Opening a can of worms -- Twilight vs. Harry Potter

[Closet_Skeleton]

Because wizards could learn to incorporate technology into their daily lives and be even more efficient.

When was the last time you changed your daily routine because some enviromentalist told you that some new way of doing things was more efficient?

[Oslecamo]

Now, one might say that being wrapped up in such tradition and bigotry is lacking in common sense, but seeing how easily they wrap up people in real life, well, I'd say that sense is more common than not.

This. Wizardry society is a conservative elititst one. They consider themselves superior to everybody else, and since they managed to hide themselves from the rest of the world, aren't really pressed to change.

Also like already pointed out anything with circuits just stops worcking in areas of big magic, so computers and microwaves are plain useless for wizards.

[Seonor]

I think that currently technology and magic are no longer that different in convienience in the potterverse. Both have their advantages. But if you look back 50-70 years, magic is clearly superior (laundry for a big family is hell if you don't have a washing machine). Also the war with Voldemort isolated the wizards even further. Because of that most wizards didn't see the benefits of technology until now.
But the end the war marks a big turning point in the history of magic. Most of the muggleborn who will be invited to Hogwarts after the battle will at least have used the internet and a mobile and probably don't want to part with either. And most of the anti-muggle movement is now dead or at least silenced. This will imo change the wizards. Either they will copy or surpass with magic things that the muggles can do better or they use more technology themselfes and keep only the better applications of magic like medicine or teleportation.


tl, dr: Magic was a long time simple better then technology, now either the wizards improve magic or use technology.

[averagejoe]

ARITHMANCY!

I heard you the first time. However, as I recall, it isn't required (it was, like, Hermionie who took that class) and what arithmancy could do was never really spelled (ha) out very clearly. I don't recall ever seeing anyone use it.

[mangosta71]

Something that a lot of people are overlooking - the people that we see communicating via owl in the HPverse are the children who aren't allowed to do magic outside the school year. We know that Hogwarts has some kind of field that blocks teleportation, and it's not unreasonable to assume that it blocks other methods of reaching the school as well, so owls are probably the easiest and most convenient way for parents to write to their kids there, too. Look around at the school in the movie - you won't see a telephone or a power outlet, and I can't imagine a reason they would have a cellular tower in the area, as the only town anywhere near seems to exist solely to keep the school supplied and is inhabited entirely by wizards.

[Rutskarn]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, just thought of something.

Is there a magical cure for cancer, AIDs, and all of those diseases?

I mean, if so, you'd think they'd share it with Muggles. I don't know--just buss ICUs occasional and mind-wipe everyone involved. And if not, what happens when Muggle science comes up with cures to both? We're probably less than half a century away. Will they have to adopt non-magical medicine to heal themselves?

[Fri]

I think that currently technology and magic are no longer that different in convienience in the potterverse. Both have their advantages. But if you look back 50-70 years, magic is clearly superior (laundry for a big family is hell if you don't have a washing machine). Also the war with Voldemort isolated the wizards even further. Because of that most wizards didn't see the benefits of technology until now.
But the end the war marks a big turning point in the history of magic. Most of the muggleborn who will be invited to Hogwarts after the battle will at least have used the internet and a mobile and probably don't want to part with either. And most of the anti-muggle movement is now dead or at least silenced. This will imo change the wizards. Either they will copy or surpass with magic things that the muggles can do better or they use more technology themselfes and keep only the better applications of magic like medicine or teleportation.


tl, dr: Magic was a long time simple better then technology, now either the wizards improve magic or use technology.

Exactly. I once said something like that to my friend.

Magical society were locked in the past. Back then, they were a lot, lot more advanced than muggle society. But now, muggles are catching up, but they just don't realized it.

The magical society is locked in a.. somewhat fantastic feudal/guild based society or something. In that society, muggles simply can't catch up with wizard. If we tried to live like them (in isolated communities, with guild based economy and manufacturing) we can't catch up with wizard. But the technological/information age is quite different compared to the magical society. I can't say that individually muggles are better than magician, but as a society, we're far, far more advanced than them.

[Oslecamo]

I mean, if so, you'd think they'd share it with Muggles. I don't know--just buss ICUs occasional and mind-wipe everyone involved. And if not, what happens when Muggle science comes up with cures to both? We're probably less than half a century away. Will they have to adopt non-magical medicine to heal themselves?

In the first book Hagrid clearly states that wizards keep away from muggles precisely because otherwise muggles would always be asking them for magical solutions for their problems.

This is, we know that wizards can rebuild bones from nothing in a matter of hours, create infinite supplies of blood, and close noncursed wounds instantly. They consider stitches barbarian.

Not to mention the philosopher's stone and immortality.

So no, generosity really isn't a very common trait among wizards. Your average wizard has a vault filled with jewelery and gold, and what was the last time you saw a wizard giving something to a beggar?

[Zeful]

I think that currently technology and magic are no longer that different in convienience in the potterverse. Both have their advantages. But if you look back 50-70 years, magic is clearly superior (laundry for a big family is hell if you don't have a washing machine). Also the war with Voldemort isolated the wizards even further. Because of that most wizards didn't see the benefits of technology until now. But the end the war marks a big turning point in the history of magic. Most of the muggleborn who will be invited to Hogwarts after the battle will at least have used the internet and a mobile and probably don't want to part with either.And why would it be more convenient now? The magic that keeps places like Hogwarts and the Quiddich stadium of the maps disables electronic devices, making most mundane technology absolutely worthless. As for the muggleborn students book seven ends in what year exactly? I don't really think they specified. But if they ask why their watch doesn't work, they'll be told electronics don't work in hogwarts, and that will be the end of that. Besides as deep in the countryside as they are (doubly so in an unmappable area) I doubt there's a cell tower close enough to get a signal.


And most of the anti-muggle movement is now dead or at least silenced. This will imo change the wizards. Either they will copy or surpass with magic things that the muggles can do better or they use more technology themselfes and keep only the better applications of magic like medicine or teleportation. What things do muggles do better? Wizard spells aren't affected by any form of personnel armor, compared to guns, which are mostly effective against unarmored targets. The only thing muggles have over wizards is food preservation. We have rations that will last for years, pretty much regardless to where they are stored (MREs), other than that, I don't really see much advancement magic needs to do to stay ahead, except maybe develop some charms to stop bullets.

[Xondoure]

On the whole arithmancy thing, it is explicitly stated that you need to know how to do it in order to get a job at the wizard bank... sounds like your average major in math with extra divination free of charge!

Edit: Timeline:
Harry is born in 1980.
Voldemort kills his parents in 1982
Goes to Hogwarts in 1991/92
Graduates in 1997/98

I may be off by one year, but that is accurate enough.

[mangosta71]

The only thing muggles have over wizards is food preservation. We have rations that will last for years, pretty much regardless to where they are stored (MREs), other than that, I don't really see much advancement magic needs to do to stay ahead, except maybe develop some charms to stop bullets.

They have no reason to develop food preservation techniques as they can just conjure up fresh food whenever they want. Just sayin'.

[Rutskarn]

In the first book Hagrid clearly states that wizards keep away from muggles precisely because otherwise muggles would always be asking them for magical solutions for their problems.

This is, we know that wizards can rebuild bones from nothing in a matter of hours, create infinite supplies of blood, and close noncursed wounds instantly. They consider stitches barbarian.

Not to mention the philosopher's stone and immortality.

So no, generosity really isn't a very common trait among wizards. Your average wizard has a vault filled with jewelery and gold, and what was the last time you saw a wizard giving something to a beggar?

Dayum. Never thought about it, but that really is pretty cold of them.

I mean, yeah, of course they'd ask you to make their lives better. Because you can. That's like saying, "Oh, I don't want that island full of people who are ravaged with disease and on the brink of starvation to know I exist--I can't be bothered to give them penicillin or agriculture."

What a bunch of jackholes.

[Flame of Anor]

What things do muggles do better? Wizard spells aren't affected by any form of personnel armor, compared to guns, which are mostly effective against unarmored targets.

Rowling said in an interview that a Muggle with a shotgun beats a wizard with a wand almost every time, and this was one of the reasons that wizards keep themselves secret.


They have no reason to develop food preservation techniques as they can just conjure up fresh food whenever they want. Just sayin'.

You're forgetting So-and-so's Law of Something-or-other, that Hermione quotes in one of the books, that says it is fundamentally impossible to conjure food from thin air.

[Tamburlaine]

You're forgetting So-and-so's Law of Something-or-other, that Hermione quotes in one of the books, that says it is fundamentally impossible to conjure food from thin air.

This is my main issue with HP's magic system; that so much of it is contradictory, hastily introduced as a retcon, or just plain badly thought out.

[kpenguin]

Like I said, they need pencils and pens. Seriously.

[Fri]

Rowling said in an interview that a Muggle with a shotgun beats a wizard with a wand almost every time, and this was one of the reasons that wizards keep themselves secret.


Bah. we all know that the authors word had no weight after he publishes his work. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeathOfTheAuthor) Word of God my ass :smalltongue:

[kpenguin]

If centaurs prove a threat to wizards with their bows, I have no doubt a gun would as well.

[Arang]

You're forgetting So-and-so's Law of Something-or-other, that Hermione quotes in one of the books, that says it is fundamentally impossible to conjure food from thin air.

I'm pretty sure Mrs. Weasley conjures gravy from the tip of her wand at some point. Given that a part where Harry is in a domestic situation at the Weasley house is in every single book, I'm not going to go looking for it.

[kpenguin]

That's a really weird law. I mean, they learn how to transfigure objects into animals. What, do the animals turn back into objects when they try to slaughter them for meat or do they just give no nutritional value?

[RMS Oceanic]

That's a really weird law. I mean, they learn how to transfigure objects into animals. What, do the animals turn back into objects when they try to slaughter them for meat or do they just give no nutritional value?

I believe Hermione's example was "You can transfigure something into food, you can make more food if you have some already, but you can't conjure food from nothing." Conjuration is like the super-hard form of transfiguration.

Since we know a Shield Charm can actually stop someone physically advancing on you, I wonder if a Shield Charm could stop a bullet?

[kpenguin]

Didn't stop Hagrid from KO'ing some of Umbridge's goons in Book 5, though I'm not sure if they had Shield charms up.

[H. Zee]

That's a really weird law. I mean, they learn how to transfigure objects into animals. What, do the animals turn back into objects when they try to slaughter them for meat or do they just give no nutritional value?

I assume the change is not permanent. So, the meat would morph back into bits of goblet or whatever while in the wizard's stomach, slicing through the intestinal wall and disembowelling them from the inside.

Harry Potter: The Darker Side.

[Oslecamo]

Didn't stop Hagrid from KO'ing some of Umbridge's goons in Book 5, though I'm not sure if they had Shield charms up.

Hagrid is half giant. He's strong enough to easily bend a rifle with his bare hands as seen in book 1. You really don't want to take a punch from him when he's angry.

As for the centaurs, well, there's a lot of them. So they prove a menace just like the big indian tribes proved a challenge to the first colonizers, despite the colonizers having much better equipment.

Also notice that like the indians the centaurs ended up in small reserves, suffocated by the wizardy world. It's left pretty clear wich side is stronger.

Besides, like already pointed out, wizards trust in their stealth for survival. Invisibility, mind control, illusions, transfiguration, extra dimensional spaces, ect, go a long way to keep one safe.

[mangosta71]

I believe Hermione's example was "You can transfigure something into food, you can make more food if you have some already, but you can't conjure food from nothing." Conjuration is like the super-hard form of transfiguration.

Suppose they transmute air into food...

[Hex-Master]

I'm sorry, I'm just so sick of the Twilight fans claiming their super-fast, super-string vampires could be everything they fight. Therefore, the Potter crew get the vote by default. They've already killed Edward once, it makes perfect sense. So I give it to the limey wizards.

...wait, was this a combat thread to begin with? Honestly, I just clicked to the end and had to add my two cents.

[Closet_Skeleton]

I'm sorry, I'm just so sick of the Twilight fans claiming their super-fast, super-string vampires could be everything they fight. Therefore, the Potter crew get the vote by default. They've already killed Edward once, it makes perfect sense. So I give it to the limey wizards.

...wait, was this a combat thread to begin with? Honestly, I just clicked to the end and had to add my two cents.

This wasn't a verses thread and still isn't one.

[kpenguin]

Well, the title of the thread is "Twilight vs. Harry Potter", so...

[pita]

It is a versus thread, but it got derailed by many people talking about how bad Harry Potter is, because really, as bad is HP is it's definitely better than Twilight, in every single way. It's not even a debate.

[Texas_Ben]

This wasn't a verses thread and still isn't one.
As of this moment it is.
Potterverse wins. Wizards have pretty much subdued all non-human magical sentient creatures and either pressed them into servitude or forced them to live on the fringes of society. That includes vampires. Vampires which are presumably actually superpowered and not covered with sparkly ******ry

[Aptera]

I'm pretty sure this was brought up earlier, but its an important point.

I think the focus on combat between muggles and wizards is misleading, because thats not how any actual attempt of muggles to get rid of wizards would go. Wizards seem to focus on avoiding and misdirecting and possible conflict. They can teleport (well at least a significant portion of the adult population), can obliterate memories and most importantly make a place impossible for muggles to get to, which cannot appear on a map, and where more advanced forms of technology don't work. They also are extremely decentralized, as far as I can tell, and live mostly in rural areas of the world.

Really, there biggest threat is there own prejudices, but they also have a significant portion of the population that doesn't seem extremely unkowledgeable about muggles (muggle borns).

I imagine an anti-wizard war (doesn't seem terribly appropriate, need a better term) would go roughly like this:
1. Muggles discover wizards, decide to kill/control/round up etc.
2. Wizards die, they realize its serious.
3. Wizards abandon there non-unplottable/ isolated areas and retreat to unplottable areas. Children probably evacuated to Hogwarts if not in school. Lots of muggles die from wizarding aparate-and-aparate attacks.
4. Wizards disappear completely by making more places unplottable and generally staying out of site while bothering muggles enough they eventually give up. Mostly however they don't interact with the outside world and become even more withdrawn.

[SDF]

This lasted ten pages :smallconfused:

I read all of HP and the first two Twilight books. I'm voting for The Hobbit.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

I hated The Hobbit and the LotR series only stopped making my eyes bleed halfway through the first book. I thought that HP was well written, but I could not seem to get into the surreal setting. Twilight has so many things wrong with it that thinking about it makes my eyes cross. I think the worship of an emotionally abusive significant other as well as the glorification of child grooming and pedophilia top the list though.

[osyluth]

At least Rowling doesn't try to claim that the supernatural forces in her books are scientifically possible.

[pita]

The Hobbit is the greatest YA book ever, without a doubt. Anyone who says otherwise is (think Kevin Spacey) WROOOOOOOOOOOONG!

[Oslecamo]

At least Rowling doesn't try to claim that the supernatural forces in her books are scientifically possible.

Wait, twilight's author claimed that the stuff in her worcks could actually happen in RL?

[Mystic Muse]

The Hobbit is the greatest YA book ever, without a doubt. Anyone who says otherwise is (think Kevin Spacey) WROOOOOOOOOOOONG!

I sincerely hope you're joking. I've only read two LOTR books. the hobbit and the fellowship of the ring and I liked the fellowship better. a lot of the stuff in the hobbit wasn't very interesting. it makes for an interesting bedtime story for kids but as a YA book? I quite obviously have not read them all but I know there are better ones out there.

[toasty]

I sincerely hope you're joking. I've only read two LOTR books. the hobbit and the fellowship of the ring and I liked the fellowship better. a lot of the stuff in the hobbit wasn't very interesting. it makes for an interesting bedtime story for kids but as a YA book? I quite obviously have not read them all but I know there are better ones out there.

I personally think the Hobbit is an amazing Fantasy novel... for kids at least. Young Adults (by that I assume the 12-14 age group?) maybe not... I sure as heck liked it at that age though.

[kpenguin]

Wait, twilight's author claimed that the stuff in her worcks could actually happen in RL?

Well, she said her vampires obey the laws of physics or something like that.

[YesImSardonic]

I'll throw my vote in for Harry Potter, for relative quality. I'll stick with my Tolkien, though.



I hated The Hobbit and the LotR series only stopped making my eyes bleed halfway through the first book.

Please, elaborate.

[Parlity]

Just one thing about the whole microwave argument:

Go ahead, buy one and put it on your table. Put food in and wait. Nothing'll happen because you have to plug it in first. Which requires you to have access to the electric grid. Which in turn requires a whole bunch of people working hard and knowing quite a lot to keep it running.

As a HP wizard, all you need is a stick, someone who tells you how to do the spell, someone who invents the spell, and some practise.

Our technology is only usable with ease because a whole lot of others prepped the ground for us, because we work as a collective. HPzards aren't so much a collective as a scattered and reclusive bunch. Yes, they keep in touch, but they don't have the numbers to rely on each other for their basic day-to-day needs.

Nice point. HP magic doesn't require infrastructure. Guns need materials, factories or skilled craftsmen, distribution, and bullets. Electricity, you need underground or overground cables, power generation and a power company (or equivalent) handling it.

[Mordar]

I sincerely hope you're joking. I've only read two LOTR books. the hobbit and the fellowship of the ring and I liked the fellowship better. a lot of the stuff in the hobbit wasn't very interesting. it makes for an interesting bedtime story for kids but as a YA book? I quite obviously have not read them all but I know there are better ones out there.

I think there are elements of the "Art out of Time" issue here. For us old geezers (you know, people over 30) who may have read the Hobbit/LotR as 12-15 year olds, it was pretty freaking seminal (despite already being a generation old). Kids who got bedtime stories weren't reading much beyond Dr. Suess and maybe Laura Ingalls Wilder, and fantasy/sci-fi (or better yet, "Adventure") sections in bookstores were combined and small.

Asimov, Bradbury, Clarke...these guys weren't accessible to the YA types. Tolkien, despite being thicker, was...and he inspired most everything that came after. Of course, that means their reputation and hype preceeds the books, and anything other than an absolutely mind-blowing will come off as a disappointment.

I guess it's just the way of things. Anyone over the age of 5 in 1977 can attest to this...just ask a 12-year-old today to watch Star Wars for the first time and see what they have to say about the crappy effects, lame acting and dull story.

- M

[Hadrian_Emrys]

I'll throw my vote in for Harry Potter, for relative quality. I'll stick with my Tolkien, though.

Please, elaborate.

The Hobbit was boring as hell. I got the impression that Tolkien seemed to love the sound of his own reading voice because I could think of no other reason to prattle on as he did. As for the first half of Fellowship, it was like an expansion pack for The Hobbit.

:smallfurious: "I don't freaking CARE that rainbows and angel song shoot out of the collective arses of the elves!!1! This is, what, the 4th chapter in a row you've fangirl'd all over the hermophrodite nation of the bitchy old bigots and their Gary-Mary S(t)u(e) levels of universal beauty/superiority!?"

[Drakyn]

Tolkien's elves were actually screwed when it came to doing anything large-scale in the world, and this was precisely because they had managed to fight large, pointless, futile wars backed heavily by arrogance that all led to massive tragedy, something they're too aware of. Most modern elves are copycat'd from him, but with three times the arrogance, seven times the power/beauty/whatever the author loves at the moment, and sometimes are "fading" just like his had, except he had an actual reason for it.

[Oslecamo]

This is, what, the 4th chapter in a row you've fangirl'd all over the hermophrodite nation of the bitchy old bigots and their Gary-Mary S(t)u(e) levels of universal beauty/superiority!?"

However, it's important to notice that in Tolkien's story the elves superior beauty and craftmanship is what brings their downfall, as Sauron gets their atention for being quite beatifull himself, and then sweet talcks the elves into building a bunch of artifacts wich he then turns against them.

[Kilremgor]

On Twilight: its setting and abusive relationships, in fact, can be compared to another series of novels... I wonder why no one remembered them.

Anita Blake vampire hunter series written by Laurell Hamilton.

They also possibly share in their descent into weirdness, interspecies p0rn and plot degradation.

Anita Blake series started as average-written, somewhat detective stories with a lot of action, magic, somewhat Mary Sue-like main character, vampires and a lot of violence - in a quite detailed world (perhaps a lot more detailed and fluff-rich than Twilight's), but without weird romances. For a time, they could be considered enjoyable (and even fun), as even with quite simple plots they were exploring different myths/supernatural creatures quite interestingly, combining playing vampire/werewolf/... tropes straight and then brutally subverting them.

Then, after abusive relationships, BDSM and similar stuff kicked in, series went into downward spiral, turning into 'p0rn with plot' (and with complete Mary Sue mode) at best. Though, they at least had quite slow and even believable character development derailment. While author, apparently, considered all the relationships and changes as normal.

Doesn't that feel similar?

Twilight, on the other hand, had a fair share of weirdness from the start, but main character in it is undergoing a similar change. It has more style, perhaps, and so far is keeping weirdness at bay better, but the similarity is a dangerous sign. It may get worse. The only way it can get better, perhaps, is a genre shift.

[Foeofthelance]

I'd say the only difference between the two books is that at least in the Anita Blake series the main character admits that her life has gone to hell in a hand basket because of all the strange stuff she's gotten involved in.

Consider:

When they had the soap-opera required pregnancy scare volume, the general reaction of all the character was between, "You're not capable of raising a kid", "You know it's going to pop out as a demon baby, right?", and "You're not capable of raising a demon baby child!"

Twilight's version came down to, "You're having a baby! Therefore we must make you an immortal sparklepire and wed her straight out of the womb to our werewolf friend/rival! Life is great!"

[Lord Seth]

Why do some people feel the need to write it like "p0rn"? Why not just write it out simply as "porn"? Is it some kind of weird self-censorship?

As for Lord of the Rings, I remember what someone told me in High School about Tolkien (well, not the exact words, but the essence of it) and it seems to ring true for a lot of people: "I love the world he creates, I just hate how he tells the story."

The Dresden Files might be my favorite urban fantasy series though. Any series where they actually mention the Evil Overlord list is a win in my book.

[Serpentine]

As for Lord of the Rings, I remember what someone told me in High School about Tolkien (well, not the exact words, but the essence of it) and it seems to ring true for a lot of people: "I love the world he creates, I just hate how he tells the story."That's the way I feel about it, but I did really enjoy The Hobbit (though this was many years ago now).

[averagejoe]

On Twilight: its setting and abusive relationships, in fact, can be compared to another series of novels... I wonder why no one remembered them.

Um, because no one has read them? :smalltongue:

[pita]

Um, because no one has read them? :smalltongue:

No, a lot of people have read Anita Blake. Those people suffer from what Freud called "repressed memories". This sort of thing only happens in really traumatic occasions like death, severe injury, and Anita Blake novels.

[Myatar_Panwar]

Harry Potter got a ton of kids to read (including myself) and they were better for it.

Twilight got some young girls to read, yet I highly doubt they are any better for it. If you know what I'm saying.

[averagejoe]

No, a lot of people have read Anita Blake. Those people suffer from what Freud called "repressed memories". This sort of thing only happens in really traumatic occasions like death, severe injury, and Anita Blake novels.

:smalleek: Maybe I've read them!

[Avilan the Grey]

On Twilight: its setting and abusive relationships, in fact, can be compared to another series of novels... I wonder why no one remembered them.

Anita Blake vampire hunter series written by Laurell Hamilton.

I truly enjoyed the LKH books up until Blue Moon. I could see where the series was heading by then and bailed ship. Most of the fans of the first books hung in for one or two more and then bailed.
Basically her fan base is split between the ones that only read the first books, and those who only read the later ones. Or put it the other way: those who enjoyed the Vampire Noir / Urbant Fantasy, and those who enjoy the Plotless Pr0n (and complain that the first books are so boring because there is no mindless sex that takes up 80% of the books).

Even if I no longer read her novels, I love the fact that her early work was what inspired Jim Butcher to write his Harry Dresden novels.

[Avilan the Grey]

Why do some people feel the need to write it like "p0rn"? Why not just write it out simply as "porn"? Is it some kind of weird self-censorship?

Yes, because we asume the censorship scripts to sensor the word Porn.

[Serpentine]

Yes, because we asume the censorship scripts to sensor the word Porn.If that were the case (which it's not), then you'd be breaking the rules :smallconfused:

[Lord Seth]

those who enjoy the Plotless Pr0n (and complain that the first books are so boring because there is no mindless sex that takes up 80% of the books).Actually, why do people use "p0rn" or "pr0n"? It just looks weird. Just write out "porn" and be done with it

I can understand using euphemisms (though I don't see how the word "porn" itself is in any way offensive) but this is hardly a euphemism and just looks plain odd.

[Jade_Tarem]

I didn't mean it to be a critique of how to use the term (and I don't think it was a particularly long rant either) but I understand your point. I meant it more of a general dislike of the label altogether, that to expect the HP books not to have the main character as the most important character in the world is an unfair expectation, and that other beloved characters share many of the same traits that people like to tag with the MS label.

It is my "new" (and probably many peoples "old") thought that the difference between a character being "awesome" and an MS is simply this - if you like the character/book, they're awesome, and if you don't, they're MS.

For disclosure's sake, I *like* the Dresden Files quite a bit. I've read all the paperbacks and am usually very excited when I get to sit down to read them. In fact, I probably like them more than any other series in recent memory and will at some point pick up his fantasy series, particularly if I hear any endorsements of it from people I know.

I made the comparison between the two characters on the scale of MSedness not as a way of taking a shot at Dresden/Butcher but with the intent of presenting my opinion on the MS criticism of Potter/Rowling.

All of that being said...

I went away for a week, and came back and saw this. While the discussion has moved on, I had to respond, and people are talking about the spelling of "porn" now anyway.

Yes, there's probably a great deal of perception involved in whether or not a character is a Mary Sue or not. Perhaps I overreacted, but there are a few points missing from your response below...


The tvtropes "definition (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MartyStu)" includes the following:

"Marty Stu is devastatingly handsome (or if not, possessed of a strange, saturnine magnetism) and desired by all significant women, yes, but romance is not likely to be the main dish. He's an unstoppable fighter, a rogue agent, a fearless freedom fighter, a master of disguise. However, as times have changed, just as Mary's acquired a bratty temper, Marty's had the occasional opportunity to show his softer side."

It further mentions that the male MS is often an application of the "Rule of Cool" - the character gets to do the things he does, even if they defy logic or convention, because he is so awesome.

My views, particularly as relates to the above, are included with your comments below. PLEASE keep in mind that I like the books, I like the character and I like the author.

Ok.


He's the gunslinger that stands up to everyone and anyone that is looking to take advantage of the little guy. He holds tight to his code of honor and chivalry (no matter how sexist) and rails against the establishment when it doesn't do right.

True. And then we get to Turn Coat, and Luccio (one of the good guys, now) points out that this attitude is bogus. What Dresden sees as right and the obvious "best" way for the White Council (the establishement) to behave won't work - it leads either to total anarchy or a world run by wizards. As she points out, the White Council wasn't founded to "do the right thing," it was founded to limit power, nothing more. Dresden's hope of a better tomorrow can't come to pass, because Dresden can't see the big picture. Idealized? Doubtful...


He will sacrifice himself in a heartbeat if that's the only way to save the people he feels deserves saving. Oh, and he always tips well. Sounds like a pretty good ideal for a lot of people.

He also has a very personal view of "who deserves to be saved." He has anger management issues, whether bolstered by Lasciel or not, and more than once has screwed things up royally by not thinking things through. While this might make him an ideal action hero, the fact is that if everyone lived like this there would be... severe problems.


In fact, his flaw (which is presented as a redeeming and idealizable trait) gets him in trouble...but his usually flawless preparation, decision making, amazing perception and intuition all come together to make his biggest flaw an asset.

[ASIDE]My recollection had his girlfriend becoming vampirized because he couldn't keep her from showing up where she'd be a hinderance and a danger...in fact, it was at that point that I decided I really disliked her. Murphey knows when she's out of her depth, and if she has to make a stand she'll call in all the cavalry she can...the vamp-to-be, not so much.

Suzan had a big part in her own fate, true, but Harry didn't fully appraise her of the dangers, and kinda brushed away her concerns on more than one occasion. To be honest, I never liked Suzan either.

Also, while he does do some sweet preparation, his decision making can hardly be called flawless. Actually, alot of what you've said holds very true for earlier books, and not so much in the later ones.


Of course he can be viewed as a wish fulfillment character. Just because Butcher puts him through physical and emotional wringers doesn't mean that Dresden couldn't be viewed as somewhat wish-fulfilly. In fact, the way a character faces the challenges might well be the trait that an author most wishes they shared with their character. Let's see:

a) Guy with the "courage" to stand up to every authority figure he comes across, often telling them off and flaunting his utter contempt for their power/authority and gets away with it - and sometimes its on a whim; [I understand that there are often consequences, but to date he's antagonized pretty much every more powerful being/organization that exists and hasn't been turned to paste]

I don't get it. You've basically stated that Dresden always gets away with ticking off the establishement - except when he doesn't. Individuals can get away with ticking off large organizations, and typically don't get killed for it. For example, if I want to send 50,000 letters' worth of hate mail to the IRS, I can do it, and they can't just kill me in response. There would likely be consequences, but "I'm not dead yet!" doesn't qualify as getting away scott free.


b) Scores (or very nearly so...in the stuff I've read to date he and Murphey still aren't together) the hot chicks (including the power-chicks like wizards, vampires/vampires-to-be and bad ass MMA copchicks with big guns) - the number one listed Marty Stu trait;

He's slept with Suzan, until she left him, and Luccio, who had to be mind-influenced into it by Peabody. Everyone else who comes on to him is trying to get something from him (Maeve, Maeve's handmaiden, that girl from Grave Peril, Molly, Lasciel's Shadow, Deirdre, Tessa, Aurora, etc. - they didn't want him, they wanted something from him), which is more a staple of the genre (noir) than the character.


c) Mastery of the ultimate gamergeek wish fulfillment power - magic;

Magical ability, while cool, does not a Marty-Stu make. Also, he's not a master at it, and he seems to frequently run into people who are better at it.


d) A badass magical sword (for a while, at least), mad juijitsu skills, a ghost familiar, the coolest cat-and-dog pair ever, and in addition to all of this, he's in excellent physical condition;

He's in possession of two magical swords right now, but his swordsmanship is crap, and his physical conditioning is mostly used when he's running away. The mad karate skills belong to Murphy. As a matter of fact, Dresden spends most of his time trying to avoid physical conflict because he's nearly always outclassed in that department.

The dog and Bob are awesome, though.


e) A farie-based cleaning service;

Ok, this might be wish fulfillment. That said, he has no hot water, and most modern-day appliances fry when he walks by. He drives a crappy car and frequently has money problems.


f) No matter what life throws at him, he always manages to come out on top.

Except when he doesn't. To date, he's lost Suzan, had his hand nearly burned off, was unable to prevent the kidnapping and torture of the Archive, watched Michael get mauled, was unable to save Thomas from being more or less broken, found out that Luccio never really had the hots for him, was unable to save Morgan, and didn't really defeat Cowl. Dresden's ability to come out on top and smelling of roses has taken a few hits lately...


I've got to say, those are all pretty high on the wish fulfillment scale for the average gamer nee author. Sure, the whole cycle of tragedy and war puts a damper on it, but at his core, Dresden is, I think, a strong contender for every gamergeeks "Boy, I wish I was like XXXX".

I'm going to go ahead and say that this is subjective. To be fair, you're probably more right than I am.

I do wonder, though, at what point wanting to be like a character makes that character a Mary Sue. I mean, this hardly seems like it could apply in real life, so we should be careful about it with regards to fiction as well. Does wanting to be like, say, George Washington or Joan of Arc make those characters Mary Sues? I don't know...


Going back to the tvtropes definition, Dresden is the dauntless freedom fighter and the ultimate rogue agent. He's utterly deadly when he gets his "mad" on, and he takes crap from no one.

Once again, except when he does. He takes all sorts of crap from the White Council, Queen Mab, Cowl, and even the Knights of the Cross, all because he can't do a thing about it.


He can be dark and edgy, has the same kind of tragic past thing going on that HP does (including bad relatives taking him in). He's lean, mean and streamlined and has that rough and rugged exterior that make women want him and men want to be like him. And I like him for all those reasons too :smallsmile:

Touche.


I'm not really sure of the complexity of the characters...once you get a little in the know, I think they're pretty straight-forward. In fact, that's why a couple of them are so easily manipulated. Less stupid? Well, from one perspective, sure...but consider from the "If he would just shut his mouth and not *say* that stupid thing it would all go so much easier" viewpoint. Still, I understand what you're saying, even if I don't agree with that part.

Which characters were easily manipulated, other than Molly? I'm genuinely curious.


Like I said before, please understand that I like the Dresden Files. I'd admit that I liked the TV show too (accepting the limitations of TV adaptations) except that too many people would beat me with mallets for saying so. Lastly, in a fight between the Harry's, its clear that Dresden wins the day...not only do hockey sticks trump twigs, he's got a freaking gun.

- M

PS: I bet Twilight's werewolves will look better than Lupin from HP. That makes this whole post back on the original topic...right? :smallredface:

I liked the TV show too. It was an interesting spin on things, and they had a better Bob.

So I'm not sure what this resolved, other than that your initial point was probably right, and that Mary Sue status is more subjective than a number of other descriptors.

[Foeofthelance]

No, a lot of people have read Anita Blake. Those people suffer from what Freud called "repressed memories". This sort of thing only happens in really traumatic occasions like death, severe injury, and Anita Blake novels.

They also tend to be really good self help books. As in, "Than God, at least my life isn't that bad!"

I admit that I find them to be good trashy fun...

[Avilan the Grey]

Actually, why do people use "p0rn" or "pr0n"? It just looks weird. Just write out "porn" and be done with it

I can understand using euphemisms (though I don't see how the word "porn" itself is in any way offensive) but this is hardly a euphemism and just looks plain odd.

Come to think of it, I think it also (pr0n) means "cheap, bad" porn. As in cheaper and worse than regular porn.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

Hell, I use 'pr0n' simply because it does look so silly. :smalltongue:

In any case, the end of the third book indeed marked the end of the decent Anita Blake stories. From there, it pretty much became this (http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/6/2/). Also, prior to Hamilton raping the original character concept, the Blake Edward was a metric ton more enjoyable to read about than the the Meyer sparklefairy. I almost wanted to dress up as Death-with-a-flamethrower myself for All Hollows.

Edit: I just had to share:
You know how when one has a hammer, all their problems begin to look like nails? Well, it would seem that Anita Blake traded her hammer for a screwdriver... :smallbiggrin:

[Foeofthelance]

Edit: I just had to share:
You know how when one has a hammer, all their problems begin to look like nails? Well, it would seem that Anita Blake traded her hammer for a screwdriver... :smallbiggrin:

Ouch. Just...ouch.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

Don't you dare give me that look, you know it's true. :smalltongue:

[Avilan the Grey]

I thought she didn't have a screwdriver, but a philips screw.

[mikej]

Harry Potter > Twilight

It's sad, the lesser of two things I dislike win, I prefer LoTR over both. Harry Potter did open up reading to whole generation of young people. Twilight ( aka; Tome of Mary Sue ) gave us...


-Snip-
“What is your name, address and phone number, just so that i can track you down ank kill You with my super awesom vampire powers THAT I AQUIRED FROM READING THE SERIES!!!!!!!!!!”

and of course this...


-Snip-
“do you WANT a cult of angry twilight luvers like mysef at your doorstep at night trying to behead you????? you shouldnt voice an absurd oppinion like this on the internet.”

[Serpentine]

Is that fo sirius? Where from?

[Lord Seth]

In any case, the end of the third book indeed marked the end of the decent Anita Blake stories. From there, it pretty much became this (http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/6/2/). Really? I heard that it went downhill in Narcissus in Chains (book #10), because the ardeur was introduced, which basically meant Anita had to have lots and lots of badly-written sex.

[Avilan the Grey]

Really? I heard that it went downhill in Narcissus in Chains (book #10), because the ardeur was introduced, which basically meant Anita had to have lots and lots of badly-written sex.

Exactly. Personally I say it was from Blue Moon, because that's where you could detect the change taking place.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

Oh man, I think my memory has been playing tricks on me again. Which book ended with her finally getting it on with someone? It was the end of that tome of horror that the series began taking a nose dive in theme. I'm now thinking it was The Killing Dance.

[Thrawn183]

...I'm pretty sure we're not talking about Twilight or Harry Potter anymore.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

The conversation seems to have evolved to include yet another Sue. :smalltongue:

On the core subject though, at least Hamilton's leeches feel like vamps. I just wish I wasn't so annoyed by the Potter setting, the writing isn't half bad.

[WalkingTarget]

Actually, why do people use "p0rn" or "pr0n"? It just looks weird. Just write out "porn" and be done with it

I can understand using euphemisms (though I don't see how the word "porn" itself is in any way offensive) but this is hardly a euphemism and just looks plain odd.

*grumbles about kids these days and how they use slang without understanding it*

Have you ever heard of "leet speak" (or 1337 5p33k, or any other variant of that)? It wasn't always a means of making your text hard to read, it began as a means of subverting language filters on old message boards that were trying to crack down on discussions of hackers (haxxors), pornography (pr0n), and whatnot but it showed a particular level of net savvy if you could make sense of it (since you had to have been around long enough to understand the slang).

The original reason for using it has largely disappeared, but from what I see people continue to use it either ironically and/or because it's fun to have a language that's largely indecipherable by outsiders (or because they saw somebody else use it and are jumping on the bandwagon). Wikipedia has an article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet) about it.

[Vaire]

As to the original question, I think I'd have to vote for Harry Potter, simply because he didn't make vampires "glittery".

[mangosta71]

I saw Twilight over the weekend...

On a related subject, has anyone seen my will to live?

[Lord_Gareth]

It's right there, being concealed by the part of your mind which takes pride in the art of communication and is currently attempting to reach out and slaughter Stephenie Meyer. Unfortunately, as it is only a personified aspect of your psyche, it's only managed to reach you. This is, alas, a great tragedy.

[Cristo Meyers]

I saw Twilight over the weekend...

On a related subject, has anyone seen my will to live?

At least you survived, that's the important thing. Now we can get to the healing part.

Somebody get me 30 Days of Night, now!

[pita]

At least you survived, that's the important thing. Now we can get to the healing part.

Somebody get me 30 Days of Night, now!

A twilight dosage such as this can only be cured by watching The Best of Omar Little. That man is the reason to live, for men both gay and straight. Gay people fantasize about him while straight people go "Heh heh, shotgun."

[Mystic Muse]

.

On a related subject, has anyone seen my will to live?

it killed itself.

[Ravens_cry]

Apparently, Stephenie Meyer has been accused of plagiarising another authors work, and is being sued for it (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/090804/entertainment/centertainment_us_books_twilight).
And gods, that dress is awful.

[Jayngfet]

Apparently the other author is asking for a cease and decist, not money out of this.

Now that says something.

[pita]

Apparently the other author is asking for a cease and decist, not money out of this.

Now that says something.

We all want a cease and desist. Someone else wanting one says nothing.
I disagree with the other author. Many of the plot elements that are mentioned are found in other places as well.
I don't know, though. Let's wait and see what happens.
EDIT- I just realized something. The author of the original book said that they wrote it as a teenager. TAKE THAT MEYER.

[Bibliomancer]

For my view on this issue, see the following picture:

http://empressfunk.deviantart.com/art/Showdown-HP-vs-Twilight-95650140

Except for the part where Harry and Ginny don't kill them.

[The Glyphstone]

Mildly amusing.

Except the last panel. That was ROFL.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

Just wanted to make sure this (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21269081@N05/3316705695/) was pointed out for those who may have missed it.

[Mystic Muse]

Just wanted to make sure this (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21269081@N05/3316705695/) was pointed out for those who may have missed it.

AAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SOMEBODY HELP ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'M IN PAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!

STEPHANIE MEYER SHALL DIE FOR THIS MONSTROSITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Comet]

Just wanted to make sure this was pointed out for those who may have missed it.
The best part? His special powers. Ming reading sure sounds like a cool sounding power :smalltongue:

[The Glyphstone]

But does it come with Authentic Neck-Biting Action?

[Comet]

I just realised that it probably doesn't even sparkle in the sunlight. Talk about worst action figure ever.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

The best part? His special powers. Ming reading sure sounds like a cool sounding power :smalltongue:

That's what I was drawing attention to. I saw that as I was last in Hot Topic, and couldn't stop laughing at the fangirls who got offended by me pointing it out.

[Moofin Bard]

The ONLY thing I liked about Twilight, ONLY thing, was the supporting vampire roles and Charlie. Charlie is a likable character with actual FLAWS. Jeez.

So Harry Potter wins my vote because they are my favorite books, even if they aren't the best written. The stupid epilogue was annoying too. Hated it. But at least the books have more of everything than Twilight.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

There are a lot of things that set me off about Meyer's books, but one of the things that bothers me more than it should is how a character that is described as a compelling leaders ends up as a man-wallflower in the plot. It's a nagging little detail that haunts me.

[Cristo Meyers]

Apparently, Stephenie Meyer has been accused of plagiarising another authors work, and is being sued for it (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/090804/entertainment/centertainment_us_books_twilight).
And gods, that dress is awful.


"I think the fans have to read both books and make up their own mind, like a judge is going to have to," Williams said.

Don't we have a constitutional amendment prohibiting punishments like that?

[Hadrian_Emrys]

Yeah... something about cruel and unusual.

[Mystic Muse]

yeah, the eigth amendment. no excessive fines and no cruel and unusual punishment.

[PhoeKun]

Don't we have a constitutional amendment prohibiting punishments like that?

*rimshot*

Pardon my ignorance on the subject, but if that lawsuit is successful, doesn't it establish a dangerous and terrifying precedent in regards to plagiarism? I'm not really all that familiar with previous cases on the subject, but am I the only one bothered by the idea that writing a book with similar scenes and subjects as someone else could land you in court?

[Cristo Meyers]

*rimshot*

Pardon my ignorance on the subject, but if that lawsuit is successful, doesn't it establish a dangerous and terrifying precedent in regards to plagiarism? I'm not really all that familiar with previous cases on the subject, but am I the only one bothered by the idea that writing a book with similar scenes and subjects as someone else could land you in court?

As I understand it, this other author doesn't really have a leg to stand on. The similarities have to be pretty close to exact to qualify. "Close" really just doesn't cut it for reasons that you just touched on.

[truemane]

Not being a lawyer, if I recall from similar stories in the past, plagarism lawsuits spend a lot of time talking about 'the money part.' Obviously books are going to share themes/scenes/motifs, especially books within a given genre. But what you want to protect is the thing that makes your book what it is at its core.

So if someone else can prove that they wrote a book whose 'money part' is the same as your book's 'money part' then you have a problem. I don't think 'similar scenes' is generally enough. These are very relatuve terms, of course, and that's what the lawyers get paid to argue about.

Also, successful authors get sued all the time. I've heard more than one say that lawsuits are a measure of success. The moment you have money, people are going to start trying to take it away. Stephen King said "Every writer with deep pockets gets sued from time to time."