The Cinderfella Syndrome


I keep trying to explain to myself the allure of the craptastic Twilight series (the books and the movie) and the hysterical response of the fangirls (and fanboys!) to any kind of criticism aimed towards the clunky writing style of Meyers and both her abuse of the Thesaurus and her penchant for doing without an actual plot in her books. I think the girl's (and grown women's) side is easily explained: Meyer preys on their desire to be loved and needed and on all those pre-teen's fear and desire for sex. Perfect recipe for success.

But what about all those fanboys? Most exclusively gay? Do they respond in the same way to the conventions of the bodice ripper? What's in it for them? Why the blind admiration? I can understand wanting to fuck Robert Pattinson, but Edward? Of course, at this point Pattinson and Cullen are one and only one and for the fans there's no separating them (poor Pattinson, who will probably have to pull a Daniel Radcliffe in Eqqus to step away from this curse).

Maybe Meyer's portrait of Cullen as the 'it' boy who focuses on the self-proclaimed-Cinderella Bella (and in projection every gay boy ever mistreated or bullied) and his reluctant and never-consumed passion for the protagonist is what breaks them and leaves them panting for more, sophomoric prose and non-existing plot notwithstanding. It's that need to be desired a human trait common to anybody attracted to a male or just a socially prescribed inclination that covers both straight women and gay men? I somehow can understand that need to be somehow rescued from dangerous situations, to be desired blindly by the man we want, to be needed and protected. But basically being stalked? (Edward watches Bella sleep!) Sublimating the fact that one's absolutely awkward? (Bella falls every three pages!) Being an idiot? (Bella needs to be rescued. Again. And again!) Being nobody without a man? (Bella cannot live without Edward!). Those are not things that seem to go well with a male-to-male relationship, where the dynamics mostly go beyond the dyad male-female and become more of union of equals (no matter who takes it up the ass, it's two males in bed at the end of the day, two male personalities and two male psyches).

But still, many men feel attracted by that old fashioned, slightly abusive and misogynistic view of relationships that Meyer sugarcoats with a varnish of goth angst. Why? Is it that we have not outgrown our own shortcomings? Is it that we will always be the fag, the queer, the boy that's 'different', no matter the five o'clock shadow and the muscles acquired after painful hours at the gym? Are we still tied to the bully's whip and look for validation in meaningless prose and outdated characterizations of relationships? Are we still Cinderfella, waiting for Prince Charming to rescue us?
Have we not grown?

I don't know. Part of me wants to believe that it's just Meyer's style (the equivalent of McDonald's fast food) what keeps people reading her books. But I suspect that there's more than meets the eye: she's supplying the crack cocaine equivalent of writing to a horde of addicts-to-be who cannot wait to see their innermost desires reflected on the white pages of a book. And I guess the only solution is rehab. And we all know that they're gonna say "No, no, no!" Amy Winehouse-style to that. Because who wants to admit they have bought into the (ever empty) hype? Nobody. They'll keep defending Meyer's 'literature' til the day they grow up. If that ever happens.

Comments

  1. Pero ya, en serio, ¿qué te hizo la vieja que es la segunda vez que te vas lanza en ristre contra ella y sus lectores?. Jejejejeje, si te contara que en la misma semana me vi "Crepúsculo" y me leí "El Valle de las Muñecas", ¿me preguntarías cuántas capas de barniz me puse en la última manicura?, jejejeje...

    Ahora si, en serio. Pienso que Meyer no debió pasar por el filtro - o bueno, tubo - de una editorial, ella debió ir directo al cine, qué distinto hubiera sido... cuántas veces se hubiera repetido la palabra "fiasco", de cuántas maneras se hubiera expresado la total falta de continuidad en su forma de contar las historia... pero bueno, al menos hay cine para no pensar durante una buena temporada, ¿no crees?

    Un abrazote.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ah, y la ilustración está perfecta... aunque yo le hubiera puesto mas bien una de Danielle Steele o de Jackie Collins... Hmmm... qué tal Jacqueline Susann, "Once is not enough", ahora que están preparando la secuela...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jajajaja
    Curioso...al igual que Milo tambien le hubiese puesto una imagen de steele!!!
    jejejeeje
    y si... Me trasnoche mucho con crepusculo.... y creo que comprare los otros... NO ME CRUCIFIQUES AMIGOOOO

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Go ahead, give it to me.

Translate

Followers

Popular Posts

En otra lengua

Restricted to Adults

Restricted to Adults
Under 18? Beat it. Now.