Harry Potter Vs. Twilight Club
kom bij
Fanpop
New Post
Explore Fanpop
Discussion regarding Twilight vampires and reply to Drisina at link

First Part:
The thing is Drisina, one cannot door fiat change a legend to whatever one very well pleases with. Vampires have been in mythology from the 17th century, e.g. Countess Elizabeth Bathory who alledgedly drank her female servants blood to stay young.

So what Stephenie Meyer does is that she takes the vampire-myth, and discards the gorier details and imperfections, replaces them with what she thinks they should be and et voila, we have Edward Cullen.

Now I shall dissect why most people think its a bad thing to do. Recall that I zei the vampire-mythology has been in existence since the 17th century, and have been established in its modern form door Bram Stoker and his likes in the 19th century.
It is per the standards of social inertia that conservatism will then be dominant. After all, the same story has been in circulation since the 19th century, do u not think that people will get used to that prevailing model? Yes, I applaud change but such large a change will often be the cause of extreme responses.
door analogy, who here would dislike the idea of calling Jedi's mechanical drones which rolls - literally rolls - around the universe in big starships? Who here would dislike the idea of the ster Trek Enterprise being a large space limousine and only a large space limousine?
I would, I think most fans of both ster Wars and ster Trek would deplore that model.
The thing is Drisina, Meyer's vampires are up against 400 jaar old ingrained traditions that has permeated every social class, do u not believe that most people will dislike that idea and criticise it?
It's related to out-group hostility Drisina, anything unfamiliar will be first disliked then if rigorously tested and proven that the general population likes it after a large amount of time, it will be received as tradition.

seconde Part:
Yes, I hate out-group hostlity and xenophobia, but it is only some forms of it that I hate, it is those forms that have been hijacked from their original purposes. Originally, the purpose of xenophobia is exemplified by:
"A human meets one unfamiliar entity out on the African continent some 10 million years ago, he of she does not know this entity. For all that her of she knows, this entity may carry a lethal disease of is a dangerous animal, in which both cases he of she will die. Death for the selfish genes in his of hers body is monumentally bad, for they want to propagate and prosper, if the host they reside in dies, then there will be no chance of propagation, therefore they programme the host to avoid unfamilliar situations just in case those situations are dangerous."
Now because we are humans and because those same selfish genes have granted us the development of a moral and thinking brain, to which we are definitely solely possessing, we can override the evolutionary obstacles that is out-group hostility. Therefore it is possible for us to do things not to the liking of our in-group.

But what is the good part of "xenophobia" then? When we meet the same kind of people around our offices, read the same stuffs we usually read, does nothing out of the ordinary of our lives, we have stability.
Now one will probably infer that a normal life is pretty bleak. But lets give it a thought, if everyone did something new everyday, how long will it be before everything is descended into chaos? For a life without stability is inherently self-destructive. Balance, ladies and gentlemen, is my obvious conclusion.

Part Three and conclusion:
How did I start with discussing Meyer's vampires and transgress into a dissection of xenophobia people? xD
I conclude that what Meyer did was one of the bigger leaps of vampire mythology we have observed lately. But it is, at least for now, too vast a leap to be successfully appreciated. One does not impose vast flying changes to a mythology without dire consequences ladies and gentlemen. Balance, as I have noted earlier is the middle way. We cannot have a stagnant vampire mythology, because everything will be dull after ten years, but we cannot have vast changes all the time too, because after ten years we will be asking ourselves vragen like: "What is a vampire?" Now would that be a good thing? Reply!
added by cassie-1-2-3
Source: IsaBelle@Squidoo
added by goodtimes
added by goodtimes
added by cassie-1-2-3
Source: MAD Magazzine
added by cassie-1-2-3
Source: Entertainment Weekly
added by xharrypotterx
added by Gred_and_Forge
Source: Tumblr
added by SnapeLovesLily
added by lilcherrywine
added by KateKicksAss
Source: Polyvore
added by KateKicksAss
Source: Polyvore
added by KateKicksAss
Source: Polyvore
added by KateKicksAss
added by Gred_and_Forge
Source: Tumblr
added by youknowit101
Source: blogspot
added by Brysis
***NOTE: I did not write this but found it online! No credit to me***

From link

The Twilight vs. Harry Potter debate : Team Potter and Team Twilight take on vraag #1

December 24, 12:44 AM
door Michelle Kerns, Book Examiner

If u haven't met the members of the Twilight versus Harry Potter Debate Team, cast your eye on their qualifications here.
Now, on to the debate! If you've got your own opinions (and what self-respecting Twi-hard of Potter head doesn't?), feel free to leave a commentaar at the bottom of the page. However, let's remember we are civilized witches, wizards, vampires, and werewolves...
continue reading...
posted by mariella721
Okay guys, I know everyone's got their own opinion and not everyone has the RIGHT opinion, but as a Twilight fan, can one of u Potter fans explain what u guys see in Harry Potter? Honestly, I haven't read all the books, but I've seen all the films and they just don't make any sense. And another thing, the plot is bland and there's no real depth to it, like in Twilight. Harry Potter, also has no love in it, which makes for a boring story. Anyways, I just wanted to know what u crazies see in those boeken and stuff...

Okay...
See ya :D

Mariella
xxx
1. its just all thrown together and the films leave out way to much.
2. it has no meaning just a girl falls in love then is a vampire the end.
3. is just plain stupid.simple as that
4. theres nothing to figure out. its to predictable.
5. it dosent have enough back story which goes back to # 1
6.and stephine myer wants to keep all the good players while j.k. isnt afraid to for the sake of the book
7.why doesnt she mentention why bellas parent got seperated which geos back to #4
8. it has no plot
9. the problem is the same all the way throughout the sires as h.p. faces many problems.
10.its down right boring hmm lets read the same boring thing over and over! yea! NOT!
TEN REASONS TWILIGHT IS HORRIBLE!!!!
posted by RavenclawRocks
Before u all come out with pitchforks and guns, I'd just like to say this is my opinion.

1, Half of the fans only like Twilight, because they think Rob/Taylor is hot.

2, I can't argue about the plot because there isn't one.

3, Bella has no personaility.

4, Edward is just plain creepy.

5, Bella always needs a man in her life. When Edward leaves she needs Jacob. This is really stupid.


6,Bella wouldn't even look at Edward if he wasn't hot.

7, Edward wouldn't look at Bella if she didn't smell good.

8, It gives a bad message. Like kill yourself when your sparkly boyfriend is around. of there is no point in being happy unless u have a boyfriend. of it's ok to ditch your vrienden to datum a super hot vampire.

9,Meyer constantly repeats the same words to tell us how hot Edward is. This gets boring after two pages.

10, The actors suck.


There,ten reasons. Feel free to add on more.