karen_w_newton (karen_w_newton) wrote,

YA (literally) forever?

GalleyCat tipped me off to an essay in Atlantic in which Caitlin Flanagan rants against modern YA novels but raves about Twilight. I can't tell from the essay whether Flanagan has read the book or is actually reviewing the movie. But what her point seems to be is, old-fashioned YA was better because girls in it didn't have sex, they only dreamed about sex. Since Stephanie Meyer is an observant Mormon, there is no premarital sex in her YA books. She has said she thinks that's wrong and so Twilight is full of unresolved sexual tension.

But one point she mentions only in passing fascinated me. Edward, the vampire boyfriend, looks 17 but is really over 100 years old. Think about that! To me, the age thing makes the romance kind of icky in a way that goes beyond the whole "vampire blood sucking" thing. This guy has been around for more than a century and he's dating a girl who's not old enough to vote, let alone drink. Can someone claim to be an adolescent forever? By definition, I don't see this as a viable relationship. Either Edward is frozen emotionally and unable to progress beyond adolescence (not a good thing) or he's mature but attracted to dewy innocence. When it's creepy even without the blood-sucking, it's too creepy.

freehit counter

Tags: vampires, ya

  • The curse of YA, or Why is Harry Potter an orphan?

    I saw a link on Neil Gaiman's Facebook page to this NYT Books section essay about how prevalent bad or missing parents are in YA fiction. It's a…

  • More on "sticky books"

    Since my post of the other day, I have decided that either kids' books are more likely to be inherently sticky or that things we read when young are…

  • And a little child shall lead them

    The subject line refers not to religion, but to publishing. The Washington Post did away with their print Book World standalone section, which used…

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic