The intro epigraph to Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight is a quote from Genesis that links the apple on the cover of the book with the fruit of knowledge that Bella’s journey is about to lead her to. But here’s another reading of the apple:
What if the apple were actually the Apple of discord of the goddess, Eris? I know, it’s not Meyer’s intention to read it thusly, but let’s do a small exercise in archetypal mythologizing here:
When Bella moves to Forks, she instantly stirs dischord in the small community. Everyone knows her, and everyone wants to get to know her - she’s essentially fresh meat in a stale little Washington state town. She is profoundly attracted to Edward Cullen, so they launch into a relationship. And Bella’s adventure just starts there:
- she sows discord between the Cullens and the small travelling band of vampires, because James decided he wanted a snack.
- she sows discord amongst her high school classmates by just being who she is.
- she sows discord between herself and the Quelutes by choosing Edward.
- she sows discord between herself and the Cullens by spending so much time with Jacob.
- she sows discord between Jacob and Edward by - essentially - leading them both on.
- she sows discord between the Cullens and the Volturi by being human.
- she sows discord between the Cullens and Victoria by having been the reason for the death of James.
I know these aren’t in order, and I’m offering them mostly as an alternative. Based on this, I expect Breaking Dawn to be an even further set of events the sow discord. I’m sure the saga will have some sort of happy ending, but only after a serious degree of chaos first.
As a reminder, the Apple of Discord was thrown into a party by the snubbed goddess Eris to be given to the most beautiful goddess. Athena, Aphrodite and, I think, Artemis fought over who was the most beautiful, but Paris of Troy gave it to Helen and started the Trojan War. Bella is the Apple of Discord. Jacob and Edward fight over her. And there will be some sort of epic war before to wrap up the werewolf/vampire versus the Volturi story line. We’ll know on Saturday.
(Eventhough I plan on attending a midnight release party, I have no intention to read the entire book right away. It’s not Harry Potter.)
July 30th, 2008 at 7:12 am
I believe Paris gave the apple to Aphrodite when she promised to give him the most beautiful woman in the world if he did so.
July 30th, 2008 at 7:34 am
Now that you mention it, I believe you’re right. I sometimes overlook crucial facts at midnight.
So in the reading above, Paris and Aphrodite are the archetypal energies that are leading Bella to wanting to become a vampire. The seeds of temptation.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:52 pm
I appreciate the “exercise in archetypal mythologizing”, and I definitely applaud the results of the exercise. Let me ask a question, though, not as an antagonist but as someone genuinely wrestling the issue. (I wrestle with this as I think about the writings of Joseph Campbell and Jung and the nature of mythology.)
I have no doubt that such an exercise has psychological value for the person performing the exercise. Joseph Campbell mentions (as I’m sure you know) four different functions of mythology, and your reading of the myth definitely has psychological value. All that is excellent.
But is there more to it than that. You state, “I know it’s not Meyer’s intention to read it thusly,” and almost apologetically proceed with your exercise. But has the exercise achieved anything else besides psychological value (e.g., instruction for the exerciser). Does the exercise result in any information about the book or the cover or anything like that? You make predictions about the next book, but can this exercise really be the basis for such predictions?
(I suppose I should add that I have not read Twilight.)
August 5th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
It is not my intention to suggest any sort of “truth,” mostly because my “truth” is different from someone else’s “truth” by the very nature of personal experience.
The point of an exercise, such as this, is twofold. On the one hand, it’s fun to speculate how the series will end, using whatever means possible. The other reason is to demonstrate one possible alternative reading of the books, based on mythology and comparative literature. It all depends on what the reader wants to put into the reading, and what the reader hopes to get out of it.
Used properly (and not in passing, as in the case of this post), this type of exercise can give information about the book and even predict the ending, but only on a superficial level. The author still has the room to throw us for loops (and there’s no way I could have predicted some of the loops in Breaking Dawn!)
The ticket to understanding Jung and Campbell is understanding metaphor and archetype, while at the same time not taking any of their works literally. But that opens a whole new conversation.
(The Twilight series is not mythologically sound. What I am trying to figure out is what is the near-mythic attraction to the books. I think it rests on the demon-lover archetype, but I honestly haven’t given it all that much thought.)
August 7th, 2008 at 7:57 am
Thanks for the thoughtful response. I’m looking forward to this project and watching you explore this ticket to understanding Jung and Campbell. I’m working my way through The Masks of God; I am enjoying it and learning quite a bit from it.
I hope you are enjoying Breaking Dawn so far. I listened to your first podcast on the train during my morning commute today; I saw someone else on the train devouring Breaking Dawn a few rows ahead of me.
You are definitely correct about possible “alternative readings” of any book. I just finished writing a short article on different interpretations of Paradise Lost, a brief historical survey of literary criticism on the story of Satan’s rebellion. That poem is particularly intriguing because Milton states his goal is to justify God’s actions but many readers end up seeing Satan as the hero.