Lily
Doctor Jane
Lotus
Joseph
chanson
Samson
Tom Sawyer
MoJoThe Carnal Bite
Posted by chanson on May 19, 2008
how great that I’m not the only one in the world who is asked by little old ladies at church, “What’s a nice Mormon girl like you doing writing about vampires?” — says Jana Riess. So Stephenie Meyer isn’t the only one. Is the Mormon teen vampire romance now the new Jack Weyland?
I know this isn’t just a Mormon thing (it’s part of a larger trend: Buffy, Ann Rice, etc.), but I’m not surprised to see Mormons joining right in. The fit couldn’t be more perfect. Love and romance are at center stage, but all that scary sex is replaced with the family-friendly entertainment alternative: violence. As I discussed in my post Rated R “just for violence,” I don’t get why healthy depictions of sexuality are totally taboo for young people, but violence can be used as harmless fun for kids.
In the case of vampire romances, it looks like a situation where a teenage girl wants to imagine the male lead having an intense and passionate physical need for her. Yet, perversely, it’s safer to revel in this feeling of physical desire in the form of “blood-lust” — the desire for the death-bearing bite that consumes her — and avoid the (much scarier) real thing. In a nutshell, this whole thing reeks of a rather screwed-up fear of healthy sexuality. Of course I’m totally biased on the subject. Am I being unfair?
May 19, 2008 at 9:41 pm
No. Bram Stoker’s Dracula is a treatise on Victorian ideas of female sexuality and, let’s face it, church culture is full of late-adopted Victorian artifacts. I don’t know how extensive Meyer’s literature education delved into themes of sexuality literature in repressive societies and I haven’t read the books yet, but the vampire theme, at least from Stoker’s time, is totally about alternate expressions of female sexuality.
May 19, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Isn’t the vampire’s bite just a metaphor for sex anyway? I mean, it’s just one step removed from being seduced by an incubus.
May 19, 2008 at 11:29 pm
There are several layers of symbolism going on.
1. Penetration.
2. Some sort of ecstasy.
3. The rape fantasy (aka “forced seduction”), which absolves (or attempts to, Miracle of Forgiveness notwithstanding) the woman of any sexual misconduct. If she enjoyed herself, gravy! (I actually like this genre fiction device; sue me.)
4. It makes the forbidden accessible to otherwise sexually repressed women (particularly in the case of incubi).
5. Contemporarily, with the rise of feminism, it makes it okay for a girl to be sexually dominated. I haven’t read the books (did I mention?) but the common complaint is that Edward acts like a stalker. From everything I can tell, it’s also an expression of a dominant-submissive relationship that is, well, not exactly politically correct right now. So you could say that’s another avenue of sexual repression for women.
I saw Nosferatu at BYU and while Nosferatu was sixteen kinds of ugly and disgusting, it was still a very heavily sexual film. I guess that got by the censors.
May 19, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Okay, so one more comment about vampire fiction that’s totally tangential but is right in front of my mind this week: Last vampire novel I read, the woman got bit in her ephemeral artery. Hello? Fact checker? It’s FEMORAL artery.
/rant
May 20, 2008 at 4:21 am
I found the books highly charged sexually even though they are totally “clean” reading. I was a bit worried about loaning them to my tween daughter, but she loved them (which makes me wonder if I should have loaned them to her!). All of her friends have read them and liked them, so it seemed like I should let her read them so we could have a conversation about them.
The substitute of Edward’s blood-lust for normal lust gets a bit creepy after while. I mean, maybe as a young teen I did fantasize about a guy who would desire me w/o the entanglement of sex. Because I definitely wanted a boyfriend but I also knew that I needed to live LDS standards so I could have a temple marriage. Dating a vampire would’ve been highly convenient (well, actually I think one of the guys I dated sort of thought he was a vampire, but that’s another story…
What struck me as LDS about the books was that Edward’s family is clannish in the same way that Mormons are. Bella’s choice to be bitten (or join their “cult,” so to speak) is much the same choice that a non-Mormon teen might make at baptism. Many become separated/estranged from their natal families and their families are no longer a part of the important milestones in their lives and, of course, they will be separated from these families for eternity if they aim for the highest level of the celestial kingdom.
IMO, Bella would be far better off if she went for Jacob and joined his ‘clan’ instead of Edward’s.
May 20, 2008 at 5:08 am
MoJo and Jonathan — So we’re in agreement that vampire bites have been a metaphor for sex ever since vampires first hit the literary scene. I agree with MoJo that this sort of story could be a way for women to explore fantasies that aren’t currently P.C. (like being raped and dominated), and I certainly don’t have a problem with people enjoying non-P.C. sexual fantasies. I just think it’s disturbing to have this sort of thing billed as “clean” (hence safe for girls) by the same people who would be horrified by a loving vanilla sexual fantasy. It’s kind of like telling girls to go straight to anal in order to stay a virgin — I’m not opposed to anal on principle, but that’s messed-up…
Jana — I think that’s exactly the draw: “maybe as a young teen I did fantasize about a guy who would desire me w/o the entanglement of sex.” I’d like to be able to comment on the Mormon-specific details of Twilight, but… Well, next time I go to the English bookstore, I’ll see if they have a copy or if I can order one.
May 20, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Quite frankly, I think it’s being billed as “clean” by people who wouldn’t know subtext (sexual or otherwise) if it popped up out of the pulp and smacked them in the face. Color me naive (ha!) but I really think the disconnect is lack of worldliness.
I highly doubt you’re going to get a discussion of why Dracula is a metaphor for female sexuality in all its contortions in any BYU lit class below a 300- or 400-level. If even then.
I would even go so far as to say Stephenie Meyer may not truly understand what she’s written.
May 20, 2008 at 3:46 pm
So much gets read into Bram Stoker’s Dracula (the book, not the myriad of bad movies) in the name of literary analysis that generation after generation pushes it aside without discovering what a thumping good read it is. It’s the book Michael Crichton would have written if he’d lived back then.
Anyway, I believe Meyer is very much exploiting this desire to turn on men without consequences. Or at least without consequences beyond the girl’s control: to play the bad girl with the bad boy without actually being bad. And without the bad boy really being all that bad either.
Because in the real world, getting hot and heavy with the opposite sex usually leads to sex. In Mormon culture, this is THE WORST THING EVER. Essentially Meyer is putting her stamp of approval on the old Mormon saying: “Better to come home in a casket than come home dishonored.” Violence over sex.
An interesting comparison is Blood and Chocolate (not the horrible movie!), a great Y/A novel about a teen werewolf who delights in turning on her human boyfriend. The author doesn’t inveigh against sex. Rather, she points out that when Tom plays with Jerry in the real world, Jerry gets eaten.
In the book, after much violence and drama, the heroine realizes that a relationship with her sadly beta boyfriend is a dead-end proposition, and instead goes for a honest-to-goodness alpha male. Of course, in Twilight it seems that Bella’s been gunning for the alpha male all along.
May 20, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Just because people read a book as a metaphor for sex doesn’t mean it’s not a thumping good read. Different people like different things, and I’m starting to get a hint of what MoJo likes.
Actually of the lot, the only vampire novel I’ve read was Interview with the Vampire (as I explained here), and it kind of put me off the whole genre. I’m definitely getting a copy of Twilight though — it’s just too much fun to discuss it with Mormons, and I need to actually read it do it properly.
May 20, 2008 at 6:09 pm
I agree, but I never entered a lit class where one objective of the semester’s reading was for you to have a good time with the material; moreover, if you happened to slip up and actually ADMIT that you had a good time with the material, your analysis automatically became suspect.
‘Swhy I specialized in creative writing and left the lit analysis to someone else. I wanted to laissez le bons temps roulez.
May 20, 2008 at 6:16 pm
I liked Interview with the Vampire and its followups, but because of that, it put me off the whole genre. LOL Anything after that seemed trite and “already done.”
CH, if you’re getting a taste, you know I like moral ambiguity in characterization and while I don’t find blood-sucking to be particularly erotic in itself, there is that breathless moment of anticipation of either penetrating (if it’s written correctly) or of being penetrated.
The scene in Dracula wherein the Brides have Harker is especially riveting because of the role reversal: the women have the power, the man must submit.
IMO, it’s the power play of the sucker and the suckee that’s erotic.
I’m with you, CH. I need to get this book to speak on it any further.
May 20, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Quite frankly, I think it’s being billed as “clean” by people who wouldn’t know subtext (sexual or otherwise) if it popped up out of the pulp and smacked them in the face. Color me naive (ha!) but I really think the disconnect is lack of worldliness.
This is kind of what I was trying to say. <irony>Doesn’t everyone realize that this is really about sex?</irony>
May 20, 2008 at 10:58 pm
I love Mojo’s deconstruction of Dracula. Makes me think maybe Meyer really does have a sub/dom fetish, if subconsciously. I have a question though, for anyone who’s read the books: how do you interpret Bella’s actions in the third book? She’s suddenly trying to become the temptress. Edward only agrees to bite her/have sex with her if she marries him. What’s with Bella resisting the idea of marriage? Is Meyer just trying to make the books a little more mainstream and less Mormon?
And I have a question for Jana: I’m curious, why do you think it would be better for Bella to join Jacob’s clan instead of Edward’s?
May 20, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Laura, I just bought the ebook of Twilight. I don’t feel like I can comment any further on the series until I’ve read them, but I’ll let you know as soon as I do!
May 21, 2008 at 12:01 am
Have you seen this DN article about Meyer’s speaking to fans in Utah this past week?
A salient quote:
Wow. I am speechless….
May 21, 2008 at 7:04 am
I think fMh should do a special series of posts on this. “My wife was a raging sociopathic homicidal lunatic and I knew there had to be a reason. Then I found her stash of Twilight.”
In other Twilight news, check out this hilarious interview with Edward Cullen!
May 23, 2008 at 2:20 am
May 23, 2008 at 2:21 am
Doh! Didn’t do the block quote right.
June 4, 2008 at 3:32 pm
I wonder if the next logical step for Mormon teens weaned on Stephenie Meyer is to graduate to Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter? In the tenth book, “Anita develops the ardeur, a rare power seen only in vampires of Jean-Claude’s bloodline, after Jean-Claude used it to ‘feed’ through her. Although this power allows Anita to draw energy from lust, it also requires her to have sex multiple times per day, at least in its early stages.” Or is that too overt?
June 4, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Jonathan — that sounds like a lot more fun than the whole blood-sucking thing!! Actually, I’ve thought of this idea before, namely drawing energy from another person’s lustful desire. Maybe I should pick up this book you mention. Unless it also uses that boring blood-sucking device…
BTW, I just finished reading Twilight. I figured that if I want to keep talking about it online (and I do!!
) I would have to buckle down and read the damn thing. So I did. It’s reasonably entertaining, but I don’t see the draw of Edward at all — unless you’re really turned on by Dom/Sub as MoJo suggests. He seems like a bit of a stalker control freak, and their shared conceit that she’s incapable of walking down the street without endangering herself is more annoying than endearing…
June 4, 2008 at 5:24 pm
June 4, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Crap. I messed up the blockquote too.
June 4, 2008 at 6:27 pm
I don’t get Edward-as-Stalker because Bella buys into it hook, line, and sinker. No, check that. She’s BEGGING to have the hook set in her mouth and reeled in.
That’s a good point, yet a subtle one. Since it’s very clear that this is what Bella wants, I don’t want to say that it’s a priori wrong. I’m just saying that this isn’t the kind of guy I want for myself. Take the part where he admits he’d been watching her secretly as she sleeps. I understand if some women might find that charming, but for me that’s a humongous red flag.
Ditto for the times where he’s talking about how dangerous he is. On one level, it makes sense to blow this off as ridiculous posturing. Yet, for me as I was reading it, when he was talking about how she should stay away from him, I found it incredibly creepy. I personally would have responded “Now that you mention it, I just remembered that I have to move back to my Mom’s house in AZ, bye!!!”
Maybe I’m just overly sensitive because of this, but really, I don’t find this sort of thing all that erotic.
June 4, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Let’s try this blockquote thing again with normal html.
Yes, that bothered me greatly. Not because he did it but because she kinda went from “You did what?!?…oh, well…hmm…interesting…he’s gonna do what he’s gonna do…awwww” in the space of about a minute. This is what I meant by having a thorough discussion with my daughter (should she read something like this) about what is and is not acceptable behavior. IMO, Twilight is a good what-not-to-do primer.
June 4, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Chanson,
I can’t personally recommend the books. Aside from the Wikipedia article, my only exposure to Anita Blake has been this Penny Arcade comic.
BTW, in case anyone was wondering, there’s no relation.
June 5, 2008 at 6:03 pm
To sum up, I think there are two threads of analysis of Twilight: (1) as Dom/Sub fetish erotica and (2) as a primer for real relationships.
1. I think it succeeds at this. Really, I think the vampire premise is suited for this fetish, and Meyer plays it well. So it’s not surprising this book is popular.
Also, even though I’ve said on other threads that I consider violent erotica to be a separate category from non-violent erotica (and hence should be considered separately), I don’t consider (legally, consensually produced) violent erotica a priori objectionable. I’m just saying that the jury’s still out for me, and if violent erotica were shown to cause harm then I could see criticizing it. However, I think it’s probably not harmful. In the privacy of my own head, I often get off on highly-non-P.C. sexual fantasies — which I would never want to see carried out in real life — so of course I don’t think that getting off on objectionable masturbation fantasies as being dangerous or even unhealthy. Twilight, of course, has very little violence. However, I consider some of Edward’s behavior to be threatening, and the whole fantasy — while perhaps hot — is not sweet or innocent, as explained in:
2. As a real-world relationship model, this is pretty unhealthy. Let’s just consider the scene where he makes a big show of the fact that he can waltz right into her house anytime he wants (and explains that, in fact, he did it). Even if he’s good and virtuous, it’s something of a threat. (I see it this way in part because the scene echoes something that happened to me in real life: threatening gestures.) He’s demonstrating that — even if he won’t do anything bad to her since he’s so good — he could kill her on a whim. And there’s nothing she could do about it. So the point is that she’s totally dependent on his good will. Bella’s reaction shows that this is exactly the fantasy she wants: to be entirely in his power and control. But in real life, you don’t want your lover to have life-or-death power over you…
June 5, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Yes, but does she REALIZE that this is what she did? That’s my burning question.
Amongst 13-yo girls? So is this something that’s a normal fantasy for teenagers? I mean, if you put it in terms of, “Look, this is how the dom/sub thing works in real life–is this what you want?” would they still want it?
Ooh, something just right this very second occurred to me. Let’s assume a 13-yo girl (or thereabouts, the target audience for this book) is going through puberty. Bewildering changes in her body, more responsibility in the home and elsewhere, more accountability for their actions, having to think more grownup thoughts for long-term goals like grades suitable for college admission, jobs in order to pay for things they want, having to sacrifice one thing for another…
Maybe the wish fulfillment fantasy for a 13-yo isn’t what I (we, adults) would think of as dom/sub; maybe it’s to escape having to grow up. Bella doesn’t have to grow up if she submits to Edward’s pull because he’ll do all the thinking and acting and responsibility-ing for her. HE chooses not to bite her. HE chooses not to kill her. HE is the one who directs the course and all Bella has to do is go along for the ride.
I got the impression that this was what raised your eyebrows with my couple #1 (B&G) and, naturally, I meant it to raise a few eyebrows. On the other hand, you were entirely correct in stating:
June 5, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Messed up the blockquotes again. Sigh. My OCD is hammering away at me now because I can’t edit.
June 5, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Deep breath. I’m going to try again.
What I’m TRYING to say is that if you laid it all for a girl, A to Z (or even your average LDS woman) in bald terms, using frank (possibly crude) language, would she find it so appealing? I think not.
But if you dare compare it to Edward and Bella’s relationship, you’d get–at best–a blank look and at worst, a heated diatribe about why this is not so.
I wanted to write an LDS woman who knows it for what it is and is unapologetic about wanting it, waiting for it, and liking when she gets it.
June 5, 2008 at 8:00 pm
I’m torn on this question too. I could really see it going either way.
I’m just saying I’m not surprised if this fantasy appeals to teenage girls. I’m not saying it’s good or healthy, especially if they aren’t thinking about how this differs from the kind of relationship they’d like in real life.
Bingo. I think that’s a big part of the appeal. They’re starting to grow up in terms of desires, but maybe not ready for all of it.
Actually, the only thing that raised my eyebrows about B & G so far (and remember, I’ve only read the beginning), was that G was all worried that B might think she’s a “slut”. That left me going “What the…? Is she still in high school or something?” Then I remembered “Oh, yeah, she’s a Mormon virgin.”
Aside from that, their relationship dynamic seems fairly reasonable. Nice erotic scar fetish. 
Well, for my part, I’m trying to write some Y.A. fiction that is entertaining and yet portrays a range of fairly realistic relationship dynamics. To pass along some of that good old-fashioned real-world experience. I hope my efforts prove useful.
It’s more than a pity. It’s the creepiest part of this whole story, IMHO…
June 5, 2008 at 8:03 pm
lol, so true.
That’s cool!
June 7, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Has anyone seen the cover to the fourth installment of Edward and Bella? Tell me if you see the same thing I do or if I’m just projecting?
June 8, 2008 at 6:34 am
You think it’s phallic? Representing a breakthrough, so to speak?
June 8, 2008 at 7:46 am
Hmmm, no. The white queen is at the front, lit. The red pawn is way in the back in the darkness. I’m wondering if there’s some switcheroo going to take place where Bella was manipulating the whole thing all the time or if she grew or, well, why the white QUEEN and a red PAWN.
Damn, that means I’ll have to get the next book and read it.
June 8, 2008 at 8:12 am
Ah, that’s the queen? The king normally has a taller crown or something?
OK, she’s white so now she’s a vampire, and she has a new red (hence live human?) pawn to manipulate?
Nah, still not intrigued. I read the first one. It was amusing but didn’t leave me begging for more. My “want to read immediately” pile is currently six books deep, and I don’t have that much free time…
June 8, 2008 at 8:45 am
In case you’re curious, here’s my “to read” pile:
1. Angel Falling Softly. I’m glad to hear you liked it (comment #21). I’m almost done with it, and I really need to finish it today to get a review done by Thursday. It’s a fascinating book, and I’ll need some time to contemplate it to decide what to say about it…
2. Voltaire’s Zadig for Nonbelieving Literati. That one is due for review in one week! Yes, I’ve scheduled myself two reviews in one week (on top of preparing a talk with sample applications for a Java conference, preparing my first trip to the U.S. in years, and oh, yeah, my home, family, and real job responsibilities). I think I’m up to it, but I really need to get off the Internet…
3. The Proviso. I’d be done with this one already if it weren’t 800 pages long.
Unfortunately, other deadlines made me move this one down the pile. I’m looking forward to getting back into it.
4. Foreign Stars. I don’t think it needs any more plot than it has, but now I’m starting to think that some of the scenes that are just bare bones dialog should be fleshed out. Since it’s a comedy, I’d been avoiding slow, melancholy mood-setting, but now I’m thinking I went too far the other way: the setting is exotic, but I hardly bothered with the fun of describing it, and perhaps the main character’s motivation needs to be developed a little better.
5. Another friend sent me a manuscript, and I haven’t had time to even look at it yet.
6. I want to read Marjane Satrapi’s Chicken with Plums. (She’s currently my favorite author.)
7. Barack Obama’s other book.
8. Contact, by Carl Sagan. I bought this book and would like to read it, but it keeps getting pushed down the pile by other priorities…
June 8, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Dom/sub fetish erotica is at the heart of yaoi, a Japanese romance genre aimed at the same demographic as romance (not gay men, as I explain here). My sister came to a very similar conclusion in regards to teen girl readers.
June 8, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Goodness, yes, Angel Falling Softly by Eugene Woodbury is faboo. (My pimpz. Let me show u it.) I’m rearranging my blog right now, but after that, I’m going to post my review.
As for The Proviso, yeah, it’s a monster, so don’t worry about a strict timetable on that. It’s with my editor and I keep having to rearrange my unrealistic expectations for its release date and I think I’m back to September now. On the other hand, in the last couple of days, I’ve got down about 10,000 words for my new one. Tagline: “A Mormon bishop. An ex-prostitute. Let the games begin.”
Re Foreign Stars and having fun with the location. I think you’ve got the right of it right there. Remember…A movie. Only with words.
I’m also going to start Chris Bigelow’s Kindred Spirits as soon as I get it converted and onto my ebook reader (moar pimpz…let me show u it).
I have the Dark Compass et al on my reader that’s chawing on me to read plus a couple of self-published doorstops I thought sounded interesting. I’m more and more on the lookout for self-published cause dang, a lot of that stuff’s good and it’s getting better and better as authors trust their voices and their product.
So many books, so little time.
June 8, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Are we on a two-link restriction for moderation, then?
As an aside, I’d sure like to see a post about erotica and its place in Mormon culture. You know, what you read, not what you look at.
June 8, 2008 at 6:27 pm
I’m not sure how the moderation queue works here. I’ve had some of my posts get caught in it too (for too many links, I assume).
Yeah, that would be a great topic!
June 8, 2008 at 10:31 pm
[...] is one reason why, when I read Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight, I was highly annoyed. I like vampires. I’ve studied vampire myths since I fell in love with Vlad the Impaler somewhere [...]
June 9, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I’ve still got a comment in moderation. Pleeeeeze release me, let me gooooooo!!!
June 11, 2008 at 10:41 am
Looks like you scooped me
I just put my Angel Falling Softly review up too: here.
June 12, 2008 at 4:47 am
Aha, looks like the moderation queue finally flushed!
I’ll try doing a separate comment for each link…
Good review. I liked the book and thought it was very good, but it was a tricky one for me to review since I like to keep my reviews light and fun, but the book was just so dang serious.
For fun I was going to write “Best LDS vampire novel ever!” and then see what kind of angry replies I get from Stephenie Meyer’s minions. But — even though part of the reason I finally read Twilight was to compare it to Angel Falling Softly — in the end I didn’t feel like comparing them. They’re too different, not just in tone, but in intent. As William Morris points out in his review (which I don’t see on his blog), Angel Falling Softly is literary fiction. So, yes, it’s more artful than Twilight, and the characters and emotions are more lifelike and real. But I don’t want to just dismiss Twilight as garbage since I think it succeeds as the type of work it sets out to be.
June 12, 2008 at 5:06 am
In that case, I’ll probably do 3 & 4 (from my list in #36) simultaneously.
I’ve been thinking about this, and I’ve already come up with a long list of scenes where I think details and more are missing.
I think you’ll like that one. It gives yet another fascinating perspective on Mormon sexuality. Did you see my review?
June 12, 2008 at 5:19 am
You mean the “His Dark Materials” trilogy? I’d be curious to hear your take on that one. Speaking of sexuality, I wonder if you’ll be as annoyed with his cryptic circumlocutions as I was…
So true.
If you stick with stuff that a major publishing house considers marketable, then you know you’ll get a certain quality product, but I’m starting to feel like that’s like having someone else chew your food for you.
A lot of friends would say that since one can only read so many books in a lifetime, it’s better not to waste time on works that haven’t proven themselves (and hence may be crap for all you know). But (to mix my metaphor), I find I’m curious about the adventures in the rough waters a little farther upstream in the publishing industry, moreso than paddling around in the tranquil pool at the end. And with the magic of the Internet, I can! So why not?
So true!!!
June 12, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Not necessarily (of course, that’s true simply because of odds). I’ve read A LOT of books put out by The Big Traditional NY Houses that are just crap. Editing (content and copy), layout, design, and cover art–all bad. This happens more often than I’d care to count. One of the self-published doorstoppers (link in next post because I don’t want to get caught in moderation again) I have waiting for me is certainly no worse in presentation than anything I’ve seen by the traditional houses (although it has no chapter breaks–I was intrigued rather than annoyed). I can’t speak to the other one because it was bought by a traditional publisher, edited, and repackaged, so I don’t know what state it was before Harper got its hands on it.
June 12, 2008 at 1:28 pm
So the first self-published doorstopper link.
I’ll not read your reviews of Kindred Spirits and the His Dark Materials trilogy before I read the books; most times reviews disincline me to read because I’m suggestible and I’ll carry that reviewer’s comments into the story with me.
As for Twilight being a “Mormon” vampire novel, most of the people on the romance blogs I read didn’t know a Mormon wrote it at all, so perhaps we’re just hyperaware of that.
June 12, 2008 at 6:31 pm
That is too funny. You’ve just shattered my tiny remaining faith in the brick-and-mortar publishing industry…
I understand. I look forward to discussing them with you when you’re done.
July 1, 2008 at 3:25 pm
My sister Kate and her friend Carole take on the series at length on Kate’s blog.
July 1, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Cool, more deconstruction of Twilight! This is why I’m glad I read this book.