Last month, I had a craving and like Edward Cullen stalking Bella Swan, I just couldn’t resist!

I’m a decade late to the party but..I completed the Twilight Saga by Stephenie Meyer - except the spin-offs, including the latest and long-awaited Midnight Sun (I ran out of time and my girlfriend was still reading it at the end of the month. Plus, I needed a break, okay. This was a lot.)

Technically, I only read 2, 3 and 4 in September, but I’m going to be talking about all of them in-depth and see if I can make any sense of them.

Right back at the start of lockdown (7 months ago! Can you believe it?!), I gave into my curiosity and watched the adaptation of the first book. I know, I know, blasphemy, you’re not supposed to watch the movie before you read the book, it’s the other way round.

But watching the movie made me want to read the book. And to be honest, I never thought I’d do either.

You see, the Twilight craze hit its height when I was a teenager and I was too cool for it (ironically being nowhere near cool myself). It was emo and it was for girls. I even remember going so far as sitting in another room and putting my headphones on while my best friend watched the movie with my family. He’d been suckered (ey, geddit?) into it by his mum and sister - was there no hope?!

As the years went by I gained valid reasons for hating it. For instance, finding out Jacob imprints himself on Bella’s daughter. Basically meaning, because he was lead on and friendzoned, he lays claim on her child and waits till she’s old enough to have her - which wouldn’t be long because she aged quickly!

This is just one example of the many weird and problematic things I learned happened in the series and it made me feel morally superior - “I don’t have to read it to know it’s problematic!”

But as they say, you can’t judge a book by the things you read about it - even if they are true. So when I rant about the issues I and many others have, at least I can now boast that yes, I have read the books, actually.

Firstly, I want to say, beyond anything, the Twilight Saga perfectly encapsulates what it’s like to be a teenager. To be in your first relationship. To be in love for the first time.

Twilight is often described as “emo” as an insult and yeah, it is “emo” but you know what? Emo just means emotional. Expressive. I don’t see that as an insult. And it’s such a strong tone that works in service of the characters.

Intentional or not, Stephenie Meyer nails how intense teenagers can be. Their angst, their moodiness. How the most trivial things are the most important things in the world. How their first heartbreak is the end of the world.

In all four novels, she captures just how small a teenager’s world really is by throwing her overly-sensitive, sheltered protagonist into a bigger, scarier one.

What’s interesting is Twilight is one of the rare occasions where even the fans don’t like the main character.

Sure, Bella might not be the most interesting character in the saga but she’s kinda relatable. Teenage girls’ lives are heightened enough without throwing attractive vampires and werewolves who fancy them into the mix. Twilight is a wish-fulfilment fantasy and I don’t blame Bella for being constantly overwhelmed and overdramatic.

She’s often criticised for not having a personality and her life only revolving around the two boys who love her but...yeah? That’s kinda the plot. And that’s exactly what teenage lives often revolve around.

Anyway, Bella does have identifiable traits - even if that is mainly being a drama queen - but I’d argue her blank canvas personality makes her great as our POV. She’s our way into this mysterious world and we can project on her.

Ironically, Kristen Stewart has historically been given a lot of flack for her “emotionless” portrayal in the movies and to this day, whenever she comes up in conversation, people still say she “can’t smile”. But you know what? She plays Bella exactly as she’s written. Same for Robert Pattinson and Edward. They’re working with the material the best they can, they way they interpret it. In the years since those movies, we’ve realised they’re bloody good actors and they knew how silly Twilight was. And their real-life romance really feeds into their chemistry onscreen, making it easier to root for Team Edward.

Speaking of which, for the first half of the series I was fully Team Jacob for the simple fact he was nicer than Edward.

The difference between how Bella describes Jacob and Edward in New Moon is dramatic to say the least. With Jacob, Bella is always happy and full of butterflies, he cares for her, he’s gentle with her. She oftens describes him as her warm ray of sunshine.

On the other, colder hand, Edward is initially always emotionally (and physically, to emphasise) hard and distant. He claims to love Bella but is always shouting at her, pushing and carrying her around. He hurts her (unintentional or not he knows his own superhuman strength), he gaslights her, he’s perpetually angry. He’s always frowning and crushing Bella’s lips. Basically, he’s described like an abusive villain and for some reason, women love this? They see Edward as the ideal man - because he’s polite? He’s cultured? He lives purely for Bella?

I think - no, I know, from common sense, from my own personal experiences, that Bella and Edward’s relationship in the first two books is toxic. You can argue Meyer glorifies/romanticises how Edward stalks Bella and controls her life for her “own safety” (and 50 Shades of Grey definitely fetishises this) and you’d be right in a sense. But I’d like to argue, it is a commentary on how unfortunately many first relationships can be toxic, how the vampirism is an on-the-nose metaphor, and that in the second half of the series, Meyer is fully aware of how Edward may be received and redeems him to the point where I switched teams by the end of book three, Eclipse. No, really.

Now, Twilight does not shy away from acknowledging its metaphors and influences. One of Bella’s interests that she shares with Edward, simply because he’s old as fuck, is liking classic literature. In New Moon, she compares them to Romeo and Juliet and in Eclipse to Heathcliff and Cathy from Wuthering Heights. Meyer does this because they’re two of the most iconic romantic couples in fiction and inspired her. But to me, they’re also two of the most problematic and toxic and Meyer seems to acknowledge that too.

For instance, Edward hates both books, as if he’s aware of the similarities and doesn’t want to think of himself as hurting Bella, whether indirect or otherwise. But in New Moon, he ends up recreating Romeo and Juliet, by intending to get himself killed after he thinks Bella is dead (from the most contrived, dumbest misunderstanding in fiction of all time). He claims he did it because he couldn’t live without Bella but denies it was out of guilt. But his actions in the next two books beg to differ.

In New Moon, Edward literally abandoned Bella in a forest on her own, where she is found hours later in the cold and rain, to “protect her” by staying away. But in Eclipse, after finding out Bella fell into depression for months (the best part of New Moon!) he admits that was wrong and spends the rest of the series apologising and making up for it.

Unlike its classic counterparts, tragedy is averted in books three and four and Edward spends Eclipse actively trying not to be like the broody Heathcliff. By the end of the book, he accepts Bella’s choice to be turned into a vampire, meaning she won’t die and he won’t be left alone. They aren’t like Wuthering Heights after all.

By Breaking Dawn, Edward is letting Bella do whatever she wants. He’s gone from breaking her car in New Moon so she can’t see Jacob to training her to take a lead role in a potential battle against an army of vampires. After realising he broke her heart, he becomes more open and affectionate, he doesn’t keep any secrets, he keeps her in the loop and is only angry with her for valid reasons.

He also says he won’t stand in the way if he wants to be with Jacob. He turns from being a controlling boyfriend who won’t let her see her friend, to being the bigger man.

One of my favourite things about the third and fourth books is Edward and Jacob’s blossoming bromance. How they put aside their differences and rather than fight each other, agree what’s best for Bella is up to her. Their talk in the tent in Eclipse is probably my favourite sequence in the series - even if it feels like fanfiction and there’s gonna be a threesome.

But as hot as it is to imagine the actors cast to play those parts in that scenario, by this point in the books, I’d gone from Team Jacob to hating Jacob.

As if to make sure readers got behind Edward after his shitty disappearing act in New Moon, Meyer doubled-down on Jacob’s pushy-can’t-take-no-for-an-answer behaviour. Edward was always forceful, with his iron grip and crushing lips but that’s because he’s got vampire strength and Bella is a puny human. But at least he didn’t physically force Bella to kiss him or emotionally manipulate her or get literally too close for comfort and rub it in front of her boyfriend’s face.

Unfortunately, the lovely Jacob becomes a rapey douchey frat bro who can’t accept Bella has chosen Edward. Arguably, she gives him mixed signals but she does repeatedly say she just wants to be friends and still wants him in her life.

By the end of Breaking Dawn, he backs off but only because he imprints on Bella’s daughter, which is creepy but kinda makes sense in context? Like, it’d be sweet for him to join the Cullen family as a babysitter if we didn’t know he was definitely going to screw said baby when she grew up. Justify it any way you will, it’s still weird. But maybe not as weird as Meyer naming Jacob AFTER HER BROTHER. I know Bella says she sees Jacob that way but this is also in the same book where he’s the main romantic interest.

Side note, I respect the balls on Meyer, and anyone who follows up something insanely popular, for ripping away the happy ending of the first book and separating Bella and Edward. I know it was to set up the love triangle the series is famous for but it’s a bold move in general to make the eventual love interest so flawed.

Arguably, Twilight joins the ranks of toxic couples in fiction, like Heatchcliff and Cathy and the Joker and Harley, and even spawned the more explicitly problematic Christian Grey and Anastasia Steele. But when you think about it, Edward’s, and Jacob’s behaviour make sense. They’re both (relatively) young, they’re new to girls and relationships. They’re a vampire and werewolf so of course their emotions and strength are heightened. And they live in a dangerous world, so of course they’ll take what they deem necessary precautions to protect an often reckless and gullible Bella.

In the end, Edward, and Jacob to a degree, learn from their mistakes, and through loving Bella, improve themselves The Twilight Saga shows that all people, vampires and werewolves alike, are flawed and do bad things, like engage in toxic and abusive behaviour, but through patience, can change and redeem themselves

Edward and Jacob have the biggest arcs in the series and I like how Twilight prioritises such character work over action you’d see elsewhere in the genre. A lot of people would probably get bored with 400-odd pages of characters sitting around talking about hypothetical situations, but that’s why Breaking Dawn is my favourite of the quadrilogy. Changing narrators and shifting to Jacob’s perspective for a large chunk of the last book in the series was another ballsy move on Meyer’s part but it kept things fresh and exciting and giving us an insight into Jacob’s head helped soften me on him again.

You’d be right to say the Twilight Saga romanticises and justifies bad boyfriends but I like to think it goes deeper than that, whether Stephenie Meyer meant it or not. I mean, she’s clearly got her wits about her. Contrary to what you might think, she sees the Saga as feminist. And I agree. Not only is Bella a true and vulnerable depiction of women, everything hinges on her choices, whether it’s about turning into a vampire, getting married or having sex.

Now, I hear you, the choices she makes are often Christian - she waits til marriage to have sex, she keeps her baby even though it might kill her etc. - and this could be considered an agenda because Meyer is Mormon and as organised religion is a product of the patriarchy then Meyer and the books can’t be feminist. But, as well as making sense within the narrative, these are still Bella’s choices and they are not directly informed by her having any religious belief. And at the end of the day, just because Twilight is imbued with Meyer’s, doesn’t mean we have to agree with her. Every piece of art is created by an individual and their opinions and you don’t have to agree with what they express.

I actually think knowing about Meyer’s Mormon background just makes the Twilight Saga that much more interesting. I think her decision to not have any swearing, drugs or explicit sex in the books just makes them more accessible and partly, how they cultivated such a wide, young audience.

Also, Meyer’s pureness doesn’t stop Twilight being sexy. That’s, like, what it’s known for being - full of sexual tension. And I kinda see that. I can remember as a teenager how monumental and intense the slightest touches from someone I liked were and Meyer nails that. I like the Mormon parallel of forbidden love and how there’s real tension because if Edward and Bela do have sex, he could literally kill her.

Speaking of tension, I can’t deny Meyer doesn’t know how to write aggression and action and appreciate the slow-burn plot of the series even if it’s frustrating at times and not much really happens at all if you think about it.

You can clearly tell she’s done her research, like deep-diving into Saint Mark’s Day for New Moon, for what is really interesting world-building. Vampires sparkling might be a bit silly but it’s a fun twist and I like how the tropes of the supernatural genre or stereotypes of the monsters are confronted or subverted throughout the books.

People complain this isn’t real vampires and werewolves - and that’s true in more ways than you think (I won’t spoil if you haven’t read) - but Twilight is an authentic postmodern gothic romance, harking back to the likes of Wuthering Heights and Frankenstein. Like those novels, I think the Saga has been dismissed and criticised because it’s romance written by a woman for women.

I’m not saying the Twilight series is an underrated masterpiece or will grow to have the same reputation as its predecessors, but it’s also not as bad as you think and even if it is, it’s harmless - as long as you’re aware that Edward and Bella’s relationship isn’t goals at first. It’s got a lot of interesting themes under the surface and has obviously resonated with millions for good reason. Why not try and find out what that is? Whether it’s the feminist angle, the sexual tension or simply because it’s trash. I took the plunge and it was worth it. You don’t know till you try it! Just like blood!