Dissecting Twilight

I hadn't even heard of the Twilight series of books until I wound up at the midnight launch party of Breaking Dawn (amidst countless teenage girls in prom dresses.)

However, Twilighters now seem to be everywhere and it seems like everybody's discussing them.

Stephanie Meyer's Twilight saga certainly has its detractors - Stephen King remarked that: "Stephenie Meyer can't write worth a darn. She's not very good."

However, that hasn't stopped the books being wildly popular. Now they're not my cup of tea (I find any books featuring vampires to be incredibly dreary) but I can see why they've become so successful. Say what you want about Stephanie Meyer as a writer, but you can't deny that she delivers very good 'product.'

I've heard accusations that the Twilight saga is nothing more than a teenage girl's wish fulfillment. Stephanie Meyer has certainly tapped into the eroticism and fantasies of that target audience - delivering a package that spoke directly to their subconscious desires.

However, on a deeper level, Meyer has written something about the nature of love and romance itself, which resonates with more than just the 'teeny Twilighters.'

Just like Harry Potter, to which the Twilight saga is often compared, Meyer's books have an appeal far beyond teenagers- although you wouldn't have thought that at the launch I went to.

In Twilight, Stephanie Meyer has done what every successful writer needs to, and focused on a specific audience when she created the characters, situations and emotions of the Twilight books.

As a result, that target audience of teenage girls love Twilight, because it speaks directly to them and their experiences. However, older women love Twilight too, because (to quote an old marketing manager of mine) "At heart, all grown-ups are aspiring teenagers."

But what specific elements make the Twilight books so popular?

Character Elements that make Twilight so successful:

Bella: The heroine of the Twilight saga is a blank slate, left deliberately devoid of distinguishing characteristics so the reader can more easily step into her shoes.

Second only to books written in the first person perspective, this is the easiest way for authors to suck readers into the world they have created.

Bella's story is one of a teenage girl's sexual awakening; her desire for Edward to turn her into a vampire is a grand, all encompassing romantic gesture similar to a teenage girl surrendering her virginity to the boy she loves. (It's hardly an original metaphor Meyer's used, but it's an effective one.)

Bella's final transformation, when she becomes a vampire in Breaking Dawn, is another metaphor - this time for the secret desire of every teenage girl to be transformed from an awkward, adolescent bundle of self-esteem issues into a beautiful, 'sparkling' creature full of grace, confidence and strength.

Bella's journey in the Twilight saga reads like a wishlist of teenage fantasies, which is compelling for her audience because Stephanie Meyer was so careful to avoid unnecessary characterization when she wrote about Bella. Therefore, it's blissfully easy for women and girls to see themselves in her stylish (yet affordable) shoes.

Edward: Impossibly beautiful, moody and sullen, yet incredibly seductive; Edward is the living embodiment of every teenage girl's crush.

Edward at first treats Bella abominably (just like kids at school bully the girls or boys they secretly fancy.) Then he reveals his hunger for Bella - in the entirely literal sense (he wants to drink her blood.)

Out of all the characteristics that make Edward every teenage girl's dream date, it's that hunger that's the most important. His desire for her blood is a metaphor for him desiring her - and for the danger that desire poses. Danger is sexy - and what's more exciting and erotic to a teenage girl than a beautiful, mysterious boy who desires her deeply, desperately and dangerously?

and that's not just a teenage girl's fantasy. Even my wife agrees that one of the sexiest things a man can do for her is make her feel beautiful and desirable.

Given that women are assaulted from all angles by unattainable representations of feminine beauty (the skinny girls in posters, the anorexic models on TV) perhaps the most powerful part Edward plays in the Twilight saga is simply making Bella (and, by extension, the reader) feel beautiful, sexy and desirable.

But to a lesser extent, Edward also represents the unattainable boy in high school. In addition to being beautiful and seductive, he's got all of the materialistic possessions teenage girls are supposed to be impressed by. A 'stupid, shiny' Volvo S60R [Yawn - Editorial Bear] and an Aston Martin V12 Vanquish.

Finally, you have to remember that Edward was born and raised in the early 19th century, making him the quintessential gentleman of every girl's fantasy. The fact that he refuses to make love to Bella until they're married is further wish fulfillment - the very opposite of most teenage girl's first experiences of love and sex.

Edward represents respect and romance and appreciation for Bella and for the gift she's honoring him with (her virginity.) That's a sharp contrast to the 'real world', where horny boys, devoid of romance, just want to 'do it' in the backseat of their Pontiac Sunfire.

Jacob: Oh, poor Jacob. He, too, represents a figure that features in most teenage girl's lives - the lovesick best friend - making him (like Edward and Bella) more of an archetype than a real character.

Jacob first appears in Twilight, where he suggests to Bella that Edward is a vampire. Bella likes Jacob enormously and Jacob develops a crush on her. What teenage girl hasn't experienced a male friend having a crush on her, while she's only interested in being friends?

This crush simmers through the book New Moon, but comes to a head in Eclipse, when Jacob (and his feelings for Bella) mature somewhat. In another twist that teenage girls will be familiar with, Bella discovers that she, too, has feelings for her 'just good friend' Jacob and they kiss.

Although the Jacob/Edward/Bella 'love triangle' totally fizzles out in the Twilight saga, it's another succulent situation Stephanie Meyer threw into her story, knowing that her target audience would devour it greedily, murmuring: "Oh, my God. This is just like my situation with [insert boy's name here.]"

Jacob makes the story of Twilight appear directly applicable to the reader's real life.

Jacob also serves as a reminder to Bella that her love for Edward is greater and more all-encompassing than her feelings for him. It validates the idealistic teenage belief that an unconsummated crush is more 'real' than feelings you might have for somebody you already know and care about.

Without Jacob as the 'friend with feelings' to mitigate Bella's romance with Edward, Edward could never ascend to become the archetypal romantic hero.

Jacob plays a vital role in making the Twilight saga resonate so successfully with female readers - but many agree with me that he basically got boned.

I was secretly delighted to to find myself discussing the situation with teenage Twilight fans at the launch of Breaking Dawn. Many of them hoped that the conclusion of the Twilight saga would see Bella end up with Jacob instead of Edward. No such luck!

Other Elements that made Twilight so successful:

Vampires: People love vampires. Just look at the success of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter. It was the books of Anne Rice that first invented the concept of 'noble' and misunderstood vampires - and the vamps of Twilight represent the very worst of those vampire clichés. They're beautiful and strong and sexy, rather than decaying corpses who thirst for blood. In Twilight, Stephanie Meyer has successfully tapped into the conventions that make vampire fiction so wildly popular.

High School: Twilight begins with Bella attending a new school in Washington, thousands of miles away from her old home in Arizona. The 'new school' scenario is tried and tested - one almost all of Meyer's readers will be familiar with, which just adds to the ease in which they can relate to Bella's story.

Sex: Stephanie Meyer writes about teenage sexuality with surprising skill and subtlety. Even Stephen King, who eviscerated Twilight in a recent interview, admitted that Meyer's description (and allusion to) teenage sexuality was what made the book resonate so strongly with a female audience:

"She's writing to a whole generation of girls and opening up a kind of 'safe' joining of love and sex. It's exciting and it's thrilling, but it's not particularly threatening because it's not overtly sexual."

"A lot of the physicality is conveyed in ways, for example, like how the vampire will touch [Bella's] forearm or run a hand over her skin, and she just flushes all hot and cold. And for girls, that's a shorthand for all the feelings that they're not ready to deal with yet."

Whatever shall we make of the Twilight Saga?

Stephen King attacked Twilight because is was compared to J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter saga - and it doesn't take a literary genius to spot that Stephanie Meyer is no J.K. Rowling.

However, she's still an immensely talented writer.

Rowling's gift was in her vibrant imagination and the beautiful way she laid her visions out on the page. Stephanie Meyer's talent, on the other hand, is a powerful empathy for her target audience and the ability to transcribe a fantasy that speaks directly to them.

I think the Twilight saga is more 'product' than literature. That probably explains why it was scooped up by Little, Brown and Company just months after completion (whereas it took J.K. Rowling several years and many rejection slips for her bestsellers to find a publisher.)

Because of all the elements described about, Twilight is simply more 'bankable.'

But as I've often said, the proof of a great writer is not the recognition of their peers or the appreciation of the critics. It's not even in the awards the writing has won (and Twilight won the New York Times Editor's Choice, Publishers Weekly Best Book of the Year and a place on the American Library Association's "Top Ten Best Book for Young Adults" and "Top Ten Books for Reluctant Readers.”)

A good writer simply writes what people want to read - and what captures their imagination.

The Twilight saga, if its millions of fans are anything to go by, certainly achieved that goal - which makes it a damn good series of books as far as I'm concerned.

Why I think New Moon will suck (but I'm still going to see it anyway.)

Ever since I first dissected the Twilight saga, I've found myself roped into the whole melodramatic mess in a way that I'm not entirely comfortable with. In fact, this Sunday I'm actually going to see the sequel movie New Moon.

Mood: Brooding, with a slight chance of angst

Now, you all know my objections to Twilight:

• It's melodramatic
• The vampires don't abide by the accepted rules of vamparism
• It's romanticizing a clearly abusive and co-dependent relationship between Edward and Bella
• It's teenage wish fulfillment (new girl meets boy who literally wants to devour her)
• It's materialistic (Edward's pretty cars)
  
• It's focused on looks (everybody's beautiful.)
• The author might have plagiarized the whole saga
• The author wants to ban gay marriage

But my main reason for hating it, of course, is that Stephanie Meyer casually wrote Twilight over the course of three months, got a $750,000 advance and now has millions of adoring fans making her wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice (or Militant Ginger.) And she's not even half the writer I am. Bitch.

Anyway. Before I go and see the new movie, I wanted to explain why I hate that too - even though I'm secretly excited about sitting down with a bowl of popcorn this Sunday.

It's got a new director:

Even now, Hollywood's not exactly packed with female film directors - so when Catherine Hardwicke took the helm of the original Twilight, it was a thumbs up to women's lib and all that liberal nonsense.

Hardwicke did a bloody good job, too. Twilight wound up being a pretty good film (even by my standards) and Hardwicke coolly earned the distinction of having the best opening weekend of any female film director in history.

Hence why I was astonished when Summit Entertainment dropped her from directing the sequel, New Moon, without as much as a by-your-leave.

Like benching your quarterback when he's just scored a touchdown, Summit sacked their star performer and replaced her with a guy.

Not that New Moon director Chris Weitz is exactly a nobody - he was nominated for an academy award in 2002. It's just I don't the reason for ditching a successful director - especially not when her vision of the original book was so spot-on.

They ditched the ginger:

Rachelle Lefevre, the Canadian actress who portrayed sexy vamp Victoria in Twilight, will be back for New Moon - and up to her old tricks again. Yet Summit Entertainment, clearly establishing a pattern against well-performing female team members, canned her toned little tush for the third film in the series, Eclipse.

Lefevre as Victoria: She can bite me anytime.

"I was stunned by the decision," Lefevre admitted, "and greatly saddened not to continue my portrayal of Victoria." Legions of fans appealed to Summit to 'bring back Rachelle' but their plea landed on deaf ears. In Eclipse, Victoria will now be played by Terminator: Salvation's Bryce Dallas Howard.

It's fan service.

So one of the things I liked about the original Twilight movie was that it stuck pretty closely to the book - but improved upon it.

There was no real sense of danger in the original Twilight, as the 'bad guy' was a single rogue vampire and Bella had a whole house full of sycophantic Aryan bloodsuckers to protect her. In Hardwicke's movie adaptation, she at least upped the ante and made Bella genuinely appear to be in danger.

But in New Moon? No difference at all.

Literally, no differences at all. In fact, if you look up 'differences between the book and movie' on the Twilight wiki (Warning: This is the very heart of the Twilight fan consciousness - those who visit might not escape alive) you will see the differences are reduced to:

• Bella wears a green dress to her birthday party, instead of a blue shirt.
• The Volturi wear red cloaks instead of black ones.
• At Bella's party, the birthday cake is green instead of pink.

That's it? That's it?

Come off it! Here you are, transferring a story from one medium (print) to an entirely new exciting, immersive medium (celluloid) and the only way you can think to improve and expand upon it is to do a wardrobe change?

Suddenly the reason they canned the original director, Catherine Hardwicke, becomes obvious. She must have had some wild and crazy 'vision' for the movie that was considered too outlandish to pass muster with the fans. Perhaps it involved making a totally disruptive change to the story - like having paper napkins in the scene at Bella's birthday party, instead of cloth ones.

Listen, I'm all for consistency - but when you fire the director and one of the stars (the ginger one, no less) of the original movie, I think you're then permitted to take a few further risks with the script at well.

Okay, so maybe I'm ranting a little - but these reasons are why I'm dubious of New Moon. Perhaps my arguments would be a little more convincing it I wasn't (in a manly, totally non-squealing teenage girl way) still a little excited to see it.

Twilight, the DVD

Editorial Bear Recommends: "Dissecting Twilight by Militant Ginger"

Like Harry Potter before it, it seemed like the incredibly hyped Twilight saga could never be translated to the movie screen without a cacophony of criticism - but director Catherine Hardwicke actually does a very respectable job.

Just as in the novel by Stephanie Meyer, the movie of Twilight opens with transplanted teen Bella adjusting to her new life in rainy Forks, Wa. It's a long way from the blazing sunshine of Arizona that she's used to.

Bella, played rather morosely by Kristen Stewart, seems like an intensely unlikeable girl - rude, dismissive and practically monosyllabic. Yet she effortlessly attracts the friendship of the school's cool 'clique,' plus the eye of sullen, solitary Edward Cullen - the high school heart-throb who all the girls in Forks are lusting after.

After a tedious courtship, Bella discovers the truth about Edward - he and his family are vampires, living in seclusion and surviving off a 'vegetarian' diet of woodland animals. Bella worms her way into the affections of Edward's family and they're the ones she turns too when a roguish trio of bloodthirsty bloodsuckers roll up in town with Bella on the top of their 'to bite' list.

The Cullen Clan - Hitler's Aryan ambitions finally find fruition.

Twilight is a fun, flimsy fantasy. It's a fairly faithful adaptation of the novel, but because the book was so emotive and introspective, it leaves the final script feeling a little lightweight. Some of the plotting is jiggled about to make the arrival of the 'bad' vampires more ominous, but the ending still feels like a bit of an anti-climax. The bad vampire, James, is grossly outnumbered by Edward's family and that deflates the dramatic tension.

Bad vampire 'James' makes a very bad decision picking a fight against all five Cullens

Much better is the cinematography - Hardwicke makes use of Washington's rainswept beauty almost reverentially. The screen comes alive with green and grey and you can almost smell the fresh rain and pine needles as you watch it.

Washington State - very pretty (but don't forget your umbrella)

Robert Pattinson, the quintessential teen-throb playing Edward, is also excellent. Despite being a British actor, best known for playing ill-fated student Cedric Diggory in the Harry Potter saga, Pattinson's American accent is flawless and he broods with sizzling intensity.

Catherine Hardwicke's loyalty to the source material actually highlights some of the flaws in the Twilight saga. Bella and Edward's love affair seems trite and inconsequential, while the emphasis on physical beauty and material possessions seems rather shallow (Edward drives a sexy Volvo C30 and his family live in a gorgeous Skylab Architecture house.)

The 'Hoke' house by Skylab Architecture. Don't give them a hard time about the landscaping (or lack of it.) If all seven Cullens live in this two bedroom, they're obviously not that well off.

Nevertheless, fans of the saga will have already made peace with its more debatable details and will probably be thrilled that the entire movie sticks so closely to the story.

Nobody can deny that Stephanie Meyer's novel resonated with an immense audience - I believe much of what made it popular has been translated into the movie adaptation, too.

Twilight, starring Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson, is available from Amazon for $17.99

'New Moon' trailer snaps teenage knicker-elastic all across America

Today, fans of Stephanie Meyer's 'Twilight' saga were in official 'fan squeeee!' mode.

(For the benefit of Siger - a 'fan squeee' is the high pitched 'squeee' that emerges from a fan's mouth upon discovery of new or exciting material pertinent to their particular obsession.)

The reason for their excitement? The trailer of the latest adaptation of the Twilight books - New Moon - hit the Intertubes with a vengeance.

Read my dissection of the Twilight saga here.

In many ways, New Moon is both the best and the worst of the Twilight books. It's terrible because it sees snotty schoolgirl Bella Swan disintegrate into utter patheticness when she's dumped by pallid, prissy boyfriend Edward. (Apparently, vampire Edward doesn't trust himself or his family not to drain Bella of blood like a carton of Ribena.)

But while Bella is moping about, the book steps up a notch by following the saga of cheerful Native American 'Jacob,' played in the movie by a surprisingly buffed-out Taylor Lautner.

A love triangle, werewolves, motor cycles and cliff-diving make Jacob's antics far more exciting than the dreary romance between Bella and Edward - which is why New Moon promises to be even better than entertaining adaptation of the original Twilight.

Ask Militant Ginger

It's that time again! Another delve into the keyword questions that drove people to Militant Ginger.

Is Princess Diana more annoying dead than alive?

I don’t know – that’s a tough one to call. I would have to make a judgment call and say yes; because while the poor woman was still alive, at least the incessant media coverage about her was mitigated by the fact that ‘shedidaloddagudworkfurcharidy, mate.’

These days, she’s still rarely off the telly in one form or another (mostly conspiracy shows about her ‘murder’) but no longer contributes to children with AIDs or digging up landmines or anything jolly like that.

So incessant media attention MINUS charitable contributions EQUALS more annoying than ever.

What’s the Bluetooth Headset Captain Jack wears in Torchwood?

Sorry to disappoint you, guys – but Captain Jack’s stylish Bluetooth headset from the mediocre mess that was BBC’s Torchwood was actually a one-of-a-kind prop made from toilet rolls and washing up bottles in the BBC props department.

Ianto, Owen and the others, however, did use a real brand – the Jabra BT250v . You can get your own here.



Why do Christians hate gay people?

Christians technically don’t hate gay people.

Certain people claiming to be Christians (i.e. certain Evangelical groups) hate gay people, but they have as much to do with Christianity as Mormonism does. [Congrats, Militant Ginger. You managed to insult two religious demographics in a single sentence – Editorial Bear]

The truth be told, the official line is that no Christian ‘hates’ gay people. They just believe, rightly or wrongly [Erm, wrongly – Editorial Bear] that homosexuality is unnatural (despite it being practiced by a recorded 1,800 species of animals) and a sin against God.

They don’t hate the sinner, they hate the sin. This distinction does seem to confuse some Christians, hence the problems – but ‘hate’ is not the official line.

Anyway. While God was pretty clear on the matter (read Leviticus) his son, Jesus, was kind of ambivalent – a little like President Obama.

It’s possible to make a pretty convincing case against homosexuality using New Testament scripture (CK whipped me in this debate, so I have to give credit where it’s due) although I believe that Jesus was more about the ‘love your neighbor’ part of his belief system, rather than whether or not being gay was cool.

ибупрофен vs нурофен

I don’t even know what this means – nor do I know why it brought somebody to my blog! But I hope it has something to do with sexy Russian ladies in uniform.

I am so objectifying this lady right now.

Did Stephanie Meyer plagiarize Charlaine Harris?

Charlaine Harris, who wrote the Sookie Stackhouse series of vampire books, is often credited as the inspiration for Twilight. People have even accused Meyer of plagiarizing Harris directly – one commentor on this blog wrote “All you have to do is read Charlaine Harris' Sookie Stackhouse series and L.J. Smith's Vampire Diaries and there's the whole storyline in all 4 of the Twilight books. Someone needs to sue this woman because she's just getting credit for what others have done and watering it down into her disgusting version. It's NOT FAIR!”

Personally, I think it’s difficult to accuse Stephanie Meyer of plagiarism, because the whole vampire genre is SO trite and derivative that there hasn’t been an original work of vampire-inspired fiction for decades. In fact, Meyer managed to inject a rare bit of originality into the genre by mixing it with the romantic tribulations of a narcissistic, self-obsessed teenager AND in making the whole series of books a clumsy metaphor for abstinence.

So, good for her.




Why can’t antibiotics cure the common cold?

One of the most annoying things about living in America is how people will rush to the doctors for a prescription of antibiotics as soon as they have the sniffles.

These people are retarded. They’re the idiots breeding antibiotic-resistant bacteria and driving up the cost of medical insurance. They’re too ignorant to research one of the most basic facts of modern medicine: Colds and flu are caused by viruses.

Antibiotics only treat bacteria. Taking antibiotics to cure your cold is utterly useless.

In fact, it’s more likely to make you sick than better, as each time you take antibiotics you perform a neat little holocaust of all the ‘good’ bacteria in your gut and screw up your digestion.

We can’t only hold the deeply stupid people who wolf down the pills responsible, though. Seriously lazy doctors have got into the habit of filling in these idiot’s prescriptions because it takes ten minutes to convince them that antibiotics are a waste of time, and just thirty seconds to give them the prescription they stupidly crave.

Educating the masses and convincing doctors not to pander to hypochondriacs is vitally important - unless we fancy all falling victim to an antibiotic-resistant super-bacteria five years in the future (hey, that's an idea for a book!)

The law, morality and Twilight by Stephanie Meyer

That’s not even a question. That sounds like the title of an undergraduate literature dissertation.

Twilight kind of went like this

Why do pirates wear eye patches?

Most people think pirates wore eye-patches to cover the hole in their skull where an eyeball used to be (remember, kids – cutlass fights are all well and good – right up until somebody loses an eye!)

But actually, patches were an essential accessory for bi-optic buccaneers as well.

On the sun-drenched seas of the Caribbean, an eye-patch was used during ship-to-ship combat. When a pirate descended into the bowels of a ship to loot the booty, he’d step from the sunshine on deck to the murky darkness of the unlit hold. As you’ll know if you’d ever had somebody shine a flashlight into your eyes, that renders you instantly blind – as it takes valuable minutes to build up ‘night vision’ after being in a well-lit environment.

Pirates would wear an eye-patch to force one eye to adjust to low-light conditions, so when they thundered downstairs into the lower decks of a raided galleon, they could lift their ‘patch’ and immediately see clearly in the darkness, without having to wait for their eyesight to adjust (which might lead to an adversary running them through in the mean time.)

It’s a good trick to remember. If you’re ever sneaking about outside, always keep one eye closed, so if the lights come on, or somebody shines a flashlight in your face, your ‘night vision’ won’t immediately vanish, leaving you temporarily blinded as soon as darkness falls again.

Which is better Nurofen or ibuprofen?

They’re both the same thing! Nurofen is an expensive brand-name pill that contains 200mg of ibuprofen – exactly the same dosage as the cheap, generic brand (but three times more expensive.)

Aside from an easy-to-swallow coating, they are exactly the same product – so use your noggin and plump for the generic pill when you get the chance. Anybody who tells you that brand-name pills have a ‘superior blend’ or similar rubbish are just buying into the hype.

Same drug, same thing – the only difference is whether you keep the difference in price, or you ‘donate’ it to a pharmaceutical giant (and believe me, baby, their profit margins make the oil industry look positively pauperish by comparison.)

Smith Cho drinks tequila in Knight Rider?

The delectable Smith Cho was one of the stars of Knight Rider’s aborted relaunch. In fact, as far as I was concerned, she was the star. Cute and funny and a mouthwatering sight in a bikini, she should have kept that show on the air even if Val Kilmer’s smooth-talking Ford Mustang didn’t.

There were other memorable parts of this episode - I just don't remember them

Anyway. In the third episode, Knight of the Iguana, our intrepid crew try to track down a stolen missile and to that end, Smith’s character – Zoe – poses as the hero’s wife and pours a bottle of tequila down him. It’s left ambiguous whether or not they got up to some tequila-fueled mischief later that evening - but I’d be thoroughly disappointed in the new ‘Michael Knight’ if he hadn’t! Girls like Smith Cho don’t come along very often.



Sweet, safe, grown-up pit bulls for sale?

If you’d read this post, you’d probably have realized that I’m not entirely convinced that pit bulls are ever entirely ‘safe.’ All dogs have the capacity to be dangerous - my wife was mauled by a tiny terrier when she was little - but I do believe that pit bulls are inherently more dangerous than most.

They're still beautiful animals, though.

Pit Bull - Bad dog, or just bad publicity?

In ‘Burn Notice’, what was the waist leather bag Fiona wears?



Fiona Glenanne, the former IRA assassin and femme fatale of USA’s Burn Notice, wears a Leather Hip Bag during some of her more dangerous missions and you can get one of your very own here.

Did Stephanie Meyer support Proposition 8?

Stephanie Meyer's 'Twilight' saga has been wildly successful - especially amongst an audience that embraces romance, the supernatural and the concept of 'true love will out.'

Which is why Stephanie Meyer's publicity hounds are scrambling desperately to cover up accusations that Meyer, a devout Mormon who attended Brigham Young university in Salt Lake City*, donated a 'substantial' amount of money in support of 'Proposition 8.'

Prop 8, as I'm sure you already know, was the controversial voter referendum in California, which amended the constitution to redefine marriage as 'between a man and a woman' - thus rendering 18,000 same-sex unions null and void and banning gay marriage for the foreseeable future.

(The California supreme court upheld the amendment on appeal, but legitimized the 18,000 existing marriages.)

This isn't exactly surprising. 45% of out-of-state donations in support of Proposition 8 came from Utah, while 80% to 90% of all door-to-door campaigning against Gay Marriage was carried out by Mormons and members of the Church of Latter Day Saints**.

In all, Mormons donated approximately $20 million dollars to ban same-sex unions in California (some families donated their life savings and their kid's college funds.)

At the very least, a significant amount of money from Meyer's 10% 'tithe' she pays to the Mormon church would have been used to support Proposition 8.

However, accusations still abound that she donated more money directly to the campaign.

In any event, I know this would upset many fans of the 'Twilight' saga.

Most of the ones I know were avid opponents of Proposition 8 and would be very disappointed to learn that Meyer's romanticized version of 'true love' only extends to those of different genders.

NB - Bob, of the blog The Mormons Are Coming! refuted my claim in his blog post 'Did Twilight Fans Help Pass Prop 8?' He points out that no cash contributions were made to the 'Yes on Prop 8' campaign by the church. That being said, over $190,000 of 'in-kind' services were donated in direct support of Proposition 8 - which still leaves their members (including Meyer) culpable.

* ...actually Provo, Utah, an hour south of Salt Lake City, as corrected by the lovely Ashley - Kitty Copy Editor
** ...actually the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as corrected by Ashley - Kitty Copy Editor

Stephen King on Twilight

Stephen King raised a few eyebrows recently by claiming that Stephanie Meyer, author of the popular 'Twilight' series of books, doesn't deserve to inherit J.K. Rowling's 'teen queen' crown.

"Both Rowling and Meyer, they're speaking directly to young people... The real difference is that Jo Rowling is a terrific writer and Stephenie Meyer can't write worth a darn. She's not very good."

Having just read Stephen King's memoir, On Writing, I am no stranger to the caustic remarks he reserves for some overrated authors (along with praise for his favorites.)

However this assassination is particularly interesting, since Stephanie Meyer's 'Twilight' series of books take more than a few pointers from King himself - He's not credited nearly often enough with reinventing the vampire genre in his 1975 novel 'Salem's Lot.

That being said, his attack on Meyer wasn't as brutal as it could have been - he gives her kudos for (bad?) writing that still proves incredibly compelling for its intended audience:

"She's writing to a whole generation of girls and opening up a kind of 'safe' joining of love and sex. It's exciting and it's thrilling, but it's not particularly threatening because it's not overtly sexual."

"A lot of the physicality is conveyed in ways, for example, like how the vampire will touch [Bella's] forearm or run a hand over her skin, and she just flushes all hot and cold. And for girls, that's a shorthand for all the feelings that they're not ready to deal with yet."

I find the whole spat rather fascinating, since King's attack on Meyer mirrors many criticisms made about his own writing over the years. Stephen King is a simply brilliant author, but for decades, his writing was dismissed as populist 'schlock' because it had the audacity to sell well.

It seems there's still a certain snobbery in the publishing industry - books that appeal to a wide audience and sell well are never taken seriously by the literati. There's 'literary' fiction (the stuff that wins Booker prizes) and 'popular' fiction (the stuff that sells millions of copies.) A powerful lobby within the publishing industry makes sure that 'never the twain shall meet.'

Stephen King represents just one of the authors who bridges the divide between literary and populist fiction. Books like The Dark Tower and The Stand are astonishingly complex masterpieces that just happen to appeal to a huge audience.

Seeing how King has been dismissed so often for his popularity, it seems somewhat unsportsmanlike to lay into Stephanie Meyer for exactly the same reason!

But then again, even by the most generous standards, Stephanie Meyer is no Stephen King.

Internet Leak Kills Twilight Series

It's not the next Harry Potter, but for many teenagers (and not-so-teenagers) the latest book sensation is Stephanie Meyer's 'Twilight' series.

A product of the post Anne Rice / Buffy the Vampire Slayer generation, Twilight tells the story of Bella, who is caught in a love triangle between centuries old vampire Edward and young and sexy werewolf Jacob.

The four part series recently concluded with 'Breaking Dawn,' which hit book stores like an atom bomb (I was at one of the launches.)

Breaking Dawn finally saw the love triangle resolved and a thousand teenage girls either wept in joy or cried in anguish depending on which monster they were rooting for (Jacob seemed the fan favourite.)

Author Stephanie Meyer had planned to follow up Breaking Dawn with another book - a not-quite-sequel which told the same story from the eyes of different characters. However, this eagerly anticipated project's now been killed - ever since a partially complete draft of the manuscript was leaked onto the Internet.

"The manuscript that was illegally distributed on the Internet was only given to trusted individuals," Meyer explained. She claims to have "a good idea of how the leak happened, as so few copies had left my hands and each one was unique."

"This has been a very upsetting experience for me. I feel too sad about what has happened to continue working on Midnight Sun and so it is on hold - indefinitely."

Cue the wailing of those teenage fans again...

Stephanie Meyer plagiarized Twilight?

Fans of Stephanie Meyer's seminal 'Twilight' saga were in for a shock today: They learned that the popular author was being accused of plagiarism by a former college roommate.

"She got those ideas from me," snapped stay-at-home mum Heidi Stanton, "I wrote a fictional short story with the same ideas when we were in college together!"

Given just how pervasive the Twilight phenomenon has been, it seems somewhat incredulous that Heidi could have been completely oblivious to her roommate's fame for the last half-decade - or, at least, to the four-book Vampire saga that some have labeled 'the new Harry Potter.'

Nevertheless, the mother of four has filed papers in Salt Lake City. Subsequently, production of the movie version of Meyer's second book, 'New Moon,' has been halted until this situation is resolved.

Is there any validity to Stanton's claim?

"Yes," says Doctor Peter Benton, who taught Heidi while she and Meyer were students at Brigham Young University.

"She did write a vampire story that stood out in my mind, at the time, because it was more advanced than most sophmore students usually presented," Benton claims. "Also, the vampire theme stood out because I had recently taught a series of lectures on Brahm Stoker's Dracula."

Whatever the contents of that short story, it's tenuous to believe that Stephanie Meyer could have spun that yarn out across four large books.

Hate it or love it, Meyer's saga resonates with a vast (mostly female) audience and it's difficult to believe that she owes all of that to a couple of pages written by her roommate in the early nineties.

Besides, who exactly owns the copyright on vampires?

But this is America - the most litigious nation on Earth. What's right, wrong or even factual in most civil court cases falls to the wayside when hungry lawyers and greedy plaintiffs spot what's really at stake - a big, fat chunk of somebody else's money.

I'm no great fan of Stephanie Meyer and her Mormon-inspired melodramas, but I certainly don't think these allegations ring true.

Ask Militant Ginger

It’s that time again! When I trawl the search engine keywords that have directed readers my way!

Who is the fittest ginger?

Do you mean the British definition of ‘fit’ – as in ‘attractive’, or the more pedestrian definition, of the ‘most athletic.’ Since ‘ginger’ is a British term, I’ll assume the former.

Well, it’s a pretty subjective question. At the moment, I think it’s worth arguing that Rupert Grint – who plays Ron Weasely in the Harry Potter movies – is probably the world’s number-one ginger sex-symbol. In a recent poll, over 60% of ladies voted for him.

Is Rupert Grint the world's sexiest ginger? 60% of women say 'I guess!'

In terms of women, there’s no doubt about it – Christina Hendricks, from Firefly and Mad Men – rocks the kasbar as the world’s hottest redhead.

She’s peaking all the Google search statistics at the moment - and is generally accepted as the most gorgeous thing on television – despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that she’s built with the kind of curves that the fashion industry fell out of love with back in the Mad Men-era of the 1960s.

I love her. She’s stunning.

Christina Hendricks... No witty caption required.

Did Stephenie Meyer contribute to California’s Proposition 8?

‘Proposition Hate’ is what many people call the referendum in California which reversed the Supreme Court’s decision to allow same-sex marriages.

The ‘sanctity of marriage’ crusade was largely sponsored by the Mormon church, who donated millions for advertising campaigns and lobbying to get the bill passed (including this family, who spent their life savings.)

[I'd just like to point out that not all Mormons feel this way, nor should they be thrown in with the lot who do - Editorial Bear]

The fact that Stephanie Meyer, author of the wildly popular Twilight series, is a devout Mormon has raised many questions about her feelings towards same-sex marriage. Many of Twilight's biggest fans are the sort of people who support marriage equality – and they’d be understandably upset if the author of their favorite books was part of a crusade against the values they passionately believe in.

Well, I haven’t found any evidence that Stephanie Meyer directly supported Proposition 8 – and nor did I find anything suggesting the church to which she ‘tithes’ 10% of her income gave any cash to the cause.

However, that church DID donate over $190,000 in ‘in-kind’ services to people lobbying to get Proposition 8 passed, which is pretty strong evidence to support the assumption that Stephanie Meyer is against same-sex marriage.

Her church was very vocal in their opposition to marriage equality – and she never stood up to vocalize any disagreement with that - so in this case, her silence is as incriminating as any financial paper trail.

Help! My BeerMachine always produces cloudy beer!

Yours and mine both, mate! Having spent many years brewing with the Beer Machine, I’ve yet to create a crisp, clear batch of beer yet (but it's still delicious.)

The Beer Machine - not as easy as it makes it sound, but delicious never the less

However, through years of brewing, I have found the following hints have definitely improved the clarity of the beer I’ve made:

1. Thoroughly wash, disinfect and rinse your Beer Machine prior to making a new ‘batch.’ Totally disassemble the machine and scrub it to remove any and all traces of previous brews. Then, after reassembling the machine, fill it with a mild mix of bleach and very hot water and seal it. Test the seal by using a CO2 cartridge. Leave the bleach in the Beer Machine for at least twenty four hours, then rinse it thoroughly with cold water several times. This will kill any foreign bacteria that might be contaminating your beer.
2. Keep it steady! During the initial five-day fermentation, silt and sediment will sink to the bottom of the Beer Machine. When your fermentation is complete (when air stops bubbling from the pressure relief valve on top of the Beer Machine) move it AS GENTLY AS POSSIBLE to the fridge. The more you shake the Beer Machine up, the more silt will be disturbed – and anybody who’s worked in a pub will tell you that once you’ve ‘clouded up’ a beer, it’s impossible to put right again.
3. The cold-filtering period, when your Beer Machine sits in the fridge, is when it will get to its clearest. Make sure the fridge is cool enough (3 or 4 is a good setting) and leave it utterly undisturbed for a minimum of seven days (I recommend ten – three more than the instructions dictate.) Remember, any shift will swill up the sediment and cloud your beer. If you can keep it absolutely still, you can probably produce a fairly clear batch.
   

To produce a perfect brew, you have a couple of other options. One is a dedicated fridge – switch it off, with the door open, during the initial five-day ferment, so the Beer Machine can process the sugar into alcohol. Then, switch on the fridge and close the door. You’ll be able to start a dedicated cold filtration without moving the Beer Machine at all, meaning you won’t disturb the sediment.

The other alternative? Two fermentations. Run your Beer Machine as usual during the first fermentation – brewing the first batch of beer until the pressure relief valve stops bubbling.

Then, instead of moving the entire machine to the fridge, pour the fermented beer into a series of individual bottles – I recommend plastic, one-liter bottles, like Seltzer water comes in (it doesn’t look cool, but there is a method to my madness as I’ll explain.)

Once you’ve separated your beer into bottles, throw in two of these – carbonation tablets. These are basically sugar lumps, which give the dormant yeast contained in the beer a new source of food to chow down on.

Leave the bottled beer out in room temperature (70-77 degrees) for five days. Your beer will be going through a secondary fermentation, as evidenced by the plastic bottles swelling up. Your beer is basically carbonating itself, plus the alcohol content is increasing.

After five days, transfer the bottles to your fridge and let them chill for ten days. The sediment in the bottles will sink to the bottom – just like it proper ‘artisan’ style beer. After ten days, your beer should be dramatically clearer than using the Beer Machine, as well as delightfully fizzy and a lot stronger than normal.

Just remember to leave the ‘dregs’ in the bottom of the bottle when you pour it, otherwise you’ll dump the sediment into the glass.

Happy brewing!

Was Cameron the Terminator, from Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, a virgin?

Erm. What?

For those of you unfamiliar with Cameron, she was a character in Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles - a promising, but short-lived sci-fi series based on the hit movies.

In the show, Firefly alumni Summer Glau played Cameron - a sexy Terminator sent back in time to protect savior-of-the-world John Connor from robot assassins.

Summer Glau is a fan-boy favorite and the show featured plenty of implied nudity to prove that SkyNet, when they created Cameron, were working off some primo blueprints (the only improvement would have been to base her off Christina Hendricks.)

But although there was an implied relationship between John and Cameron in the series, let’s not surrender to fan-boy fantasy. In the TV series she was a robot. A killer robot. A killer robot sent back in time, designed by a self-aware computer virus that detested humanity!

While they did everything they could to make her blend in – by giving her a perky set of breasts and a tight, round rump, as revealed in the various implied nude scenes – it is very doubtful that they ‘completed’ the illusion.

And if that’s too vague an answer, I’ll clarify – underneath her panties, she was probably ‘equipped’ like an Action Man or Barbie Doll. She was a robot, for God’s sake!

Saving the future? Easy. Keeping your clothes on? Not so simple!

Then again, Editorial Bear is nudging my elbow to remind me that one of the terminator robots they ran across in the series was ‘equipped’ for duty – and had posed as a woman’s husband for several months (which implies they were intimate on more than one occasion.)

Given that nugget of information – and based on where the series had been taking John and Cameron’s relationship – I’m now wondering if Cameron did come with the ‘equipment’ necessary to consummate a relationship.

If so, I worry deeply about the mental health of the show’s writers and am now secretly pleased that it was canceled! Crikey – some people!