I Never Know Where I Am
Where we were? Something curmudgeony, I believe. Was I talking about my snowbound walks to school? No, that wasn't it. It could have been about modern Hollywood starlets being tramps. But I don't think it was. Perhaps that modern music lacks the depth and beauty of Frank Sinatra? No, I don't usually blog about that. Oh yes, the teen book and cross-over phenomena.
I am comparing using Harry Potter, the Twilight series, and other teen novels with Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, and a number of David Eddings books. I have established that my selections are biased, my methodology flawed, and my analysis self-serving.
Wait.
I don't think I said much about the methodology, only that I would be comparing them. I have a number of categories in which I will be comparing them. These categories are as arbitrary as anything else. The discussion is about whether teen and cross-over books are less effective in creating a literate and educated society and thus the criteria that I have chosen are part of what I consider to be intellectual development and a continuing education. I will compare the books in the maturity of content, vocabulary, the complexity of the plot structure, and the complexity of the narrative.
It's More than Sex and Death, But That's Good Too
Reading Twilight is an exercise in reading about teenagers not having sex and not dying. The maturity of the content in any of the Twilight books is not particularly significant. The laughable way that Stephanie Meyer handles teen marriage, sex, and pregnancy are reflective of the shallow, child-like approach to the content. Where she moves into a slightly more adult category is in the melodrama that surrounds adult romances. She creates a passion and attachment that is not found in children's books. Her stories draw their allure in no small part (in my opinion) from the experience of love that she imparts. Particularly to teenagers, with their under-developed and hormone-addled minds, Meyer's books are an accurate description of how love can seem to be. Her books center on love as an experience. However, the characters never really develop and they operate in an environment largely free of negative consequences. The same cannot be said for J.K. Rowling's creations.
The teen romance and melodrama in the Harry Potter series is not as in-depth as in the Twilight books nor are J.K. Rowling's forays into romance nearly as compelling. However, her characters evolve considerably, they are more deeply flawed and those flaws have consequences as the series progresses. Harry spends much of The Order of Phoenix moping about in his angst and self-pity. He might as well have started wearing flannel, dying his hair, and listening to Hawthorn Heights. But he grows out of it, like an actual human being. He is faced with serious loss, considerable terror, self-doubt and struggles his way through. The Harry Potter books may not have the titillation of Twilight, but they provide better insight into the world and into human experience in that world. The Harry Potter books also invoke spectres of terrorism and fascism, and forces the world Rowling created to cope with these developments.
The David Eddings books fall short of the reality presented in Harry Potter. Eddings' characters are certainly complex and fascinating, but rarely do they evolve, have hidden motives, or questionable dark sides. Though more complex than Meyer's characters and perhaps more complex than most of Rowling's as well, most of Eddings' characters do not adapt to adversity, but rather rely upon agile minds, existing skill sets, or newly invented prowess that hadn't existed until they were necessary. Many of Eddings' characters are older than either Edward and Bella or Ron and Hermione and they have more adult relationships; love is not felt as passionately as in Twilight, but is expressed with greater variety in tone and temperance. His romantic relationships are diverse and many are quite touching to the reader, but the passion that those characters feel for one another is not elucidated nearly as well as in Meyer's books. Eddings' exploration of non-romantic relationships surpasses all others in this category and is, perhaps, his greatest strength. Of course, the rest of the story is fairly straight-forward - dragons and swords and such. Occasionally, there are political maneuvers, but the content is little more than well-written fantasy.
On the surface, the maturity of content in Lord of the Rings is relatively low. There is death aplenty, to be sure. Romance largely takes a back seat when Aragorn isn't Viggo Mortensen, covered in mud and blood. Yes, Kate, I am aware that is the image you mentally super-impose on my body every time I take my shirt off. Epic struggles are not uncommon in fantasy literature. Saving the world from an evil sorcerer is par for the course. Moreover, character development is limited as well. Aragorn doesn't really grow into his kingliness; it is present from the start, even if his royal birth is a secret. The hobbits evolve as characters, from relative naivety to far more worldly characters, but few others grow as they do. Where Tolkien surpasses all his colleagues is in the allegorical nature of the story and the sheer diversity of his characters, both good and evil. Tolkien has denied that Lord of the Rings draws heavily from World War II, but most of us see it even if he doesn't. His commentary of socialists having seized the country during the war was a bit heavy-handed as well. Nevertheless, his story involves the corruption of good characters by worldly forces and he clearly intends to impart meanings about confronting evil and the character of heroism drawn from his experience of World War II. No other book compared here comes close in the thematic exposition that can be done on Tolkien's novels.
On the whole, Meyer's books are clearly the immature or the most "teen" of the literature here contrasted. They are a descriptive experience written for teenagers who are experiencing emotions that their brains aren't wired to handle yet. Their utopian ending may have attracted a broader audience, but I actually consider that to reflect negatively upon the maturity of the content. Harry Potter and David Eddings are fairly close, with Rowling probably edging it out. I should note that both of their writing matures - the first two or three Harry Potter novels are clearly children's books and do not possess much of the maturity found in the later books. Similarly, Eddings' first series, The Belgariad, is more teen-ish, as the main character is, in fact, a teen. A bit more of the mature relationship structure and nuanced characters can be found in his early books, but not nearly as in his later series. Eddings' characters slightly surpass Rowling's in complexity, but Rowling's world towers over Eddings' creations in terms of a grey-scale morality and the impact of negative consequences from actions taken by protagonists. Tolkien is, unsurprisingly, the most mature in content. I say unsurprising because Kate's friend, Amelia, now a lawyer in New York, wrote her undergraduate thesis on Tolkien. I simultaneously want to read her thesis and keep her far away from these sophomoric analyses. Anyone who writes a thesis on Stephanie Meyer could never make it through law school. Although, if he pulled it off, he'd probably make a very good lawyer. . . or used car salesman.
That's Not Irony, It's Poor Writing
Once again, my pedantic writing has limited how far I can get into my post. I'll probably have to expand this past the planned third post. I cannot continue into my vocabulary analysis because I have been far too wordy in this post. Isn't it ironic, don't you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment