Funny, I think horror is possibly the most relevant genre to the journey of life without Christ. A horror story with a hopeful ending though? Nothing better.
This talk of horror being all out evil is just misinformed. Sure there's a lot of it that glorifies evil but you might be surprised to find someone like Stephen King writes evil to be something truly disgusting. His books almost always have themes of redemption.

I could just as easily generalise and say that Michael Jackson is a creepy, sensual man. But he was an amazing singer and dancer and did many great things for those less fortunate. Don't ignore the flaws but also look for the good points. Then, with God, discern what is beneficial to your spirit.

I found [Artemis Fowl] quite entertaining, but the quality definitely began to go down hill after a while.

Ditto. I'm not sure where I started, but I'm pretty sure my favourite was the third book. Do you want to read them, Su²?

Really? I think that the latest books are very good. I was a little disappointed with The Lost Colony but I thought that The Time Paradox was excellent. The Opal Deception probably is my favourite; I love how Eoin Colfer was able to return to the old Artemis. I'm really looking forward to the next one.

Glenstorm the Great: Wow, really?? I can't even imagine the plot of the story! Romance into Horror?? nuh-uh, I can't even visualize what Lizzy would be doing in that story.

I have an admission. I love zombie movies and video games, so the idea of mish-mashing a classic with the horror genre is actually kind of funny, especially when it seems like there are dozens of film versions already out there. Seriously, what's one more "adaptation" going to hurt?

Which reminds me, a few years ago I read a book called The Zombie Survival Guide written by a gent named Max Brooks (who I think is Mel Brooks' son). The book alleges it is the only source on how to survive the zombie apocalypse and gives details on what weapons one should carry (flamethrowers, for instance, are excellent anti-zombie weapons but are heavy and bulky), what buildings one should barricade themselves in (hint; the hospital is a very bad place to go, aim for the South Pole!), diagrams of why ponytails are bad to have in the event of a zombie outbreak, and other tongue-in-cheek observations. The book is hilarious because it's obviously built around a fake subject and yet it takes itself so seriously and I found myself laughing at several points throughout it.

sandy: neither can I .

W4J: notice I said this kind of horror. I don't believe all horror books are bad, mainly just the ones with vampires and werewolves being the good guys. When evil is good, that isn't right. And please don't say anything about MJ right now. I'm kind of sensitive to the subject. One of my friends made me cry yesterday b/c of all the horrible things he said about him .

I think it might be a bit of a misnomer slap the genre "horror" on books like Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. I haven't read the books, but from what I've heard from people who have, it's more humorous than frightening. If just having vampires or zombies is enough to make it horror, then it probably is (but I don't think any of us would call Twilight "horror"--even if it is a bit horrifying), but the point is not to make the warm romance story into a frightening "horror" novel, but to entertain Austen critics and lovers alike by inserting a laughable feature into the story. I realize that people have opinions and emotions attached to the "wholesomeness" of the books, but I think it's probably unfair to call it "horror."

That said, I have absolutely no desire to read them at all. I think Austen is a master and I don't wish to read any imitators. I don't want to read the modern writers trying to write Austen with her characters or her characters' children, and I don't want to read her text with vampires inserted.

mainly just the ones with vampires and werewolves being the good guys. When evil is good, that isn't right.

If I may ask, on what basis are you saying that are vampires, werewolves, and zombies "evil"? Is that due to any actual historical or Biblical mentioning, or is it all just association with others' fictional stories?

As far as I see it, the sort of "evil" we don't want to present as "good" is that which could be imitated and thus be harmful if imitated. Now, I'm not seeing a huge trend towards people attempting vampiric druidism (the "evil" of Twilight is something else entirely*), I believe werewolf imitation is more or less out of the question, and I don't think anyone really wants to imitate being a zombie.

There are some cases of otherworldly beings that should never be attempted to made "good"; demons, for instance, at least as they are described in the Bible (and not, say, simply a misunderstood misnomer for otherwise possibly benevolent beings), should never be made good.

But many such beings are just human-created things, and are in and of themselves "neutral", only made good or bad by the human who uses them.

Just saying, unless you have a good reason to, don't write off any kind of supernatural being as "evil". Especially if they don't particularly exist in the real world anyways.

*The real "evil" of Twilight, in my opinion, is how it seems to glamorize a certain kind of romance that is wholly unhealthy, and what's more, how so many female readers actually seem to seek that kind of romance now...

*peeks into the Book thread* I have a question for you guys...has anyone on here ever read any books by Anne McCaffrey? I saw some of her books at the library today and they looked kinda interesting, so I was wondering what they were about.

Any information would be a big help to me! Thanks.

~Lucy

If I may ask, on what basis are you saying that are vampires, werewolves, and zombies "evil"? Is that due to any actual historical or Biblical mentioning, or is it all just association with others' fictional stories?

I do think it's unbiblical. The Bible says we shouldn't drink animal's blood, so I'm pretty sure God wouldn't want us to drink human blood. Also, humans are not animals and they shouldn't be half human half animal. To be so is sinful. And, although I do believe that resseurection can take place, I don't think dead people walking around and drooling and scaring everyone is exactly godly. It's not just biblical or historical evidence, it's also the cultural connotation. Until Twilight became so poplular, when people thought vampires or werewolves, they would think evil. Throughout history these mythical creatures have been used as horrible villains, and the new trend is to have them as the amazing, almost god-like lovers. The real evil in Twilight, to me, is this. Sneaking in the evil as good. The devil knows how to make bad things attractive. Sorry if this is really blunt or seems to extreme or radical, but it's what I think on the subject, and I'm sorry if I'm offending anyone. I don't want to start a huge debate over this, but feel free to comment on what I wrote if you agree/dissagree. (PS: vampires and werewolves can both be imitated. I don't want to get in to it b/c it's completely dark and evil, but it's true.)

I don't mean to get off the zombie subject, though I have nothing to add to it.

I have to ask, has anyone here read the Kingdom Series by Chuck Black? They may have already come up in discusion, but I had to ask. I just bought One of his Knights of Arrethtrae books: Sir Kendrick, and I LOOVED it! It was WAY to short! I just wanted to get some opinions on the Kingdom Series, as I might be getting them out of the library tomorrow.

Glenstorm, I think you're taking the idea of vampires and werewolves way too literally. Yes, there are many authors who glamorise evil in horror fiction but can't you see that the vampire/werewolf analogies can be excellent representations of our fallen state? Our flawed, sinful natures at war with what God wants us to be. It's really the Dr Jekyl and Mr Hyde scenario all over again.

I agree that Twilight sets girls up for unhealthy relationships and possible domestic abuse.

Glad you understand, Gtg.

It's a trilogy. 100 Cupboards, Dandelion Fire, and The Chestnut King.

Ah, thank-you! Are the following two as good as the first?

Yes indeed! I saw Solstice Wood and viewed the cover's beautiful tranquility, and fairy-light atmosphere. I nearly picked the book just because the cover blew on a good impression of it, but I decided to first find out more about it, since I've never read anything by her.

*loves The Scarlet Pimpernel and My Side of the Mountain* Are you going to read any of the sequels to either book? I think there are four for My Side of the Mountain and the first one is pretty good but then the others are a little bit more about saving the environment than actual story story and they've skipped forward about twenty years or so our time while the characters didn't. Or at least, that's what I remember, and I didn't like grown up Sam as well as I like young Sam.

Wait... The Scarlet Pimpernel has a sequel? Or did you not mean that?
Hmm... as for My Side of the Mountain (which I finished and loved, btw!) I think I like it too much now to read a sequel if Sam isn't as he us when he grows up. Maybe if I grow really curious, but the ending of the first satisfied me enough to reread it a couple times. It's such a pleasant book! The end was quite touching.

Mel, I must say, you simply amaze me with your knowledge of books! Not only now, but in the past several times, when I've mentioned a book you almost always know it. Very impressive. =]

Fanny: Yes, yes--regale away on the many books you've purchased, please!
---

About the discussion of supernatural creatures and all: Being no good debator, I will shirk from joining it and just say that my opinions lie pretty much the same as Fanny's and Kate's.

That said, *goes on to talk of books*

A copy of Wuthering Heights was borrowed from the library and my sister planned to read it but I picked it up last night and read some of it. After that...I felt like there was an aching void and I nearly cried at the pit of hatred, bitterness, and cruelty the characters invite in themeselves. I don't know if I want to read it. Reading some thoughts on it earlier in this thread, I saw that hope does actually happen amidst it all but I don't know if I want to plow through a thick book just for that. We'll see.
Currently, I'm rereading The Hobbit. It's my second time, and I'm getting so much out of it! J.R.R. Tolkien was such an excellent writer.
Also, I finished Gideon's Gift by Karen Kingsbury the other day and was very touched by it. I'll definitely remember to read that one around Christmastime. Sets one in just the right mood. =]

Glenstorm, I think you're taking the idea of vampires and werewolves way too literally. Yes, there are many authors who glamorise evil in horror fiction but can't you see that the vampire/werewolf analogies can be excellent representations of our fallen state? Our flawed, sinful natures at war with what God wants us to be. It's really the Dr Jekyl and Mr Hyde scenario all over again.

I take this literally b/c it is reality. People try to do/become this and it's evil. It's not an analogy or representation. It's an evil reality.

Horse_Lover: I read that series a few years ago and was obsessed with it for quite a while . It's very interesting and I like it alot .

*Sigh* Forget it. We're not on the same page.

The Bible says we shouldn't drink animal's blood, so I'm pretty sure God wouldn't want us to drink human blood.

I went ahead and looked up the corresponding verse, and sure enough, right in a passage in Acts, Peter suggests to new Gentile Christians to not drink blood, along with... not eating meat offered to idols?

Wait, wasn't that last one something Paul said is okay for Christians to do if done in good conscience?

Then, wouldn't it be possible for drinking blood to fall under the same?

Huh. Well, I'll grant one thing: vampires outright attacking humans to drink blood sure ain't good conscience, which does rule out an awful lot of vampire fiction.

That said, I think the no-drinking-blood restriction was a necessary one for those early Gentiles in order to distance them from their old Pagan ways. Whether the same applies to other people--or friendly neighborhood vampires--is doubtful, I'd say.

Ah well, it's not like a lot of people drink blood anyways...

...oh wait, I had cow blood once when I went to China...

...that doesn't make me a heathen, does it? In my defense, it tasted nasty...

Also, humans are not animals and they shouldn't be half human half animal. To be so is sinful.

Uhh... humans are not animals? Last time I checked a biology textbook, we are. Yeah, sure, we have the whole soul thing and "made in the image of God" thing going for us, but past that, biologically we're animals. I mean, God even created us on the same day as He created the other critters...

...and besides, if you really think being half human and half animal is sinful... well, there goes Narnia. I mean, that place is just full of half-human-half-animal folks: fauns, centaurs, satyrs, the list goes on. Surely, they must be sinful, C.S. Lewis must be sinful for writing them, and every single person on this website, including you, must be sinful for reading the Narnia series, because we are certainly being tempted into trying to become half-animal.

And, although I do believe that resseurection can take place, I don't think dead people walking around and drooling and scaring everyone is exactly godly.

Well, to be honest, I haven't really read much stories in which the undead are good folks. A couple here and there where said undead can be "revived" later on, and one where they don't walk around drooling and scaring everyone, but rather just live lives and do things like go on adventures and win the murder case of her own death. So yeah, maybe walking around drooling and scaring everyone isn't godly, but isn't that just typical zombie prejudice? Not that any other zombie story (Pride and Prejudice and Zombies included) has done much to curb that prejudice.

t's not just biblical or historical evidence, it's also the cultural connotation. Until Twilight became so poplular, when people thought vampires or werewolves, they would think evil. Throughout history these mythical creatures have been used as horrible villains, and the new trend is to have them as the amazing, almost god-like lovers.

Culture may be as culture does, but in the end it is just another human creation. And like any other human creation, it can be used for good or evil, and others are certainly welcome to take it and use it in ways other than they were originally intended to use, whether such a way be for good or evil.

Just so you know, your argument here is very much like the argument many more conservative Christians like to throw out for saying that the Narnia series are of the devil. Their claims are understandable; many of the mythological creatures Lewis used are pagan in nature, and some were downright nasty: fauns were not nice guys at all in mythological history, and the less said about Bacchus, the better.

Trends are trends, culture is culture. Neither have any bearing on what any individual being of yore in any individual story is aligned with. Now, following certain unhealthy trends can be bad, and I will agree that the current trend of making vampires near god-like lovers is bad. But if your vampire novel doesn't have that aspect, why lump it with Twilight and the rest?

The real evil in Twilight, to me, is this. Sneaking in the evil as good. The devil knows how to make bad things attractive.

Really? If the devil is trying to use "good vampire" fiction to draw me into druidic vampirism, he sure ain't doing a good job of it. I mean, I love a good "good vampire" fic (read: not Twilight) and I have never had the desire to become a vampire in any way, shape, or form. Same with werewolves. And the last thing I want to be is a zombie.

Well, devil, so much for that plan of yours.

Really, though, what puzzles me is that you would see that as the main evil of Twilight, and not the fact that the romance that the series glorifies is wholly unhealthy. If we want to talk about sneaking in evil as good, that evil, I think, is more worth worrying about, because it does look attractive, it already has drawn in many females into believing it, and arguably, it is better at ruining lives than just having a fling with druidic vampirism.

Perhaps, then, instead of being so focused on the "horror" aspects of such stories, we should look at other, more relevant ways in which the books might (or might not be) harming the readership?

I mean, yeah, people can imitate vampires, and try to imitate werewolves. However, keep in mind two things. One, people can try to imitate pretty much anything in a fictional book, whether good or bad. Someone could, for example, try to imitate Aslan... that wouldn't be very good, would it? But does that automatically make Narnia bad? Second, the books themselves don't seem to be causing some massive breakout of vampirism/zombieism/werewolfism, despite the large audience that is exposed to such books. Now, if there was such a large breakout, there would be reason for concern, but if the vast majority of readers can avoid the temptation, I would think that for the minority that do get affected, the problem lies with them, and not the book. The book may have helped them along, but it would be their own sinful hearts that ultimately drove them to sin.

Sorry if this is really blunt or seems to extreme or radical, but it's what I think on the subject, and I'm sorry if I'm offending anyone.

It's not really that you're offending anyone, but that, to be quite honest, none of your arguments are all that strong. They're all rather surface arguments that I've seen before or otherwise are illogical, and what's worse, some of them are really easy to turn right back on the Narnia series, which I presume you think are okay to read considering you're on this site.

My point, though, is that no individual story about an otherworldly being should be written off as "evil" purely on the basis that they contain an otherworldly being commonly associated with evil. They should be evaluated on how they are written, instead. Yes, there is a lot of unwholesome vampire/zombie/werewolf fiction out there. Their unwholesomeness is due much to the content within, not just that they are using normally evil beings as good beings. A book about a "nice" vampire who falls in love with a human girl('s blood scent) and obsessively stalks her while the girl totally swoons over him in return? Yeah, I'd rather stay far away from that.

But if a NarniaWebber wants to write a story about a friendly, literature-loving vampire who helps out at a pub in Ditto Town, drinks blood-wine drawn from chickens, and has a nice friendship-evolving-into-love romance with a local young woman, is what she's doing really wrong? (Mind you, she did all this well before the Twilight craze started.)

Anyways, if you want more discussion, we can take this to the Christianity thread, if you so wish. Or, you can just PM me, though I warn you, I'm time-pressed as it is and might not get back to you too soon.