The Harry Potter book series is better than the Twilight book series.
First round is for acceptance and questions by Con that will be answered in the comments section before the debate begins in round 2.
Before I begin, I would ask the readers to please make their decision based upon who was more convincing in their arguments and NOT what their favorite book series is. I, like most of you, think Harry Potter is the best thing since oompa loompas but also believe that it has its weak points compared to twilight. Without further ado, I give the spotlight to my opponent and wish him luck.
I ask the readers to dismiss this round due to difficulties with Pro's DDO account. Both me and Pro will continue next round as normal.
I will present my case, but please note that I will never devote an entire point as an attack to Stephanie Meyer or the Twilight series, I beg my opponent to do the same.
I would like to thank Brorator for this fun debate.
Before we start claiming that Harry Potter is superior because all the good guys die, I have a question to ask. Exactly what purpose does killing the good guys have? The answer would be that it provokes an emotional response in the reader, usually one of sadness. But it is Stephinie Meyers, not JK Rowlings, who is the clear champion of producing emotional responses out of their readers. The entire story revolves around a sad love story between two people who live in polar opposite worlds. Would you call Harry Potter sadder than Romeo and Juliet? I daresay you would not because the fact is it isn't sadder. Twilight is the closest modern day Romeo and Juliet you will find, so it goes that it would be sadder than Harry Potter. This also makes Stephinie more talented than JK, because she was able to find ways to add sad elements to the story without killing off anybody. Stephine comes in with the double win...
Most people will agree with me when I say that it is not the quantity of mythical creatures that is important in a story, it is the quality. Even though there is no man-eating snakes or sock loving elves in Twilight, the mythical creatures that are introduced are incredible. Stephinie goes into a great detail describing the Vampires and Werewolves and adds a level of detail and Character that JK's mythical creatres lack. As for background information, Twilight has its share too. Twilight takes place in a real location with real landmarks. Many of the types of ethnicities such as the Quileute tribe are a real group of people.
3) Twilight is imaginative too
What I think Pro is trying to get at is that Harry Potter is more imaginative because it opened doors to other stories. If this is the case, then Twilight shares the title “Most Imaginative” with Harry Potter because it too has many possiblities for more stories. Stephinie Meyer has debated whether to continue the story with Jacob, Rennesseme, the Volturi, or any number of Character plotlines. She has even published a novel entitled The second life of Bree Tanner which tells the side story of another Vampire not associated with the main Character of Twilight.
4) Why you got be such a hater?
In Pro's next argument, he blatantly claims “Twilight is written poorly, and we all know it. If you need any sources, please read the books.” No, I did not know that it was poorly written which is why I am debating it. Also, I do not believe the readers are going to read the entire series just to see if your right. In the next round, I hope Pro gives actual reasons as to why Twilight is poorly written. Pro's next point is that since Harry Potter is written from third person and is unbiased, it is better. But for many readers, the exact opposite is true. People want to get inside the head of the Character and experience the same feelings and emotions the Character does. Writing from first-person actually helps the reader become more enveloped into the fantasy world of the Character. Twilight also shares its narration with Jacob and Edward diversifying the range of perspectives.
5) C'mon, give Twilight some credit
While Harry Potter is certainly unpredictable, Twilight is not a “I saw that coming” kinda book either. In fact, one of its strong points is its unpredicatibility. An example would be the love triangle between Bella, Jacob, and Edward. The book leaves you biting your toenails wondering if Bella was going to pick Jacob or Edward. And neither was it blantely obvious she was going to pick Edward because Stephanie created a emotional connection between Jacob and Bella that left readers wondering who Bella loved more. There is also moments when you don't know if Bella or another Character was going to die such as when Bella met the Volturi.
As both Harry Potter and Twilight are both nonfiction books, I shall only being arguing the entertainment value of the books.
1 The fighting scenes
Clearly in a nonfiction book, fighting scenes will be important. Unfortunately for Harry Potter, JK simply had no imagination when it came to fighting. The best the readers got where some balls of light being shot between the good guys and bad guys. C'mon, all Voldemort(Oh God, I said his name) and Harry Potter did was wave their sticks at each other and scream jibber jabber words like two fat guys fighting over a potato chip. At least Stephanie had some combat in her books. Her vampires actually ripped each other heads off which is pretty awesome. Werewolves trying to tear apart Vampires and Vampires throwing fireballs at Werewolves is way more epic than that humiliating crap JK tried to pull of as “fighting”.
Another important aspect of a good entertaining nonfiction story is the romance. Harry Potter didn't even find a girlfriend he wanted to keep for more than 2 chapters until book 6 or 7. And even at that, all we got was one sloppy kiss between Ginny and Harry. When reading Twilight, I almost fell in love with Edward myself AND I'M A GUY!!! Thats pretty good stuff. Stephanie masterfully recreated a modern day Romeo and Juliet that is indisputably better than that Harry and Ginny crap.
I have tried not to make my case too long so that Pro may be ableto rebuttal all my arguments. In the next round, I will bring up new points and rebuttal old ones. And with that, I turn the attention to Pro...
1. Even the good guys die.
Con claims that the reason that JK kills off the good guys is to invoke an emotional response. I completely disagree, and this point will be left to the voters. My entire point revolved around this having to do with being more truthful to the real world. In a society where all the good guys live, no one can learn the inevitable truth of death, no matter how it occurs. However, Con continues to argue why Meyer is better at invoking the emotional response in readers anyway, so I will debate that side too. "The entire [Twilight] story revolves around a sad love story between two people who live in polar opposite worlds" is the reason that Con claims Meyer to be superior in invoking an emotional response from the readers. However, I would like to point out that death is more common that two love-struck "teenagers" living in different worlds. Everyone dies, and is related to those who have died. This brings up the point, again that it is more real and truthful to the modern day world. More people will be able to learn from the books if they have experienced the pain of the other characters in the sense of learning other solutions to the same problems or even just viewing how other people react in general.
2. JK knows her history.
Con claims that the mythical creatures in Harry Potter are basically not as good as those in Twilight. In Twilight there are only two different types, whereas in Harry Potter there are so many it's hard to count. From Mountain Trolls, to Cornish Pixies, to Basilisks, to Werewolves, to Animagi, the creatures in the Harry Potter series are described as much if not more than those in Twilight. The only reason Meyer is able to include to much about the two types of creatures in her own story, is that she was the room next to all the other crap she thinks is important. Her constant description of Edward as being as cold as granite, does not help us define the vampire as much as JK helps the readers learn about the Animagi. Also, just because Twilight takes place in a real location, does not make it any more imaginative. If anything, it tells us how unimaginative she is, and that she is unable to create her own locations, other than an island, maybe, that is named only after Edward's mother.
3. Harry Potter is more imaginative, still.
Con obviously misunderstands this point (maybe because he lacks the imagination from reading as much Twilight as he seems to do). My point is that there are books that relate directly to Harry Potter written by JK. Meyer has written other books, sure. And they might be able the same subject, great. But the two are not related. JK has taken the base story of Harry Potter and has gone into so much detail that she was able to write up two textbooks from the series, and a story book that was mentioned. Because she is able to do this, we can see the much more creative side of the Harry Potter series because it is able to be researched so much more because it provides us with more material. The only books by Meyer that involve Twilight directly are the initial 3 books. Publishing a book about vampires and a similar story is not creative, it's boring.
4. I am not a hater, but Twilight's text is hard to read without losing brain-cells.
First I would like to point out that in my point, "we" means everyone that has read the two books and is on my side of the argument. The idea of the point is to prove it, as Con seems to misunderstand anyway. Then again, if I had decided that I enjoyed reading Twilight more than Harry Potter, I doubt I'd understand any of this either. Con asks for my reasons that Twilight is poorly written but I already have. Con misunderstands the idea of this point, however, which is why I will 'rebuild' it. In third person, you can get inside the head of all characters. Maybe just a little bit less, and you may not learn everything than most books in first person. However, with Twilight, this case is destroyed. Getting inside the head of Bella Swan is not something most readers even want to do. She is a one dimensional character, and there is nothing more than her seeming lust for Edward and the controversy of Edward and Jacob. In every book you relearn her character, whereas in Harry Potter you can see how the mindset of every character changes, the main advantage of third person.
5. Harry Potter is much more unpredictable.
Actually, refuting Cons point here, Twilight is an "I saw that coming" kinda book, to many readers. Any readers with a bit of logic can tell that Edward and Bella end up together in the end. Why do they know? Because in the first book they make this epic connection. Because of my previous point that Meyer in unimaginative, we can already tell that they will have that same obsession love for each other in the end. If Con "[bites his] toenails" wondering what will happen later in the series, I worry for him in even more ways. I, personally, like most readers, did not expect Bella or another character to die when they met the Volturi. Sure, it was interesting that Meyer decided a totalitarianism society of vampires would be cool, but other than that, I didn't wonder what would happen, because I knew that Meyer wouldn't kill off the main character of the series, or any of the good guys, as I have stated earlier in this debate.
I would like to start off by pointing out that Con seemed not to know what genre the two series were classified as. Non fiction is a genre about things that have been proven as facts. Fiction is what's made up. Seeing as there is no proof that there are sparkling vampires running around, or a magical wizarding school in another dimension, these are classified as fiction, and sometimes fantasy.
1. Wands are more powerful than fireballs.
Fighting scenes are not "clearly" important in fiction books. There are many successful fiction books that have no fighting, so this initial point will be thrown out. Con claims that there were only bits of light shot out of stick between the good guys and bad guy in the Harry Potter series, however this is both not true, and an unimportant point to this debate. First of all, this is not true. The dementors can be seen as the bad guys in that they "fight" the good guys in the end, and are used as weapons. They are not bits of light. They feed off of the happiness of their victims, and suck their soul out. This is by far more imaginative and intense than fire balls that are so typical. Fire in the form of a ball, big whoop. This is uncreative, again. In the Harry Potter series, the spells are so much more powerful than Con seems to understand. They are the ultimate weapon, and you can only see the light, but they are so much more important. Being able to have such amazing power in a "stick" is so much more interesting and creative than the physical violence that takes place in Meyer's books. Ripping off heads, sure, it's pretty cool sometimes. Con wants to argue entertainment purposes, yes? Ripping off someone's head because they are made of basically rock limits the effects. The effect that the spells have in the books are so much more complex. Maybe it's cool to rip off someone's head, but it's Meyer's easy way out of being imaginative. JK creates the spells and effects of them herself.
2. Love or obsession?
Harry Potter's inability to find a girlfriend quickly is more realistic than this automatic mutual obsession with each other that occurs in Twilight. Meyer did not create a modern-day Romeo and Juliet, she created two hormone driven 'teens' obsessed with each other. Besides, "one sloppy kiss" between Harry and Ginny is by far more satisfactory than realizing Edward stalks Bella while she sleeps, and Jacob is basically a pedophile and falls in love with a newborn. The simple thing is, that when trying to compare the love in each series, Harry Potter is much more original and realistic than that of Twilight.
I welcome Con's refutations, as I have run out of characters.
1) Am I stating an opinion?
What exactly is the authors purpose in killing good guys? Pro claims it makes it more realistic. I claim that it is to invoke an emotional response in the reader, to make a impact. Authors write fiction books to get readers to experience their imagination, to grab the readers interest. Playing with the readers emotions does just that, it captures the readers attention. Authors do not try to make fiction, which by definition is story about imagination, more realistic. Maybe if we were arguing over two biographies, then Con might have a valid case as to why the Author would want to make their story more realistic.
Making an impact vs. Making a story realistic
You decide, which side accurately describes why a an Author writes a fiction book? The next two points brought up are
A) Twilight is about two love-struck teenagers. Absoultely not. Edward is nearly 100 years old and Bella is shown to have a maturity level much higher than even most adults. She is smart, shy, secluded, and reliable. She is not your typical love-struck teenager.
B) Because everybody dies, it is more emotionally realistic to the reader. First of all, everybody falls in love too. Second of all, Pro do realize that both HP and Twilight appeal mostly to teenage-young adult readers, right? You know what that means? Teenagers and young adults will be able to connect with a story about love much more than they would a story about death.
2) Didn't I just argue this?
This argument can be split into two parts, one for each of Pro's rebuttals
A) Pro seems to have missed my earlier argument about quality and quantity. It doesn't matter how many mythical creatures JK introduces, the question is do they hold their own against Stephanie's mythical creatures? I would say no for several reasons. Stephanie spends half the series adding to Edwards profile to make him a distinct and amazing character. She adds a a lot of visual description to him- everything from the color of his eyes to certain facial expressions he has. What mythical creature does JK do this for?
B) I would like to ask why is Pro attacking Stephanie imagination at this point? The resolution was that Stephanie has researched her material also, not that she is more imaginative.
My resolution. Stephanie has researched her material also because Twilight takes place in a real location with real people. This is not very different from Pro's resolution which was
JK has researched her material because she includes many mythical creatures and latin names that already existed.
By attacking my resolution, Pro also attacks his.
3) I didn't mean to say HP is more imaginative, I meant to say HP is more imaginative.
Con says I misunderstood his point.
My point: There can be, will be, and are books that relate directly to Twilight by Stephinie Meyers.
Cons point: “My point is that there are books that relate directly to Harry Potter written by JK.”
I'm not seeing much difference between our points. And to be clear, The Second life of Bree Tanner is in fact related to Twilight.
4) Con calls for all haters to unite!
Con begins his stellar argument with this statement.
“First I would like to point out that in my point, "we" means everyone that has read the two books and is on my side of the argument. The idea of the point is to prove it, as Con seems to misunderstand anyway.” The “point” was to show that Twilight is poorly written. “we” means everybody who already agreed with pro. The “point” of the “point” was to show how that Twilight is written poorly to those who already agreed with Con. This makes absolute no sense and is asking the readers to agree with him because they already agreed with him. Wtf??
Con's second rebuttal is that Bella character is static. I'm going to have to disagree and say she is dynamic.
Definiton of a Dynamic chacter “character who undergoes an important innerchange, as a change in personality or attitude”
Bella undergoes an important innerchange when she meets Edward. She goes from being a reclusive and antisocial person along with hating her everything around her to being outgoing, wanting to hang around Edward instead of being reclusive, and loving her town, the people, and land around her.
Simply put, Bella is not static.
5)Much more predictability?
First of all, just because Con has amazing phycic powers does not mean the rest of us normal people do. Stephanie spent an entire book creating a relationship between Jacob and Bella that created uncertainty in the reader who she loved more. This is why phrases such as “team Jacob” and “team Edward” started making appearances. The readers were unsure who Bella loved more and began to make their own opinions as to who she should choose. As for the Volturi; Neither me, the readers, nor Pro knew anything about them when they they were first introduced. So as to how Pro knew they wouldn't kill anybody is a mystery to me. And while I'm at it, I'm going to give a time line of Harry Potter.
Harry Potter finds a magical world------> Bad Guy is stronger and creates havoc for Harry------> Harry saves the day and kills the bad guy.
Geesh, wonder how JK came up with such a original and unpredicatable plotline....
I would like to begin by saying that I indeed got fiction and nonfiction mixed up and would like to explain myself. You see, a large dwarf prostitute shot me in the eye with a fire arrow and hit the part of my brain that differentiates between fiction and nonfiction. Not likely you say? Well if you agree with Pro that HP is realistic, then you have no room to complain. Now on to my case.
1) The fighting
I did not say fighting scenes were necessary, I said they were important. Again, the point of writing a fiction book is to entertain and interest your readers. Most fiction books have fighting scenes because they do just that, entertain and grab interest. Since both Twilight and Harry Potter have fighting scenes, we shall not throw that point out. Con says that since Dementors can kiss the happiness right out of you, they make interesting fighters. No. All they can do is kiss you and fly around like retards trying to catch butterflies. All they do is creep towards you trying to smooch you to death. While they may be interesting characters, they are not interesting fighting characters. And I don't care how many spells are in Harry Potter, the fact doesn't change that they are a bunch of screaming idiots waving their wands around hoping to kill each other with balls of light. Twilight on the other hand involves hand to hand combat along with body decapitation and tank sized wolverines. Lastly, there are 56 vampires that fight in Twilight each having their own power. Clearly, fireballs is not the only power that is used from the vampires.
When it comes to fighting
Werewolves+Vampires> A bunch of hormonal teenage wizards.
2) I'm going to go with love
A) Edward does not stalk Bella while she sleeps. If you read the series, Edward is being protective of her from Venessa and newborn vampires that are trying to kill Bella. He is also fascinated with how she sleeps because he hasn't slept for over 100 years. If you want to call that stalking, be my guest.
B) Jacob is not a pedo. Again, if you read the series you would know that he is not in love with Renesmee, he has a brotherly love for her. Big difference.
C Sigh.. Pro seems to be stuck on the fact that an Author would want to make their fiction book more realistic. This defeats the purpose of of writing fiction and makes no sense. People's love life for the most part suck, so why would they want to read a realistic love story? For example, Is Romeo and Juliet realistic? No, yet people still call it one of the best love stories of all time. Why is that? Because it tells love as it should be, it makes the reader want to go make their own perfect love story. It is because of this that Harry Potter failes when it came to romance.
It seems I'm out of characters...
The character limit for this round will be 11,111, just for fun.
My argument is below:
Due to Pro's broken link, readers will have to visit the following link to view Pro's case. If for some reason it is not working, then visit the comments section.
Lets look at my my diagram again.
A) Bella throws herself off of cliffs because she has been ripped apart from her soulmate. She has gone crazy from losing the thing that she loves most and is on the verge of killing herself. Many mature people have fallen under the same depression after losing their mate making what she does completely normal given the circumstances.
B) Pro seems to want to play semantics with me. I wrote most because there obviously will be people who are not a teen and will love HP. But the fact remains the same- it is written for children and teens.
Barnes & Noble has the age range at 9 - 12 Years under product details.(1) There you go, theres your proof that HP is written for teens.
2) I think JK is a better Author. Why? Idk
A) Pro has finally submitted to quality over quantity. Unfortunately, the moment he did so I had won this argument. There is absolutely no creature in HP that gets more spotlight than Edward with nearly half the series to himself. Edward goes through deep internal doubt about what he should do about Bella. This doubt makes him evolve as a character and produces changes in his character. If Pro thinks that Stephinie spent half the series describing Edward as a boring rock, then he is entitled to his opinions. I on the other hand think that he is a deep character that is not just “granite rock”.
B) I really don't feel like arguing that Twilight is its own world when it so obviously not. The whole Edward and Bella, the Volturi, the werewolves, all this isn't a fantasy world? What constitues as fantasy to Pro I wonder? And then Pro goes on to repeat his research resolution which I have already rebuttaled. JK spent her time researching latin phrases while Stephanie spent her time researching info about Forks and its people. They both did their research, so how is ones researching or imagination superior?
3) Irrelevant points did not suddenly become relevant
A) Pro insist because JK has made more books based off of HP, HP is better. How does other books add or take away from the main series? The fact that JK has written any books about HP is irrelevant to the the actual series. And I would like to say that I found The Second life of Bree Tanner quite an interesting and entertaing read. But my opinions about the books matters little, and so it should be with Pro's opinions.
4) What truth?
A) “Bella DOES NOT love her town, the people, and land around her.”
My god, have you not read twilight? She loves Edward, Jacob, The Cullins, the woods, the meadows, the Quielite tribe, her classes, pretty much everything about Forks now.
All these things, she did not love before meeting Edward. The story tells how she wanted to move back to Phoenix so bad because she despised these things. Pro even acknowledges she changes when he claims any changes in the beginning doesn't count. But does it matter when she changes? The fact that she changes at all makes her dynamic. I would also like to add to this argument by saying that she also changes at the end when she becomes a vampire. Pro has been ingenuine about Bella’s character from the beginning, something that has done little for his arguments.
4.b I never dropped, you just never gave me more than your personal opinions as to why third person is better. Your main rebuttals was quote on quote “Getting inside the head of Bella Swan is not something most readers even want to do” and “she is a one dimensional character.” All points I have already rebuttaled or that is just an unbacked up opinion.
5) Pro changes his view on how HP is unpredictable.
Pro now claims that it is the unpredictability within the story that counts. I have some questions to ask then-
Did the readers predict that Edward would leave Bella for an entire book?
Did the readers predict that the Voulturi would want to kill the Cullens?
Did the readers predict Jacob would imprint on Renesmee or that Bella would have even gotten pregnant?
Case in point. If this is what Pro actually wants to argue, then he never had a leg to stand on.
1) When did I suddenly become the hater?
*Brief note about my conduct. Pro has tried to appeal to the conduct vote by saying I have resorted to insulting HP.
I) Lets not resort to semantics please. . As long as I give reasons for calling something a retard(which by the way I never did), I am within my rights.
II) I forgave Pro for forfeiting round two.
III) I allowed Pro to go over the character limit without making an issue. This makes my job of refuting much harder, but never once did I complain.
IV) I did not make an issue out of Pro's sloppy writing in round 1 nor did I make an issue about his broken link.
I have tried to uphold good conduct in this debate and hope the readers don't listen to Pro's nonsense about me being otherwise.
2) Edward is a pervert?
A) I can confidently tell you Edward wasn't checking out Bella's reproduction system. That just makes no sense. Just because Pro is a horny teenager doesn't mean the rest of us are thinking about sex 24/7.
B) Never once has Jacob french kissed Renessemee. It is and will be for awhile, brotherly love.
C)Twilight has received several awards including
Publishers Weekly's "Best Children's Books of 2005"(2)
School Library Journal's "Best Books of 2005"(2)
The reviews were initially mainly positive.(2)
Clearly Twilight is not as badly written as Pro would like us to think.
Pro seemed more interested in appealing to those who had already liked HP better. Many of his arguments- such as the argument of realisticness- end up being turned against him. Arguments such as “Twilight is written better” were backed up by absolutely nothing but Pro's own opinion.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||1|