Fun Stuff > ENJOY
Twilight (Sorry for cursing)
Surgoshan:
Speaking as a scientist... that picture is erroneous.
Ikrik:
--- Quote from: a pack of wolves on 05 Feb 2010, 07:23 ---
--- Quote from: Ikrik on 05 Feb 2010, 02:32 ---She almost brags that she purposefully didn't do any research on vampires before she started writing...
--- End quote ---
Actually, I rather like that idea. What she ended up with was crap, but it's not like we're talking about something that exists outside of fantasy so it's not like the vampire anti-defamation league is going to get pissed by your insensitivity when you come up with something different to what everyone else has, which is what she did. It just wasn't a good thing, but that's the fault of her bad writing. The idea's sound.
--- End quote ---
See I really hate the idea because I think it shows laziness. If I wanted to write a werewolf novel the absolute first thing I would do is as much research as I possibly can. Even and especially if I'm going to be changing the mythology. You run the risk of just being insulting to the thing you're using. How many kinds of vampires do we have that share the same basic kinds of characteristics? Nosferatu's, Dracula's, 30 Days of Night's, Cronos, From Dusk Till Dawn, Blade's? Anne Rice's Stuff, Vampyros Lesbos (the best kind). These are all different from each other but you would never, ever question that these creatures are vampires. I would want to do my best to research whatever it is I'm doing because then I can not only pay respect to the classic mythology but can also change them in such a way that suits me but still stays true to the creature.
Alex C:
--- Quote from: Ikrik on 05 Feb 2010, 20:32 --- I would want to do my best to research whatever it is I'm doing because then I can not only pay respect to the classic mythology but can also change them in such a way that suits me but still stays true to the creature.
--- End quote ---
That assumes you think there's value to staying true to the creature. Effectively saying that "This creature is what the term vampire has been alluding to all these years," isn't really bad writing in and of itself, particularly when you consider that the modern vampire is a chimera stitched together from all manner of different legends. In this case staying true is hardly even possible anyway.
elizaknowswhatshesfor:
Had she tried to re-invent them & made them more AWESOME than say, The Lost Boys, it would have been fine. She took a myth based around repressed sexuality & made it both Lame & creepy at the same time.
The reason people, me included (& vampires have never been my favourite of all the "monsters" I'm a zombie girl at heart), have got all riled up is because there IS value in the creatures she's messing with.
Look at what the Blade character did with the Vampire myth, messed up all kinds of things, but it still had a backbone, spine and MADE SENSE.
The fact that the original Vampire myths came from many different sources & were then mostly characterised in the Bram Stoker novel, then we have had many layers of meaning from many different 20th century sources building it up to became something we all reckognise, even if each one is slightly different. Eg: In Lost boys he says "Garlic doesn't work"
Whether it's comic books like 30 days of Night, TV like Buffy, Novels like Anne Rice there is a sense of continuity in the use of Vampires, whats the point in calling it a Vampire if it isn't, she should of just called them Stalking Sparkle monsters.
Sorry if this is insanely rambling, this is because, I am & do & because I'm hungry, very hungry. Soz.
Alex C:
This reminds me of that penny arcade comic in which Gabe said that the difference between something being derivative and something being an homage is whether he likes it or not.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version