16 Years Ago, "Twilight" Didn't Bite Me But Why Should I Hate It? It Wasn't Supposed To

“Twilight” came out 16 years ago in 2005. I didn’t read it until a couple years later. In college, I took a course on vampire literature, and got to read some great stuff like “Dracula” and a bunch of other classic vampire novels I don’t remember, but I’m sure they were classic. I was already a fan of vampires, having devoured a bunch of Anne Rice novels. Anne Rice’s classic 1976 vampire novel “Interview With The Vampire” is still one of my favorites to this day. However, because “Twilight” was the face of vampires at the time, the professor started out with the class reading “Twilight”. I read it in 2 days, and didn’t love it but didn’t hate it either. It was alright. It had some compelling characters, a ton of wish fulfilment for it’s readership and oddness I chalked up to poor writing. It needed an editor, and it felt like there was a better novel in it with good polish. Most of the class hated it and went on and on about how it was a fantasy novel about male abuse. Obviously I was the only one who read paperback novels from my local drug store, because I saw it for what it was: a paperback novel from my local drug store, except a YA version with vampires.

I got it’s appeal, as it had no appeal to me but if I was a 12 year old girl with a poster of Harry Styles on my wall, it would have a ton of appeal to me. Stephanie Meyer was basically Danielle Steel or Nora Roberts or Judith Krantz for the younger set with teen vampires thrown in. She wasn’t even Anne Rice. She wasn’t good enough to be.
 

The response to her novel felt like, in hindsight, a prototype for woke culture. A friend of mine, a 20 something guy trying to make it as a freelance writer, wrote a long article hating on “Twilight” and Stephen King was taking shots at it. It did strike me as odd that two male writers, a mega star like Stephen King and an aspiring freelance fiction writer like my friend, were taking shots at this YA fluff novel obviously targeted to female readers. Not all novels speak to people's experiences. A lot of novels speak to people's fantasies, and there's really nothing wrong with that as long as you can either move on, or when your reading it, know what this is. Because the "Twilight" readership was often young, I assume they moved on. King said Harry Potter was about the importance of friendship and courage and "Twilight" was about the importance of having a boyfriend. Yeah, because "Twilight" inspired to be mostly escapism, not something deeper. There's room for both. Also, it didn't speak to King's experiences and fantasies, because he's a straight guy, and you know what? It doesn't speak to mine either because I'm a straight guy.

There were valid criticisms of “Twilight”, as the book was too long, a ton of it played out like a real over the top teen fantasy, with over descriptions of Edward looking amazing, a supernatural war over a girl who was nice enough but nothing really special looks wise or personality wise, and the fact that she herself was enamored with Edward to a dangerous degree. That’s not unusual with girls her age, but usually a parent or in this case, Bella’s single dad, would step in to monitor the solution a bit to make sure it played out safely, vampire or not. I mean, if a teen boy was watching my teen daughter sleep outside a window, I simply open the window bemused at the teen boy, but also tell him if he wants to date my daughter, this isn’t how this is going to play out. Go home or I’ll call your parents. The writing of Bella's dad allowing this didn't read as realistic to me, even more so because he was a small town cop.  A lot of the book doesn’t play out great in the MeToo era. Also Bella comes off very melodramatic, but she’s also a teenage girl. Teenagers, both boys and girls, are melodramatic. That’s the age. You're basically a mixture of angst and hormones you don’t understand. That’s science. You’ll be wondering what you were so angry about 20 years from now.

However, on the other hand, the book itself does embrace the totally silliness of teen romances and stories in general. It’s melodramatic, like when she tells Edward to say what he is in the woods! Say it! You're a vampire! SAY IT! Edward swooped in to save her from some creepy older guys! Edward played the piano because she inspired him! Edward being more like James Dean then Anne Rice’s complicated vampire creation Lastat! He even wears a leather jacket! He’s more like the Fonz or Uncle Jesse! He’s a bad boy...but not really! The Cullen family are all being overly attractive! Them being young forever! (well, that’s normal with vampires) The whole middle of the book where Edward gives an overly dramatic information dump about his backstory went on forever! The whole fact the vampires play baseball and the fact they sparkle! (seriously, that’s the cheesy factor up to 11). The fact I end every sentence in this paragraph with “!” is a testament to the book! 

“Twilight” was a huge deal because it was the first novel to knock “Harry Potter” off the top of the New York Times bestseller list. I really didn’t hate “Twilight”  to be honest. I was never going to read the sequels, but it was the literary version of “Saved By The Bell” for me. A silly thing you liked as a teen. All in all, I have never been a 12 year old girl but I can see the value of it for a 12 year old girl or even an older female reader. It’s pure escapism. Orson Scott Card, who is a way better writer than Stephanie Meyer, nailed it in his piece for Time Magazine the year Meyer made the Time 100 list. He said she doesn’t stand between the reader and the dream, and that does make sense. So 16 years later, what do I think of “Twilight”? It’s fine.