The Twilight saga is a lot of things:

Ridiculous.  Under-edited.  Repetitive.  Amazingly angsty.  Over-the-top.  Addictive.

But racist?

I don't see it.  From the very beginning, I was disinclined to take the comments all that seriously, because before the essay even begins, the author mistakes the white chess piece on the book cover for a king (it's a queen*).  Within the essay, inaccuracies continue.

It seemed like, especially in the comments, the author's accusation of racism was being drawn more from issues with the Book of Mormon than from the Twilight novels. 

Anyway.

(via Teen Book Review)

*After reading BD, I assumed that the queen was Bella and the pawn was Remesnee**, but according to one of the commenters on the racism post, Stephenie Meyer has said that both pieces represent Bella.  That works, too.

**Still hurts to type that.

Comments

[tulip]

"Time and again, I have seen mothers quoted in articles about the series, speaking of their love for the books because they are "squeaky clean" - meaning there is no sex in them"

I wonder what those moms are saying NOW??? Also I had no idea that these books were preferred over the Harry Potter books due to MORAL issues?? How about all the "imprinting" and creepy 100s of years old guys "falling in love" with actual teenagers? Super ew. I think it's ridiculous to expect people to only read books that are somehow "moral". God forbid we read something and then have a discussion about how reading something in a book doesn't mean we agree with it. *eyeroll

"They are, like the most effective propaganda, wolves in sheep’s clothing.
Werewolves, in fact."

Maybe she was trying to be funny? I laughed out loud at this last line.

[Sarah]

I thought it interesting to note that nowhere in that post does she mention that after their initial shock neither Bella nor Edward has a problem with Jacob imprinting on their daughter. They're even ready to send her away with him if something would happen to them.

[Leila]

Yeah, someone brought that up in the comments. As well as the fact that she got Jacob's tribe wrong and that Laurent was so not the most evil vamp and that S. Meyer had nothing to do with the casting anyway...

[TadMack]

I just skimmed the article (out of morbid interest and a complete and utter need to avoid actual work, apparently) and -- meh. I think the author is all over the board, and thus making no point at all. I DO feel, from having read the previous books, that Meyers engaged in an unfortunate dominant culture stereotype in having Jacob force himself on Bella in the first place -- there's a BIG long tradition of hot-blooded-brown-guy, be he Native or of African ancestry -- being drawn irresistibly to the pure and virginal white girl. It's tiresome, and a huge cliché, and it further demeaned an already dumbed-down storyline. However, knowing what little I do about the whole books-to-movies thing, I can firmly say that authors don't even get much input on their book COVERS, much less who is cast for their movies. This person is upset and disgusted, yes, but probably should save their ire for something that matters.

[Leila]

I do think that's a totally fair complaint (about Jacob kissing Bella against her wishes (and her will, if I'm remembering the scene correctly)), and it would have been a good point for the essayist to have brought up. As it was, though...

I can't believe I'm still talking about Breaking Dawn. You should have seen Josh's face when I tried to explain the plot to him. It was priceless.

[beth]

I can't believe that I totally didn't get the cover art until your footnotes. And the pawn/queen both being Bella makes total sense to me now.

[Str4y]

Reading that essay almost inspired me to beat the memory of it out of my brain by hitting it on my desk repeatedly, but then I remembered the article I read explaining exactly why the Harry Potter books are a thinly veiled story about why satanism is cool (did you know that house elves represent aborted babies?) and that it could be so much worse. People see what they want to. If I felt like it, I could probably find examples of, I don't know...why listening to rock music turns you to the dark side, or how the series is a metaphor for child abuse. I'm going to file this under my blanket 'people are dumb' policy and then go get caffeine.

Anyway, the fact that the writer comments on Meyer's 'excellent plotting and storytelling' and her 'perfection in word choice' really discredits her from the get-go. ;)

[dangermom]

I think the writer gives Meyer waaaay too much credit as an author; she talks as if Meyer is in the same bracket as Tolstoy or something. I seriously doubt that Meyer is that deliberate.

Also, the number of misconceptions about Mormons in the article and the comments is pretty breathtaking.

[tzveyah]

Wow. That was hard to read, the logic was ALL over the place!! And I agree with you on the child's name. How do you pronounce that anyway? RenEESme? Renee-esme? Reneesme (same vowel sounds throughout?)? Confused!

[A Paperback Writer]

Another problem with her argument is that she assumes that the character named Jacob in the Book of Mormon is what we Mormons call a Lamanite and therefore brown-skinned and a Native American. But the Jacob character in the Book of Mormon is what we call a Nephite, and therefore would be white-skinned.
Since the Book of Mormon represents the POV of one set of characters (the lighter-skinned ones), it is not too far-fetched to think that there was some racism going on there. BUT, the name of Jacob does not connect to Native American the way she tries to make it here. The argument of the surname Black is a much better one.
She obviously doesn't really know as much about the Book of Mormon as she would like you to think.

[cuileann]

"No other with the skill that Stephenie Meyer possesses does anything in her books by accident."

Hm...what if I disagree with the assumption that she has skill in such spades? ;)

Some interesting points, though I'm not sure how far I'd believe it. The mistake about the white queen at the beginning is pretty off-putting.

[Hannah]

Yeah, I wouldn't call it culturally diverse but I definitely wouldn't call it racist either.

[Leila]

Jane at Dear Author has a good post about it.

[Gail Gauthier]

I _still_ don't get the cover.

I found that post seriously disturbing. If she didn't know Meyer is a Mormon, would she be seeing any of this stuff in her book?

While I was reading BD, I thought I saw some religious significance to Jacob's name, too. But I know nothing about the Book of Mormon, so I was thinking the Old Testament. Meyer makes a big point of telling us that Jacob has a sister named Rachel (I don't remember her from the earlier books) and then drops her. She also makes a big deal about the possibility of Leah and Jacob becoming some kind of couple and then drops that. Well, Jacob, Rachel, and Leah were something of a triangle in the O.T. To make a long story short, Jacob loved Rachel but ended up having to work seven years before being allowed to marry her. In BD, Jacob loves Reneseme but will have to wait years for her.

That would be a pretty common Biblical reference that an author could expect a certain percentage of readers in a Judaeo-Christian culture to get. The reference to the Book of Mormon that Valdes-Rodriguez sites would only work if an author expected her book to be read primarily by Mormons. Given The Twilight Saga's publishing history, I doubt Meyer was making that assumption.

Leila--I love your description of these books as being under-edited. That's a perfect description.

[dangermom]

I think Jane has a much better take on the question.

[Faber]

I think the concern that SMeyer (or her books, at least) are racist is a valid one. On a forum I belong to someone made a post voicing concern on the "colorblind" approach that SMeyer applies to her werewolves, primarily Jacob - that is, Jacob is culturally and mentally removed from his Native heritage; despite actually physically being Native American, he doesn't really acknowledge or care much about it. That (if anyone's interested) can be found at http://twilightsucks.proboards81.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=twilight&thread=159&page=8.

That being said, I do think that article is a very poor justification for the "SMeyer is racist" argument.

[Leila]

I think it's hilarious and awesome that so many people have jumped on the "Stephenie Meyer has mad skillz" thing. Hee hee hee.

Sassymonkey has a great round-up and analysis of related posts. The comments are, of course, worth reading. And another post from AV-R. She's now planning to read the Book of Mormon.

[cc]

What I don't understand is why people are bothering to even engage in this question; the "article" does not meet basic standards for discussion, which are 1) factual accuracy and 2) basic grasp of logic.

[Cara]

I skimmed this article, and...yeah. The article was lacking in validity.

And then my friend sent me this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dompotjTeIA and I almost choked my food. This is much more worth your time.

[chrissy]

Twilight is totally racist, dude. --But before you tune me out...

I read the twilight series in one week. I couldn't put it down. My boyfiend missed me-- And, I missed my home work. I really liked reading Twilight. But that doesnt mean that Twilight isn't a smidge racist. Can we at least agree that some of the descriptions are if not blatantly stereotypical than at least horribly contrived?

The Amazonian women, "wild" in animal skins "less civilized" pg613, Amun the machismo Egyptian male and his submissive wife, and the eastern european romanians, so thirsty to start a revolution-- Meyers even named one Vladimir... I mean COME ON! All this made my eyes roll, because I could tell that Meyer just simply didn't know better or couldnt write better.

But isn't that racism?? Not having to worry if youre a little on the sterotypical side, not worry how it might objectify, because hey, its just fiction. vampires and werewolves. The privilege of not knowing better...

Isn't Racism a description of a power dynamic? A dual relationship (either/or, normal/other), where one end of the relationship expresses privilege or power over the other? If this is the case then the racism in Twilight is deeper than the seterotypes and deeper than Meyers. The step to understanding racism is understanding that it does't ask you to be colorblind, it asks you to be color aware. To be aware of the power dynamic. The normal/other dichotomy.

Maybe its so easy for Meyer's and her defenders of fiction to say, "hey lay off, its just a story about vampires and werewolves"...because, perhaps, they are enjoying the privileges of not having to understand what it feels like to be on the OTHER side of white privilege?