Harry Potter Vs. Twilight Harry Potter vs Twilight: all-for-your-favorite book brawl!

veryDevious posted on Jun 10, 2012 at 01:49AM
So, this is a game in a kind of way. A sort of heated book discussion. In the way I see it, at least it'll improve your reasoning skills, but it's mostly just for fun, so nothing too insulting or serious, unless you have reason to be. So, either side starts it off by posing a question/argument against the opposite while backing it up with reasons.The other side will have a chance to defend and do the same. EVERYTHING NEEDS TO HAVE REASONING, or else it's not accepted as part of the game. I'm personally a HP fan, but I'm curious to see Twilighters' answers. I'll start this thing up (again, no offensive intentions):
1. I believe that Stephenie Meyer uses too many embellishments/ornate scrollwork that it takes away from the basic meaning of the original story. This distracts readers with irrelevant detail. Just because each sentence isn't complicated doesn't mean the essence of the writing can't be. I like J. K. Rowling's style better (yes, I am biased) because of her simplicity that cuts straight to the core, but her vocabulary is used artfully,with very intellectual, deep meanings to Harry that don't seem forced or out of character.
2. Bella...she's not a strong protagonist/lead to me at all, not even a strong female. She teaches girls today the wrong things. I read a post today, and ths girl thought Bella was a role model because she "was pretty, and teaches girls to try and make themselves prettier." I thought this was especially artificial.Not the girl, the message. What she embodies is that men have the right to sit around and do nothing, while letting females take the load. People also seem to ignore that she never does stand up for what she wants, it's all about Edward. She's given it all up for him, without much thought for her future, and if this was realistic, honestly, the parents would be MUCH more upset when they know how much she's damaged herself and their family to be with a vampire. She IS whiny and suicidal. She's supposedly clumsy, but no one acknowledges it, but it wouldn't matter anyway, as Edward always catches her. One quote particularily ticked me off: "I guess my brain will never work right. At least I'm pretty." This just displays just how far Bella's internal sight and mental judgement/interpretation of people reaches: skin deep, quite shallow. I believe all that strings her and Edward together is her infactuation of his looks, as she's constantly waxing poetic about his "skin with light shattering of the surface like diamonds" and his "Adonis-like features." Moreover, she continually degrades herself, saying she's not pretty, not good enough for Edward. Her name literally means "beautiful swan." Honestly, Meyer? I mean, if you didn't want us to think of Bella as a Mary Sue, you could at least TRY to cover it up.
3. I think Twilight should be more realistic, period. There should've been an explosive battle at the end of Breaking Dawn, and some intense, suspenseful action in all of the books, instead of being crammed into the end after too much filler and fluff. Not many people die, like, two total? And you percieve this as war. I was all ready for there to some fang bangin', but they just talked over their differences. Of course, the vamp baby is beautiful as well, and they all live happily ever after. The book never thinks to address some points that would have definitely have added more drama, like what if Charlie and Renee found out about how their daughter was not aging? But no, it would be too difficult to explain if we delved into that. There was no closure. I had too many questions still swirling in my head that I got no definite answer to. One more object of pondering: HOW is Renesmee half human, half vampire? It doesn't make sense. Either you're dead, or you're alive. Either you age, or you're immortal, there's no in-between. Oh, so her heart beats, she has blood pulsing, but she needs to take others' lives to exist and she stops aging after reaching maturity. Basically a perfect vampire with all the human perks.
4. I think that many people argue over the creativity and imagination of the two books, as well as which main character is more relatable. I have a few opinions. Rowling created an entire WORLD and plotted out all the details, all the secrets, the twists that make your heart jolt and your stomach plummet, the ones that you are kept in suspense along with Harry. Of course, I will give Meyer some credit here, after all, she did actually make something out of nothing, which is quite a feat considering how many people like her writing. All that's said and done, so I'll get to the point: there's a fine line between creativity and plain weirdness/craziness. You need things to have plausible reasons to back it up, so the reader can actually logically understand the connection you're making. I think the vampires sparkling is a bit too much. I know, she did it to differentiate it from all those original tales, but she could've just went with the back story, then built on the character that takes off from the stereotype we have when we think 'vampire', a bit like Rowling did. Witches were not considered anything like wizards. They had green skin, bulbous noses, and pus filled warts, and they cackled evilly over their cauldrons with a sinister black cat as companion. Wizards, were wizened, wrinkled, and wise (the 3 W's!). They had long white bearded and glasses, wearing dark blue robes sprinkled wth stars and cone shaped hats of the same pattern. Now there were people who looked no different from us but had magical ability, and they went to a special school to hone thir skills and use it further in their career. I think some of the Twilight lines used no logic and didn't make sense, and storylines were inconsistent, while book titles didn't have connection to their content. Some lines were too far-fetched that had me raising eyebrows, but some were just classics with everything stripped away except romance.
5. I think that Harry Potter reaches a larger audience (just my opinion, of course, you're welcome to state an argument against it) and Twilight just reaches the teens, along with some love-starved older ladies. But mostly just females in general. Harry Potter has no defined gender, with a jumble of a little bit of everything. It has magic at your fingertips and really sparks the urge to believe. I remember ths being one of the popular topics of act/make believe, I used to get wands with some friends and alternate producing the effects of spells. Children can read and understand this, with this entangling whimsical world so different from ours that piques their interest. Older fans in the teens, like me, appreciate the messages it conveys, and now know to expect out of the box, and interpret implications, that makes it all more engaging, as when you get older, you change perspective of the book, and you seem to find something new every time you re-read. I find the impressions of the essence of the story all over the text now. Twilight never really spoke to me like that, nor did I find any morals worth learning or noting.
I think that people will respond, but just as an incentive, if ONE side replies, but the other DOES NOT, then I shall either make the assumption that one fanbase dominates on this topic, or that one side doesn't have enough reasons. I look forward to seeing you in the Games! ;)

Harry Potter Vs. Twilight No ang sumagot