Now, to be fair, it was before being a Twihard was a mainstream thing and I immediately saw the light the second I turned the last page on Eclipse and managed to get off the bandwagon months before the first film was released. Since then I've been like a lot of people. poking fun at the series and it's very enthusiastic fans while criticizing it for its sexist, somewhat racist, and just plain problematic contents.
Except, lately, I've been seeing Twilight with new eyes.
Recently, I read a blog post arguing against Bella's position as an anti-feminist figure. The author argues Bella is not anti-feminist because she exercises her freedom of choice. She chooses to to value the role of wife and mother over others. This is one part of Bella that seems to bother people - the fact that she chose a life with Edward over a "normal" life without him. Instead of celebrating the fact that she is allowed to make such a choice, we criticize her for making it.
Then there is the issue of Bella's behavior in New Moon.
After Edward leaves her (for her own protection), Bella falls into a deep depression. The novel famously has four chapters consisting only of "October", "November", "December", and "January", signifying the passage of time and Bella's inactivity. During her depression Bella suffers from night terrors and engages in some extremely risky behavior because in the moments nearest death she is able to see glimpses of Edward. I think people's criticism can be summed up in this meme:
Meanwhile, the argument for Bella can be best illustrated by this post.
Despite all of the Bella-bashing, this Gothic heroine is allowed to do something certain other heroines are criticized for doing - she is allowed to be transformed.
In my first post I talked about how the ending for the theatrical version of Hannibal differs from the novel's ending. Basically, in the novel Lecter and Starling become romantically involved after Starling undergoes a transformation; going from a traditional classical heroine to a Gothic Bride. In the film Starling undergoes no such transformation; instead we leave her standing on the edge of one with her Gothic ending a distant sight on the horizon.
I can't help but wonder why, despite her critics, Bella is allowed to be transformed into a vampire with much consequence while Starling's turn is branded as character assassination. Is it okay for Bella to turn because it's deemed as being "in-character" for her to do so? Is it because Starling's status as a feminist heroine was established from the get-go while Bella's is still in flux? Or was the foundation for her foundation just not made clear enough for the audience to follow?
Why is Bella allowed to be transformed while Starling isn't?
Bella, Edward, and Jacob are descendents of a long line of Gothic tradition - the Maiden, the Shadow, and the Suitor. Yes, Jacob is a werewolf (which serves to throw an almost subversive edge to the series), but if Bella were to choose him then at least she wouldn't be one of the undead. I think this is one of the many reasons why Bella is allowed to choose Edward and become transformed. With either choice she makes she is still remaining in the realm of Other. We already expect Bella to make some sort of transformation, to grow up a little and become something else.
I think one thing audience members failed to grasp is the fact that, when we first meet her, Starling is already existing in the realm of Other simply because of her sex. She is a woman inhabiting a man's world, trying to work in field populated by men who see her as something different, something Other.
If anything, Starling is more deserving of her transformation. Hers has been a long time coming, subtly (maybe too much so) established in The Silence of the Lambs and achieved in Hannibal.
In Art of Darkness: A Poetics of Gothic Anne Williams states "The Female Gothic plot is a version of Beauty and the Beast." Bella and Starling are both Female Gothic heroines. The difference between them and say Jane Eyre or Christine Daaé is that they are the ones transformed and not their respective beasts. They both undergo changes as a result of their choosing to follow their natures and not doing what has been expected of them and yet they are both criticized for doing so.
Is it must me, or does that just not seem fair?
No comments:
Post a Comment