Check out our Most Anticipated Books for 2025

The Problem With Twins

I have a problem with twins. Nothing personal, you understand. In fact I have a pair myself and two more beautiful, wondrous children it would be hard to find (I may be biased here).

No, my problem is with twins in literature. And the problem is that, in books, no-one is ever just a twin. No, being a twin is always a plot device. If you are reading a detective story and someone mentions that they have a twin, look no further for the killer. If your taste is for lighter fiction and a character has a twin, brace yourself for hilarious romantic complications. Phoebe and Ursula In Friends are prime examples. In a comedy, you are bound to kiss your boyfriend's twin brother; in a crime novel, your long-lost twin is very likely to kill you. Incest, yes. Mistaken identity, yes. Good and evil, yin and yang. Yes, yes, yes.

And, in a way, I can see the attraction. It's so easy after all. Even Shakespeare did it and he should have known better, being the father of twins himself. Specifically, he should have known that boy and girl twins cannot be identical. But the father of Judith and Hamnet makes this fundamental mistake in Twelfth Night. To be fair to Will, it's a common misconception. I lost count of the times I had this conversation when my children were babies.

'Ahh!' (Looking into buggy). 'Are they boys or girls?'

'They're a boy and a girl.'

'Are they identical?'

'No...They're a boy and a girl.'

David Lodge makes this mistake in Changing Places, though he corrects it in Small World. Malcolm Saville has identical boy/girl twins in the Lone Pine books. To J.K. Rowling, twins are so obviously interchangeable that she doesn't bother to give Fred and George Weasley separate identities. Ged and Forge, indeed. In Donna Tartt's A Secret History and Arundhati Roy's The God of Small Things (both wonderful books, by the way), having boy and girl twins is an excuse for a spot of incest. Reginald Hill takes the missing twin option in one of his marvellous Dalziel and Pascoe books. Children's books aren't immune either, viz Lynne Reid Banks' deeply disturbing Angela and Diabola. You know, guys, it's OK to have twins and one not be a psychopath. In fact, it's OK for them to be completely different people.

So, this is my plea to my fellow authors. Next time, create a character who just happens to be a twin (in the same way, characters in fiction rarely just happen to be adopted). Have a character casually mention that they have a twin and don't have that twin turn up in the last chapter to be unmasked as the murderer or someone's lover. Go on, you know you can do it.


Elly GriffithsThe Crossing PlacesElly Griffiths' is the author of the Ruth Galloway novels which are set on the Norfolk Coast of England. The books take their inspiration from Elly's husband, who gave up a city job to train as an archaeologist, and her aunt who lives on the Norfolk coast and who filled her niece's head with the myths and legends of that area. Elly has two children and lives near Brighton. The Crossing Places, the first in the series, is just published in the USA, and has received extremely positive reviews from BookBrowse's members. Visit Elly online at ellygriffiths.co.uk. Also by Elly Griffiths in BookBrowse's Blog: "Snow Days"

Loved this post. Was reading nervously as I had included a pair of teen girl twins in a kids' book series I wrote. But they weren't angelic or diabolical, they didn't poach each other's boyfriends, nor did one of them happen to be a secret murderer, they were just... human, more or less. And I hadn't even read this post! Phew.
A very fine post, indeed. I've always been fascinated by twins and I love your take on them.
# Posted By Anne Mazer | 4/6/10 2:29 PM
Twins are also seen as sinister, viz the ones in Stephen King's 'The Shining' and in Kubrick's movie of same, standing hand in hand while buckets of blood cascade out of the elevator. Fantastic!

I love the idea of mentioning twins but doing nothing with it as a plot device because given people's expectations, said twins will then provide the perfect red herring(s)...
# Posted By Britical | 4/13/10 8:36 AM
Try "The Writing on the Wall" by Lynne Sharon Schwartz. I agree with you. I have twins and am also adopted and rarely find characters where this is just a part of who they are and not a central part of the plot. I laughed because I have had the "are they identical?" question asked hundreds of times for my boy/girl twins! Sometimes I just say yes for the fun of it!
# Posted By Nancy | 4/18/10 11:41 AM
When my boy/girl twins were born, the nurse in the doctor's office asked me if they were "identical." An unforgetable question!
# Posted By Rita | 4/18/10 12:15 PM
I have 23 year old (frat) twin girls who couldnt have more different personalities. The comments over the years have been remarkable, most memorable being "oh, they look so different, what is their age difference?" (when they were under a year). They are like any other sibs, with the unique difference that they shared the tight space in the beginning. They have been the centre of attention, whether they wanted it or not!
# Posted By Susan Orenbach | 4/19/10 5:30 AM
The reason that twins in fiction are rarely "just twins" is quite simple: The law of conservation of detail. TV Tropes explains it better than I can, but in short: An unusual or interesting detail should not be present unless it's important to the plot. In real life, twins just happen, and there doesn't need to be a reason. But in fiction, every detail the reader learns is a deliberate choice made by the writer; so the reader expects unusual choices to mean something. If you specify that two siblings are twins, the reader will quite reasonably expect that this detail is important to the plot; otherwise why would you specify?

If twins were as common as non-twins, maybe it wouldn't make any difference; but the fact is that they're rare, so they're inherently a detail that is going to stand out to the reader. (Same with adopted kids.) Perhaps it makes sense to complain about the particular ways that fictional twins end up being significant, to complain that authors aren't coming up with more interesting or creative or original reasons for characters to be twins; but it doesn't make sense to complain that there has to be a reason at all. That's almost inherent to fiction. So in most cases, no, authors cannot "have a character casually mention that they have a twin" and then not have that detail become important later. If it weren't important, the character would not be mentioning it.

(All of this applies more to literature, of course. In a visual medium like a movie or a comic book, you can demonstrate that two people are twins without anyone saying anything, making it more of a background detail.)

"To J.K. Rowling, twins are so obviously interchangeable that she doesn't bother to give Fred and George Weasley separate identities. Ged and Forge, indeed."

Fred and George are supporting characters. Supporting characters, in general, are much less distinct than main characters; it's not specific to Fred and George. This is all the more true when two characters appear together often, are friends with each other, and serve similar narrative roles: Crabbe and Goyle also come across as interchangeable, and not only are they not twins, they're not even related.

Furthermore, Fred and George actually do have distinct personalities: Fred is more outgoing, while George is more reserved. It's just hard to spot, because the traits they do have in common — for instance, their love of jokes and pranks — tend to dominate everything else. (Speaking of pranks, if there were ever any twins who would deliberately act more similar than they really are in order to trick people — like they do with their mother in their first appearance — it would be Fred and George.) And you didn't even mention the Patil twins, who are distinct enough that they ended up in completely different Houses!

(Also, ironically, both the Weasley twins and the Patil twins are examples of twins who really are "just twins". I'm not disputing your point that this is a rare phenomenon; I just thought it was funny to bring up a series featuring not one but two sets of twins who really are just twins, in a post complaining that twins are never just twins.)
# Posted By NoriMori | 3/20/24 11:06 PM
Comments (Please click on the link above to post a comment. Your comment will not appear until approved.)
BookBrowse Free Newsletters