In compiling the hangovers for today, I realized I’ve accumulated enough Breaking Dawn-related links to make their own post.
I was highly amused by Leila’s live blogging her reading experience ("47 – Of COURSE it’s Pachelbel’s Canon") and Jen Fu’s entry "live texting Breaking Dawn: a Novel of Vampire Doing-It" ("PAGE 360 OH MY GOD THAT DID NOT JUST HAPPEN").
The wonderful and insightful Liz Hand’s review in the Washington Post is the real piece de resistance though. She read all four books and spots some troubling subtext:
Yet there’s something distinctly queasy about the male-female dynamic that emerges over the series’ 2,446 pages. Edward has been frozen at the age of 17. But he was born in 1901, and he doesn’t behave anything like a real teenager. He talks and acts like an obsessively controlling adult male. He sounds far more like a father than a boyfriend, and Bella’s real father remains a detached if benign figure. Bella consistently describes herself as stupid, accident-prone, unworthy of her beloved’s affection.
…snipped for length…
This bland passivity has been excused as a way of allowing female readers to project themselves into Bella’s place, but the overall effect is a weird infantilization that has repellent overtones to an adult reader and hardly seems like an admirable model to foist upon our daughters (or sons).
More from Liz here. Matt Ruff uses the review as a jumping off point to talk about the fact there’s an element of this in every romance involving a young person and a centuries-old vampire and recommends a British miniseries called Ultraviolet that sounds really interesting.
And for the even more controversially inclined, there’s the ongoing conversation about race in the series. I suspect this post at Dear Author pretty much nails that one.