Untitled

[rleah8]

Freud: The Uncanny

While I was reading and attempting to decipher Freud’s essay, “The Uncanny,” I started to think about how it related to Paul Auster’s novel, “The New York Trilogy,” which pretty much celebrates the uncanny. Freud states that the uncanny is “in reality nothing new or alien, but something which is familiar and old-established in the mind and which has become alienated from it only through the process of repression. [The uncanny is] something which ought to have remained hidden but has come to light. When experiencing the uncanny, the unknown appears as something which is – paradoxically – familiar (Freud 132). In Auster’s “New York Trilogy” the uncanny could refer to the doubling effect and the terror or uneasy feeling it causes the reader. In Ghosts, Blue spies on Black and as Blue’s uncanny similarities to Black become clearer throughout the story, both Blue and the reader start to feel a little confused and uncomfortable. He feels uneasy because he feels like he has seen Black somewhere before, but he can’t figure out where. As he spends hours every day doing nothing but watching Black, he starts to realize that he and Black are basically the same person, or doubles of one another. The uncanny is what makes this story so interesting, yet also quite disturbing.

I also thought that the passage about children’s fear over losing their eyes was interesting and, of course, in typical Freud fashion, he has to relate it to castration. He writes, “The study of dreams, fantasies and myths has taught us also that anxiety about one’s eyes, the fear of going blind, is quite often a substitute for the fear of castration” (Freud 139). I had never heard of the “castration complex” before (or maybe I blocked it out of my mind), but I suppose I can understand it. I don’t have a neurotic fear of losing my eyes or other organs, but I certainly wouldn’t want to lose them if I had a choice. I thought it was interesting how he connects the castration complex and the fear of losing one’s eyes with the story “The Sandman.” He writes, “We would therefore venture to trace back the uncanny element in the Sand-Man to the anxiety caused by the infantile castration complex” (Freud 140). I tend to think that the majority of Freud’s theories that I have learned about are pretty out there and hard to come on board with, but his arguments nonetheless always serve as interesting topics of discussion at school. I don’t know if his theories would make good family dinner conversation, however.

[rleah8]

The Locked Room

This story is quite bizarre and I think that the ending is anticlimactic, but I appreciate the correlation with “City of Glass” and “Ghosts” on the issue of identity. It seems to me that, similar to Blue and Black in the previous story, Fanshawe and the narrator are almost the same person at times or, at the very least, have some sort of innate “twin-like” connection. Even Fanshawe’s own mother mistakes the narrator for him at one point. The narrator so seamlessly fills Fanshawe’s role as a husband and father it is almost like Fanshawe never existed; but, of course, Fanshawe is everywhere even when he seems to be nowhere.

The narrator used to envy Fanshawe because everything seemed to come so easily to him, whether it was his talent for writing that far surpassed the level of his classmates, or his effortless athleticism that guaranteed him to be a star. The narrator claims that there was “more innate goodness in him than in others” and that “he was more truly himself” than he could ever hope to be (205). Unlike most people, Fanshawe never felt compelled to bask in attention or even seek attention at all for his multiple talents. He didn’t like praise and ultimately became detached from his behavior no matter how extraordinary it was.

I have a hard time understanding Fanshawe’s character because he is so mysterious and complex, but I guess it makes sense that he would disappear as he did because he had always been a very introverted person. My question is “why?” I understand his childhood was troubled with his father dying from a long and painful illness and both his mother and sister struggling to cope, but why couldn’t he ever find a way to happily coexist with the rest of society? I don’t quite understand why he was so against being found and why he was willing to resort to violence, even going so far as to threaten to murder his friend. I honestly don’t know whether to villainize Fanshawe, pity him, or respect him for his willingness to give up his previous life to his “best” friend. Of course, it seems that he never really wanted that life to begin with or even if he did want it, he would never be able to conform and make it work.

There is a great quote in the story that says: “You get to a certain point in life, and then it’s too late to change” (269). Maybe that’s what happened to Fanshawe. In spite of his many talents, he spent his entire childhood and young adulthood trying to avoid recognition and praise; so, as a grown man, it would be very difficult for him to suddenly change and take on a new role. He could have become a world-renowned author, but he preferred to live in the shadows. I get the sense that he was punishing himself for some reason, but I have no idea what it could be. Maybe it is only something that Fanshawe himself can perceive. After all, it is not uncommon for a brilliant mind to be plagued by irrationality and self-doubt. Fanshawe was undoubtedly brilliant, but he never saw himself that way or wanted other people to see him that way, which is a rare quality.

[rleah8]

“Ghosts”

I don’t know what is going on, but I love it! So Blue is Black, or is Black really Blue? Who is really who here and who is actually watching who? From the onset of the story, I could definitely sense that there was something strange and ominous going on. For example, Blue notices that White has a black beard and his skin appears unnaturally white, almost like he’s wearing some kind of disguise. This is really the first clue that White is actually Black. After he has been watching Black for some time, Blue starts to feel as if he is actually watching himself, which he kind of is in a way because both men do absolutely nothing every day except watch the other. Blue thinks that he recognizes Black from somewhere, but he can’t remember where. The story offers little hints along the way which suggest that Blue and Black are pretty much the same person, but not quite. Blue says that there are moments “when he feels so completely in harmony with Black” and other times “when he feels totally removed from Black” (153). Blue is described as a “solid character less given to dark thoughts than most,” which leads me to believe that Black is the more evil of the two. I think that “Black” is a fitting name for this mysterious character. The fact that Blue feels the need to go out looking for Black when he is not home is odd, but it is almost like he is actually going out looking for himself because the two are so invested in one another and have such a strong, yet strange connection. I started to get frustrated that Blue was letting himself become entangled in this boring and relentless routine of doing nothing except watching Black. He could have quite easily just stopped and taken up a regular job, but no, he just let the monotony drag on and on. I also wonder who the woman is that Blue sees Black with at the restaurant and question whether she is Mrs. Black, meaning that she is someone who Black could be with if he weren’t so invested in this pointless tirade with Blue. Blue has needed Black to maintain his own miserable existence, but he comes to the realization that he can’t continue to live if Black is in his life. Even though he kills Black, is Black really gone for good or will Blue deal with continue reminders of Black for the rest of his life. I wonder if maybe Black represents Blue’s depression or mental illness, which constantly haunts him and consumes his every waking moment. The title “Ghosts” could suggest that someone is dead, but is it Blue? It’s very confusing. Maybe “Ghosts” refers to ghosts of the past.

[rleah8]

City of Glass: Identity Crisis

I liked “City of Glass” for the most part, but the narration still has me reeling a bit. I think that the complexity of the narration adds to the depth and mystery of the plot, but for me it also distracted me because I was trying to figure who was who and what was going on at times. Maybe that is part of the fun of the story, though. It is interesting and somewhat disturbing at the same time. By having Quinn called on the phone by someone asking to speak to 'Paul Auster', the private detective, Auster establishes an elaborate and complex web of characters and identity. This is further complicated by Quinn, the detective writer, choosing to become 'Paul Auster the detective' and help his 'client', one Peter Stillman. Indeed, although he has "no idea" who 'Auster' is, he gets ready to do what 'Auster' has promised to do, as "in a kind of trance", having "found himself doing a good impression of a man preparing to go out", namely 'Auster'. The transformation continues, as he enters Stillman's apartment: "he could feel himself going blank, as if his brain had suddenly shut off." I can only assume that Auster used different personas to experiment with or establish multiple facets of identity, which the character Peter Stillman is a good example of. 

Peter Stillman is a Kaspar Hauser-like character cut off from all human contact for most of his life by his father - also called Peter Stillman. The younger Stillman is literally a 'still man', someone who has lived a morbid existence. Still is also constant or stationary; Peter is the boy who never grew up. Stillman is very confused about language, words and names, and their validity. He says to Quinn, "My real name is Mr Sad. What is your name, Mr Auster? Perhaps you are the real Mr Sad, and I am no one." In rejecting his name, he can replace it with one of his choosing, depending on his mood. For he states "I am Peter Stillman. That is not my real name. My real name is Peter Rabbit." However he further says "Perhaps I am Peter Stillman, and perhaps I am not. My real name is Peter Nobody." In regards to his wife, he says that Virginia "is not her real name. But that makes no difference. To me." Names may not make a difference to Peter, and by rejecting the name Peter Stillman he is rejecting the name his tyrannical father gave to him, also his father's name. "We are both Peter Stillman. But Peter Stillman is not my real name. So perhaps I am not Peter Stillman, after all." To Peter Stillman his identity is thus not dictated by his name, but by his random and irrational whims. His detachment from human contact was part of his father's experiment on the effect of isolation on the development man's language. Yet this isolation has deprived Stillman of constant and definitive identity. As he says, "I cannot say who I will be tomorrow. Each day is new, and each day I can be born again” (42).

Source: http://www.bluecricket.com/auster/articles/dawson.html

[rleah8]

I feel that this building located in Poland, called Krzywy Domek, or the “crooked house,” mirrors some of the themes we discussed for “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?” This work of architecture almost doesn’t even look real at first glance; in fact, if I didn’t know any better I’d think I was hallucinating. When I saw this building, it made me think of Connie's somewhat warped sense of reality, as she is only sixteen and still quite immature. Before Arnold Friend comes into her life, she has no idea that her sense of security can so easily be ripped from her in an instant. He ultimately destroys her innocence and leaves her corrupted both physically (we can assume) and emotionally. I feel that this bizarre-looking building, with its wavy lines and seemingly morphing structure, can be representative of Connie's initially carefree reality collapsing and shifting into an entirely new and painful reality.

[rleah8]

Charles Schmid - The real-life Arnold Friend?

Charles Schmid murdered three teenage girls during the 1960s in Tuscon, Arizona. Joyce Carol Oates read about the murders in Life Magazine and was inspired, but deliberately did not finish reading the article because she didn’t want to be influenced too much by the details of the crimes. She wasn’t intrigued by the murderer himself, but by the fact that he was able to convince a number of teenagers from “good families” to help him with the murders.

The character Arnold Friend in Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been? embodies Charles Schmid in both physical appearance and personal characteristics. Both men were handsome (though you’d never know by looking at the photo above) and smooth talkers, but they also both deliberately altered their appearance with makeup and by stuffing their boots to appear taller. Like Schmid, Arnold Friend also has a fiendish obsession with teenage girls and though the story ends before we can find out what happens to Connie, we can only assume the worst.

[rleah8]

HOLY COW

I can understand why this book drives people crazy with all of the unrealistic elements, but I still think it’s pretty cute and has an important message. While I was reading, I was trying not to think about the logistics - like how a turkey was able to fly a plane - because I felt that getting too wrapped up in the smaller details would take away from my appreciation for the story’s overriding message. The visual of a turkey flying a plane with a cow and a pig looking out the windows is pretty funny, though. The disclaimer at the end of the book is a clever touch because Duchovny knew that people would have a hard time looking past the implausibility of the events themselves and might fail to appreciate all of the good the story has to offer. It’s kind of ironic that in America Elsie despises humans for the way they treat animals, but when she goes overseas she reviles humans for how they treat other humans. No matter where she goes, she finds that hatred and social disparity and unrest reign supreme. Even in India, where she thought she would enjoy a life without worry, she discovers that being “holy” isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be. At first she actually likes the special treatment, but then she discovers that there is a price to pay for being a cow in India. One of the reasons I like Elsie so much is because she is simple, innocent and humble, so when the other cows tell her that she will destroy the hierarchy by associating with “inferior” animals, she says, “I’m not a goddess, I’m just an animal, we’re all animals, just like the pigs, the birds, just like the humans” (196). It’s funny that while she was initially seeking this great, big adventure, by the end of it she envisions having a calf of her own and spending the rest of her time out to pasture. To her credit, she had a dream and went after it, even though she had to face some harsh realities about human nature along the way. 

“We are all animals and we have our place in the womb of Mother Nature. Only man has separated himself from the great chain of being and from all the other animals, and I think that has been to his great detriment, and sadness, and to ours” (204).

“This is my religion - we’re all animals, perfect animals created in the infinite image and imagination of nature. It’s a life not without pain and competition and suffering, but it can be a life of dignity and mutual respect” (205).

[rleah8]

The Lottery

I read “The Lottery” in one of my previous classes as well and I really liked it for the shock value. At the beginning of the story, I was kind of confused as to what was going on and what exactly the lottery was. The morning is described as a beautiful summer’s day, with flowers blooming and rich, green grass. The mood seems to be pretty jovial as children are running around carefree; yet there are some subtle details which suggest that the reason for the gathering is a somber one not to be celebrated. Men are described as joking, but “their jokes were quiet and they smiled rather than laughed” (Jackson). It really wasn’t until the end of the story that I actually understood what was happening when the stones were introduced and I was completely shocked because it was so unexpected. The matter-of-fact way that the people respond to the impending murder of Mrs. Hutchinson is very disturbing because it represents how powerful a mob mentality can be. Mr. Summers says, “Let’s finish quickly,” while the children pick up stones to throw. The fact that children are involved is terrifying because they will only grow to be more accepting of killing as they develop into adults. The belief in traditions is also evident in this story and contributes to the compliance of the people in the murder. While there are plenty of traditions worth celebrating, this story proves that some traditions deserve to be done away with, though the people in this story seem to be very grounded in the past and unwilling to change.

[rleah8]

Holy Cow

I really like Holy Cow so far, more so for the overriding message than the actual writing and dialogue. I love how witty and charming Elsie is, even after she discovers the harsh truth about humans and what happened to her mother. I find her very endearing and I admire her will to persevere in spite of the obstacles she faces to escape from the farm. While her best friend, Mallory, is content living out the rest of her (short) life on the farm, Elsie is the one who has actually seen the gruesome images of slaughter and cannot fathom meeting such a terrible fate. The message that I gather from this text is that the meatpacking industry is morally corrupt and violates the rights of animals. Delving even deeper into this issue, I feel that animals have feelings and should be treated with dignity, which is likely why Duchovny humanized animals in the story. If animals are going to be slaughtered, the process should be humane and should minimize the suffering of the animals as much as possible. What this text does so well, at least for me, is invoke sympathy from the readers for the animals by creating a human-like connection with Elsie and the way she feels after discovering the truth about her mother. I can only imagine how heartbroken I’d feel if my mother disappeared and I went on living my life believing that she was alive somewhere, not knowing that she was truly dead. The monsters in this story are humans because humans, unlike most animals, kill for selfish reasons. Elsie tells the reader: “Yes, we kill to survive, some of us have to, but it’s not the type of killing humans do; there’s no hatred or joy, only necessity” (Duchovny 9). To that same effect, however, one could argue that plenty of humans do kill for necessity and get no thrill from destroying a life.

Quotes that I like: “All you humans do is take, take, take from the earth and its beautiful creatures, and what do you give back? Nothing” (54). “What a strange god that instead of bringing people together, divides them” (62).

[rleah8]

Willa

I really enjoyed this short story by Stephen King, even though I wasn’t necessarily scared reading it. I certainly don’t find the story as frightening as The Shining or It, but there are some elements to the story that are unnerving to think about. For instance, the fact that all of these people are dead and don’t know it or simply don’t want to accept it adds a sort of ominous tone to the story. Like David and Willa, these ghosts still reside in the mortal world, but unlike David and Willa, they cannot bear to accept the notion that their lives as they know them are over. It is scary to imagine living in a world where you are merely a passing breeze as the living go about their daily lives. What also scares me is the idea that this could happen to any of us when we die. A part of me hopes that when I die my world will go black and I will disappear into nothingness, as before I was born. I don’t necessarily want to believe in an afterlife because there is no promise that it will be pleasant. What if the afterlife involves a torturous psychological state of uncertainty and longing for closure and peace? That doesn’t sound pleasant to me. I feel sorry for these people who have suffered a brutal death and are now either forced to accept their end or be forced to accept it when the railway station is demolished. I hope that they can cross the crucial border of acceptance so that they can enjoy the overwhelming sense of calm and happiness that David and Willa experience.

This short story also made me think of the movie The Sixth Sense because the concepts are similar; the only difference is that the movie absolutely terrified me. I actually had nightmares for quite a while after seeing it. However, there are elements of gore in the story which add to the “fear” factor; like when David describes that “half of Rattner’s head was gone” and “the rest of his face had been burned black” (23). David also looks at Pammy Andreeson and for a moment sees “a corpse, burned bald, in a rotting rag of a dress” (24). It’s scary that while David can see how horrific the other passengers look in death, they are unable to because their perceptions are flawed.  

[rleah8]

Just some monster thoughts...

As we have learned in this class, monsters don’t necessarily have to be physically “monstrous” to incite fear in audiences. In Twilight, Edward is a beautiful savage who, as we have discussed thoroughly in class, captivates Bella so much so that she develops an unending willingness to yield to his every desire. What unnerves us so much about Edward is the fact that he is able to disguise his monstrosity quite effortlessly; until, of course, he meets Bella and she reawakens his lust for human blood. Edward certainly does not fit the typical mold of a monster, but, like most monsters, he is internally flawed and atypical of what society would consider “normal.” Essentially, if we really analyze Edward we are pushed to an uncomfortable place because we are forced to redefine what we have come to perceive monsters to be. Sometimes the most beautiful creatures possess the most terrifying propensities. A monster such as Frankenstein perfectly encapsulates everything we would imagine a monster to be physically (his psychological complex is a much more complicated issue); but a handsome and sensitive monster like Edward is reason enough for us to reevaluate our understanding of monstrosity. As we know, monsters are all too often unassuming individuals who seamlessly blend in with the rest of mundane society going about their daily routines.

[rleah8]

Phantom of the Opera Final Thoughts

I must admit that while this story was a little confusing at times, I actually genuinely liked it overall. When the story began, I was curious to find out more about Erik and how he managed to live so inconspicuously (to some extent) within the Opera House. I couldn’t quite grasp how he seemed to be everywhere – and yet nowhere – at the same time. I thought that perhaps he was truly a ghost because his presence moved so effortlessly throughout the Opera House and he somehow knew everything that was happening in and around the confines; however, it became more obvious as the story went on that he was simply a living “monster.” When Raoul and the Persian ventured below the stage into the extraordinary web of secret passages and corridors with beams and ropes galore, I realized that Erik was a much more sophisticated being than I had originally thought. Only someone with intimate knowledge of this sophisticated underground lair could navigate it as efficiently as Erik had being doing for so many years. I was glad to learn more about Erik and his days in Persia and India, where he had first exercised his architectural talents and where he had also learned to become a master of strangulation and torture. At the end of the epilogue the narrator asks the reader the lurking question: should Erik should be pitied or cursed?  It’s funny, even though I really hate Erik for the pain he caused so many people, I also feel sorry for him because he was an unfortunate, tortured soul simply by birth. He really never had a chance at a normal life because of his ghastly appearance, which is quite tragic because if he had looked “normal” he likely would have become renowned and respected for his architectural skills. Ultimately, Erik’s life is the embodiment of wasted promise due to society’s misconceptions of physical appearance. His violence cannot be forgiven in my eyes; however, he really had no other choice but to live alone in a dark and miserable pit when all he really wanted was to love and be loved in return.

“He simply longed to be ‘someone’, someone normal. But his hideous appearance would not allow it! He had a big heart, large enough to embrace the entire world; but, in the end, he had to confine himself to a dismal cellar” (282).

[rleah8]

Phantom thoughts

The Phantom disturbs me tremendously because he has the ability to cause great death and destruction whenever he wants to. However, I think what troubles me most about him is the fact that he seems to have two different personas; one is  more convincingly compassionate and human-like, and the other is of course entirely evil and merciless, particularly in his quest to “woo” Christine. Christine is naturally terrified of the Phantom, but she also pities him, which he likely realizes and tries to use to his advantage to keep her coming back to him. She tells Raoul, “There was so much human sorrow in the Voice as he spoke that I should have henceforth realized that I was somehow the victim of my own delusions” (Leroux 132). The Phantom is somewhat like a creepy guy who walks around a park with a dog, trying to lure children away with him; except, in this case, the Phantom’s tool at his disposal is his captivating voice.

Quotes that I like:

“Music, Raoul, has the power to make one forget everything save those sounds that touch your heart” (141).

“That he had not taken me into his arms at a time when I could offer no resistance must mean that there was something of the angel about the monster” (148).

“His music took me on a painstaking journey through martyrdom and into the uttermost recesses of the abyss that this hideous creature inhabited” (149).

“Listening to that triumphant symphony which seemed to set the world ablaze, I understood that the work had reached its apotheosis and that Hideousness, soaring on the wings of Love, had dared to face Beauty” (149).

[rleah8]

The Phantom of the Opera (Prologue - Ch. 6)

This is my first time reading The Phantom of the Opera and I must say that I am already completely enthralled with this ghastly, yet captivating tale. While I enjoyed Twilight more so for the lively class discussions, I think that I will find myself liking The Phantom of the Opera more so for the actual literary content. I can already appreciate Leroux’s attention to detail and his quest to create a monster that has a depth of character, which may have been lacking in Edward. Unlike how I felt while reading Twilight, I am actually intrigued by the phantom and feel compelled to learn more about him. I want to know why he is the way he is. What happened to him that has made him so vengeful and mean-spirited? While he is certainly a monster in every sense of the word, I wonder if there is another side to him that is precisely the opposite of what we have come to believe monsters to be. Aside from the phantom, I’m also interested in finding out what will transpire between Raoul and Christine as the story continues.

[rleah8]

Twilight Abstinence

The article “Bite Me (Or Don’t)” addresses some interesting topics regarding the Twilight book series, including abstinence and Bella and Edward’s flawed relationship. I have to admit, as a first time reader of Twilight, I kept waiting and hoping that Bella and Edward would consummate their relationship at some point during the first book of the series, but it never happened. The issue of abstinence talked about in this article and its popularity among “purity” groups was something that I was unaware of. It never really crossed my mind that Edward and Bella were abstaining from sex for purity reasons; rather, I just chalked it up to the fact that Edward might kill Bella if they have sex. Plus, in the last half of the first book Bella is too busy trying to hide her scent from another vampire to worry about having sex. While the article talks about how fans were upset when the couple finally make (violent) love, it would seem to me to be the natural course of action after a couple has married. According to the article, some fans were so upset that Edward and Bella had sex that they created an online petition demanding answers from Meyer and her publisher (Seifert).

I would also point out that in the first book it seems to me that Edward is the only one who wants to abstain, whereas Bella appears ready to give herself to him. The article also addresses the issue of rape fantasy and its role in Breaking Dawn, which is quite the contrast from the message of abstinence and purity in the other books. Apparently, the morning after they have sex, Bella wakes up covered in bruises and subsequently tries to conceal them so that Edward won’t feel guilty (Seifert). This doesn’t seem to me to be the best scenario to create for susceptible readers and it certainly doesn’t aim to empower women; then again, I suppose this series was never intended to empower anyone except vampires. It’s just unfortunate that Bella, at least in the beginning of the series, never seems to find her voice or a will to match Edward’s dominating personality.

[rleah8]

Twilight ending

“And he leaned down to press his cold lips once more to my throat” (Meyer 498).

The ending was very anticlimactic for me. I don’t know why, but I thought it would be more suspenseful. I was hoping for something more exciting that would make me actually want to read the next book. I might read it anyway, just for kicks, but after the ending to this book I don’t feel compelled to find out what happens with Bella and Edward. I still think their relationship is a little twisted. Perhaps it would be less creepy if Bella became a vampire herself, but she would still be a teenage girl and he would still be ancient.

Bella: “You are my life. You’re the only thing it would hurt me to lose.”

“I was getting better at this. It was easy to admit how much I needed him” (Meyer 474).

I actually feel sorry for Bella that she feels she cannot live without Edward. I understand that she just endured a traumatic experience and basically owes her life to Edward, but from the moment she saw him she has been obsessed with him and has been barely able to function. At first I chalked it up to a typical teenager experiencing her first love, but now I understand that there is something more going on. Bella is unable to resist Edward’s advances and is ready and willing to go with him anywhere, at any time. She seems completely fine to sacrifice her own well-being in order to please Edward.

I must say, however, that I do respect her for risking her life when she thought her mother was in danger. All in all, this has been a fun, yet frustrating read for me. What I really enjoyed was listening to other people’s thoughts about the book in class and reading everyone’s posts on Tumblr.

[casie-pierce-blog]

Recap on my thoughts

I think I have already said everything I want to say on this book in class, but let it be known, that I have not enjoyed this book at all.  There are many good reasons why this is the first time I have ever read this book.

There are many things that I find disturbing about this book, the apparent rape culture, the constant talking down about a woman’s role in society and so on.  We talked about the age difference and yes that is a problem, but logically speaking, the only way for Edward to have a relationship with someone his age is for there to be another vampire that was born, and then made at the same time he was.  There are several other vampire or monster stories where the love interests are different ages because of this.

But there is one thing that I am surprised never came up in class. Edward is dead. In terms of classic vampire mythology, he would have had to die in order to become a vampire. This means that Bella is a necrophiliac. Think about that for a moment. This is a “love” story, about a teenager and a 100 year old walking corpse.

[rleah8]

Great point! I never thought about it that way, but you’re right. I’ve tried to think about Edward as a teenage boy because that is less creepy, but when you really think about it, he is most certainly not a teenager, except in outward appearance. If he looked his actual age, I imagine Bella would be repulsed.