The book was horribly alluring. I don't know if it sparkled in the sunlight, but it might as well have.
If it had been a copy of Dracula I would have invited it in immediately. Or a collection of esoteric vampire stories. I was rather hoping it'd be some dark, weird, bizarre re-imagining of Snow White... because, you see, the apple.
I don't have anything against vampires, on principal. In high school I was once the kind of girl who read books about vampires and angst and cheered and sighed with the rest of them. If you're a girl in your mid 20s, there's a decent chance you read LJ Smith's Nightworld series. They were vampire/werewolf/ghost/changeling romances, a little silly-seeming now, but fun enough if you were 14 and nerdy and didn't know any better. I can respect a series about vampire soulmates and girl witches and destiny and makeouts as fun pulp.
The thing is, girls and guys were monsters equally, and the dialogue was well-written (for the genre), the angst was interspersed with fun... they were good books.
From the accounts of all my fantasy-loving girl contemporaries... Twilight has nothing on LJ Smith. It doesn't even have anything on Anne Rice or
Laurel K. Hamilton. It's just cheesily written girl-suppression emo abstinence pron.
I think the reason that many of my friends are so offended is that, even for what it is, it's bad. If girls wanted to go insane over some vampire romances, they could have at least had
taste.
Then there's my friend Dan, who thinks that the romantic vampire concept needs to be retired, and we need a bit more of the "horrible monster who will eat you and won't care." kind of vampire again. After this, I think he may be right.
.