|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:27 pm
"Another question I think we could look at is whether or not Harry Potter will be considered a classic book/series. By "classic," what I mean is a book that transcends time and can be enjoyed even centuries from now.
LOTR is already recognized as a classic series. Do you think the same will be true about Harry Potter? Especially considering that there's quite a bit of opposition, most notably from the Catholic Church...." -Kitamaya
Well, I don't want to sound like a broken record, so I'm just going to say one thing. It seems to me that books that meet with a lot of opposition tend to survive longer. It just makes the fan-base stronger and more loyal to the books when someone is threatening what they love.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 11:10 am
Twilight is an insult to literature. Hell, Twilight is an insult to Mary Sues'.
It is absolutely poorly written, filled with purple prose, painful cliches and the cheesiest dialogue this side of bad fanfiction. The characters are two-dimensional, the books have no plot. And to top off; the cherry of spite on top of the rancid cake filled with gruel? The books send a distinctly negative, and quite frankly horrifying message to all women who read them. The message is this: sexism is just awesome and should really make a comeback, all feminists who want a career or independence, who don't want to marry at 18 and push out babies, then stay at home and clean should just die, abusive, unhealthy relationships are hunky dory is your boyfriend is hot and sparkles, and ***** is True Love. Also, suicide is romantic. Stalking is flattering. And wanting to eat your girlfriend is beautiful and natural.
There is no comparison. Twilight. And Harry Potter shouldn't be mentioned in the same time zone, let alone the same sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 7:18 pm
I hate the fact that everyone in my school loves Twilight! Everyone is always carrying around the books, even guys are reading it! I think Twilight is very good, but Harry Potter, in my opinion, is better. That may not me how others think, but it is for me. I've read Twilight, New Moon and Eclipse and Breaking Dawn. When people say Twilight is better then HP, it makes me want to fight back, but I'm not that kind of person. A lot of my friends love Edward. LOTR is ok, but I've never heard of people comparing it to HP. I really hate it when people compare series that have completely different plots. All very clever plots but different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2008 5:16 pm
Quote: Twilight is an insult to literature. Hell, Twilight is an insult to Mary Sues'. It is absolutely poorly written, filled with purple prose, painful cliches and the cheesiest dialogue this side of bad fanfiction. The characters are two-dimensional, the books have no plot. And to top off; the cherry of spite on top of the rancid cake filled with gruel? The books send a distinctly negative, and quite frankly horrifying message to all women who read them. The message is this: sexism is just awesome and should really make a comeback, all feminists who want a career or independence, who don't want to marry at 18 and push out babies, then stay at home and clean should just die, abusive, unhealthy relationships are hunky dory is your boyfriend is hot and sparkles, and ***** is True Love. Also, suicide is romantic. Stalking is flattering. And wanting to eat your girlfriend is beautiful and natural.
Ghoul, I'm going to have to disagree with this. I certainly didn't get that message. And besides, how is this comparing? I've just read bashing, and that's not what this thread is about. I'm going to have to defend Twilight again. Sorry to those of you that have not read Twilight, and won't understand the references I'll have to use.
Twilight's morals are different than Harry Potter's, it's true. But those mentioned above by you are not the messages the books were meant to express. I read the books and find a romance book emphasizing chastity before marriage. How many fanfictions (even with the cheesiest dialogue) have you read that do that? And have that many teen girls and even boys reading it? Do you understand the effects that that moral could have? Also, emphasizing chivalry and morals in a time that seems to have forgotten both, the empowerment of women, the nature of love, selfishness vs. selflessness, the nature of one's soul and the redemption of it, and the balance between taking orders and exercising your free will. These are some of the messages which the Twilight series tries to promote.
Some of the "messages" mentioned by you are really the flawed views of real, three-dimensional characters. All characters should have flaws and virtues. A balanced amount of these means that the characters are not Mary Sues at all, but rounded characters. (And if Mary-Sues are being insulted, then that proves that her characters are three-dimensional, doesn't it?) And honestly, we've been dealing with the romanticism of suicide since Shakespeare, and maybe even before. You still won't see Romeo and Juliet coming off of the high school reading lists anytime soon.
However, your statement, "And wanting to eat your girlfriend is beautiful and natural" gives off the impression that you do not understand Edward's character. He knows his instincts are wrong, hence why Bella even lives past the first chapter of Twilight. And it seems you don't understand why Bella laughs when Mike inadvertently phrases his similar observation in a way that is completely ironic to her. It's true and Mike doesn't realize how close to the truth he's actually hitting.
Harry Potter's messages revolve around Racism, the nature of Death, Bravery, Deception, and I'm absolutely sure that we as Harry Potter fans can name many more. I'm tired though, and will cut this part short. Maybe tomorrow I'll look and see if there is a thread yet for listing the morals that Harry Potter teaches.
It is these unchanging messages, these morals, that make a "classic." And the ability to express those messages. In my opinion, Harry Potter should already be considered a classic. Too bad some English professors don't agree with me.
I'm dismayed to find that Meyer's messages did not make it through to you. Twilight's one step farther away from being a classic then. *shrug*
But I still don't understand where you are pulling this moral from: "all feminists who want a career or independence, who don't want to marry at 18 and push out babies, then stay at home and clean should just die."
None of the major female characters in Twilight do this. Renee, Esme, Alice, Rosalie, Bella, Leah, Victoria... none follow this situation in their human lives. And of those that are vampires, only Esme is the typical stay-at-home mother. If you call being a vampire typical. And if you looked at Esme's human life, you'll find she was the last of her friends to marry, encouraged by her parents into an abusive marriage in the early 1900's, ran from that abuse to protect her pregnancy, and survived on a schoolteacher's salary to provide for herself. The child didn't survive more than a few days. (By the way, how does her example prove that abusive relationships are good?) She clings to that "stay-at-home" style of living because she never had a good chance to do it in her human life. She's always had that maternal ache, and she's physically the oldest of the Cullens, so she naturally fell into a maternal role. And honestly, I can count the number of semi-major characters that died on one hand.
As I mentioned above, the Twilight series is actually about the empowerment of women. Victoria is so much more of a threat than her mate, James. Bella ends up being the most powerful and most valuable player. The reason it takes so long for her to surpass her damsel in distress role is the same reason no Muggle goes up against Voldemort and survives. Her foe has powers and abilities that she does not possess. But look at the example of Mrs. Weasley in DH. If anyone's promoting a stay-at-home mother it's Jo. Molly's the one that got married right after Hogwarts at eighteen and promptly had seven children and stayed home to clean and care for them. And yet Mrs. Weasley takes out Bellatrix instead of the opposite. stare So where does that leave your moral?
I would honestly promote both series, but I always try to emphasize the difference between the genres and the writing styles. Twilight is a romance, first and foremost. Harry Potter is a mystery-adventure. Also, there is a big stylistic difference between reading Jo's third-person Harry-centric mystery and Meyer's first-person Bella-centric romance. There has to be a stylistic difference. A romance does not follow the typical plot outline of an adventure novel. It can't if it's a good romance. And just like we have to deal with Harry's angst (especially in OotP) and his limited viewpoint riddled with red-herrings, readers of the Twilight Saga have to deal with Bella's obsessive love and her limited viewpoint in the matters that surround her.
Mindy, I'd have to agree with you about hating when people compare series that have completely different plots. But perhaps we can compare the messages and morals of the books if we can't compare the plots. And I'd encourage a LotR fan to point out the morals that that series promotes. Personally, I read it for entertainment purposes and the only moralistic commentary that I can remember is the corrupting nature of power.
Anyone up for comparing morals?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2008 6:57 pm
Matelia legwll Quote: Twilight is an insult to literature. Hell, Twilight is an insult to Mary Sues'. It is absolutely poorly written, filled with purple prose, painful cliches and the cheesiest dialogue this side of bad fanfiction. The characters are two-dimensional, the books have no plot. And to top off; the cherry of spite on top of the rancid cake filled with gruel? The books send a distinctly negative, and quite frankly horrifying message to all women who read them. The message is this: sexism is just awesome and should really make a comeback, all feminists who want a career or independence, who don't want to marry at 18 and push out babies, then stay at home and clean should just die, abusive, unhealthy relationships are hunky dory is your boyfriend is hot and sparkles, and ***** is True Love. Also, suicide is romantic. Stalking is flattering. And wanting to eat your girlfriend is beautiful and natural.
Ghoul, I'm going to have to disagree with this. I certainly didn't get that message. And besides, how is this comparing? I've just read bashing, and that's not what this thread is about. I'm going to have to defend Twilight again. Sorry to those of you that have not read Twilight, and won't understand the references I'll have to use.
Twilight's morals are different than Harry Potter's, it's true. But those mentioned above by you are not the messages the books were meant to express. I read the books and find a romance book emphasizing chastity before marriage. How many fanfictions (even with the cheesiest dialogue) have you read that do that? And have that many teen girls and even boys reading it? Do you understand the effects that that moral could have? Also, emphasizing chivalry and morals in a time that seems to have forgotten both, the empowerment of women, the nature of love, selfishness vs. selflessness, the nature of one's soul and the redemption of it, and the balance between taking orders and exercising your free will. These are some of the messages which the Twilight series tries to promote.
Some of the "messages" mentioned by you are really the flawed views of real, three-dimensional characters. All characters should have flaws and virtues. A balanced amount of these means that the characters are not Mary Sues at all, but rounded characters. (And if Mary-Sues are being insulted, then that proves that her characters are three-dimensional, doesn't it?) And honestly, we've been dealing with the romanticism of suicide since Shakespeare, and maybe even before. You still won't see Romeo and Juliet coming off of the high school reading lists anytime soon.
However, your statement, "And wanting to eat your girlfriend is beautiful and natural" gives off the impression that you do not understand Edward's character. He knows his instincts are wrong, hence why Bella even lives past the first chapter of Twilight. And it seems you don't understand why Bella laughs when Mike inadvertently phrases his similar observation in a way that is completely ironic to her. It's true and Mike doesn't realize how close to the truth he's actually hitting.
Harry Potter's messages revolve around Racism, the nature of Death, Bravery, Deception, and I'm absolutely sure that we as Harry Potter fans can name many more. I'm tired though, and will cut this part short. Maybe tomorrow I'll look and see if there is a thread yet for listing the morals that Harry Potter teaches.
It is these unchanging messages, these morals, that make a "classic." And the ability to express those messages. In my opinion, Harry Potter should already be considered a classic. Too bad some English professors don't agree with me.
I'm dismayed to find that Meyer's messages did not make it through to you. Twilight's one step farther away from being a classic then. *shrug*
But I still don't understand where you are pulling this moral from: "all feminists who want a career or independence, who don't want to marry at 18 and push out babies, then stay at home and clean should just die."
None of the major female characters in Twilight do this. Renee, Esme, Alice, Rosalie, Bella, Leah, Victoria... none follow this situation in their human lives. And of those that are vampires, only Esme is the typical stay-at-home mother. If you call being a vampire typical. And if you looked at Esme's human life, you'll find she was the last of her friends to marry, encouraged by her parents into an abusive marriage in the early 1900's, ran from that abuse to protect her pregnancy, and survived on a schoolteacher's salary to provide for herself. The child didn't survive more than a few days. (By the way, how does her example prove that abusive relationships are good?) She clings to that "stay-at-home" style of living because she never had a good chance to do it in her human life. She's always had that maternal ache, and she's physically the oldest of the Cullens, so she naturally fell into a maternal role. And honestly, I can count the number of semi-major characters that died on one hand.
As I mentioned above, the Twilight series is actually about the empowerment of women. Victoria is so much more of a threat than her mate, James. Bella ends up being the most powerful and most valuable player. The reason it takes so long for her to surpass her damsel in distress role is the same reason no Muggle goes up against Voldemort and survives. Her foe has powers and abilities that she does not possess. But look at the example of Mrs. Weasley in DH. If anyone's promoting a stay-at-home mother it's Jo. Molly's the one that got married right after Hogwarts at eighteen and promptly had seven children and stayed home to clean and care for them. And yet Mrs. Weasley takes out Bellatrix instead of the opposite. stare So where does that leave your moral?
I would honestly promote both series, but I always try to emphasize the difference between the genres and the writing styles. Twilight is a romance, first and foremost. Harry Potter is a mystery-adventure. Also, there is a big stylistic difference between reading Jo's third-person Harry-centric mystery and Meyer's first-person Bella-centric romance. There has to be a stylistic difference. A romance does not follow the typical plot outline of an adventure novel. It can't if it's a good romance. And just like we have to deal with Harry's angst (especially in OotP) and his limited viewpoint riddled with red-herrings, readers of the Twilight Saga have to deal with Bella's obsessive love and her limited viewpoint in the matters that surround her.
Mindy, I'd have to agree with you about hating when people compare series that have completely different plots. But perhaps we can compare the messages and morals of the books if we can't compare the plots. And I'd encourage a LotR fan to point out the morals that that series promotes. Personally, I read it for entertainment purposes and the only moralistic commentary that I can remember is the corrupting nature of power.
Anyone up for comparing morals? The Mary-Sues are insulted because they don't get a novel of their own. Duh. Bella is not three-dimensional. She is a Mary Sue and a self-insert for Stephenie Meyer to carry out a sex dream she once had. Bella is whiny, a terrible friend, selfish and contradicts herself, but these are never SEEN as flaws by any of the characters. She is never caught out on them and therefore they can't be argued as flaws, as she never has to overcome them. Bella is instantly adored by all her peers, she already knows all the school work, is asked out/lusted over by FIVE guys. She is also the most special person, being impervious to Super Powers possessed by some vampires. Her only flaw is her over-the-top clumsiness (mentioned a whopping 27 times in the first book). Which, any Mary-sue dictionary will tell you is NOT a flaw at all. Edward is egotistical, jealous and treats Bella like a child. But again, this is never brought up as an issue in the books, so they can't be seen as flaws. Bella mentions Edward's perfection a total of 278 times in all four books. This is only his general perfection, not his gorgeous face, gorgeous body, gorgeous eyes or gorgeous hair. And I will argue this, Edward tells Bella he wants to eat her, does she get scared, AS SHE SHOULD BE? No, she says "You won't hurt me." She is an idiot, instead of staying away from this psycho who wants to hurt her, she goes alone with him into the woods, BEFORE he has "decided" he loves her too much not to suck out her marrow. She doesn't see this as anything wrong for her boyfriend to tell her. The series is not about the empowerment of women, I'm very sorry to break it to you. Here is why: Bella defines herself by her relationship with men. Namely Edward. When he leaves her she becomes suicidal. How does this show empowerment of women? She is controlled and manipulated by Edward all the time. He doesn't want her to see Jacob - he disables her car so that she can't go anywhere, he gets Alice to kidnap her so that she can't sneak off when he isn't there. She doesn't bring this up with him, SHE ALLOWS IT TO HAPPEN. She merely feels trapped. She doesn't even punish him for this behaviour by ignoring him or getting angry. Bella constantly plays the damsel in distress - often putting herself in these situations. Then she is always in need of being saved by Edward/ *insert other man here*. Examples – fainting in Biology and being saved by Mike/Edward, almost being attacked/raped at Port Angelus, walking right into James' trap. She needs saving by Jacob in New Moon, first because Edward leaves, later because she falls for Victoria’s trap. She needs saving again in Eclipse, again, from Victoria and her legion of New-borns made JUST TO KILL HER. And in Breaking Dawn, despite now having OMG BEST GIFT EVER!!oneone11 she is still saved from doing any fighting by a male vampire-hybrid-plot-device-thing. For months, Edward followed Bella home, broke into her room and watched her sleep. He also followed her around Port Angelus in his car and watched Bella arrive at school through the bushes. Yes, this is most certainly stalking.(Some of these only became apparent in Midnight Sun). Instead of being disturbed, disgusted or scared, she is merely flattered. Edward lies to and keeps secrets from Bella. He isn’t open with her, yet expects her to bear her soul to him. (How are you supposed to be close with someone if you don’t talk about uncertainties, aspects that could have drastic effects on the relationship) He also controls every intimate act that they share. Not allowing her to kiss him, he always has to kiss her, witholding sexual intercourse from her (“for her safety”) but then manipulates her into marrying him so that she can finally share sex with him, despite the fact that she will still be human. Everytime she tries to take hold of the relationship and initiate intimacy he belittles and insults her. His has control over her, they do not have equal authority in the relationship. She is always compromising herself to please him, rather than being herself and hope he likes her anyway. He takes, takes and takes from Bella. She gives up all other social contact to spend every waking minute with Edward. Bella gives up dreams, aspirations in order to be with a man. Ie; Bella gives up College and the prospect of furthering herself academically and for the chance of being highly qualified because of Edward. Also, many of the female characters endure all kinds of abuse from boyfriends, because the male "loves" her. Emily is even physically abused when Sam attacks her, leaving her face horribly scarred forever. Edward and Jacob are both emotionally manipulative in order to get Bella to do what they want, and Bella is AWARE of this, yet does nothing. All women are shown as superficial and obsessed with material things such as looks and clothes. Alice, for example, all she does is shop, dress others up and plan extravagant parties for no reason. Her power is also by far the most inconsistent and the most limited--for example, her visions don't always come true and she's unable to "see" the werewolves whereas Edward's gift does not err and he can read the werewolves' minds. Why is the female vampire's gift so inferior to the males'? Why is hers inconsistent (females=unreliable?) whereas Edward's and Jasper's are completely reliable? Bella's mum is flighty and inconsistent whereas her father is solid, dependable, caring. They are also all obsessed with being with a man to complete them, and preferably having children. Esme longs for children so much that she basically commits suicide because she loses hers, then she plays the mother role to the Cullen's. As a human, the fact that she is last to marry means nothing. Can you imagine all the obsessing she did about wanting to be married all that time, about how much she longed for a child. She STAYED in the abusive marriage in order to have a baby. The only reason she would then run away is to protect the child, not protect herself, to protect her child. Rosalie is the pinnacle of baby obsession. As much or even more so than Esme. She hates Bella because she can have a baby, then she protects Bella to protect the baby. All she thinks about is babies. Bella goes through with a pregnancy despite the fact her child poses a grave threat to her very life. The books are in this respect promoting the ridiculously outdated beliefs of Pro-life (aka the rights of the child before the rights of the mother) and even promoting teenage pregnancy. (I’m Pro-choice, and have nothing against a woman going through with an unwanted pregnancy, and I realize that many women would feel the need to protect a child) However, Bella not once shows any motherly instincts, she is very selfish and never mentions wanting a child before she becomes pregnant. And, as her pregnancy lasted a few weeks, she had no time to do a 180 about how she felt about babies and thereofere putting the baby above herself. Speaking of babies as the greatest, most important thing to ever happen to women. Female Vampires can’t have them. Female vampires are infertile, because their bodies “can’t change/ are frozen” and yet male vampires can have as many children as they want with mortals. Despite the fact that men have to change to .. you know .. get it up. Female werewolves are also infertile, can’t have babies and therefore can’t imprint. Aka – find their true love. The books are glorifying unhealthy, abusive relationships in which men dominate over weak willed women. To quote someone who I admire deeply, and who also shares my sentiments about Twilight. "This book, which is rife with negative messages, is not a dark and cynical look at them. It is not a commentary on the treacherous undercurrents of our society – it is one of them." ___________________ Now comparing to Harry Potter. All the female characters are strong-willed, gutsy, intelligent and flawed. Hermione is the brains of the organization. (Don't try and argue for a second that Bella is smart) She is a terrific asset because her skills in dueling, potion making and otherwise. She isn't lusted on by everyone who meets her- and is in fact ostracized because of her intelligence and ambition. SHE HAS TO OVERCOME THIS. She grows as a character. Molly is a stay at home mum, but is never held-back by this. She didn't get put on this earth simply to fill Mother shoes, she isn't consumed with this role. She is a talented witch who can stand her own, she can fight, she can take control of her marriage and has an equal partnership with Arthur. She never lets herself get screwed around. She defeats Bellatrix through the power of love, something that despite Bella feeling for Voldemort, ridicules and berates. *This* is the point of Harry Potter, that love can do anything. Molly didn't defeat anyone because she is a housewife, she defeated Bella because she could feel love, and this made her a stronger person. And Molly may have gotten married young, but NOT EVERY CHARACTER wanted to do this same thing. Hermione had kids very late (as shown by the epilogue) she perused a career and got very far i it. Yet, this doesn't diminish her as a character, as it would in Twilight, where Meyer would judge her about getting a career and try to argue that she isn't as loving because she didn't want to pop out babies ASAP. This is a point of similarity between the books; the power of a mothers love/motherhood. In Twilight motherhood is seen as the only thing a woman ever needs to do to be happy. As a selfish thing and as an outlet for vanity. None of the mothers in Twilight are seen as pure or truly loving. They are obsessed and rabid. In Harry Potter, this love is pure, it is eternal and powerful. As all love is shown to be. Also, don't claim that Bella and Edward are in love, or is a stronger love than any love that has loved before. Because this is simply a lie. Bellatrix is a threat. Victoria doesn't come close. Bellatrix is powerful, insane and truly heartless. She has an objective and will do everything in her power to ensure it comes to pass. Victoria skulks around, being boring, and is killed by Edward within minutes of them fighting. As apposed to Twilight, here is what I think about the themes present in Harry Potter. Here is what I wrote on another thread in this very guild: "There are deep messages to be interpreted and the books have important things to say on a range of issues. JK Rowling is a very passionate woman, and a very intelligent woman, and her ideals come through. The themes in them help to shape all that read the books into accepting, liberal people; against discrimination in all forms, realizing the weight of their own actions (choices), selfless and understanding, independent (yet still realizing the importance of having strong networks) acknowledging the power of love and able to cope with death by being spiritual. " JK Rowling manages to cleverly speak about the nature of fate and prophecy, having Harry Potter be a simple boy with average wishes and intentions. He is in no way a hero, and has to be molded into one by others. He is a good person though. And by Rowling throwing in Neville as the "could have been" and then showing him grow into a hero all by himself, into a person that could rival and very likely top Harry, is beautiful. It shows that Voldemort was doomed no matter what, that anyone can become truly amazing and fight for what is right. Rowling can also make reference to History, without it being awkward. It is completely relevant to the plot. Unlike Meyer who steals the storylines of classic literature (such as Pride and Prejudice, Romeo and Juliette, Wuthering Heights and The Merchant of Venice/Midsummer's Night Dream) and completely removes the morals and themes they taught, simply turning them into soulless vessels to carry out her sexual fantasies. And to vainly show how intelligent she is that she knows so much classic literature. Rowling alludes to depraved times such as the Holocaust and Nazi Germany, to instill in her novels universal emotions of heartache and protest; we all want to fight against oppression and discrimination. She makes reference to the Civil Rights movement and social class through the House Elves and half bloods. Harry Potter will be seen as a classic, Twilight will one day be seen as the trash it is and SMeyer will be sued for writing such an insult to women everywhere. I'm fairly sure I didn't leave anything out. If you still feel the need to try and debate/ or would like examples, feel free to ask me to expand on any points. *passes out and fingers fall off*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:06 am
I actually enjoyed both series. I think Twilight was an interesting read BUT i have to admit that I hated Bella from the start. She offended my feminist sensibilities to the core!! I couldn't have made a better argument then The Ghoul. Honestly, I think Twilight has some merit but it fails horribly at female empowerment. I couldn't have broken it down better than Ghoul did.
The series was interesting but Bella had me cringing every time I read something like: "Don't leave me," I begged in a broken voice. Like I said, the story had some merit and it was interesting enough but Harry Potter is infinitely more empowering to women than Twilight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:09 pm
gina787 I actually enjoyed both series. I think Twilight was an interesting read BUT i have to admit that I hated Bella from the start. She offended my feminist sensibilities to the core!! I couldn't have made a better argument then The Ghoul. Honestly, I think Twilight has some merit but it fails horribly at female empowerment. I couldn't have broken it down better than Ghoul did.
The series was interesting but Bella had me cringing every time I read something like: "Don't leave me," I begged in a broken voice. Like I said, the story had some merit and it was interesting enough but Harry Potter is infinitely more empowering to women than Twilight. Aw shucks, you are too kind. You makes me blush. redface redface redface redface redface
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:46 pm
I solemnly swear that I am up to no good...
Okay, this topic INFURIATES me. But I'll post anyway. ;3
Now, I'm a HUGE fan of both Twilight and Lord of the Rings. BUT my LOVE is HARRY POTTER. Understand that before you draw any thoughts about what I'm about to say kay?
Twilight and Harry Potter are NOTHING, I repeat: NOTHING ALIKE! Harry Potter is complex world of magic and fantasy. The story is more detailed and dream like. Twilight however exists in our own world with a slight twist: vampires. I must admit, the vampires in Stephenie Meyer's love story are very detailed, magical, and amazing. However, that's only one factor of the story. Harry Potter and Twilight are both written by a woman and have a huge fandom but the storys are NOTHING ALIKE!
Harry Potter came first, has a bigger fandom and has had more time to build. Therefore, in my heart, Harry shall reign. <3 ((Plus, Twilight has more women in the fandom, while HP has pretty much everyone. :3))
Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings are also nothing alike. They're both complex worlds this time but are two completely different stories.
In my opinion, Harry Potter reigns over the three. With Lord of the Rings close behind my favorite wizard. I realize some of you may have different thoughts and different loves. Please don't get offended by what I've said, it's simply the TRUTH.
So everyone, STOP FREAKIN' COMPARING THEM! YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR FREAKIN' MIND IF YOU THINK THEY'RE ALIKE.
To anyone who agrees with me about this: thank you! you must have a right mind! XD
>> I'm open to conversation on this subject, so if anyone wishes to talk, please feel free to pm me. :3 I've kept this post fairly shorter than what I actually have to say on this topic. So for anyone who wishes to have a long detailed chat: YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED. I could go on for ages. <<
Mischief Managed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 8:36 pm
Honestly? I was rather mad about the whole, Vampire sparkleys because of the sun's rays, I mean the rays don't just disappear when they hit the earth, they come through clouds, they bounce off the sun, so techniquelly speaking Vampires should be Sparkling all day everyday. Another issue I had with Meyer is the fact that she keeps contradicting herself. Jacob is a werewolf, now he is a shapeshifter, like what the ********? Vampire's can't have babina's, Bella is magically preggo. I mean, if your going to write by your own standard at least make sure your fact stay the same. (Ghoul I have to agree about Bella being the most two dimensional character that I've ever seen.)
My second issue is that if I had Bella on my Pyche couch, I think I would have to put her under heavy anti-depressants. And the sad thing is..... The most normal character in the whole damn series to me happened to be Doctor Carslyel (sp, it's been awhile since I read Twilight.)
While I'mt supposed to be comparing about the only thing I see that is relatively similiar to Twilight and Tolken is almost all the characters needed mental help by the middle of the series.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:40 am
Well, I really like Harry Potter, otherwise I would not be here and I totally adore the Lord of the Rings! Twilight is okay, but I think it cannot be compared to the other two books... what I want to say ist that J.K. Rowling and Tolkien created a whole new world, like their own universe and the books are much much much more complex, at least I think so...and Twilight is quite a nice book but honestly New Moon, Eclipse and Breaking Dawn are, as I think, really really weak...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 1:04 pm
I think we can compare and contrast any other book in this thread so long as it's fiction-y. Speaking of other books, I read a book a long time ago about two witches in a victorian time period. The book was written by two different authors, and they wrote the book through a series of letters to eachother... However, I read this book in 6th or 7th grade and I can't remember the name of the book s: Can anyone help me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
