Edward and Bella #1

Locked
The Dark Knight
Touched By Cold Hands
Posts: 1250
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 6:55 am

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by The Dark Knight »

Jazz Girl wrote:
ringswraith wrote:The Dark Knight: You bring up some great points. Allow me to discuss a few of those.

First, your comment on human psychological profiling on werewolves and vampires. I can see where you're coming from, but while they are both grounded in human nature, I believe they are different enough to render human psychological profiling rather useless (or result in an incomplete/incorrect picture). The vampires have been around for a long time- centuries, in someone like Carlisle's case. How does one relate to that? Plus, those of them with added abilities such as Edward, Alice, or Jasper can confound such profiling simply because they can stay one or more steps ahead of the profiler. And the profiler would have no idea that he or she is being manipulated. As for the werewolves, profiling them will probably be easier, but one would have to understand the wolf portion of their minds in order to create a complete picture. And how does one relate to a wolf?

Second, I find it interesting that you have this opinion, yet when you explain the "truck disabling" incident, you go straight to the supernatural explanation. There is merit to what Jazz Girl has been saying all along- You cannot remove the supernatural from these characters and expect them to make the same sense in a normal world.
Ringswraith~ you make my arguments for me. Thank you.

Dark Knight~ I do want to take issue with the following comment:
The Dark Knight wrote: The first post about E&B relationship that started this last round of discussion hit many real points. Bella is co-dependant, regardless of any mystical being or what not, she demonstrates all the basic characteristics of co-dependency (yes she sometimes doesn’t but that does not override the truth that she “normally” does depend on Edward). She gives her life over to him in a very unhealthy way in Twilight the Book and pays dearly for it in NM. Her relationship toward Edward borders on submissive most of the time. Sorry, but that’s how it reads. Now, you may think that I’ll saying this is wrong, that just isn’t true. It just how SM wrote it. That’s the way their relationship works. He’s the protector and she along for the ride (at least through the first three books).


I would first point out that that is how the relationship reads to you. There are many of us (though I am speaking only for myself) who do not read Edward & Bella's relationship that way at all. First, when I look at Bella's realtionship to Edward, I actually see a fairly typical (supernatural elements not withstanding) progression through a relationship. In its' inital phases, both parties are completely enraptured in one another, desiring only to be with the other to the exclusion of other parts of their lives. Particularly adolescent relationships tend to start out exactly that way. You then have a bit of a stabilization process, where things normalize. This is the part of their relationship we really don't get to see because most of it happens during the summer between the time of Twilight and New Moon. Life takes on a routine and other interests creep back into life. We know that Bella worked at Newton's over the summer, she spent time with Alice and Esme and the other Cullens, as well as Edward. But, she also spent time with Angela and Charlie. But, again, because we are not privy to that time, we don't know that she didn't spend time with anyone else.

The events of New Moon disrupt the "typical" progression, obviously. But, even those events can be looked at in context of the reactions. Something happens that tests the relationship. Both parties, still being new to the idea of relationships, have extreme reactions to what they see as a catastrophic event. Because they do not yet understand the importance of communication in a relationship. neither one really understands how to handle the situation as a couple. So they act individually with horrible consequences. But, when the chips are thrown down and it comes time to act, it is Bella, the submissive, completely-overtaken one, who acts heroically and in the best interests of the relationship and the other party. Once that catastrophy is dealt with, both Edward and Bella have a very intense discussion about the future of the relationship, a very natural thing to happen after a challenge to the relationship. They both establish their desires for the future, their boundaries, and they start to put some of their fears on the table as well. They are demonstrating that they are starting to figure out the true dynamic of a relationship; two people coming together to be one entity, not losing themselves in one another, but being a unit as opposed to separates.

Now, Eclipse throws a monkey in the whole wrench. It is a second immediate challenge to a relationship that has already been tested and worked through and is progressing. But, the events of Eclipse also serve a purpose in that they test the relationship and the individuals in a very different way. And, alas, again, it is Bella, the submissive codependent, who tests Edward, the dominant leader of the relationship. Hmh, ironic? And, again, the concepts of communication and openness are reiterated and strengthened. And, of course you have the final committment in Breaking Dawn. And, again, the protagonist for much of the healthy progress is Bella, the submissive, completely over-taken one.

As you might have noticed, I find your characterization of Bella as submissive and overtaken as a little bit off, to say the least. Yes, Bella often turns to Edward for guidance and protection. She's a human navigating a supernatural world. Who else would she turn to but the man who loves her who has lived in that world for 90 years and is strong enough to protect her from it. But, that never means Bella surrenders herself. It is Bella essentially who decides that they cannot simply walk away from the relationship out of differences or fear. It is Bella who attempts to sacrifice herself to save the entire family in Twilight. It is Bella who pushes herself and decides to live any sort of life after Edward leaves. It is Bella who takes back the decision about her mortality at the end of New Moon. It is Bella who completely pushes the issue of keeping Jacob and the pack in their lives in Eclipse. It is Bella who decides her own fate completely contrary to the wishes of almost everyone involved including Edward and Carlisle with regard to carrying and giving birth to Renesmee. It is Bella who orchestrates Renesmee's future in BD. And, it is Bella who is ultimately responsible for the victory over the Volturi. Characterizing her as weak and codependent is just plain weak.

And, again, I will maintain that in all of these things, you absolutely cannot remove the supernatural from the equation. There will always be big center pieces of that puzzle missing if you even try.
Jazz Girl, glad to see you passionate defense of your POV. It OK to disagree on view points. However, you may want to do some research of definitions of the terms used; co-dependence and passive aggressive as it relates to co-dependency, mostly Submissive and topping as it relates to submissive. It would help you see where others are coming from.

Being co-dependant and mostly submissive does not equal weak or helpless (See definitions referral). Your arguments are good and in reality give credence to Bella being co-dependant or mostly submissive when you look at how she accomplishes them. These terms do not take from her rather they are explanations of her very human responses. As we all read the books we could often predict how a character would react. When one has tendencies they can be defined and I put to one and all that co-dependant and mostly submissive along with passive aggression and topping are Bella’s standard operating procedures.

Let me point out exactly my strongest argument for both of these terms. First co-dependant, she can live without Edward, her words and actions as well as one of the biggest underlying plot points of the whole series. If ever there is a clear cut conformation of co-dependency it is this. Sorry you don't like the term but it's fairly clear cut. Now for submissive (notice not "completely over-taken one" which is more accurately a definition of a slave; not Bella at all) she take a more passive role to Edward. It has been repeatedly talked about where Edward make large decisions without regard to Bella’s true desires, See truck issue and his leaving her in BD, he often tries to make amends for his mistakes but he still makes them. Bella’s deference toward Edward’s will is a strong form of submission. That is their relationship throughout most of the saga.

Again, these terms do not make her weak or helpless but rather define her human actions. I would say her passive aggressiveness and topping does greatly influence her getting her way often. In Eclipse, she is very ashamed of her manipulation of Edward when it comes to the big fight (good thing too she did). When you look at how she forced Edward to stay with her it is a classic form of passive aggression. She didn’t force him to stay with her by using brute force but rather brought him to the compromise that she wanted. I would further submit that her putting her mortality to a vote at the end of BD is a form of Topping. She has no real way to force Edward to change her into a Vampire, but by using his family against him she finally gets him to do what she wants albeit she does have to agree to meet other conditions (the later part being another form of submission).

So JassGirl, you may not like the terms but they do define her actions. She is only human after all
Image

"Peaces is not the absence of war, but the presence of justice."
Knives
Jump Starting Bella's Truck
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:01 pm
Location: Trudging Through the Ashes

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by Knives »

I've got to weigh in on the argument that Edward's "vampiric nature" overrides any human judgements on his behavior. I quite strongly feel that this is utterly and completely not the case. Edward acts very human through the entire series; he experiences love, lust, anger, hatred, concern, humor, sorrow, and other human emotions the same way we do. Likewise, the other Cullens - and even the other unaffiliated vampires - display human emotions in human ways. Even Aro can be described as a simple sociopath. A sociopath who could slaughter your entire city single-handedly and then ding dong the witch is dead which old witch the wicked witch about the blood on his suit, but a sociopath nonetheless.

Even if one were to say that Edward's lack of conventional biology excludes him from being judged as human, his behavior takes on a rather darker aspect. Vampires are, first and foremost, predators, in a way humans can never be. If one wishes to judge him as a vampire, his stalking of Bella and the various incidents such as the truck and the kidnapping become, not less, but more worrisome. I don't know about you, but if I was dating a girl whose species would consider my exsanguination to be a meal and not a tragedy, I'd be a little worried to find her outside of my window.

Frankly, one of Meyer's weaknesses as an author is her inability to portray nonhuman beings as truly alien. Her vampire and werewolf motivations go straight back to human roots, and they never truly evolve past (or sink below, depending on one's view of it) their human beginnings, and that's why I've never treated Edward any differently from a human of his (mental) age.

Incidentally - because I feel the urge to be a little rediculous after that post - I like muffins.
Openhome wrote:Knives, I believe that..
wait for it...
you are right.
ringswraith
Running with Leah 'cause she thinks I'm hawt
Posts: 4633
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by ringswraith »

Knives: Great points, as always. If you're referring to my post (about the psychological profiling) I wasn't trying to say that the vampiric or shapeshifting natures overrode their human natures- rather, that they give another side to consider that doesn't quite make itself readily understandable or relatable to normal humans (which in turn would confound such attempts to profile them).

Plus, remember that we are seeing everything through the filter of Bella's mind. She refuses to see them as vampires, or werewolves. To her, they are people; so she applies human traits to everything she sees. I'm not saying that she's wrong- in fact, I believe the majority of us who read the series did the same thing- but there are parts of these supernaturals that even she doesn't understand.

Again, each opinion to his or her own. :)
Knives
Jump Starting Bella's Truck
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:01 pm
Location: Trudging Through the Ashes

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by Knives »

I was actually replying to Jazz Girl's arguments, which - to me - seemed to be excusing Edward's behavior on the basis of his, well, corpsiness. It's a given that psychological profiling will be more difficult after one transitions out of the human race, but I don't hold that it's impossible; you just have to figure out what problems and conditions come with the new territory (such as werewolves and that lovely temper of theirs).

This is starting to get a little off-topic, though. My badness ^_^
Openhome wrote:Knives, I believe that..
wait for it...
you are right.
ringswraith
Running with Leah 'cause she thinks I'm hawt
Posts: 4633
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by ringswraith »

Knives wrote:I was actually replying to Jazz Girl's arguments, which - to me - seemed to be excusing Edward's behavior on the basis of his, well, corpsiness.
Hahaha- sorry, that made me laugh. :lol:
Jazz Girl
Making beautiful music with Edward as only I can
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Rob's HalfwayHouse, shacked up with some FicWard.

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by Jazz Girl »

The Dark Knight wrote:Jazz Girl, glad to see you passionate defense of your POV. It OK to disagree on view points. However, you may want to do some research of definitions of the terms used; co-dependence and passive aggressive as it relates to co-dependency, mostly Submissive and topping as it relates to submissive. It would help you see where others are coming from.

Being co-dependant and mostly submissive does not equal weak or helpless (See definitions referral). Your arguments are good and in reality give credence to Bella being co-dependant or mostly submissive when you look at how she accomplishes them. These terms do not take from her rather they are explanations of her very human responses. As we all read the books we could often predict how a character would react. When one has tendencies they can be defined and I put to one and all that co-dependant and mostly submissive along with passive aggression and topping are Bella’s standard operating procedures.

Let me point out exactly my strongest argument for both of these terms. First co-dependant, she can live without Edward, her words and actions as well as one of the biggest underlying plot points of the whole series. If ever there is a clear cut conformation of co-dependency it is this. Sorry you don't like the term but it's fairly clear cut. Now for submissive (notice not "completely over-taken one" which is more accurately a definition of a slave; not Bella at all) she take a more passive role to Edward. It has been repeatedly talked about where Edward make large decisions without regard to Bella’s true desires, See truck issue and his leaving her in BD, he often tries to make amends for his mistakes but he still makes them. Bella’s deference toward Edward’s will is a strong form of submission. That is their relationship throughout most of the saga.

Again, these terms do not make her weak or helpless but rather define her human actions. I would say her passive aggressiveness and topping does greatly influence her getting her way often. In Eclipse, she is very ashamed of her manipulation of Edward when it comes to the big fight (good thing too she did). When you look at how she forced Edward to stay with her it is a classic form of passive aggression. She didn’t force him to stay with her by using brute force but rather brought him to the compromise that she wanted. I would further submit that her putting her mortality to a vote at the end of BD is a form of Topping. She has no real way to force Edward to change her into a Vampire, but by using his family against him she finally gets him to do what she wants albeit she does have to agree to meet other conditions (the later part being another form of submission).

So JassGirl, you may not like the terms but they do define her actions. She is only human after all
Dark Knight~, Let me first say, that I absolutely hate the idea of labeling anyone or any relationship without the ability to evaluate deeply. That being said, no, I understand the terms perfectly well. My opinion is that you are looking for pathology where none exists. You are assigning terms like codependent and submissive to thoughts, feelings and actions that can clearly be defined as grief reactions or typical relationship progression. Certainly, if you look at the symptoms of codependent behavior, Bella does demonstrate many of them ie caretaking behavior, feeling avoidance and denial immediately jump to mind, particularly in relation to New Moon, but also beyond. But, those are also classic grieving behaviors as well. And, isn't Bella grieving the loss not only of Edward, but also her future family and the life she chose. It is Charlie who says it was more like someone died, but it is Bella who confirms directly that that is how she viewed her life after Edward left.

But, let's look beyond to the events of Eclipse and Breaking Dawn. I am really trying to see your point of view, where any of her behavior in either of those story lines could be considered codependent. Codependents try to be perfect for the object of their dependence. They also struggle with intimacy issues and have a tendency to be hypervigilant about situations that threaten their relationships. Looking at the primary behavioral component of Eclipse, Bella's insistance on maintaining a relationship with Jacob against Edward's wishes, with those components of codependence in mind, I don't think you can at all justify the codependent label. The same is true of Breaking Dawn. Bella's primary action in Breaking Dawn is the carrying and birth of Renesmee, an action completely contrary to the wishes of Edward until the very last moment. Again, a codependent personality would buckle almost immediately to the wishes of their partner. She might have put up a fight for a few days, but Edward's pain, his desire to see her safe against her wishes, would have worn through her decision. You simply cannot label her behavior there as codependent at all. To answer your direct argument, yes, she can live without Edward. But, we can all live without our partners. They do not become biologically imperative to our survival. But, establishing a deep emotional connection to your chosen partner does not make one codependent. Nor does the act of questioning whether or not you can survive without that person. Again, it demonstrates strong grief over the loss of your partner and the life you lead with that person.

So, then let's turn to your assertion of submissive, which I am sorry, could be very easily put in laymans terms as completely overtaken, in terms of that person's personality. The key trait of a submissive personality is to give over control of one's self to another, to be humbly compliant and to acquiese in all things. Again, yes there are times when Bella acquieses to Edward's wishes or feelings. But again, I think you are looking for pathology where none exists. Bella also maintains a very healthy level of her own thoughts, feelings and actions. Are there times when she submits to Edward? Absolutely. But, it is never a situation of blind obedience, as in the case of a submissive. Again, one need look no further than Bella's asking for a vote on her mortality, or her insistance on seeing Jacob, or her insistance on keeping Renesmee, or her insistance on her own conditions before marriage to see that Bella's personality is quite the opposite of submissive.

And that leaves us with passive-aggressive. In and of itself, passive aggressive behavior is not unhealthy or pathological. But, it is plenty damn irritating. And, believe me, there are plenty of times when Bella's choices irritate the crap out of me. But, again, I defend Bella because I think labels are being tossed around carelessly. Some of the same behaviors you label as passive aggressive could also very easily be looked at as healthy situational reactions. The newborn battle is the perfect example. Bella is still processing and overcoming her fears of losing Edward again. A battle with a horde of bloodthirsty newborn vampires all hellbent on destroying the one thing he will die to protect would be a panic inducing situation to Bella. So Bella asks Edward directly to help her deal with the situation. As Edward points out, it is what compromise is all about. Here are the situations I can deal with, now lets find something we can both deal with. Healthy relationship progression. Communication and equal partnership.

So, Dark Knight, it isn't a matter of liking or not liking the terms. It is a matter of understanding that one person's sought-after negatives can be another person's healthy alternatives.

Knives wrote:I was actually replying to Jazz Girl's arguments, which - to me - seemed to be excusing Edward's behavior on the basis of his, well, corpsiness. It's a given that psychological profiling will be more difficult after one transitions out of the human race, but I don't hold that it's impossible; you just have to figure out what problems and conditions come with the new territory (such as werewolves and that lovely temper of theirs).

This is starting to get a little off-topic, though. My badness ^_^


Knives~ it isn't that I excuse his behavior, no more so than I excuse Bella's or Jacob's. It is a matter of understanding that Edward's corpsiness, and Jacob's wolfiness for that matter, add complexity and additional factors that simply have to be taken into account when you are evaluating their behavior. There is a difference.

And, yeah, I get the goofy. I like...cookies.. :lol:
“Directing 7 Cullens at once=herding cats" :ROTFLMAO:
C-Dubs is TwitterRoyalty
Image
Turning Page is Gospel~Ashley=MiniMe~HHBS
amethyst
Teaching Eric Social Graces
Posts: 202
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:27 pm

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by amethyst »

Wow . . . Jazz Girl, just utterly amazing. The way you toss words like that and form perfectly coherent paragraphs, I have yet to learn!!
"I never would have banished him from her society as long as she desired his. . . . . But, till then--if you don't believe me, you don't know me--till then, I would have died by inches before I touched a single hair of his head!"
akire
Finding a Nice Guy for Angela
Posts: 976
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 7:03 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by akire »

Jazz Girl wrote: As you might have noticed, I find your characterization of Bella as submissive and overtaken as a little bit off, to say the least. Yes, Bella often turns to Edward for guidance and protection. She's a human navigating a supernatural world. Who else would she turn to but the man who loves her who has lived in that world for 90 years and is strong enough to protect her from it. But, that never means Bella surrenders herself. It is Bella essentially who decides that they cannot simply walk away from the relationship out of differences or fear. It is Bella who attempts to sacrifice herself to save the entire family in Twilight. It is Bella who pushes herself and decides to live any sort of life after Edward leaves. It is Bella who takes back the decision about her mortality at the end of New Moon. It is Bella who completely pushes the issue of keeping Jacob and the pack in their lives in Eclipse. It is Bella who decides her own fate completely contrary to the wishes of almost everyone involved including Edward and Carlisle with regard to carrying and giving birth to Renesmee. It is Bella who orchestrates Renesmee's future in BD. And, it is Bella who is ultimately responsible for the victory over the Volturi. Characterizing her as weak and codependent is just plain weak.
This is my favorite thing you've written, ever. Amazing. Oh wait... maybe this is.
Jazz Girl wrote: But, we can all live without our partners. They do not become biologically imperative to our survival. But, establishing a deep emotional connection to your chosen partner does not make one codependent. Nor does the act of questioning whether or not you can survive without that person. Again, it demonstrates strong grief over the loss of your partner and the life you lead with that person.
Also, haha you like cookies. I like cookies, too. And unicorns.
Image

Image Image Image
Knives
Jump Starting Bella's Truck
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:01 pm
Location: Trudging Through the Ashes

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by Knives »

Jazz Girl wrote:Your assertion that Edward's leaving in New Moon is in reaction to his lack of connection to Bella is just, I hate to say it, but wrong. In fact, I would make the argument that actually leaves because he fears the growing connection between them. He knows that he brings danger into her life. He cannot have her blood on his hands, so he makes the assumption that by removing his influence, he removes the danger in her life. What he doesn't realize is that it is already too late. They are both already too emotionally connected to each other to be apart. So, Edward's choice not to live without her can be understood. When he says she is his life, he isn't using hyperbole or exagerating or being dramatic. He is telling the absolute truth. Their lives are too intertwined to be separated. And, again, this is the place where you cannot separate the fantastical elements of the story. In our world, his choice to die would be selfish and wrong. But, in his, where eternity is a very real concept, and the love that he has for his mate is so much more visceral and integral to his survival, where his insticts and feelings are so much more intense, and where his family is a family of vampires who, even though they would grieve his loss, would also completely understand the intensity of his grief, it is a different story. Edward's choice not to live in a world where Bella does not exist makes complete sense, in that world.
Sorry it's taken me so long to get back about this; I had something all prepared, and then real life came up, and I forgot, and then I remembered, and then real life came up. I swear, if it wasn't essential to my survival I'd tell things like eating and having a place to live to go screw themselves :P

The problem I find with your reasoning - aside from the aforementioned "I don't think the supernatural elements really affect the relationship" argument, above - is that Edward's action is not indicative of a real emotional connection. Yes, Edward is afraid of Bella getting hurt, and he's afraid of the consequences of his presence in her life, but instead of talking to her about the problem, Edward reacts by distancing himself. Why? Because Bella is already distant. The two never share their problems with each other - they don't discuss them, work them out, or even fight about them. Without any real experience to call upon and without the ability to get advice from any quarter, Edward reacts to this problem the way he's been reacting - by creating distance. This is not a healthy behavior, and whether one is human, vampire, werewolf, or freakin' Starfire from Teen Titans, this is indicative of serious dysfunction.
Openhome wrote:Knives, I believe that..
wait for it...
you are right.
ringswraith
Running with Leah 'cause she thinks I'm hawt
Posts: 4633
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: Edward and Bella

Post by ringswraith »

Or, he could be simply making the same mistake that people have made time and again- Assuming that they know better than the other person and deciding something for them instead of consulting them first. Which is what I see Edward doing in this case. After all, he's over a century old- he should know better than a girl who just turned 18, right?

And I can't really agree with your statement that they were distant because Bella was distant- that they never talked about their issues. Solely going by the events of New Moon, after the birthday party incident, did they not talk about it in the car? Did Bella not tell Edward that "What happened with Jasper was nothing, Edward- nothing!"? Bella attempted to get Edward to see her side of things, but he decided against it for her.
Locked