Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2010 13:31:25 GMT -8
So, on the former TwilightSucks, I remember a thread in this subforum that focused specifically on the character of Alice. Contrary to the curious number of anti-Twilight users here who think Alice is a "good character", the purpose of the thread was to counter this movement with a discussion on why Alice should be considered one of the more overrated characters in the series, regardless of whether or not you are a fan.
For a discussion starter: Meyer introduced a potentially tragic backstory for Alice. Was it simply used to partially justify the appearance of James in the first book? Even in Breaking Dawn, was Alice's emotional potential discarded entirely in favor of selling the personality that was more attractive to the fans?
|
|
|
Post by thewizardofoz on Dec 30, 2010 14:25:26 GMT -8
I can answer that. For a discussion starter: Meyer introduced a potentially tragic backstory for Alice. Which wasn't a good idea, as will be explained later. But of course. Why do you think James and Co. just happened to come across the Cullens in the first place? This is the way I think the timeline was set up. -1901: Alice is born. -1917: Alice goes into asylum. -1918: Alice befriends a vampire who worked at the asylum. -1919: Alice is stalked by James, who intends to devour her blood. The vampire who worked there is her friend/secretly wanted an affair with her/actually had an affair with her, either w. or w.o. sexual intercourse, so he would have good reason to fight off James. But how, when, and where did Alice become a vampire? James claims to have bitten Alice and "did away" with "the old one", but that's largely sketchy, since he didn't actually catch Alice. James seems to have murdered that guy for no real reason as far as I can tell, and Alice was left randomly in a field. So what the hell happened? So, James is looking for Alice, but then after he finds out she's a vampire, he's like, "Oh, fuck, let's call this a game." Honestly, James only wanted to kill Bella out of spite anyway, so there's no real reason for him to be doing any of this unless he's some kind of terrorist. Although, in retrospect, he actually he is. Cross-country murder plans? Kidnapping? Extreme physical abuse? Murder in the first degree? Blaming the victim's mother as an excuse to get the victim in an enclosed area where only he is master of his domain? Yeah, pretty odd, if you ask me... Also, waiting eighty-six years is a really random and bizarre time to exact revenge on Alice. Hey, what did he think? "I'll wait until I get a girlfriend and best mate, until my intended victim found a mate, and until she had a seven-person army/gaggle of 'clan members' before I can do anything? Oh, wait, Bella smells tasty. MUST EAT! NOMNOMNOM- ( is killed)" Absolutely! Meyer will do anything at the drop of a hat. Yes, you made a good point, actually. She basically sold Alice out as a ways to continue her story arc and get more profit. But anyway, to continue on the thread's direction, Alice was never a good character regardless. Here's a quote that explains why her visions are bullshit, and even touches on how her character is based on it. Thank you for re-starting my thread, kinjer. Much appreciated. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Elentari on Dec 30, 2010 15:41:20 GMT -8
I have much contempt for this character. What could have been an interesting character was turned into a sad excuse of one - a materialistic manipulative bitch.
She had potential in her background - due to her experiences with her family and having lived in an asulym she could be anything from a cynical, dark psychic to a wise and empathetic character. But convenience kicks in and she forgets all about her potentially hurtful past. She doesn't have to deal with any hard stuff - she can just start over and have all bright and fine future stored in for herself. Somehow she had visions of Jasper and Carlisle although neither of them had made any decisions to meet her.
Her visions are treated as some Great Truth Carved On Stone. It's constantly emphasized how it supposed to be subjective, but the Cullens treat them like they were absolutely going to become true. Like what she saw about Bella - that the little moron was going to get either killed or vamped. She and her not-family acted like those are the only possible futures and one of them is going to happen anyway, so it's futile to fight that. Actually she gets irritated with Wardo when he is trying to fight those futures and is for once trying to act decent, not wanting a defenceless girl get killed or vamped. Alice wants just have things her way and I think it's the main reason why she wants Bella be turned: that way she could prove she wasn't mad at all and didn't belong in the asylum, and her visions stop being hazy. Because you not having clear visions of future is so much worse than an innocent girl getting her life destroyed.
And what about the way she treats Bella? She knows how Bella despises all kinds of presents, parties and makeovers. Yet she insists on having them regularly and forces Bella to take part! It's all okay even when once this obsession of hers almost leads to Bella getting killed by Jasper. And then she goes and causes Wardo's suicide attempt because she 1) is nosy bitch who won't leave Bella's future alone, 2) assumes her vision of Bella jumping of a cliff is 100% right, 3) telling others about it and 2) finally not even bothering to call to her not-family to inform them of her mistake. What does she do? Accuse Rosalie of her own mess!
So yeah. I'm definitely Anti-Alice.
|
|
|
Post by reniefuwa on Dec 30, 2010 20:29:29 GMT -8
Alice seems kind of awesome when she first comes on the scene, but only because of the context of the character. There's other human girls, who we don't care about because Bella doesn't care, and Bella, who is a codependent doormat. Then we have Alice, a female who is not afraid to be outspoken and who the guys listen to and appear to respect, both for her visions and other things we don't actually know about, but they seem to be there. Given those general descriptions, she seems pretty cool.
Regarding her back story (all of them really), it seems like Meyer just took every interesting plot segment she'd thought of up until that point and applied them to certain characters. I mean, they ARE interesting concepts, most of them, and could be awesome stories in and of themselves, but Meyer tells (and doesn't show) them in her regular dry, boring tone, and sucks the interesting right out of them.
|
|
|
Post by fdragon010 on Dec 30, 2010 21:57:11 GMT -8
I agree with Elentari. I started to hate Alice around New Moon, but now I have started to think about why. Alice is desperate for a friend, and she wants to manipulate Bella into beign that friend. Alice is the one that wants to buy Bella things and plan weddings and wants Bella to be a vamp. Why is she pushing this friendship so hard? It's becasue she wants it, not because it is natural.
Here is another thing. Alice only gave two options for them, but what is she was lying? What if there was a third way but Alice didn't disclose it for fear of losing her best bud? You might say this would be impossible with Eddy, but here is another snag. Say Bella chose Jacob instead of Edward. Alice's powers don't work around the werewolves. Say that since Bella's fate is now tied to Jacob (I hate that term, but lets go with it for the sake of canon), Alice can't see what Bella's fate will be now. Bella can now have a perfectly normal human life. Even so the Voltery might attack, but now Alice can't be sure if Bella will be killed by them becasue she can't use her powers anymore. I'm not very impressed by the Voltery, and i think that the werewolves had a chance of winning, even if they suffered loses. But Alice wouldn't want that to happen, she'd lose Bella if that happened, so she made if very clear that she wanted Bella to be with Edward, not for Bella or Edward's sake, but for Alice's own gratification. She she manipulates Bella and keep her in the dark.
How is it I can come up with a better story then the actual writer?
|
|
|
Post by vampirekites on Dec 30, 2010 22:32:15 GMT -8
I hate Alice. I think Eclipse really showed her true colors. She excused Edward's behavior and just wrote off Bella's suspicions. She "kidnapped" Bella for Edward in exchange for a car, which is funny cause she could have easily bought it herself.
I don't think making her a materialistic party girl is in part because of her past. Elentari made a good point. Have Alice as a more cynical person who isn't so incredibly pushy. Even though I think Bella is an ungrateful bitch, she still has every right not to want a party (though one can argue that's just another martyr complex).
Her visions are a "Get Out Of Plot Free Card" (thanks WolfGod). They are either untrue or true depending on what direction the plot is supposed to go. It's a poor excuse at foreshadowing and practically gives away the whole story before it's even begun. The rest of it is just filling in with exposition and sparkles.
|
|
|
Post by reniefuwa on Dec 30, 2010 22:43:15 GMT -8
She could have been such a fun/interesting character, too. Imagine for a moment if her "visions" looked more like Raven's from the Disney show "That's So Raven": a few moments very specific event with no context, and no idea how things got that way. So she's working frantically trying to either make them come true, or not.
|
|
limelightqueen
Persistent Member
You know how to whistle, don't you?[Mo0:0]
Posts: 2,741
|
Post by limelightqueen on Dec 31, 2010 4:17:59 GMT -8
She kidnapped her supposed best friend in exchange for a car she could probably have bought for herself. I think that speaks volumes.
|
|
|
Post by thewizardofoz on Dec 31, 2010 18:18:45 GMT -8
She kidnapped her supposed best friend in exchange for a car she could probably have bought for herself. I think that speaks volumes. In other words, she's insane. I can understand that, but I could never sympathize with that. Still, all of you seem to be making good points that revolve around a central idea: Just who is Alice, why is she crucial to the story, and why did Meyer create her in the first place? I'll go with the third idea. Bella, Edward, and Jacob were simple enough. Jacob was based off of a real person Meyer knew and met, Bella is Meyer's female self-insert, and Edward is Meyer's male self-insert and thus her own love interest. But who is Alice? Some have suggested that Alice is based off of Meyer's sister, Emily Morgan, due to her markedly similar appearance of that of Ashley Greene, the actress who played Alice. However, there's one small problem. I have no idea what Emily is like, so I can't draw any basis of fact or even a hyphothesis. We all know that Meyer created Bella due to her lack of a social life and refusal to judge others beyond their material worth, so she created a stand-in for herself to express exactly that. Let's work this over for Alice. Is Alice yet another friend for Bella to draw to so she can feel close, like a sister to? Is Alice a representation of that material worth, something that belongs to the Cullens, as represented by her mark as Edward's sister? Was Alice meant to be Bella's sister or Edward's sister? Looking back at the Twilight series, I feel much less confused about Meyer's intentions, but I still have no bloody hell what ideas she was trying to get across. If she wasn't intending to satirize teenage relationships in the 21st century by calling out horrible bastards as "vampires" and their "prey" "weak", then what was she planning to do (besides make money, of course)?
|
|
|
Post by fdragon010 on Dec 31, 2010 23:58:11 GMT -8
^Maybe Alice is Meyer's disire for a best friend who will do nothing but shop for her and buy expensive doodads for her. Keep in mind we are the only ones who think that Alice is a horrible person and try to look into her character. With Meyer the shallowest solution is probably the right one.
|
|
|
Post by thewizardofoz on Jan 1, 2011 0:55:03 GMT -8
^Maybe Alice is Meyer's disire for a best friend who will do nothing but shop for her and buy expensive doodads for her. Keep in mind we are the only ones who think that Alice is a horrible person and try to look into her character. With Meyer the shallowest solution is probably the right one. That makes sense. Still, it begs the question as to why Meyer would want that much money when she lives in Phoenix's Paradise Valley District.
|
|
limelightqueen
Persistent Member
You know how to whistle, don't you?[Mo0:0]
Posts: 2,741
|
Post by limelightqueen on Jan 1, 2011 7:35:51 GMT -8
I think Alice is an excuse to give Bella everything while still claiming Bella is humble. Alice is materialistic, not Bella and thus Bella cannot be described as materialistic. But because Meyer seems to be rather materialistic herself she allows Bella, through Alice, reap the fruits of materialism: lavish parties, expensive clothes and cars et cetera et cetera. But since Bella complains about this treatment the whole way through she is free of being described as materialistic.
And of course, the deus ex machina visions.
PS: Argus_Mc please do not use Meyer's weight as an excuse to trash her. It's against forum rules.
|
|
PRINCESS TROLLESTIA
Persistent Member
YER A WIZARD PONY HARRY
AND THEN I SAID, "OATMEAL?? ARE YOU CRAZY??"[Mo0:15]
Posts: 3,810
|
Post by PRINCESS TROLLESTIA on Jan 1, 2011 7:56:30 GMT -8
But then again, she's a greedy, fat cow, so what am I saying? You know we don't tolerate this bullshit here.
And I mean the fat comments in addition to your unnecessary comma splice.
|
|
|
Post by Lady of Himring on Jan 1, 2011 19:03:53 GMT -8
I have much contempt for this character. What could have been an interesting character was turned into a sad excuse of one - a materialistic manipulative bitch. She had potential in her background - due to her experiences with her family and having lived in an asulym she could be anything from a cynical, dark psychic to a wise and empathetic character. But convenience kicks in and she forgets all about her potentially hurtful past. She doesn't have to deal with any hard stuff - she can just start over and have all bright and fine future stored in for herself. Somehow she had visions of Jasper and Carlisle although neither of them had made any decisions to meet her. Her visions are treated as some Great Truth Carved On Stone. It's constantly emphasized how it supposed to be subjective, but the Cullens treat them like they were absolutely going to become true. Like what she saw about Bella - that the little moron was going to get either killed or vamped. She and her not-family acted like those are the only possible futures and one of them is going to happen anyway, so it's futile to fight that. Actually she gets irritated with Wardo when he is trying to fight those futures and is for once trying to act decent, not wanting a defenceless girl get killed or vamped. Alice wants just have things her way and I think it's the main reason why she wants Bella be turned: that way she could prove she wasn't mad at all and didn't belong in the asylum, and her visions stop being hazy. Because you not having clear visions of future is so much worse than an innocent girl getting her life destroyed. And what about the way she treats Bella? She knows how Bella despises all kinds of presents, parties and makeovers. Yet she insists on having them regularly and forces Bella to take part! It's all okay even when once this obsession of hers almost leads to Bella getting killed by Jasper. And then she goes and causes Wardo's suicide attempt because she 1) is nosy bitch who won't leave Bella's future alone, 2) assumes her vision of Bella jumping of a cliff is 100% right, 3) telling others about it and 2) finally not even bothering to call to her not-family to inform them of her mistake. What does she do? Accuse Rosalie of her own mess! So yeah. I'm definitely Anti-Alice. ^This, so much this. You get karma for that. fdragon and VK you too.
There were several things that bothered me so much about Alice, mostly her visions being treated like they were truths. She herself said that visions change, that they aren't a certain thing until the person makes up his/her mind.
Another thing that bother me is that she's so certain that Bella is going to be vamped and wants her to experience life yet she kidnaps her in order to avoid Bella seeing Jacob. I have news for you Alice, life involves friends too. Yes, he was trying to win her over Edward, but if Bella was so in love with Ed, it wouldn't matter.
|
|
Demeter
Persistent Member
You know what you are in the dark...[Mo0:8]
Posts: 4,114
|
Post by Demeter on Jan 1, 2011 19:18:43 GMT -8
For the whole "kidnapping" thing (I'm putting it in quotes because it wasn't like Alice pulled a gun on Bella or literally forced her to go to the Cullen's place), I think that was just a GINORMOUS overreaction to the fear that Bella would die/not come back from Jacob's just because Alice couldn't see the wolves future.
I... I guess I like Alice, just because she has an actual role (unlike Esme) and semi-interesting backstory. And I think her and Jasper could be really cute. I need to reread the books.
|
|
|
Post by Lady of Himring on Jan 3, 2011 17:22:47 GMT -8
^Demeter: Before I post anything I just want to clarify that this is not against you, I'm sleep deprived and cranky, so I apologize before hand should my post sound too bitchy. I just want to explain why I think is kidnap.
What Alice and Edward did here, was emotional manipulation. At this point in the series Bella has a huge emotional attachment to Edward and in a lesser extent to Alice.
They are using this knowledge by having Alice have "the slumberparty", Bella wants to see Jacob. He's been hurt and is unconcious, and she wants to be there when he wakes up. And they're not letting her see her hurt friend, not only that, they have Bella rehears what she's going to tell Charlie. (This takes place after the battle with the newborns, btw. I checked)
In Twilight, when she's worried that James will go after Charlie, Edward has Emmett restrain her, physically. What Alice did, was emotional restraintment. Because they know that Bella will do what they ask her to.
I hope I got my point across, and like I mentioned, nothing against you, just wanted to explain my point. I hope someone else explains it better that I did.
|
|
Demeter
Persistent Member
You know what you are in the dark...[Mo0:8]
Posts: 4,114
|
Post by Demeter on Jan 3, 2011 20:36:05 GMT -8
^ Oh, it's okay. It didn't sound like an attack at all. I'm not really trying to defend the kidnapping, but I just wanted to point out what SMeyer probably meant.
|
|
|
Post by vampirekites on Jan 3, 2011 20:48:27 GMT -8
I think it's also downplayed in the movie as well. The fact that they had to get Bella to the "safety" of the Cullen's home so Bella won't see Jacob is an invasion of her privacy. As much as she irritates me, she does get a lot of shit put on her by Edward and others. She has every right to see Jacob, and if something does go wrong, she'd suffer the consequences. Still, it's HER RIGHT to go see whomever she pleases and Edward has no right to tell her otherwise. Even if Bella felt safe with Alice, she was still being told what to do. Alice needing to be bribed is another indication that Edward was overreacting and that the idea wasn't a good one. Of course, all of that is trumped with the "Good Intentions" card, and dismissed by Bella herself whose self worth is so low that she allows this to happen, needing only to look at Edward's perfect form to forget about her anger.
I also think Alice is an excuse for Bella to be materialistic without doing it firsthand. Alice buys the clothes, dolls up Bella, throws huge parties, all for Bella. She makes a stink just to look "humble", but it's not like she goes "You know what? STOP FUCKING DOING THIS!". She let's it happen. It may be another way of others stepping all over her, but I think she secretly loves all of this, but needs to have that martyr front.
|
|
|
Post by Lady of Himring on Jan 4, 2011 15:45:37 GMT -8
Demeter: Glad it didn't! I'm just so sleep deprived is not funny. I'm sure Smeyer didn't meant a lot of things on these books, but it's there and sadly unavoidable.
VK: You know, it always struck me how Bella was always so "free and mature" and is treated as a downright child who knows nothing by the Cullens. And as much as she enrages me too, her life's still her. She has a right to see her wounded friend if she so wants.
^THIS!! Added that I see Alice as someone who uses emotional blackmail to do it: "Don't you love me? Then let me throw you this thing that you hate, but I love."
|
|
|
Post by vampirekites on Jan 4, 2011 16:44:38 GMT -8
Exactly. They also do the "what would 'fill in the blank' feel about it?". That's emotional blackmail. It's guilting someone into doing something for other people, not themselves.
Why is this book so universally praised again?
|
|
|
Post by Lady of Himring on Jan 4, 2011 17:16:25 GMT -8
I am a little fuzzy with the details (lack of a proper night sleep), but I believe she outright did it on the wedding.
On her having a vision of Bella and Edward runing to Vegas, she did say something amongst the lines of: What is this vision of Vegas that I'm having, don't you like my plans? Or something like that.
I have no fucking clue as to why people like this book.
|
|
|
Post by firegirl26 on Jan 4, 2011 17:29:48 GMT -8
She could have been such a fun/interesting character, too. Imagine for a moment if her "visions" looked more like Raven's from the Disney show "That's So Raven": a few moments very specific event with no context, and no idea how things got that way. So she's working frantically trying to either make them come true, or not. if i wrote twilight thats what i would do.
|
|
limelightqueen
Persistent Member
You know how to whistle, don't you?[Mo0:0]
Posts: 2,741
|
Post by limelightqueen on Jan 5, 2011 10:11:14 GMT -8
Alice making Bella have a big wedding when Bella didn't want one really pissed me off. We have been told that every other decade or so Alice throws herself a big wedding with Jasper. So if she wanted all the pageantry she could have had it for herself.
It reminds me of my sister's wedding actually. My sister was in school six thousand miles away during the planning so naturally my parents were the ones to look at venues and try the caterers and whatnot. My sister did get final say but most of the time she just went "I don't know/care mom, you decide." So my mom decided. She also decided on the guest list- my sister and her husband had 50-75 guests, the total guest list was 312 people. Most of those friends of my mother, many of whom my sister had never even met. In one case my mother went over Hannah's head to invite the dean of students at our high school who Hannah (as well as every other student) hated.
Basically, it has become a joke in my family that Hannah may have gotten married but it was my mother's wedding. Hannah wanted a smallish wedding, family and close friends (no one she and her husband had never met for example) but my mother threw her a lavish ceremony.
But in Bella's case it's even worse as Bella was basically being forced to marry Edward anyway, or at the very least bribed. She was embarrassed by the whole thing, so it makes sense that she'd want to run off to Vegas and do the whole thing quietly. And as the freaking bride she should have the right to decide what type of wedding she wanted. But noooo, Alice wants her to have a huge ceremony so Bella has to do so and invite the whole freaking town to witness it.
|
|
|
Post by reniefuwa on Jan 5, 2011 10:54:46 GMT -8
Exactly. They also do the "what would 'fill in the blank' feel about it?". That's emotional blackmail. It's guilting someone into doing something for other people, not themselves. Why is this book so universally praised again? Because it's the perfect "Pants" tale, of course.
|
|
|
Post by Corporal Flashback on Jan 5, 2011 11:03:25 GMT -8
Alice making Bella have a big wedding when Bella didn't want one really pissed me off. We have been told that every other decade or so Alice throws herself a big wedding with Jasper. So if she wanted all the pageantry she could have had it for herself. I'm pretty sure that Meyer said in one of those personal correspondence things that A&J have small weddings and R&E are the ones who put on a big show. So this makes no sense whatsoever. edit: It's personal correspondence 1. Ew, the Lex has an awful problem with talking ads at the bottom of the page.
|
|
tldr
Member
Resident alcoholic[Mo0:0]
Posts: 287
|
Post by tldr on Jan 5, 2011 11:37:37 GMT -8
I'm actually kind of a fan of selfish characters, but the problem with Alice is that she doesn't get called out on it. My memory of the books is a little rusty, but I can kind of relate as to why Alice would be selfish. She was pushed into a mental asylum at an early age, had to take care of her self even after she became a vampire, and after she met Jasper and pushed him into "vegetarian" lifestyle they sort of ran out of people she could hang out with. Also, Alice can't really hang out with any of the humans so when she meets Bella through Edward, I can see her latching onto her because she's desperate for some new company. The car thing/kidnapping is really left wing.
Yea... I definitely think the Twilight books/characters would have been better if someone else wrote it.
|
|
|
Post by Elentari on Jan 5, 2011 11:40:32 GMT -8
limelightqueen: You'd think these idiots would have learnt in New Moon something about whether it's smart to throw huge parties for Bella. Alice and Wardo insisted she should have a birthday party she didn't want to have and what happened? Jasper tried to nom Bella, she got thrown in a pile of glass and the family (or Edward) decided to leave. But no, that's not enough! Lets make her have more parties she doesn't want to have anyway! Nonetheless, it's all about how Meyer's fantasy - she wants Bella to have parties and presents but masks it with Bella's wangst. If our Heroine truly hated having parties and stuff, why does she let these people do these things to her anyway?
|
|
|
Post by Lady of Himring on Jan 5, 2011 16:07:21 GMT -8
^Agreed. And she allows it because, like you said: Smeyer's fantasy. Another point, when she told Edward all he had to do was show up.
Yeah newsflash Alice, he's the one pressuring Bella to marry him. He should be involved in the wedding. After all, isn't it their wedding?
|
|
|
Post by vampirekites on Jan 5, 2011 16:17:05 GMT -8
limelightqueen: You'd think these idiots would have learnt in New Moon something about whether it's smart to throw huge parties for Bella. Alice and Wardo insisted she should have a birthday party she didn't want to have and what happened? Jasper tried to nom Bella, she got thrown in a pile of glass and the family (or Edward) decided to leave. But no, that's not enough! Lets make her have more parties she doesn't want to have anyway! Nonetheless, it's all about how Meyer's fantasy - she wants Bella to have parties and presents but masks it with Bella's wangst. If our Heroine truly hated having parties and stuff, why does she let these people do these things to her anyway?
This is exactly what I keep saying. Though I initially feel bad for Bella and do understand not being in the spotlight, people who know and love me DON'T FUCKING DO THINGS I don't want to do. If they don't know, I'm not afraid to give them a bit of info about how I think and feel. With Bella, she turns into this pile of "Woe is Me" and instead of growing the balls to tell them to fuck off, she doesn't want to hurt their feelings ( : and goes along with it. It's Smeyer who is living the fantasy, but still has to keep Bella "humble" throughout to books.
|
|
Tim Willard
Member
Got pen, paper, booze, and ink, it's time to write.[Mo0:3]
Posts: 349
|
Post by Tim Willard on Jan 6, 2011 6:45:57 GMT -8
she does it so she can both have stuff and attention AND be a martyr!
She wins double!
|
|