Zombies, Schmombies! Teen Girls Are Vamping It Up!
Why is the young adult book business bursting with bloodsuckers?
It is probably only a slight exaggeration to say that to be an author of young adult books today is to have written, be writing or contemplating writing a book about vampires. But vampires are over! says conventional wisdom. It’s all about zombies and faeries (that’s faeries, with that extra “e,” signifying their paranormal qualities and that they’re not of the Tinkerbell or Tooth varieties) and ghosts and werewolves. Vampires are totally 2005!
But the conventional wisdom is, in this case, wrong. Like the necks they so greedily suck on, vampires have attacked the young adult market in such a way that editors, agents and publishers are throwing up their hands in surrender. Give the people what they want!
“I thought vampires were over at least two years ago, and I was completely wrong,” said Trident agent Jenny Bent, who represents Lynsay Sands, author of best-selling mass-market paperbacks with titles like Bite Me If You Can and The Accidental Vampire. “These trends come and go, but vampires aren’t going anywhere.”
Why they aren’t going anywhere is a more complicated question. Certainly it doesn’t hurt that the vampires of the mid-aughts are, for the most part, stunningly handsome and remarkably human-seeming. In Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight series—the books that most editors and publishers agree kick-started this new phase of vampire lust—the main vampire character, Edward, is a gorgeous 17-year-old boy who also happens to be kind, thoughtful, brilliant, funny, caring … and immortal. And he and his adopted vampire family subsist on the blood of animals, not humans, which allows them to live semi-inconspicuously among the residents of a small town in Washington. Bella, the (non-vampire) high-school girl he loves, is sweet and smart and interesting, but—to be blunt about it—not totally in Edward’s league.
“Stephenie has tapped into a new level of yearning in teenage girls,” said Megan Tingley, whose eponymous imprint at Little, Brown publishes Ms. Meyer’s books. “This vampire is sexy, but he’s an old-fashioned gentleman. He doesn’t want to kill her. That’s a new twist on the whole vampire stereotype.
“I think that teenagers are attracted to the forbidden,” Ms. Tingley continued. “The dark side. That’s always happened—they like the bad boy, the mysterious guy. That’s something that’s existed for a long time and will continue to exist.”
So perhaps the vampire stories as told by Ms. Meyer and others are little more than classic romance tales, complete with a stock male character who may seem perfect, but is in fact inaccessible. And conveniently for young adult readers’ parents, Edward and Bella can’t have sex, because, in the midst of passion, it is implied, he would not be able to resist biting her neck. (You see, he’s trained himself not to bite humans—but it takes a lot of self-control. So basically, if they were to have sex, she would have to become a vampire. Which she kind of offers to do—after knowing him for, like, a month!)
Which raises another possibility: that these books are, in some way, escapist fantasies for a generation of teenage girls raised on the competing 21st Century American values of Christian-right abstinence and midriff-baring, Lolita-esque Britney Spears (who of course tried to have it both ways, telling the world she was a virgin when in fact she was boning Justin Timberlake in the tour bus). In that case, why wouldn’t a 19th-century kind of man—who has to keep his girlfriend chaste—seem appealing?
Or maybe these teenage vampires are simply the latest manifestation of that erstwhile, endlessly attractive male figure: he who is brooding, aloof and just a little bit dangerous. (In Heathers Christian Slater’s character J.D. had more than a little of the vampire about him. Perhaps that was why I built a shrine to him in my sixth grade bedroom.)
Audrey Quinn and Katie Bludworth are two Michigan 18-year-olds who run a Twilight fan site called Bella Penombra, and they have quite definite opinions about the appeal of Ms. Meyer’s books. “Part of the appeal is the vampires are always so tortured,” Ms. Quinn, a freshman at Oakland University in Rochester, Mich., told me. “They seem to have everything. In Stephenie Meyer’s books, they’re wealthy and beautiful, but at the same time, each and every one of her characters is always tortured. The dichotomy between that is interesting—these beings that are perfect are actually flawed.”
Not paradoxically, it could also be argued that, in their nostalgia for a past that puts agency in the hands of bloodsucking males, Ms. Meyer’s books are fundamentally antifeminist. Best-selling young adult author Meg Cabot (The Princess Diaries) has written on her blog: “I didn’t take my husband’s last NAME when we got married. Do you honestly think I’d like a story about a girl considering changing SPECIES for a guy? No offense to any of you, but as a feminist, I just can’t go there.”
And Columbia University comparative literature professor Jenny Davidson, 36, who is the author of a forthcoming paranormal YA book, The Explosionist, argued that vampire books going back to Dracula, Bram Stoker’s 1897 novel, often represent anxiety about modernity. “The Stoker novel really is a book about technology and modernity,” she told me. “It really is a book about telegraphs and letter-writing and wax cylinders that you might record madmen speaking onto. And that intersects with the idea that the vampire isn’t modern, the vampire is from the deep past. … The vampire seems to be a place for that intersection—very modern, but very much from the romantic past.” Next Page >
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
The idea of shifting the paranormal fasciantion from vampires to something like zombies is logical and probably natural. However, zombies will never have the romantic appeal vampires have always held. Zombies are undead creatures, mindless and brutish. Where is the appeal in that to a teenage girl? But take a vampire, always painted as hauntingly beautiful and tortured, and you'll keep the interest. In order for the focus to shift off vampires to another mythical creature, that creature would have to be one just as appealing. Zombies and werewolves don't really have that, unless shown in a humorous way.
The whole antifeminist thing is completely ridiculous. I have read the series, and there is nothing demeaning to the female characters in the 3 books. Bella wanting to become a vampire like Edward has nothing to do with feminism, she only wants to spend th rest of eternity with him. I am positive that if she could do that without having to become a vampire, then she would. But that's not the case, so it's inevitable. Her wanting to change to be with him says nothing about feminism. It's something she wants and will do whatever she can to get it. But, I will give Meg Cabot that there may be only one thing antifeminist, and that's Bella damsel-in-distress appeal. Meyer protray's her like she can't help but hurt herself, but that's why having Edward as her "protector" fits in with the storyline.
I understand where people like Meg Cabot are coming from when they say that the Twilight series is anti-female, but I do not believe that it is true. Bella,the main character of Twilight,although sometimes whiny, is never weak or a bad role model for girls. The type of love described in Twilight is not something that young girls are going to find everyday, and it is an understatement of female self-respect to think that just because a teenage girl read a book where a normal girl falls in love with a gorgeous vampire, she is going to run out and offer herself up to the next good-looking guy that walks past.
I consider the Twilight series to be an epic, romantic and tasteful addition to Young Adult literature, and a refreshing change from the typical YA book where the leading couple engages in pre-marital sex or casual hook-ups.
I applaud authors like Mrs. Meyer who don't compromise their principles to conform to YA demands, and , at the same time, create great stories and characters like Edward and Bella.
In Cabot's own 'Mediator' series, the male love interest is a a ghost who turns into a human. Because the heroine wants him to.
I guess Cabot thinks that is peachy keen since it's a girl who's changing her love interest's species without his consent. Talk about the splinter in someone else's eye.
Meg Cabot's comments are completely ridiculous. Truthfully, I think we're all tired of totally empowered female heroines. Most girls simply don't have that level of confidence, and it is much easier to relate to Bella, who is shy, indecisive, but still true to herself, than the often one-dimensional, catty girls of most YA novels. In addition, Stephenie Meyer has succeeded in writing a wonderfully powerful love story WITHOUT sex. I can't tell you how much of a relief it is to know that I can read these books without being on pins-and-needles, hoping it won't morph into an indulgent, smutty book. Meyer has taken us back to what true love really is. Other YA books seem to dismiss abstinence as old-fashioned and simply assume that all teens are sexually active. We're not, and I'm glad Meyer is finally giving another side of the story.
Edward and Bella can’t have sex, because, in the midst of passion, it is implied, he would not be able to resist biting her neck. (You see, he’s trained himself not to bite humans—but it takes a lot of self-control. So basically, if they were to have sex, she would have to become a vampire. Which she kind of offers to do—after knowing him for, like, a month!)
If the persons writing this article actually read the book or took anything away from it other than the preconceived notions of what they expected to find they would know that the above statement is not at all what is "implied" what is "implied" is that he is strong and could HURT HER. Not that he would "bite her neck". Why do they always go to the sex = demon thing. Too much Buffy perhaps? (and I love Buffy.. but SM's world could not be more different). Its so irritating.
Edward and Bella can’t have sex, because, in the midst of passion, it is implied, he would not be able to resist biting her neck. (You see, he’s trained himself not to bite humans—but it takes a lot of self-control. So basically, if they were to have sex, she would have to become a vampire. Which she kind of offers to do—after knowing him for, like, a month!)
If the persons writing this article actually read the book or took anything away from it other than the preconceived notions of what they expected to find they would know that the above statement is not at all what is "implied" what is "implied" is that he is strong and could HURT HER. Not that he would "bite her neck". Why do they always go to the sex = demon thing. Too much Buffy perhaps? (and I love Buffy.. but SM's world could not be more different). Its so irritating.
Hi! Doree (the author of the article) here. I have, in fact, read Stephenie Meyer's books, and maybe I misunderstood the whole reasoning behind why they couldn't have sex. I was under the impression that he had trained himself to control his desires, to some extent, around her, and that if they had sex, yes he could hurt her, but there was always the chance he might bite her if things got too passionate. But maybe I misunderstood that! Anyway, just wanted to clear that up.
DS.
dshafrir is right, if Edward and Bella had sex, he could hurt her, not only bite her.
Regarding Meg Cabot's comment, surely she haven't read not even the summaries of the books. There's nothing about anti-feminist in these books. So feminism now is about doing what feminists want? Because bella WANT to become a vampire, nobody is forcing her, even Edward is against it.
Heather Brewer's books are terrific! I highly recommend them. Nan
Maybe girls are into vampires because it has something to with menstruation? Vampire blood as a symbol for fertility, sexuality, and being at an age when you're trying to sort these questions out?
Every culture needs/has had a menstruation/fertility goddess image and perhaps vampires are it?
Male vampires have a "blood lust" and that's funny, that's what teen girls have....
Yes, I agree, there's more complexity about vampires here than meets the eye.
“Edward and Bella can’t have sex, because, in the midst of passion, it is implied, he would not be able to resist biting her neck. (You see, he’s trained himself not to bite humans—but it takes a lot of self-control. So basically, if they were to have sex, she would have to become a vampire. Which she kind of offers to do—after knowing him for, like, a month!) “
So, if the person who wrote this article really read the whole Twilight series…you may what to refer back to Eclipse page 447 to get your facts straight.
I think this article doesn’t do the “Twilight Series” justice. This series of books is first and foremost a beautiful love story, which by-the-way happens to have characters that are vampires. These books should not be classified in the same “vampire” category. Read the books!!! (I’m a mom with two teen daughters who introduced me to the books.) Also, you should check out www.twilightmoms.com, teens aren’t the only ones interested in the Twilight Series.
I'm a bit aggravated after reading this article only because I feel the book has been misrepresented. I feel that the writer of the article made the book seem like a bad read for a teenage girl even though there is a paragraph on how "Christian-like" the book is. If anything, I think parents would not allow them to read the book for the reason of the sex paragraph. The writer made it seem that the only reason why Bella and Edward don't have sex is because Edward would want to bite Bella. If you write an article about a beloved series, I suggest that you should maybe check in with the author before misinterpreting the story. We, Twilight fans, would not want Stephenie's books to be seen as something that should not be read because it is too mature. I did not finish the article because I was annoyed at the fact that the books are being represented so I apologize if you later did appraise the book.
As far as Cabot's comment...I'm extremely upset. Honestly, anti-feminist?! What is the world coming to? Bella is a unique person who is anything but ordinary. She conveys to young teenage girls that being your own person is very important. There is nothing wrong with showing love for another and expressing it. If anything...we, as a country, should be taught to love more than anything.
As a parent, the mention of sex within the context of Marriage is fine…what a great communication tool! This is what is so refreshing about this Twilight series. You see, marriage is a condition of Edward’s before he and Bella have sex. “(His virtue) is the one area in which I’m just as spotless as you (Bella) are. Can’t I leave one rule unbroken?” Eclipse pages 453-454. Please just read the books.
Plus, there are a number of special quotes throughout this series, such as:
“And so the lion fell in love with the lamb…,” These books are classics.
It's a shame that so many people are turning against Meg Cabot for her statement about feminist characters. A girl wanting to fundamentally change her physical identity for a boy is culturally regressive, yes. It disheartens me to hear young readers who are so quick to defend a character who "may be whiny" but is willing to do "anything" for love.
You don't have to like it. You are fully free to maintain your regressive ideals about relationships between males and females. You have the feminist movement to thank for that.
Today, a girl doesn't have to lose her identity -- change her name -- become a vampire.
Editors take note:
This thread is *useless* without pics.
another good YA author is Mari Mancusi, author of Boys that Bite, Stake That and Girls that Growl. They are clever and have a lot of humor.
By the way, I'm a mom and a librarian and I think the Twilight series is a great read.
I think this article really misinterpretted the whole Twilight series. Especially the anti-feminist comment which Stephenie responded to with: "There are those who think Bella is a wuss. There are those who think my stories are misogynistic—the damsel in distress must be rescued by strong hero.
To the first accusation, I can only say that we all handle grief in our own way. Bella's way is no less valid than any other to my mind. Detractors of her reaction don't always take into account that I'm talking about true love here, rather than high school infatuation.
I emphatically reject the second accusation. I am all about girl power—look at Alice and Jane if you doubt that. I am not anti-female, I am anti-human. I wrote this story from the perspective of a female human because that came most naturally, as you might imagine. But if the narrator had been a male human, it would not have changed the events. When a human being is totally surrounded by creatures with supernatural strength, speed, senses, and various other uncanny powers, he or she is not going to be able to hold his or her own. Sorry. That's just the way it is. We can't all be slayers. Bella does pretty well I think, all things considered. She saves Edward, after all." http://www.stepheniemeyer.com/nm_thestory.html
As much as I love Meg, her comment really upsets me. She obviously hasn't read the series and therefore drawing the wrong conclusions on why Bella wants to be turned into a vampire. And about the sex thing... the fact that Twilight is selling so much without having to add smut in it is definitely a gift from above. Its sad to say, that the world has had enough smut out there to last a lifetime and the twilight series is definitely a very nice break from all of that. I mean, we get sex pushed into our face with tv commercials, movies, advertisement, etc. Twilight takes a different approach about the whole matter and its definitely the positive way of looking at things.
Right on ichi!!
As a feminist student/scholar, and a fan of the Twilight series, I have been bothered by the assumptions I have seen pop up about Meyer's books being inherently anti-feminist.
I want to join my voice with others who have commented in disagreement. I think the anti-feminist views of Twilight highlight a misguided, perhaps myopic, view of what feminism is. Twilight and its heroine Bella have been a wonderful way for me to connect with younger women and girls about meeting our life choices bravely and choosing our own destinies. I think what would be problematic is if feminists provided young women with a short-list of what is appropriate for them to choose as their destinies, and then regarded choices that diverge from that list as anti-feminist.
Bella makes choices about her own life, and stands passionately behind them to the point where she abandons safety in the pursuit of her desires. Let us not forget that for every time Edward saves Bella, she saves him right back. So what if she's not strapping on the pumps planning to be a young corporate tycoon? Has feminism gotten so crotchety that we can't connect with our younger sisters and their discussions of love, desire, fantasy and fun??? I support the argument that feminism is much more useful when engaging pop culture rather than dismissing it. There is a reason these novels are resonating with so many young women, and we should discuss this.
I think the argument that Twilight provides an alternative to the hypersexualized images thrown at teens does touch on a truth about their appeal. This argument could of course extend into a much larger discussion, but briefly, I do think many young women realize that the media's blatant sexualized images do not represent their desires and the other extreme (conservative abstinence) is grossly unrealistic as well. The dialogue seems to reside somewhere in the middle of these two extremes and I think Twilight can be a helpful avenue to start the discussion with young fans. I have a colleague in women's studies who offers these books as pop-culture discussion pieces.
This article isn't full of facts, but instead of knowing what they author's writing about, they're making things up. So say Bella's not in Edward's league...It's called fiction for a reason. Stephenie Meyer has created a true work of art, something Shafrir obviously knows nothing about.
The Night Wanderer: A Native Gothic Novel
As a librarian who works with teens and as a HUGE fan of the "Twilight" books I am very familiar with the vampire/supernatural publishing phenomenon. Vampires have always held a fascination for readers. There is something dangerous and sexy about them that pulls at the female psyche no matter how much of a feminist we consider ourselves. Whats interesting though about the "Twilight" series though is that as much as it is about vampires and a vampire mythology what it really is, is just a really good epic love story. The love story between Edward and Bella is not just vampire and human - it is an amalgmation of Romeo and Juliet, Elizabeth and Darcy and Catherine and Heathcliff. Meyer's has her characters feel everything and express everything - every sigh, every kiss, every facial expression has meaning and resonance behind it and they are not afraid to tell each other the true depth of their feelings. They are soulmates in every sense of the word and because Edward is a vampire and has the power to make Bella they are soulmates that can be together FOREVER - what love story is more epic or more gothic than that? Ultimately, the Cullens' vampireness is the backstory to their love story. When fans of her books come looking for what to read next - I do give them other vampire books and they like them well enough but in the end what they really want is to find other characters that make them swoon they same way as Edward and his romantic rival, the very hunky werewolf, Jacob Black. Unfortuantly, the plethora of vampire novels that are now engorging the YA market tend towards the romantic comedy side, the contrived side and not towards gothic romance and thats a disservice for Meyer's fans.
I honestly think that Bella staying human would be anti-feminist. Like she said, a man and a woman should be on EQUAL levels, and if Bella stays 'breakable' she's putting herself and her family at risk. She doesn't want to be weak and always have to be saved. And I also don't think that sacrificing (i.e. giving up her life) for love is anti-feminist, I think she knows what she wants and she's going to do some hard stuff to get it.
I have to disagree with the previous comments about the idea that books about zombies would not appeal to teenagers. I think they can be sexy, in a very dangerous way. I recently read a galley of a YA book by Brian James, called ZOMBIE BLONDES. Essentially, it's about blonde teenage cheerleaders, and what's more, they're zombies! They don't go around walking around aimlessly doing nothing. They're true teenage zombie blondes! Maybe if some people read the book, they'll see there's more to the supernatural than just vampires.