhisper, if that is so, why does your country have a president, which is as much "leader" as you can get in my book (assuming you're from the US). But yeah, maybe this is not the forum to disc..."

You assume faultily. I'm definitely not American ;)

That something exists doesn't mean it's a positive thing by the way. Think Hitler, Stalin or Mussolini. You can add both Bushes, Reagan or Thatcher if it pleases you. Come to think of it Kitchener and Haig also belong to the leaders we'd better not have had.

I'd personally be hard put to find many so-called leaders doing much good. Ghandi, perhaps, but then he was, sure as hell, no alpha male. But already every single Pope I can think of did, on the whole, not enough good for the harm they did. See now why I prefer not to tackle that topic? ;)

A lot of Edward's behaviour is dictated by what a young man in the late 19th and early 20th century would have done. This is, quite a rare thing, correctly envisioned by Meyer.

In case you are unaware of this, I really do not like the Twilight series, but she has to get her due where it is due. Edward isn't the problem I have with Twilight.

Why anyone would get wisdom simply through time spent on earth I wonder. I see so many 30 or 40 year olds on the internet who behave like teenagers, I can't undersign this as a natural thing which has to happen given enough time, sort of as a matter of course. It entirely depends on the kind of experiences you're exposed to and make, eyes open.

The "wimpy pussy" if there is any such is Bella in my opinion. But then I wouldn't really call anyone a "wimpy pussy". ;)

Well, please don't get me started on Bella. I can go on and on about her.

I wouldn't call a peron a wimpy pussy, but since it's a fictional character I don't think I'm hurting his feelings. However, I'm quite sure that breaking into your lover's home and watching them sleep every day was NOT accepted during the time Edward was born. I think that's actually something you would get punished quite severely for.

And most adults that act like kids have led sheltered lives, in which the only bad thing that has happened to them is a person glaring at them in the subway. Once you've had certain experiences, you can't just go back to acting like a teenager. In the life Edward has led for so, so long, he is bound to have come across some pretty gruesome stuff? I mean, like the Volturi just killing people when they feel like it. Wouldn't that make you grow up a bit?

I don't think Edward's mindset is so much of a 17 yr old either, but has more to do with being born and raised in late 19th and early 20th century. He is chivalrous and mindful of Bella at all times. He could have "died" at 30, but if he was born in the same time period, I don't think he'd be any different.

When I think of Edwards stalking I actually think it more of a compulsion. I would think he was SUPER CREEP if he had done this before to another female, but I believe it was Meyers way of conveying his compulsive behavior and attraction towards Bella alone.

Have to agree with Steelwhisper in that Edward was not the problem with Twilight books. IMO, he was the redeeming quality. I find many leading males to be cliche and predictable. Edward was a pleasant surprise.

Yes, Tabitha, my thoughts.

As I stated somewhere, that controlling, taking care, taking decisions away and making them for the female etc etc, all that is very 19th century. Here before the Great War women owned no property, they could not vote, the moment they married everything was the husband's property and he made absolutely all major decisions for them. A young girl born e.g. in 1880 or 1885 would never be left alone anywhere, would be closely guarded and shielded. All that changed with the Great War and the rise of the suffragette movement.

But essentially what Edward is showing are traits of a perfectly caring and loving 19th century gentleman, albeit a young one, and some things he *can* do--simply because he is a vampire and not a man. But they all make sense within his frame of personality.

I think a modern teen or young woman would be completely freaked out and scandalised by any Victorian gentleman or just simple man behaving towards her as was common then. The differences are pronounced and Meyer got at least that pretty much spot on right. Indeed, the time-period background of the vampires she seems to have researched quite well. Jasper for instance as well is very much a child of the time *he* was born in.

As I also stated, I am currently up to my eartips in books of the time period 1815 to 1950 with a great stress on gender relationships, psycho-sociology and general mores and laws. And given what I am learning there, I see Edward as a rather mild specimen who already much adapted his original stance as he must have had it when he was young.

Celine wrote: "Well, please don't get me started on Bella. I can go on and on about her...."

LOL obviously. ;) I'm not that passionate about Meyer's books, but don't start me on Fifty Shades of Grey...

He isn't acting like a kid. He is acting like a young man of Victorian time. ;)

Bella, now she is, ahemm, rather curious. To say the least ;)

Edward's acting like a young man of Victorian times...yeah, I'll give you that, but he's been alive for over a hundred years, don't you think he would change?

Nepeta wrote: "Edward's acting like a young man of Victorian times...yeah, I'll give you that, but he's been alive for over a hundred years, don't you think he would change?"

I'll repeat it: there are certain things which get fixed in one's psychological make-up at age 7 and also again at puberty which afterwards either don't change or are extremely hard to change (you need a shrink's help to do that).

So, no, such stuff doesn't change that easily.

Additionally, that's just my opinion, I wouldn't say that living as a vampire is helpful regarding changes of inter-human behaviour. Not really.

It doesn't change what Edward does, but it explains it. If you're really interested I can give you a list of some books which show that for a guy of the era during which he was born Edward is downright enlightened during the present. ;) But somehow I suspect that's not what you want to hear ;)

Nepeta wrote: "Edward's acting like a young man of Victorian times...yeah, I'll give you that, but he's been alive for over a hundred years, don't you think he would change?"

Exactly what I think. You're not the same person when you're 60 as when you're 30, right? Things change over time, and you really do not need the help of a shrink to learn some insights in your life. No, your most basic character won't change, but the way you see things will.

If you couldn't change, this world would be a very sad place in my opinion.

I agree a person changes over time, but when I was a kid I was taught to treat people a certain way...but brother was raised to treat women a certain way. 30 years later, we still treat people like we were raised to. Edward may be 100, but he was taught a certain way to treat women, I don't believe that is something that easily changes in a person.

Who is 'Edward Cullen'??

Tabitha wrote: "I agree a person changes over time, but when I was a kid I was taught to treat people a certain way...but brother was raised to treat women a certain way. 30 years later, we still treat people lik..."

My grandfather used to get up when a woman entered the room or got up herself, he held the door open (fairly sprinted to do that), opened the car door and what-not. He always paid up wherever he was with a woman or women, even if they were just neighbours or distant acquaintances and he'd step in front of a woman if he perceived there was any danger or unpleasantness ahead. He'd positively hover in such circumstances. He could never fathom why women would want to work if there was no need for it, or why they'd want to do everything themselves.

He was born in 1896 and lived long enough so I witnessed how irked my female elders were over his behaviour sometimes. He'd smile, duck his head and keep behaving like that. It wasn't even slapped into him as a youngster, that was just the way a gentleman would behave in his youth, so he did as well and he was convinced that was proper behaviour towards females to the day he died.

Wow....

Edward isn't a gentleman. He goes into Bella's room for Strider's sake! And watches her in her sleep...without her knowing.

I honestly had no idea that Victorian gentlemen behaved like that.

Nepeta wrote: "Wow....

Edward isn't a gentleman. He goes into Bella's room for Strider's sake! And watches her in her sleep...without her knowing.

I honestly had no idea that Victorian gentlemen behaved like that."

I do not think we will achieve any kind of understanding there, and that's quite okay. To each his own.

In my opinion Edward is in her room because he can, he is a vampire after all. I do not treat him as a human in my considerations. That may explain our different opinions.

Good ole Stoker's Dracula did this stunt as well. So did Carpenter's Dracula in "Vampires" (classy movie by the way) and a couple of further vampires I read or watched.

Edward is not just some guy, he is a vampire too, no? So he can do it, he's capable of doing it. He's attracted by her smell (the concept may be silly, but then Stoker's Dracula was irresistibly attracted to Mina too), he wants to watch her, he does. He also may consider this a form of watching over her, rather than just watching her, but the more important fact to me here is that he is a vampire and can do as he wishes.

That used to go with the species, so I am astonished people cease to bear it in mind and evaluate Edward as if he was a normal boy or man.

Anyway, this difference in how to consider him is probably the reason why we see his actions differently as well.

You do have valid points here, BUT, in 'Dracula', it's not seen as a good thing.

In Twilight, Woman of Tissue- I mean, Bella Swan, finds this behavior romantic and it is condoned.

That's exactly why I say that Bella is the f..., heh ;), the problematic character in Twilight, at least after she came a bit to her senses.

If anything the not really well-reflected way Meyer twists and reapplies old vampire tropes is my main beef with the series.

Steelwhisper wrote: "I din't get the whole sparkles thing anyway. I'd have thought "skin disease" most likely."

"Ask me if I sparkle, and I'll kill you where you stand."-- Bones from Jeanine Frosts's Night Huntress Series...sorry, but I couldn't resist :)

Vampires should never sparkle in the sun dang it. Yes and with him being 100 yrs old its really pathetic.

Michelle wrote: "Vampires should never sparkle in the sun dang it. Yes and with him being 100 yrs old its really pathetic."

*laughs* Absolutely! You're 100% right. <3

Michelle wrote: "Vampires should never sparkle in the sun dang it. Yes and with him being 100 yrs old its really pathetic."

Yup, and it also adds the fact that he's a total emo.

Enishia wrote: "Ask me if I sparkle, and I'll kill you where you stand."-- Bones from Jeanine Frost..."

Love this quote! I laughed my ass off the first time I read it. Definitely one of my favorite quotes from Bones.

Edward and Bella are two of my least favorite characters in Twilight. Which I know sounds weird. Why did I keep reading then, when I think Edward and Bella didn't have a healthy relationship and a lot of the action like why she put him with his odd bossiness at times were not really explained. The answer is easy, the secondary characters, namely Jasper and Alice made the books for me.
-Pammie