Hermenuetics

Comments

I read and enjoy these books as fiction. I hope if I ever have children that I will have educated them in the strategy of critical thinking so that they can do the same.

Posted By: Sara | December 23, 2009 2:28 PM

Twilight is little more than pornography for women. Just as teenage boys are the ones most excited about pornography, teenage girls are the ones most excited about Twilight.

Posted By: James | December 23, 2009 7:25 PM

Granger's analysis was ridiculous.

You can read a blow-by-blow analysis of Granger's review here:

http://danielomcclellan.wordpress.com/2009/12/10/mormon-vampires-in-the-garden-of-eden/

Or, here's the response that I wrote on the review on Touchstone Magazine's blog:

Reading Granger's analysis, I have to say I think he's in as much of an alternate universe as Edward is.

Let's start with John L. Brooke's "Refiner's Fire."

The book makes assertions about Mormonism that almost no Mormon - modern or otherwise would even know about, much less advocate. I have never met a Mormon in my life of 35 years in the LDS Church who knows about or is even remotely interested in how Mormon beliefs supposedly evolved from roots in the 1600s. The fact that Granger dates the "founding" of Mormonism to the 1600s shows the sort of alternate universe kind of conspiracy theory-driven thinking that one can only shake one's head at.

Mormonism started in the 1830s. And Joseph Smith was far too uneducated to be tapped into anything remotely resembling philosophical trends from the 1600s - except insofar as the formed a part of the general milieu of frontier America he grew up in.

This is nothing more than wild speculation posing as literary analysis. Maybe Granger has read "Refiner's Fire." But I would posit that he's one of the few human beings on the planet that has. Mormons are blissfully unaware of this stuff, and even those of us with a good knowledge of apologetics have not the slightest clue who Mr. Brooke even is.

So much for the Carlisle connection.

Linking the Volturi to the Catholic Church is just silly.

The idea of a powerful organization against whom the hero must struggle is hardly a uniquely Mormon idea. Everyone in America has this archetype stored away somewhere in their psyche. Meyer could have gotten it from any number of places without having Catholics in mind.

Also, in calling the vampires "blood-atonement driven" I wonder if Mr. Granger even has a working knowledge of what the doctrine of blood atonement even is, or if he just picked it up watching "September Dawn" one Friday night.

Granger's attempt to link the perfectly circular meadow with the "Mountain Meadows Massacre" is just so pathetically desperate as to be almost comical. You can almost envision a sleepless Granger sitting at his desk thinking about how to work in a Mormons-are-bloody angle into a review on a Mormon vampire novel.

"Let's see... blood, blood... what's bloody about Mormons? Oh, I know! Blood Atonement! OK, that's one link... what else... Oo, oo, I know - Mountain Meadows Massacre! That's a really good one! Now, how can I possibly link that bloody episode with Twilight? Oh yeah! Twilight has a "meadow" in it. I am on a roll here!"

News flash - clearings have always had symbolic literary meaning. You travel in the dark woods of life, and then you suddenly come into a clearing and taste the sun. It can represent enlightenment, opening your world view, any number of things.

I mean, come on guys. How credulous can you get?

Do you seriously think that we Mormons are all having Mountain Meadows flashbacks every time we hit a meadow?

Or maybe you do think that. Because you guys have gotten so used to defining our entire faith off of a few conveniently negative episodes that people like Granger simply assume that every believing Mormon must be thinking about the same stuff he thinks about every time "Mormonism" is on the brain.

Well, I hate to break it to you - but even with the recent books about Mountain Meadows, most Mormons aren't thinking about the topic at all. Almost none of us have purchased any of the books on the subject, much less read them. This isn't a topic that most Mormons care about.

I only know about it because I spend a lot of time debating with Protestants, and some of them are fond of opportunistically using the incident as a general slur on the Mormon population. And even I don't feel any particular guilt about the incident.

I also found amusing Granger's airy dismissal of Mormon apologetics on the massacre as "pathetic." They're only pathetic because they are inconvenient for him. I note that Granger never deigns to enlighten us why exactly they are pathetic.

As for myself, an atmosphere of panic about you Protestants sending an army to wipe us out seems like a pretty damn-good explanation to me. How about you?

The genetics thing is cute. And I'm glad that Granger found a way to shoehorn in another criticism of Mormonism in the guise of doing a literary review. But this one sinks as well.

The South American native showing up has nothing to do with Book of Mormon origins. Stephanie Meyer herself explained this detail in an interview. She did her research for this book. On vampirism, not Mormonism.

There is a South American legend of vampires that impregnate women.

That's it.

That's where the genetic hook came from. Not half-baked DNA criticisms of Mormonism - which again, most Mormons neither know nor care about.

Incidentally, the DNA argument is an absolute embarrassment to anti-Mormonism. It betrays either a profound ignorance of how population genetics work, or an ignorance of what the Book of Mormon actually claims, or both. It was rather amusing to watch all the frenzied excitement in the anti-Mormon camp when they thought they'd finally uncovered a silver bullet to discredit Mormonism - and then the outraged anger and confusion that resulted when Mormons not only refuted the entire argument, but didn't even break a sweat doing it.

Happy to elaborate on this if you are interested.

Finally, Granger's attempt to shoehorn another tired counter-cult ministry standby into the review - Adam-God theory.

Let me just tell you right now that the only Mormons who even know about Adam-God are those who have it shoved in their faces by some anti-Mormon. The rest don't know about it at all.

Adam-God theory comes from some very confused and vague statements made by prophet Brigham Young waay back in the 1800s. It was never fully accepted even when Young was prophet, and has fallen into complete and utter obscurity since then. Mention Adam-God theory in a modern Mormon Sunday School class and you will be met with a room full of blank looks. I find it implausible in the extreme that Meyer was ever even aware of this theory.

Granger would know this if he really knew that many Mormons. Apparently he doesn't.

There is a very real temptation to assume that the members of a group are thinking about the same things we are thinking about when we are thinking about them.

If you were to play a word-association game with Mr. Granger with "Mormons" as the starting point, you'd probably get something like the following: "polygamy", "Mountain Meadows", "DNA," "Adam-God", "Jesus and Satan are brothers," etc.

But if he thinks that modern Mormons really know, care, or think about those subjects, he would be completely wrong.

Let me give you an example on the other end.

Does the average Lutheran spend his time in the pews during the sermon agonizing over the Salem witch trials. Are we supposed to be looking for witch trial imagery in all books from Christian authors?

Well, of course that's wrong. That's just silly.

And Granger is being equally silly here. He is assuming that his own views of Mormonism - as an outsider - must be representative of what Mormon insiders are thinking. It's an incredibly sloppy piece of thinking. I would have expected better from Touchstone.

Posted By: Seth R. | December 23, 2009 8:26 PM

As for the remarks about teenage sexuality.

No beef here. Most Mormon bloggers I know were expressing similar concerns with Meyers' books.

Posted By: Seth R. | December 23, 2009 8:29 PM

I found the mormon connection quite stretched but have not done nearly the work that Seth has. But your dismissal of the abstinence as a physical problem ignored Edward's concern for Bella's soul (and possibly sin). There are several conversations between them, or between other characters about the fact that sex before marriage might condemn Bella to some sort of hell. And that is before the discussion of Edward turning Bella into a vampire. I am all for discussion, but we need to get the basics right first. And the abstinence discussion is more complicated than most that I have seen allow it to be. (A 37 year old male that liked the books.)

Posted By: Adam S | December 24, 2009 1:57 PM

I'm sorry, this is not about vampires, why would you even want to write about that? THis is about Jenny Sanford. I am late coming into that discussion, very late, however, it is Christmas and I was trying to see what the Sanford family would be doing. In googling, I came across your discussion and so, I am responding here. I read most of the commentary from women and I have to say, save for the comments from the Christians on the board regarding Mrs. Sanfords not bringign up God in her day to day conversations with close friends, I found views interesting save for MaryAnn's. Mary Ann sounds like a loony tune. Ms. Chapur does not shoulder the total blame nor does Governor SAnford, however, Mr. Sanford feel short of his marriage vows and made a decision. There is blame to be had by Mrs. Sanford as well. You women just aren't clued in to it. Whatever Ms. Chapur did or did not do, I do think she is exordinarily beautiful in a very natural way. It is racism that persist here with women of color. AS this is S.C. the same exotic descriptions or expectations of how Ms. Chapur would look, hot, blah, blah, blah, are all couched in racist ways. Women of color are not all hot sirens waiting to snage innocent husbands out of their lairs. We women of color are intelligent, strong, intellectually gifted, as you white women and yes, we attract men of opposite races all the time. So I found MaryAnn's comments to be particularly distasteful towards Ms. Chapur, and yes MaryAnn you do sound extremely bitter. I don't know what the future holds for botht he Governor and Ms. Chapur, but I think taht Ms. Chapur has shown the most dignity, whilest the First Lady, and I completely understand her pain, has shown the "least." She has paraded in front of the cameras since the story broke, when all along she knew about the affair. For political expediency and to further her political ambitions and that of her husbands, she was willing to work with him on exocising this woman from her husbands loins and brain in order to keep the status quo. To me that does not make her any less pitiful or pathetic than the other political wives that she has been compared to and come out the victor. She is just as controlling as any of them were, the least to me was Ms. Spitzer, I do like her. When the Governor disobeyed her command, that's when she went ballistic and orghestrated his downfall. The press conference we became aware of was in June, ok. For something this tramatic to hit a marriage, I would think you would need more than six months to work towards reconcilaition through forgiveness as the Mrs. has sprouted. I would think it would take at least a year. Separate, go to counseling work with your children so on. It seems all Mrs. Sanford has done is trademark her name, write her memorirs give interview after interview to countless upscale magazines and news broadcast outlets and now six months later she is filing for divorce, Wow! Even I can't catch my breath! When has she had any time to really work toward reconciliation as she has stated and given it time to actually work?...Or I forgot, she used to be a corporate raider, pretty much like the ones, who are were orghestrating the downfall of the American economy and they were like little worker bees weren't they? So all Jenny Sanford as really done, is written him off, which is her perogative to do and work like a little worker bee towards her own agenda while she sweetly in the most southernest of ways...destroys her husband. What say you MaryAnn? And as far as the Precious movie. I am first a southerner, 2nd An African American, woman of color who does not have the background of a precious, but understands why the filmmaker made the moves he made. The movie has universal themes and should be taken as such. This happens whites as well and has been happening to whites for as long as you have Men in the world. Consider Thomas Jefferson sleeping with his slave's children, and others as well. It's called rape and it comes in all colors. It's called extreme poverty and it comes in all colors. Just because your news outlets love to give the color of poverty black faces on the front pages of your newspapers, or celebrities when they want to clean up their images go have their pictures taken with black folk, does not mean that the same lifestyle does not exist in the white reaces and/or other races. Obesity is a universal scourge on Americans as well other races that engage in unhealhy diets and lack of exercise. Incest is a common theme that happens all the time in white households. So don't hold your noses as if it doesn't exist. Precious is a movie that touches all lives, red black and green.

Posted By: Iconic58 | December 24, 2009 5:37 PM

I am an evangelical Christian and most definitely not a Mormon and have major problems with the Twilight series, but I wholeheartedly agree with Seth on the Touchstone article.

Most people from any church background simply don't know their church's history well enough to embed it in a book like that - and those of us who do are usually too geeky to read or write teenage vampire romance novels.

To embed that much of Mormon history so subtly in the Twilight series would require brilliance - and if an author went to that much effort, they would make it known that was their intent. Otherwise, what a waste - very few adults, even Mormon adults, know that much of Mormon history - let alone the teenage girls with whom the series is popular!

I believe we need to read Scripture exegetically, gaining the meaning intended by the writers instead of reading our culture and lives into it. We need to do the same with other books as well - what was the author's intent?

Posted By: Ann | December 26, 2009 4:46 PM

There are many ways to critique literature. My opinion is that meaning is derived not simply from the intent of the author (which can never be fully known), but through the interaction of the reader with the text. That is, as a reader, my experiences, emotions, and prior knowledge contribute to the meaningful experience that I derive from the text. (The Bible might be an exception to this, as I try to uncover the intent of the author {God}, but still recognize that the deepest levels of meaning come from my interaction with God through the Bible: a personal relationship.)

Once the text is disseminated, the author no longer owns or controls its impact, which may vary depending on the reader--much like a work of art.

That said, I am able to read books such as the Twilight series (or The Da Vinci Code), enjoy them as fiction, and analyze their themes without endangering my own values and convictions. My goal for my children is to develop the same skill.

Posted By: Robyn | January 5, 2010 10:54 AM

Thank you to Laura Leonard for posting her article. You are quite correct in saying that the Christian church at large (with a few exceptions) has been silent on the issue of the Twilight. When the Harry Potter series appeared with its witches, warlocks, and other themes of the occult, many Christians quickly responded. However, the Twilight series has received very little response from Christian churches. The Twilight books have somehow “snuck in” the back door before Christian parents, youth ministers, and pastors were aware of its arrival. I first heard of Twilight from my pre-teen daughter some time ago. We were in a bookstore when she pointed to the book and stated this was a book she was NOT going to read. I asked why and she explained that it was about vampires and the occult, but what also worried her was that many of her friends (all Christians) had read it (some without their parents’ knowledge) and were now “addicted” to the book.
There are several things we as Christian parents might consider regarding the Twilight books and movies:
1. Reading books and watching movies about the occult desensitizes us to the occult. This is an unfortunate part of the human condition in which no one is immune. The more we allow our children to learn about vampires and witches, the more they become desensitized to the evil of the occult. Try to avoid the weak response of some parents that your child is too smart, strong, or “Christian” to be negatively influenced by these books. Just look in the Bible for examples of how the mighty have fallen after making that false assumption!
2. Many books and movies will portray evil as being good. One of the main problems with movies and books that have witches or vampires as characters is that these characters are presented in a way that is false or untrue. If a book/movie portrays a witch or vampire as being good, then it is presenting a false view, though it is presenting it as true. Christians hold to the true belief that evil is not good and, therefore, there are no good witches. For those who ask if this is really important, I might remind them of one point: if you worship Jesus as Lord, you are worshipping the One who said He is the “way, the TRUTH, and the life.” Jesus is the Truth, and Satan is the father of lies (John 14:6; 8:44). So, yes, the truth matters. We shouldn’t worship the Truth on Sundays, then support a lie the rest of the week. By the way, there are Christians who write fiction or fantasy stories that portray evil as it really is (evil). The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, by C. S. Lewis, has a witch as a character, but few Christians criticize this book. Why? Because the witch is portrayed in a truthful way – as an evil witch.
3. As Christians, everything we do should glorify God. Our main reason for existence is to glorify the God we worship and adore. This includes the area of our entertainment. Entertainment is a wonderful thing, and Christians will disagree as to what degree different types of entertainment will glorify God, but it is saddening if we disagree on something that clearly dishonors Him by glorifying evil. If your teenage daughter has more of a look of adoration and worship on her face for Edward the vampire than for Jesus her Lord, then you should have an idea of who is really being glorified through these books! Eternal life can only be found through the blood of Jesus Christ, not the bite of a vampire.
In my opinion, this is not a debate about Mormonism (though I understand there may be Mormon themes in the book), and it isn’t about whether or not our children should be free thinkers, or read fiction (as some of the responses have claimed). This is about whether Christians should read books that present the occult in a positive light. The occult is not romantic, beautiful, exciting, or pleasing to God. It does not provide lasting true love or salvation for the soul (things only God can do). The occult is evil, destructive, and devastating. It leads to depression, misery, pain, and death. Unfortunately, evil is also very seductive and many people will use any reason to justify it.
If you are a teenage girl who has chosen not to read these books, I applaud you! Please know that you are not alone. There are many other young Christian women who are also taking a stand for what is right. It is never easy to choose what is right over what is popular, but in the end, you will be grateful for the choices you have made!

Posted By: Teresa | January 12, 2010 8:06 PM

Hey there!
My name is Tori and I'm a Christian student.
I've read the books and studied quite a bit on the themes, author, and Christian's analysis of the series.

First off, although I could understand how there are maybe Mormon themes in there, I've studied the LDS church, and while reading the books never noticed that. I think that's a stretch.
Also, Edward believes in abstinence as a moral issue, not just for Bella's safety. He is old-fashioned and holds on to his gentlemanly morals.
And to round this out, I just want to say that these books have opened up a lot of conversations about what really is okay for a Christian (especially Christian teen) to be reading and engaging in. Also, opening up conversations about what type of guys we should honestly be setting our standards too (Edward vs. Jacob) and how we should be treated as young women.
Whether or not you as parents choose to let your children reads these books is entirely up to you- I say boys should be older when they read them. My parents never allowed me to read Harry Potter, and still stick to that.
Honest opinion, these books can be harmful without a faith or support of friends or small group or adult you can trust who's also read them. But so can any other form of entertainment or relationship. Pray about it, and go from there.
Thank you.

Posted By: Tori | January 14, 2010 10:19 PM