vampires, who likes them, who doesn't?

[Steerpike]

You must not have heard very many, then. I've seen a number of criticisms that focus on things like the fact that Bella and Edward are in what is pretty clearly an abusive relationship, and yet that relationship is lionized as True Love For The Ages, which is an absolutely awful role model for the young women who are the book's core audience. It has nothing to do with jealousy or resentment; it's a perfectly valid criticism of the book's central relationship. And that's just the most obvious one I can think off of the top of my head.

Given all of the books subject to similar criticisms, and what it says about the criticizer's view of the reader, you still have to explain why those criticisms appear with such vehemence with respect to Twilight. And I think Shockley is on the right track.

[Steerpike]

Also, I think the jealousy and resentment factors explain why it is that, seven years after the publication of Twilight, most of the original fans of the series have moved on to other books, whereas those who get so worked up hating the book that they can't see straight still dredge it up into writing conversations on a very, very frequent basis

[Shockley]

I think it shares the origin, though perhaps subconsciously for the person making it. There are a lot of works that glorify really awful relationships without ever condemning them, and that's rarely brought up in their criticisms (Off the top of my head: The Fountainhead, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, The Good Earth, The Great Gatsby all have these terrible relationships).

It seems that the criticism is being applied to Twilight specifically, while other works get a free pass even if they are worse (the prime relationship in the Fountainhead revolves around the love a rape victim has for her rapist, though it's never depicted in such direct terms). I can't buy that it's just moral outrage. I can't.

Yeah, Edward watches Bella sleep. And Romeo leads Juliet to suicide.

[Mindfire]

I don't agree. That's letting the reader off too easy. There's nothing wrong with an author throwing something out there and letting the reader draw conclusions. Some of the greatest works of literature do just that, without the author intruding and saying "now, you're supposed to think X, Y, or Z."

Well, even open-ended works have clues about what the author believes the right opinion is. I have yet to see a work where there's no clear author opinion. And besides, this isn't a morally grey area. Stalking, abusive and unhealthy relationships? It hardly gets more black and white than that. A reader might draw the conclusion that Edward is a great guy, but that's still a wrong conclusion. And if the author makes no attempt to correct this (which Meyer has not AFAIK, she seems content to bask in the "OMG I LOVE YOU EDWARD I WANT YOUR BABIES" fervor of her fans), then the author is complicit in that wrong conclusion.

[Steerpike]

Well, even open-ended works have clues about what the author believes the right opinion is. I have yet to see a work where there's no clear author opinion. And besides, this isn't a morally grey area. Stalking, abusive and unhealthy relationships? It hardly gets more black and white than that. A reader might draw the conclusion that Edward is a great guy, but that's still a wrong conclusion. And if the author makes no attempt to correct this (which Meyer has not AFAIK, she seems content to bask in the "OMG I LOVE YOU EDWARD I WANT YOUR BABIES" fervor of her fans), then the author is complicit in that wrong conclusion.

I disagree with everyone you've said here. So it appears we have a fundamentally different outlook on things.

[Mindfire]

There are a lot of works that glorify really awful relationships without ever condemning them, and that's rarely brought up in their criticisms (Off the top of my head: The Fountainhead, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, The Good Earth, The Great Gatsby all have these terrible relationships).

Books I have never read. And now I won't read them. Thanks for the warning. And if what you say about them is true, they most certainly don't get a free pass. At least not in my book.

Yeah, Edward watches Bella sleep. And Romeo leads Juliet to suicide.

FUN FACT: I've always hated Romeo and Juliet. Every. Single. Version. Of it. West Side Story especially has a distinguished place in my Hall of Hatedom.

[Svrtnsse]

This topic got a bit derailed didn't it?

I like what I perceive to be the original idea with vampires: undead, everliving creatures of the night who prey on the living.

[Steerpike]

I think it shares the origin, though perhaps subconsciously for the person making it. There are a lot of works that glorify really awful relationships without ever condemning them, and that's rarely brought up in their criticisms (Off the top of my head: The Fountainhead, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, The Good Earth, The Great Gatsby all have these terrible relationships).

It seems that the criticism is being applied to Twilight specifically, while other works get a free pass even if they are worse (the prime relationship in the Fountainhead revolves around the love a rape victim has for her rapist, though it's never depicted in such direct terms). I can't buy that it's just moral outrage. I can't.

Yeah, Edward watches Bella sleep. And Romeo leads Juliet to suicide.

Yes. I've tried to make this point before as well. If I'm not mistaken, you get a similar dynamic with Angel watching Buffy in the TV show (which I actually like). But, as you say, literature is rife with novels and other works having such relationships. Ah, well.

[Steerpike]

Books I have never read. And now I won't read them. Thanks for the warning. And if what you say about them is true, they most certainly don't get a free pass. At least not in my book.

FUN FACT: I've always hated Romeo and Juliet. Every. Single. Version. Of it. West Side Story especially has a distinguished place in my Hall of Hatedom.

This is why it is good that we have the freedom to write and enjoy vastly different works, and why it is good that no single person or group has a free hand to censor what is out there.

[Steerpike]

This topic got a bit derailed didn't it?

I like what I perceive to be the original idea with vampires: undead, everliving creatures of the night who prey on the living.

That's how I like them. I think the novelization of 30 Days of Night has been mentioned before. That's a nice, relatively recent example of nasty, vicious vampires.