I don't believe authors typically feel the need to reconcile the actions of characters they've created with their own personal values. The world is made up of every kind of person; to portray humanity with any sense of realism, an author must present a wide variety of values and motivations. Authors who have deep religious convictions may avoid certain topics, language, or situations, but certainly the differences in story telling would end there.Jazz Girl wrote: The characters [Stephenie] 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 . . . .
The inequality of Bella's expectations for Edward's and Jacob's verbal treatment of each other has been broached on the boards a lot. I've seen vehement objections on both sides: everything from Jacob never gets away with anything to Jacob gets away with everything. I look at the situation rather differently.Jazz Girl wrote:. . . in my mind, Stephenie's preference for Jacob [is] 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.
There are a lot of strong personalities in my extended family. Only a few family members share my values. When some who do not share my values sound off, I save my breath -- because speaking up would not change a thing. However, if a family member who does share my values sounds off, I might say something -- because I have influence in that relationship, and my comments may be heeded.
As far as Bella - Edward - Jacob go: I don't think Bella could change Jacob's language by merely asking him to cool it. Jacob would definately blow her off. However, if Bella asked Edward to change his language, he would probably try to accomodate her. Why would Bella knock herself out trying to get Jacob to shut up or change the way he expressed himself? It would be wasted breath.
Jacob did apologize for his I'd rather you were dead remarks in Chapter 8 of Eclipse, and Bella did hold him accountable by shutting him out for a time -- if only a brief time. She had her reasons for not "holding a grudge," as Edward termed it. To sum it up, I think Bella knew when a reproof from her would have weight, and she usually didn't waste energy on fruitless objections over how they referred to or spoke to each other.