Tornado wrote:Yes, but what I am saying is that if she turned into Team Jacob during the course of the books, as some people seem to think, I'm sure she could have provided a different ending if she really liked Jacob better. We know that she was under pressure at one stage to only write three books instead of four. It could have provided a nice, neat ending to book three to have her go off with Jacob and have puppies instead.
As far as I know (December, Alphie,Pel, please correct me if I'm wrong, as I don't have the sources you do *sadpanda*), Stephenie was never pressured to shorten The Saga, only to lengthen it, expand it. It was originally written as two novels; Twilight & Forever Dawn. After the success of Twilight, Little Brown essentially begged her to expand the series into four novels total. As EsmeEcho so helpfully pointed out, there's no way she could just change it. Stephenie has always maintained that she is essentially a biographer for Edward& Bella. It is their story she is telling. The ending was already written. In the expansion, she had to fill in the gaps, go into more detail, but she could not just change the reality of the story. That is where she had the opening to express a little bit of herself in the characters and story.
Tornado wrote:So, as she expanded the story and was really forced to acknowledge and deal with those aspects of Edward's life and personality that conflicted with her own beliefs and preferences, she started to realize and acknowledge that she wouldn't have made the choice Bella did.
Yes, but she's not Bella. She has said that. She hasn't got Bella's bravery. And what in Edward's life conflicts with her beliefsSo, not only (when she has the opportunity to express it indirectly) do we hear comments that support the idea that she prefers Jacob to Edward, we see it also, as in the examples that we talked about within the text (comments Jacob is allowed to make, actions that go unatoned, etc).
Can you quote me some examples please?
First, let me say that this is all my opinion, how I've seen and interpreted passages and interviews and other information sources. No, Stephenie is not Bella. But, in telling their story, they are her characters. She is their creator. So, in as much as she sees herself as biographer telling their story, she also has to assume some responsibility for who and what they are. She is answerable for it. It's kind of the ultimate dilemma for an author who writes the way she does. The characters she created and loves, rather like our children, may say, do or believe things that she does not believe herself. Primarily, I look at the beliefs she follows as a member of the Mormon Church. She's always maintained that she holds her spiritual beliefs very close. So, those things that might conflict with her spiritual beliefs, she has to reconcile accepting as a part of her characters. In part, I think that is where Jacob really originated. His character allows her to have a source of opposition to those things that might conflict with her personal beliefs, though he's not the only one.
The overarching conflict within the love story is a perfect example. For Bella & Edward to be together, they both have to essentially choose for her to die. She has to willingly give up her human life and Edward has to willingly and intentionally take it from her. This conflicts with most Judeo-Christian belief systems, include the Latter Day Saints. In my opinion, this is why Bella is changed the way she is. Rather than both partners choosing to accept that the only way they can be together is for her to be changed, and willingly choosing that love and future together, it is done as a "last resort", a no-other-option scenario where it is (as with all of the other Cullens) the only way to save her.
If you would like direct quotes from the books, there are so many that reflect, in my mind, Stephenie's preference for Jacob as seen in the latitude he gets to express his bile. The one that always sticks out in my mind is when Jacob tells her he would prefer her to truly be dead than be a vampire. Jacob is never made to acknowledge the hatred and jealousy and inflicted pain of that remark, ever. But, the overall attitude he is never forced to answer for pervades the novels. Jacob is allowed to insult, degrade and torture Edward without ever having to answer for it; his thoughts in the parking lot after the trip to Florida, every reference he makes to Edward or the Cullens as ticks, leaches, bloodsuckers, etc, threatening Edward's life at the wedding, and on and on. But, the few times Edward's thoughts or words are anything other than completely civil, Bella immediately takes him to task about it, dismissing altogether the rivalry that she herself creates and essentially forbidding Edward to experience the emotions that she causes in him.