Poll: Dracula or Twilight?
- Thread starter MelasZepheos_v1legacy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Neither. I have to go with the "Queen of the Damned"/"Interview with the Vampire" Type for vampire.
Moderately well know, still pretty cool, and brings in a decent income without being overly hyped.
I think the vampire Lestat is one of the single greatest characters in the entirety of the vampire mythos.
Moderately well know, still pretty cool, and brings in a decent income without being overly hyped.
I think the vampire Lestat is one of the single greatest characters in the entirety of the vampire mythos.
I'll admit, well timed question since I'm a novelist that's published a novel with vampires in it (and other creatures, don't worry, only one person in the whole thing sparkles and he's marked for death) and I was wondering the same sort of thing not long ago.
Truth be told, while if I had to choose one or the other I think I miiiiight lean towards the timeless classic... I think any good author could have crapped out Twilight after enough liquor (Meyer herself wrote the damn thing in 3 months and got it published in 6). So I think I'd write the timeless classic...get a pseudonym and write out the crappy money maker under that alias (much like Stephen King has done, repeatedly).
If I absolutely had to choose though, a little money now means I get to keep writing. A lot of money later means no one in my direct family has to worry about their kids going to college for several generations. I'll be dead someday, but they'll have foundations and awards with my name on it that will make sure that people like Stephanie Meyer never become the dominant power in the thing I love.
So, I'd like to write Dracula, it'd do more good for humanity, my family and the world in general than a piece of crap that makes me rich and famous for a decade before people forget who the hell I am (no one's going to remember Meyer after this, her follow up book series "The Host" has barely blipped on anyone's radar).
In the meantime, I guess I'm going to find out which I get. Shards of Glass by Jeremy Varner, available on most major online retailers and the iBooks store for only $2.99! Yeah, I know I said I want to write the timeless classic... but as a friend of mine once said, "he would like to eat something other than ramen".
Truer words never spoken.
Truth be told, while if I had to choose one or the other I think I miiiiight lean towards the timeless classic... I think any good author could have crapped out Twilight after enough liquor (Meyer herself wrote the damn thing in 3 months and got it published in 6). So I think I'd write the timeless classic...get a pseudonym and write out the crappy money maker under that alias (much like Stephen King has done, repeatedly).
If I absolutely had to choose though, a little money now means I get to keep writing. A lot of money later means no one in my direct family has to worry about their kids going to college for several generations. I'll be dead someday, but they'll have foundations and awards with my name on it that will make sure that people like Stephanie Meyer never become the dominant power in the thing I love.
So, I'd like to write Dracula, it'd do more good for humanity, my family and the world in general than a piece of crap that makes me rich and famous for a decade before people forget who the hell I am (no one's going to remember Meyer after this, her follow up book series "The Host" has barely blipped on anyone's radar).
In the meantime, I guess I'm going to find out which I get. Shards of Glass by Jeremy Varner, available on most major online retailers and the iBooks store for only $2.99! Yeah, I know I said I want to write the timeless classic... but as a friend of mine once said, "he would like to eat something other than ramen".
Truer words never spoken.
Begin known and famous while alive is very easy, but begin remembered for a long time after your death is harder and more worth it.
Well isn't that what happens with most art? It only becames famous/revered after the artists death?
I would rather contribute something to humanity instead of making another turd of a movie just for some easy cash.
Dracula, I would rather have my work be remembered as a classic than as a turd that gets me money.
I'd first write Twilight.
Then I am set for life, and can write my opus.
And a lot of people will read it since I am already so popular.
But if I had to choose, I'd still go for the money.
Being really poor sucks ass!
Then I am set for life, and can write my opus.
And a lot of people will read it since I am already so popular.
But if I had to choose, I'd still go for the money.
Being really poor sucks ass!
I rather make something that came from my passion that could be famous after my death than to be rich for making crap purely for greed (the Twilight author mention that she started to dislike the whole vampire story in the news ages ago).
Beside it's the legacy that is important than the current rich and fame. Once she had pass away, her books will be a mockery.
Beside it's the legacy that is important than the current rich and fame. Once she had pass away, her books will be a mockery.
Woah, you sound like a die hard fan. Awesome! Is it an actual picture of it that you bought by the way? Because I'd love it on my wall. I love John Ajvide Lindqvist, i'm guessing you've read his books?Gazzoid said:Agreed. I love the avatar, by the way. I have the same picture on my wall and tattooed on my arm.Flamezdudes said:Neither.
Let The Right One In.
Eli.
