Apr 23

hekapolis asked: I always though that being labelled in a clear clique (snobbish rich kids that think they are so better than everyone that they date each other instead of spreading the love) was a way to hide in plain sight. Humans are bound to talk about them if they pay too much attention they might start to notice vampiric things. If you give them something concrete, they won't notice the vampire traits. I also think HS is done sporadically it worked for Forks in this century but they didn't do it in Alaska.

I’d buy the clique thing if they weren’t dating each other. Jessica is right—they live together, it’s weird, even if they aren’t technically related. It still looks/sounds like incest even though it isn’t and that’s negative attention no one would want. What if someone called social services and had Dr. and Mrs. Cullen investigated? It just seems like a bad idea from the standpoint of secrecy, especially in a small town prone to gossip. (“What kind of foster parents let their kids date? Do they share beds in that house?  Are they having sex? Someone should look into it, it doesn’t seem to be a healthy environment in which to raise children.”). It didn’t raise any red flags to Charlie the cop or any of Carlisle’s colleagues at the hospital?  From an outside view, it looks fishy.

Can Alice/Jasper and Rosalie/Emmett really not pretend to just be friends/siblings for a few hours a day? They can be snobby rich kids who don’t associate with anyone without dating their foster siblings.

I don’t know what they did in Alaska, but according to Midnight Sun the plan seemed to be if they moved on from Forks (because of Bella) that they would start high school again: 

"The question," Carlisle continued, "is whether we should move on?"
"No," Rosalie moaned. "We just got settled. I don’t want to start sophomore year in high school again!"
"You could keep your present age, of course," Carlisle said.
"And have to move again that much sooner?" she countered. 

squirreltastic asked: On the subject of why the cullen 'kids' go to school...I can see it, but like every other decade or something. I mean new information is added to curriculums over time, discoveries change things but it would be a bad investment of time to just do it over and over so close in time. advancements have to be made and added to the textbooks for it to be worth while. its not a perfect way to learn this stuff but its an idea...

I think there are ways to justify it — it keeps them exposed to humans in an environment where they can easily escape (Teacher! I have to go to the nurse!) and they can help each other; or like you said, going back every decade or so to get updates on science and things like computers and tech isn’t totally dumb.  

But let’s be real: they suck at blending in. You don’t drive a shiny new Volvo or a flashy red BMW to a small rural high school to “blend in.” You don’t sit only with your adopted siblings (who everyone knows are dating each other) to ‘blend in.’ You don’t all (including the one who looks/acts like a ‘dumb jock’) get perfect 4.0 grades and skip classes on sunny days to ‘blend in.’  

Claiming Esme homeschools them would create much less gossip and attention than all that. 

Like, if SM had her heart set on them being in high school I think she could have come up with some better justification for it.  If it was part of some grand plan to get them used to being around humans I could maybe buy it (a softer, kinder version of the “torturous effort” Carlisle inflicted on himself because he’s too compassionate to make the rest suffer the same way he did), but this “we go to high school so we can blend in!” doesn’t really fly when everyone is gossiping about how creepy it is that adopted/foster siblings are dating each other and everyone is super aware that you skip school all the time when the weather is nice. 

thepurpletribute asked: If you could redo the human ages of the Cullen's (especially Carlisle and Edward) and the other vampires how old would you make them?

That’s an interesting question.  I could go a couple of different ways. 

If we’re talking about changing the human ages so that the story they present in Forks makes sense (that Carlisle and Esme adopted a bunch of teenagers who attend the local high school) then the solution is to make Carlisle and Esme in their 30s rather than their 20s and lower all the kids’ ages slightly. But then the problem would be you’d also have to redo all their backstories—if Carlisle were 33 rather than 23 when he was turned, it’s highly likely he would have been married and had children and wouldn’t have been so much under the thumb of his father, who might have been dead by then.  Jasper rising to the rank of Major by only 19/20 is unusual enough as it is, doing it by 17/18 would be pretty much impossible. The other kids it probably wouldn’t make too much of a difference (Edward and Rosalie could stay 17 and 18; Alice looks young for her age anyway because she’s so small, and Emmett’s age is kind of irrelevant to his back story).  Likewise Esme could be 36 rather than 26 and it wouldn’t have to change her story much, other than having a longer abusive marriage and adding fertility/health problems to make it so she only had her first child at 36. 

If we aren’t factoring in the Forks cover story or high school in general, I’d probably keep Alice, Edward, Emmett and Rosalie about where they are.

Carlisle I might add a few years but not many—I like the idea that someone who looks so young is actually so old and wise. The average age of marriage in Restoration London for the common folk was about 26, so he could be a few years older than 23 and still unmarried without it being weird. Let’s say 26, which is the age people usually are when they graduate med school, so he’ll still look a little Doogie Howser-y but less so.

Edward makes a point in New Moon (I think it was NM?) that Esme is older than Carlisle and it has never bothered them, but I’d want to play with that and make it more of a gap. Let’s make her 33 to Carlisle’s revised 26. Then you might actually have an obvious age gap and if they DID want to pose publicly as C/E’s children, Esme could be their mother (at 33 her range of ages she could pretend to be could go up to a young-looking 40) and Carlisle the younger stepfather, like Renee and Phil.  

Jasper would be a few years older, which would make his rank make a bit more sense and would mean he wouldn’t have to humiliate himself with high school anymore. All the others—even 20-year-old Emmett—hadn’t set out into the world on their own yet, Emmett was still at home helping to provide for his family. Jasper lived an independent, adult life in the army for several years and then existed in brutal vampire war for 90 years and now has had to pretend to be someone’s adolescent child. It’s silly and embarrassing. Make him 21 or 22 and then he’s too old to pretend. I’d also remove the idea that he considers C/E his parents at all. If anything he’d see them as in-laws, as Alice’s ‘parents.’ 

Carlisle is my favorite, not as a ‘father figure,’ but as an individual. So it’s not really important to me that he’s old enough to be Edward or anyone’s father. It’s a more interesting and complex relationship than that, IMO.  What’s important is that he is older and has more experience and Edward looks up to him, other than that it doesn’t matter. I DO like the idea of Esme being a bit older though, because I don’t think physical age/appearance would matter much to vampires and I DO see her as more traditionally parental than Carlisle. 

Apr 22



twilightintheusa asked: I don't kno why but to me emmett and rose's relationship always seems forced, I can see how all the others r true soul mates, but emmett is the least protective out of all of them and they have completely opposite personalities. I think it said somewhere that rose would give emmett up to be human? Idk, but to me the whole relationship seems pretty forced lol

Emmett and Rose sort of suffer from us not seeing them interact as much I think.  Bella is very close to Alice so we get some perspective on Alice/Jasper from that, and Edward is close to Carlisle and Esme so we see them through his eyes (especially in Midnight Sun) but Emmett and Rosalie, because none of narrators (Bella, Jacob or Edward in MS) are big Rosalie fans, we don’t get to see them in the same way.  I definitely get how at first glance they might not seem all that ideal on paper.

Emmett and Rosalie are said to have a very enthusiastic and active sex life which is kind of amazing when you think about the brutal way that Rosalie died. Emmett must be quite the guy to help her get over that trauma so that she can enjoy being intimate with him to that degree.  It might seem like their relationship is shallow because it’s so physical, but in this context it’s kind of sweet.  He helps her have fun in a life she never wanted and she grounds him and keeps him from doing anything to stupid and reckless. I don’t think Emmett’s not protective, it’s more that Rosalie’s whole demeanor screams I CAN TAKE CARE OF MYSELF and Emmett stands back and lets her do her thing.

re: Rosalie would give him up to be human, Edward said that in MS and Emmett didn’t disagree but a) saying you’ll do something and actually going through with it are two different things.  Like Bella—she said in choosing Edward she knew she’d have to give up Charlie and that she made this sacrifice willingly, but then in Breaking Dawn she comes up with her plan to let him “guess wrong” so he can stay in her life after all.  If Rosalie actually found herself in a situation where she had to chose humanity or Emmett, would she really be able to give him up?  IDK.  and b) I don’t think her trading Emmett for humanity means she doesn’t really love Emmett, it just means that being human is THAT important to her. Like people who give up love to follow some other dream—it doesn’t mean there wasn’t love there or that the decision was easy.

I like E/R because there’s something just really “human” about them.  There are no superpowers between them, no visions of them being together, no “I can read every mind except yours.” Neither are held up as being ~perfect~, they are both flawed. But she saw this dying human and wanted to save him. She carried him over 100 miles while he was bleeding profusely and she had only been a vampire for 2 years herself—still practically a newborn! She begged Carlisle to save him for her because she doesn’t trust herself not to kill him.  Rosalie—stubborn, prideful Rosalie—was wiling to humble herself, admit there was something she could not do, and ask for help. She asked even though she knew it was selfish because she couldn’t let this man die.  He saw her as his saving angel and she found a reason to be happy with her unwanted existence.



creoleprincess asked: Bella's hair visibly got healthier and stronger looking during her transformation in the movie, so maybe vampire hair is super strong.

That’s definitely how it played out in the movie.  I’m not sure that that it fits book canon because SM had this to say on the Lexicon:

Vampires do shower, but they don’t get dirty the same way we do.  Outside dirt, yes–blood and mud and whatnot (though most vampires don’t get a spot on themselves when they eat–its all a matter of practice), but not sweat or body oils. They would never have B.O., ha ha.  One girl asked me why Alice had a bathroom and if vampires have to pee.  No, they don’t (they use all the blood, creating no waste), but they do shower. (And of course they have to have bathrooms–houses are just built that way, and when they want to move, it would look a little weird on the real estate listing: eight bedrooms, no baths.)

They do wash the dust and rain out of their hair, too.  And Rosalie particularly spends a lot of time doing hers.  (Hair is dead cells–the vampire transformation doesn’t affect it.  If you’ve got split ends, sorry!  Not getting better.  Ha ha).

Over time you’d think that would result in damaged hair and hair loss though, so really it’s just one of those times you shrug your shoulders and accept the fantasy—otherwise Edward and the rest of the vampires would probably be bald.

hekapolis asked: I don't think selecting a place with the idea that you will have a better alibi if you slip is what good people do. If anything is better they remove all temptations by going to a place that keep accountability so they have as many incentives as possible. I do think Bella is generous to the Cullens (Rosalie and Jasper are cold blood killers) But Edward, Carlisle, Esme, Alice and Emmet always try to do the right thing and that is what good people do,IMO. I guess we have to agree to disagree.

I don’t think they are bad people but I don’t think they are exceptionally good either other than maybe Carlisle (and possibly Esme—she was very kind to the wolves but we don’t see what she does out in the world, if anything).  Alice is sweet and friendly and helpful… but she also uses her gift to cheat the stock market—would a ‘truly good person’ do that? IDK. (And isn’t that a very bad idea in terms of secrecy?) Emmett is one of my favorites but he makes bets with Jasper about how many people Bella will kill as a newborn which is pretty callous to the potential loss of human life.  And that’s fine—for a vampire.  But if two humans made a bet about how many people would die in any given scenario, we’d all be pretty appalled.

I like them all, but I actually like them better as flawed vampires than as perfect people. I mean let’s be honest, if we had billions of dollars and all the free time in the world, most us wouldn’t be doing anything useful with our time either. It’s actually very human and relatable.  I do think they are falling short of the example Carlisle has set, but they are young yet. Maybe someday they will be doing more.