Forum - View topicNEWS: Twilight Manhwa by Young Kim to Be Published by Yen Press
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hon'ya-chan
 Posts: 973 |
|
|||||
I think it's called "Negima!" |
||||||
|
||||||
SongstressCela
 Posts: 615 Location: Pennsylvania |
|
|||||
 I'd honestly rather see a Twilight manga than HP. I like both properties, but for some reason I can't see a HP manga working out well...I dunno why.
|
||||||
|
||||||
The Xenos
 Posts: 1519 Location: Boston |
|
|||||
With Twilight specifiably I look at Meyer and how she's got this crazy take on vampires. Her take on the issue is so far off and I disagree with it so much, I flat out reject the book. Again, if I was to publish a unicorn book and made then look like ugly elephants, shouldn't fans of unicorn fiction reject it? Plus the romance is pure cardboard for young girls to chew on. It's a cheap Happy Meal made with grade Z meat. And again, I saw most of the movie and thought it was awful. I'm sure the book was better, but being better than that even by a mile still isn't good.
Ha. As bad as that harem manga is, in my opinion, at least it doesn't molest any mythology. Sure it adds to the generic magic users genre that's been around anime since before Potter. I don't care for the shonen harem romance genre, but that's another point entirely. Actually, if you're going to put a spin on vampires, make it good. Master of Mosquiton was a good comedy. Lament of the Lamb turned vampirism realistic by making it a blood disease in a family drama. Hellsing did an intersting take on Bram Stoker's Dracula. They didn't create some new create and hijack the name vampire as if they were making THE vampire story of the decade like this pretends to be. Hell at least Hirano watched the Coppola Dracula and did some research before moving on. Meyer was just a bored housewife with a English degree from Brigham Young that seems to have never touched a vampire story before. She cites Jane Austin more for inspiration than any vampire tale. |
||||||
|
||||||
merlin2377
 Posts: 6 Location: Ouran High School |
|
|||||
....I still don't really see where people are getting this thing that vampires MUST be a certain way. Dracula walked in the sun. Being killed with crosses and holy water is an influence from Christianity. (...but where did garlic come from? o.o ) There are vampires-like myths in other parts of the world, but those vampires aren't killed with holy water because there wasn't Christianity in that region. Are those cultures' vampires not vampires because they don't conform to the rules? In the book, Meyer's vampires drink blood...I'm pretty sure that's the main thing that makes something a "vampire". (Also immortality and strength, which Meyer's vampires have.) A lot of the "canon" vampire characteristics have been created by Hollywood, so I think Meyer can have a little lee-way too...Anyway, Hollywood is also responsible for turning Frankenstein into a monster that can only say "aaaaaaarrrrrgggghhhhh" instead of the eloquent creature he is in the novel. That's much worse than "NO WAI sparkling vampires!!" And I agree with you that if you hear a lot about something and decide you really don't want to read/watch/listen whatever, that's your own choice, and there's nothing wrong with that. I just have a problem with people who listen to what other people tell them and that makes them an expert. Those people are just willing to let other people have an unhealthy degree of control over their opinions. I also see your point about someone hearing that Twilight was amazing and then reading it, but they are still free to think it's terrible after reading it. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
SongstressCela
Posts: 615 Location: Pennsylvania |
|
|||||
That's actually a Christian thing too, I believe.  A lot of people in that era believed garlic to be a powerful tool in white magic and preventative measures, similarly to how it's used in health foods today. People always knew it was helpful, it's just the source of said helpfulness that was in debate. xD
But, yes, that's likely where it came from. It wasn't just used for vampires either, but lesser known wards for werewolves and other nasties. Anyway, I do agree with much of this post. x3 I'm not really a fan of Meyer's vampire canon, but I still greatly enjoyed the books and it didn't really hurt the entertainment much for me at all. Besides, something as badass as Rosalie's turning story certainly makes up for something as tame as sparkles! 
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
JadeLiCat
Posts: 8 Location: NJ |
|
|||||
What exactly is that supposed to mean? That you don't think anyone with an English degree can do research and write a good vampire story? If that's the case, don't you think that's stereotyping just a little bit? I have an English Writing Degree and I read alot of vampire novels way before Meyer came out, and I can assure you she's not the first to do a “vampire in love with a human” aspect. There are writers who have gone that route before and done it a million times better. And for all of the stories I'm currently working on, I research my butt off to make sure I get it right. I have a ton of books on vampire folklore, angelic folklore, demonic folklore, books on various types of magicks, books on religions such as Shinto, and so forth. Also the whole thing with glittery vampires is just an interpretation, nothing more and nothing less. I adore vampires, I really do and I have read stories by other authors where they can walk out in sun light, give birth to children, etc, so it's really nothing to get that upset over. And honestly, I figured that if Twilight had been a shojo manga rather than a novel, alot of shojo fans would have been all over it from the beginning. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Nagisa
Moderator
 Posts: 6128 Location: Atlanta-ish, Jawjuh |
|
|||||
I'm no fan of Meyer either, but her being a housewife, bored, and a Mormon all have no bearing on the poor quality of her work whatsoever. Neither does her interpretation of vampiric myth, to be completely honest. It would have been nice if she'd done more research, and it's certainly not the most entertaining, thought-provoking, or traditional interpretation ever, but it's still just a different spin, simple as that. If anything made Twilight unbearable, it was Meyer's clunky, awkward, often shamelessly over-elaborate writing style (see purple prose), and her even poorer characterization. It was the actual mechanics involved, not so much who she was as a person or how she treated mythology. |
||||||
|
||||||
Animehermit
 Posts: 964 Location: The Argama |
|
|||||
well that explains a lot, considering her complete bastardization of what Bram Stoker originally intended with Dracula. That isn't to say that other vampire stories don't do the same, i have the same content for those as I do Twilight. And just about the only vampire anime i liked was Hellsing |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Nagisa
Moderator
Posts: 6128 Location: Atlanta-ish, Jawjuh |
|
|||||
|
You're making me defend Stephanie Meyer. I feel dirty. Please stop. Also, the jab at her religion was unnecessary.
Dracula was not the first, nor is it the be-all and end-all in terms of vampiric myth. Novels like Carmilla and short stories like "The Vampyre" predate Dracula considerably, and myths of blood drinking apparitions (most, if not all of which directly influenced our modern interpretation of vampires) extend as far back as Egyptian & Greek mythology, ancient Chinese folklore, Hinduism, and even influenced the Old Testament's interpretation of demons. There is room within vampiric mythology to diverge from Dracula. Stoker did not invent vampires, nor is the myth slavishly bound to his spin just because it was the first modern mainstream success with the creatures. |
||||||
|
||||||
littlegreenwolf
 Posts: 4796 Location: Seattle, WA |
|
|||||
|
Ah, I come in here and see where this conversation has gone now and can't help but face palm and go "Jebus, are you people s******g me?" I think most of you guys complaining about the vampires being bastardized really are NOT familiar with what the Romance genre has done with vamps for the last decade or two.
What some of you people need to do to get over your unjustified hate of the thing is just take a step back and quit looking at the Twilight series for what it isn't (a sequel to Stoker's Dracula) and look at it for what it is: An extension of the 1 Billion dollar industry known as the Romance Novel industry. One in particular targeting teen girls. I personally don't like Romance novels, but I'm not going to just brush off any of the authors for being complete rubbish because I don't like the type of story they're writing. (Personally I like some of Nora Robert's mysteries under the name of J.D. Robb, where otherwise I'd cringe and hide from any of her romance novels) That said, I won't deny that there takes a certain amount of skill required to write all those heaving bosoms and naughty sex scenes, and some apparently do it very well, but for someone who isn't a fan of the genre to go on about how horrible something is because they don't understand what it is they're reading is just annoying and it sort of makes your opinion moot in an actual discussion about the subject. It's like getting a Classic music critic to review a Sex Pistols album. They're more than likely going to hate it and not see any value in it, but does that mean that album isn't one of the best damn punk albums out there, completely void of any musical merit? No. It pains me really that I find myself defending Twilight, ,but as a bookseller and a bookworm I hate to see any book tore up so badly, especially when there is really worse stuff out there. Twilight is as entertaining to someone who doesn't like a romance story as the punk music would be to that Classic music enthusiast. It has a formula designed to check off certain boxes (love/hate relationship, classic old fashion boy, girl put into peril, etc, etc) to in the end entertain people who WANT that sort of story. It was total Mary Sue, and I'd be lying if I didn't admit I laughed through most of it while reading due to Meyer's writing style, but if you pay attention to what Meyers was trying to achieve you might find something you can enjoy throughout the series. For me it was the parallels to famous love stories. For the first novel it was Pride and Prejudice (I'll give anyone time who can give a decent nod to Jane Austen) and in the second book it was obviously Romeo and Juliet, and I'll be the first to tell you I was ecstatic Edward was out of the picture for pretty much the whole thing making it extra intriguing to how Meyers actually pulled off the story without her leading man (extra Kudos to all the Native American research in that book). The third book was annoyingly Wuthering Heights, but still, I find some enjoyment seeing how she worked all those book's themes and plot twists into a modern, vampy setting. Sure, it has all happened before and it will all happen again, but romance novels aren't the only genre guilty of reusing classic plots and characters that have survived the centuries. If anything I found Twilight to be an interesting study on Classical influence on a literary train wreck turned mainstream phenomena. Yeah, the main character in the series is a total Mary Sue with no personality, but the other characters are replicas of classic archetypes and literary traditions who somehow ended up more fleshed out than the book's heroine. Sure it was an odd experience to enjoy the supporting characters more than the main ones too busy going "Oh Edward, Oh Bella!", but I'll be damned if Alice isn't one of the coolest vampire females out there, or that that the revelations of Rosalie and her obsession with babies (or in particular THAT scene in the 4th book) didn't have me clutching the book as much as I did during any Anne Rice novel. Meyers can write some interesting psychology if she puts her mind to it. I suppose it was just a matter of time til the Mormon thing came up. If anything, I think her Mormon values splattered all over the book helped the series succeed so well where others in the genre failed. Romance novels are called the trash of the literary world because they're pretty much gussied up erotica. Twilight managed to keep all that sexual tension while sending the message to young readers that maybe it's alright to not have sex, and maybe you can expect a guy to be a gentleman (albeit a rather possessive one). I'm not one to advocate abstinence only and all that, but romance novels being successful without any naughty bits are few and far in between. I can't tell you how many grandmothers, aunts, and mothers I got into the store coming up to me with a Twilght book and asking me "does this have any sex?" and it was only with my answer that nope, it didn't have an ounce of sex that the woman would finally relent and hand it over to their 12 year old charge grinning away like Christmas had come early. Twilight, being void of the naughty scenes made it suddenly open game to talk to your fellow Sunday worshipers, and it also made you "hip". It wasn't soon after it became hard to keep on the shelves because of the preteens then suddenly all those aunts and mothers began coming in to buy copies for themselves, and then I got in their co-workers, and even the occasional curious male significant other. Bah, I'm sick of thinking about Twilight, and feel like I'm writing an essay. I forget what my point is now, but I believe I was striving for it being Twilight is more of a romance story than it is a vampire story, and it's just the one of hundreds of vampire romance novels published a year to make it into the mainstream, and than even if you're blind to it, there's some of value there. And I'll also be damned if I don't just point out that the 4th book is the bloodiest YA-novel I have ever read. Meyers gets extra kudos for getting away with half the crap she did in that book and still retaining the YA rating. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Animehermit
Posts: 964 Location: The Argama |
|
|||||
you've sort of missed my point, I was talking about what Stoker originally intended with Dracula. Which is, to put it bluntly, sex(not that there isn't other themes present within the book, of course, but sex is the most obvious of them). and while Dracula isn't the first to use vampires or even coin the term, it the most revered vampire novel of all time. There is a reason why its the premier vampire novel with mainstream success, its a damn good book, and worthy of being an end-all be-all of vampires in literature(note i say literature here, not fiction in general). I wasn't meaning to say that vampire on the whole are strict in there depictions. I rather like this rather new trend as sort of making vampires "cursed" beings, like tragic heroes, but sadly it is hardly ever well written enough(I would also like to add that i do enjoy HBO's "True Blood"). I don't care what anyone says having any person, place or thing "sparkle" when it hits sunlight, is stupid, vampires notwithstanding. oh and sorry for the jab at Mormonism, i do like to take a stake to it whenever i can. 
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
JadeLiCat
Posts: 8 Location: NJ |
|
|||||
|
And my message was meant for The Xenos more than anything. And I actually own and read all four of the books in the series, so any criticism I have should be legit. I was more offended toward what Xenos seemed to say about how someone with a degree in English Writing can't write a story or do research. That's what offended me the most. I don't care what people think of the book, I just don't like being stereotyped.
|
||||||
|
||||||
Agent355
 Posts: 5113 Location: Crackberry in hand, thumbs at the ready... |
|
|||||
|
If I'm reading all the hate right, it's okay to bash Stephanie Meyer because: A. She panders to female readers by making her books romantic, B. She reinterprets so-called "vampire lore" in her own way, C. She is inspired by classic female writers such as Jane Austen rather than Bram Stoker, D. She is a housewife (who "just" has an English degree).
3 out of 4 reasons are out-and-out gender bias. Whoa. Guess JK Rowling's publisher was right that she had to hide her gender 'till her books got big. This saddens and upsets me. 
Just out of curiousity, Littlegreenwolf, what do you think about the book "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies"? I can't believe it's on the NYTimes bestseller list, meself. Hopefully, it'll be adapted into a manga, too. After all, it was written by a man, so there should be no complaints about it from otaku fanboys, right?
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
JadeLiCat
Posts: 8 Location: NJ |
|
|||||
|
Well Agent, I never actually said anything bad about Stephenie Meyer or her work. All I really said was that I had authors before her that I felt did a better job then her. That being said, I actually was very entertained by the books and though they were a decent read, I just wanted to be careful about what I said since haters tend to be a bit vicious. And I'm not a fan boy, I'm female.
And as stated perviously, my first comment was meant for Xenos. I was just pissed about about the comment about the English degree and feel Xenos should explain him/herself. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
littlegreenwolf
Posts: 4796 Location: Seattle, WA |
|
|||||
Ah, Pride and Predjudice Zombies. When I discovered this I celebrated and went out of my way to try and obtain an advance reader copy. I am a huge Jane Austen fan, but I'm also a huge, and I do mean HUGE, Zombie fan. If Romero has a new movie out, I'm there opening night grinning away as I eat my popcorn. The general idea of the book amused me to no end, and I thought as long as they can realistically pull it off, I'd be happy. Key word there was realistic. Yeah, you can only be so "realistic" when it comes to zombies, but well, Pride and Predjudice Zombies was pretty much a sad joke to me. It was a cute idea, but the author obviously wasn't an expert in the Regency Era, didn't really try any research, or for that matter looked into how zombie apocalypses usually happen (he should have at least read World War Z by Max Brooks). It pained me to see that it was for the most part straight dialogue selections pulled right out of Pride and Prejudice with a lot of the thoughts and emotions clipped out of it, and well, just about everything that made me absolutely love Pride and Predjudice, and oh yeah, let's throw in a zombie and have all the girls suddenly kick zombie butt via their ninja arts, then go back to the party as if nothing is amiss. It just didn't make any sense to me that people could just act like that as their world was falling apart. I can go on to the problems the book had in this department, but basically it did nothing for me as a fan on the Jane Austen front. I'm not even going to even try addressing the Ninjas when Japan should have been in isolation still. Historian nutt me wasn't happy with the book either. Still, the Austen fan in me could be disappointed while the Zombie fan in me could still be happy... Then there was the setting for the zombie apocalypse. When I got the book I was thinking "yay! How would the Regency era government and people deal with a zombie apocalypse?" because the one thing I love about zombie movies and books and such is the story of survival and adapting to that horrible situation. That book didn't take it seriously. People were going about business as normal, and would go "oh... zombie in the street" and go around it or something and continue on with the shopping of frivolous things. No precautions, not barriers against the dead, no rules, etc, nothing I was hoping for as a serious what if. Zombie fan me laughed a bit at the stupidity, but on the Zombie Scale of Awesome it hit a low 2 out of 10 putting it in line with the forgetful zombie B-movies of the 70s that could only wish for the Romero touch. Jane Austen fan in me hated it because it didn't try to retain any of the charm or personality of the original, and the writer seriously didn't seem to know how to write a female character at all. So... I found it to be a horrible waste of a time for a book, one I didn't even bother finishing. I probably was taking it too seriously, but it let both the Zombie and Austen fan in me down. That said, I believe it will make a much better movie which I will happily go see when it hits theaters, something I can't say the same about the other Twilight books. And if they were to make it (P&P Zombies) into a comic I'd pick it up as long as they got a good artist. Also, the cover on that book was brilliant. I'd so buy a poster of it. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group