Sweet Clementine, GeekaChicas' newest Lit Geek addition, is a student at BYU. This is her unique perspective on fellow Mormon Stephanie Meyer's Twilight series.

Stephanie Meyer's Twilight.  I believe the applicable phrase is "cultural phenomenon".  She has created a world in which hundreds of thousands of girls, both old and young, can revel in melodramatic romance to their hearts' content (which, let's face it people, means A LOT of melodramatic romance!)  I think we may honestly say that not since Harry Potter has a story created such a large and rabidly devoted group of fans.  So, to be fair, I say congratulations Stephanie Meyer.  You have created a commercial utopia of writing.  I have not.  Therefore, on the scale of Sweet Clementine's success vs. Stephanie's, you're clearly winning.

That being said, simply because many people are reading her books, that doesn't necessarily mean they are well written.  This was an argument I heard last semester in favor of her writing.  No.  Nooooooo!  Lots of people also read the soft porn known as Harlequin Romance novels.  Does that mean that they too are well written?  Absolutely not!  Before I get shanked by the nearest 13 year old girl, let me say that despite my intense hatred of these books, I do not put them quite in the same category as Harlequin romances.  But I do propose that there is a certain type of writing which, utilizing no talent or skill whatsoever, appeals to the lowest possible factor of human entertainment.  Sadly, much of commercially produced media these days (not just literature, but movies, music, and any and everything else) is aimed at this level of entertainment.  It is the basest aspect of human nature.  The part of us that is entertained by sex, and violence, and stupidity.

Let us draw a food comparison.  I like food.  You know those big orange semi-marshmallow-like candies commonly known as circus peanuts? (the logic of that naming has eluded me for 22 years, and many more to come I'm sure)  Now, I actually like circus peanuts.  However, I am well aware that every time I eat one of those semi-congealed, dyed and processed orange slug-candies I am putting not one single redeeming thing into my body, and quite likely, quite a few rather damaging things.  I don't try to argue that somehow, because I like circus peanuts, as do some other insane people, that they must be nutritious in some way.  No, when I eat a circus peanut, I know that I am eating it for no other reason than a weak desire for a straight shot of sugar and chemicals into my veins.  When someone reads Twilight, it is the literary equivalent of eating a circus peanut.  There is nothing there but pure guilty indulgence.  You want drama, you want sex (but we're Mormons here so its very tame...err...did someone just hear a headboard crack?) and you don't want anything to get between them and you.  Especially not big words or fancy, thought-provoking ideas.

Are you still not convinced?  You think there is still some deep-buried treasure of insight or quality?  Let me see...perhaps an upgrade from circus peanut to french fry then?  An item that once was good and wholesome but has since gone through fire and oil in a refining process that has stripped from it any semblance to real food it ever had.  I read Twilight and New Moon back to back and even enjoyed the former.  I was impressed that she could find a new take on a topic that has been as well-canvassed as vampires. 

But just like the wholesome simplicity of the potato is lost in the golden waves of boiling oil, so was the novelty of sparkling, vegetarian vampires lost in the golden-eyed perfection of their ageless lifestyle.  Which leads me to the categorization of my issues with Twilight.

1.) A glorification of evil. 
I think the least personal and most serious issue I have with these books is simply that they exalt something that is evil.  If the Cullens are what it is to be vampires, then sign me up!  Is it really wise to take one of the most ancient and undisputed symbols of evil world-wide and glorify it to the point of adoration?  Perhaps, while I say this is the least personal of my reasons, it is also the most Mormon of them as well.  No doubt people compare me to the parents whose complaints got Harry Potter banned from school libraries.  And perhaps I do practice a double standard when I find magic harmless and blood-sucking harmful.  However, I defend myself on two sides.  I am not screaming to take these books out of print (at least, not for this reason alone).  I am simply stating why I dislike them and would discourage my theoretical children from reading them.  Also, there comes a point where one must draw a line and stick to it.  This is mine.

2.)THE most annoying character in my entire literary experience.
Bella.  Oh my gosh Bella!  I don't know if I will be able to keep this even semi-academic.  First, her name: Isabella Swan.  Swans.  Creatures of innocence and beauty.  The generally accepted definition of grace, provided they're in their element.  Also, white.  Bella.  Creature of lust and supposed normal looks (explain how exactly she can be completely average looking and yet catch the eye of not only every single boy in her school, but also her resident vampire heartthrob?)  Awkward and prone to accidents, save when being bodily carried by her perfect vampire lover (her element?)  Oh, and also white.  Bizarre contrasts and even more bizarre parallels.  But this is only the teeniest and most insignificant tip of the iceberg. 

Bella has been repeatedly described as a "strong female character".  Are you kidding me?  She spends the entire 608 pages of New Moon trying to kill herself to get her boyfriend's attention (ok, 600 pages, those first 8 are devoted to her boyfriend breaking up with her, hence her need to get him to talk to her).  Is this a good strategy to be teaching our young women?  Yes, you loved him and he's left you.  You are completely justified in trying, repeatedly, to commit suicide.  I am pretty sure that these are not signs of strength nor independence.  I'm going to go with a more accurate diagnosis of severe mental and emotional instability.  She repeatedly insists that she can't breathe when Edward isn't there.  But neither can she breathe when she looks into his dreamy and perfect eyes.  She should teach classes on how to subsist on the gasps of air she inhales while blinking.  It might come in handy for Olympic athletes or military captives.  She never has a single thought that isn't focused on Edward.  She is in constant terror lest she do something to upset him, and thence lose his love.  Yes girls, indeed we must never upset our lord and master.  If you ever disagree he might leave you...or beat you senseless--is there any difference?  You know living without him would be just as painful.  Agree with his superior wisdom in all things, do you hear me?!  Sure he might say he feels so lucky and blessed to have her, but we all know that she's one false step away from blowing the whole thing.  I have a good idea!  Why don't you invite him to sleep with you?!  That is a tried and true method of securing your man's love.  Everyone knows that! 

But facetiousness aside, I understand that readers are supposed to identify with Bella so easily because she IS the first love experience.  But truly, and maybe I'm alone in this, I never have felt even remotely like Isabella Swan.  I am a living, thinking, human woman.  I have loved people and I have lost the love of some of those people.  It hurt.  Really badly.  But I neither stalked them while we were together, nor despaired of life when we were apart.  I just didn't. 

3.) A painfully limited vocabulary.
I'm pretty sure that Mrs. Meyer only knows three adjectives.  I'd be willing to buy her a dictionary and/or thesaurus!  Anything to save me from another use of the words "perfect" "terrifying" and "perfect" (wait, did I already say that?).  Just, find a new word!  Perfect is only perfect for so long.  Then it becomes perfectly maddening.  I can give you a perfect example at how perfectly the word perfect can be used to a perfect death.  Seriously though.  Her writing is a as repetitive as a scratched vinyl record.  Much the same way some TV shows follow a formula, because it works, Mrs. Meyer seemed to find a pleasing description of Edward, including his perfection, refrigeration, and petrifaction and simply copy/pasted them whenever she needed to reinforce how perfect he was. 

4.) Generic plot tricks.
Into this category falls both her obsessive need to end every chapter on a ridiculously inflated cliff-hanger, and the Edward, Jacob, Bella (Bella's baby??) love...quadrangle.  I would hesitantly suggest that, while we Americans have a notoriously short attention span, we can maintain interest in a story arc over more than a chapter, without requiring a dramatic *gasp* at the end to propel us into the next.  Especially if said *gasp* is going to be resolved within the first 7 sentences of that next chapter because it was completely contrived to begin with.  Such a system is not only unnecessary, but insulting.  I feel like I'm reading a soap opera, and not a very good one at that.  And as for Jacob, what can I say?  I'm writing my teen-aimed vampire romance novel and I'm worried that I don't have enough conflict and angst, with nothing more than a threat of my heroin's death to tear the lovers apart.  What shall I do?  I know!  I'll add ANOTHER soul mate!  Ah!  It's perfect.  What shall our plucky lady do with that?  Well, of course she'll choose the perfect man (after all, Jacob doesn't get the golden adjective even once that I'm aware of).  But in the mean time, I will torment you the reader with a torture of guilt when you realize that you actually like Jacob better than Edward!  WHAT?!?!  Blasphemer!  But you will continue to read now because you just have to know. who. Bella. chooses!  Ah yes, my clever plot succeeded and now I have you solidly addicted not just to my four behemoth books, but to an entire poorly written film franchise as well!  Mwahahahahaha!!!

4.)A so-called "BYU/Mormon author"
No. Noo!  Please, please, please, don't let this be the work that is associated with BYU!  And here we have the most silly and personal reasoning for my hatred.  But I don't think I can bear to have that writing associated with my school, or my religion.  In my mind, it is the equivalent of the Mormons=polygamists issue.  An exaggeration you say?  Maybe, but there it is.  Anything else that comes out of this place will be colored with the lavender stigma of Stephanie Meyer.  Call me petty, but it KILLS me that this can become famous while I scratch away in poverty-ridden obscurity.  And if I ever do finally write something that gets famous, because I come from the same school, people will place my work along hers.  Please writing gods that be, spare me that humiliation!

And there you have it.  If you aren't convinced now, well I give you up for hopeless.  Indeed, I give up society as a whole.  We are a people willing to exalt mediocrity (I just have to throw a shout out here to Eragon!) and relegate the truly good to obscurity.