I know MacKenzie didn't oppose the books for the feminist reasons of some people quoted in the article. I don't know if the book caused her to "notice in that first week of reading that I was feeling things I hadn't been able to feel in a long time." But it's interesting to know that this sequence of events happened to enough people to warrant a Washington Post article."Twilight" came for the tweens, then for the moms of tweens, then for the co-workers who started wearing those ridiculous Team Jacob shirts, and the resisters said nothing, because they thought "Twilight" could not come for them. They were too literary. They didn't do vampires. They were feminists.
Then something happened: the release of the "Twilight" movie, which last year introduced $384 million worth of audience members to Kristen Stewart as mortal Bella and Pattinson as lust incarnate.
first of all, nice pun! Second of all, I think it's because the movie was acutally better than the book, which is rare. People started reading because they were expecting the opposite (however, some of us were quite disappointed in the writing, and now don't care to even see the movie)
ReplyDeleteI didn't even intend to place a pun in the title. Awesome!
ReplyDeleteI think the underlying message of this post is that Craig is pretty excited about taking me to see New Moon next week but feels societal constraints against expressing that joy so he had to get his Twilight writing urge out of this system another way.
ReplyDeleteha ha! Brandon is the one that actually wants to go see it in our family, so don't feel too bad Craig, it's ok. You're just being a nice husband and father. I just thought that though MacKenzie might miss Mother's day with a baby outside of her belly, Craig will have his first fathers day in June. awwww!
ReplyDeleteI felt so smart that I'd already read the article this was analyzing! Chaste Vampire are not Us: http://www.getreligion.org/?p=21735
ReplyDelete