I’ve recently been having an animated discussion in one of the forums on Goodreads.

One of the posters there claims that Stephenie Meyer, author of The Twilight Saga, was dishonest because she changed the definition of the substance her vampires are made of. While I personally cannot see the contradictions in the information he/she has posted, that may be because anything scientific causes my eyes to glaze over.

But the question I wanted to ask here is, if she did change it deliberately because the earlier definition couldn’t hold up under scientific scrutiny, does that mean she has been ‘intellectually dishonest’?

I have argued that fantasy elements don’t usually hold up under scientific scrutiny anyway, because by their nature, fantasy elements are never going to hold up in the real world. That’s why they’re not in the real world. But should she have stayed consistent to her original definition, or was it better that she changed it, if that’s what she’s done?

This makes me tremble in fear when I think of my own book, which will be released in just a few weeks. I’m sure it has contradictions galore. Will I come under pressure to change them? Will that make me ‘intellectually dishonest’?

If you’re a fan of Meyer’s work, I’d like to hear your take on the matter. If you’re an author, I’d like to know if you’ve encountered this problem in your own writing. So if you’d like to share your wisdom with me, please feel free.

To see the conversation on goodreads, go here: http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/966330-the-twilight-saga-official-illustrated-guide?page=2&utm_medium=email&utm_source=comment_instant#comment_73019856