The end of the year means one thing for magazines: lists. Lists of bests. Lists of worsts. Lists of tops. Lists of bottoms. Lists of lists. Publisher’s Weekly caused an uproar when they released their list of Top 100 books for 2009. Only 29 female authors made the cut, and none of them cracked the top ten.

The Washington Post reacted with an article called “The key to literary success? Be a man — or write like one.” Salon.com responded in kind with “If you want to be a great writer, be a man.” Both articles were written by women, recalling advice from former college professors.

As I was reading both (valid) arguments that women get the shaft in publishing circles, I couldn’t help but compare the experiences of those women to the experiences of women in the fantasy genre. Sure, fantasy is full of epic male authors: Tolkien, Lewis, Jordan, Gaimen, Pratchett, Dahl. But fantasy also has its share of celebrated (and well-paid) female writers: Kurtz, Rice, Rowling, Weis, Bradley.

Is the fantasy genre simply more friendly to female writers?

I think so.

But why?

Let’s start by looking at the biggest bang (and bank account): J.K. Rowling.

By now, her personal journey is as well-known as that of of The Boy Who Lived. For example, that “K” in “J.K.” is not even her real name. When Bloomsbury bought Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, they feared that young boys wouldn’t want to read a fantasy tale by Joanne Rowling, so she adopted an androgynous “K.”

By the time Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire hit shelves, Rowling was the highest-profile author in the world, and everyone knew the “K” was for Kathleen. It didn’t matter that J.K. Rowling was a woman; what mattered was that she hurry back to her office and start writing about Hogwarts, Year Five.

Rowling also did another thing for female writers in the fantasy genre: she blurred the lines between children’s fiction and adult fiction. Women have always been trusted with cooking, cleaning and kids; so, the children’s publishing industry has historically been more accessible to females. During Harry Potter’s off-years, many adults went digging around in the children’s sections at their local bookstores, looking for an equally entrancing fantasy fix. And publishers paid attention.

But Rowling wasn’t the first woman to enjoy monetary success and critical praise for her fantasy writing. Before her, there were vampires — and three women who, er, brought them to life.

Marilyn Ross‘ Barnabas Collins series, Anne Rice’s Vampire Chronicles and Chelsea Quinn Yarbro’s Saint-German series changed the vampire genre. Under their pens, vampires became brooding, tragic, poetic heroes. And unlike the implicit sexual themes in vampire stories before theirs, Ross, Rice and Yarbro made it overt.

What they did for vampires, Marion Zimmer Bradley did for Arthurian Legend. Her Avalon series boldly turned Camelot on its head and examined it from the perspective of female narrators.

And what Bradley did for Arthurian Legend, Katherine Kurtz did for Medieval fantasy lit. And what Kurtz did for Medieval fantasy lit, Tanith Lee did for sorcery.

I think fantasy is more receptive to women writers because it has a long, proud history of financially successful female authors in nearly every subset of the genre. While most writers will tell you they want to bring fresh, engaging concepts to print, they will also tell you that it is much easier to get published if there’s a record of success with what you’re writing. To that end, it would be disingenuous to tell a female fantasy author that men won’t read her books simply because she is a woman.

Of course, financial success and excitement from publishers isn’t synonymous with critical acclaim. Even with the accomplishments of the women I mentioned — and the dozens I didn’t — last year’s Hugo Awards were awfully slim on female nominees. But I’m still not going to cry sexism.

If you want to be a great fantasy writer, they key isn’t writing like a man; the key is writing rich, textured, deeply-imagined stories. As women continue to do just that, it will only be a matter of time before full parity comes to the genre.

Or you could take a shot at writing your main characters sparkly genitalia.

Stephanie Meyer isn’t exactly celebrated, but she certainly hasn’t gone broke writing about vampires.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

Was Harry Potter really the hero of the Harry Potter series?

On the surface, this sounds like a stupid question. Potter was the main character, and he did do heroic things. Most importantly, Voldemort was defeated because of Potter.

Or was he?

When I recently reread Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, I concluded that Potter was, at best, a weak hero. Too much of Potter’s success with defeating Voldemort hinges on Albus Dumbledore.

Dumbledore was dead, of course. But in the final book in the series, it becomes clear that he set many plans in motion before he died. These plans set things up so that Potter could defeat Voldemort. They clearly went well past merely explaining a Horcrux or showing Harry memories about Voldemort in the Pensieve.

Some plans were small, like arranging for the safekeeping of Gryffindor’s sword (which was useful for destroying Horcruxes).

Some things were bigger, like his handling of Severus Snape. At the start of the book, it appeared that Dumbledore’s trust of Snape had been the biggest mistake of his life. By the end of the book, it’s clear he knew exactly what he was doing. As a result, Snape ended up being an unexpected asset, not liability.

Then, throughout the book, Potter regularly thinks of Dumbledore and what he’d wanted. This influences Potter’s decisions. On page 692 of the 2007 US hard cover edition, it even says: “Dumbledore’s betrayal was almost nothing. Of course there had been a bigger plan; Harry had simply been too foolish to see it; he realized that now.”

All in all, it seems clear to me that Dumbledore had everything planned. All Harry Potter really did was act as Dumbledore’s pawn in helping carry out part of the plan. Harry was critical, of course, since there were certain things that only he could do. (However, he needed to do these things because of events outside of his control. For example, Voldmort’s attempt to murder him when he was a small child.)

I have mixed feelings about my realization. In one way, it’s nice to see “brain” rather than “brawn” win. And Dumbledore does represent “brain” far more than any other character.

Yet, overall, I’m disappointed. All along, I’d been viewing Harry Potter as the hero. Even early on in the series, long before Voldemort made his return, I was betting on two things: Voldemort would return, and Harry would forever beat him.

This would be a classic David and Goliath type story — a classic theme of the ordinary person who is called upon to fight evil, and who wins, despite the odds.

This happened in the earliest books. Dumbledore then appeared to be little more than a source of wizard knowledge. He’d sometimes help, but usually in small ways. Early on, Harry Potter would have to fight mostly his own fight.

Some fights were impressive. For example, take Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. The Chamber’s reopening caused a real problem. It even stumped the best wizards, up to and apparently including Dumbledore. It was Harry Potter who actually solved the problem. Not bad for a second year Hogwart’s student!

As the series went, my view that Harry would vanquish Voldemort was supported more and more. My view met its apex at the end of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, when Dumbledore died. It was a shock, but it made sense for the story line. He needed to go so Harry would be the hero; the young wizard who is forced into greatness.

Except, I was wrong.

While Dumbledore never did return from the dead, he did operate quite effectively from the grave. His plans, made before he died, guaranteed that. Indeed, he worked so effectively, even dead, that I think it feels almost heavy-handed at times. (If nothing else, it’s incredible how infrequently his plan didn’t work as planned!)

In the end, it leaves Dumbledore the real hero of the final book.  And I  think he’s also the real  hero of the series, since the overall series is about vanquishing Voldemort for good.

And I — a loyal reader since 1999 — am left disappointed.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

According to The-Leaky-Cauldron.org, Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling has opened a Twitter account.

The first two tweets read as follows:

I am told that people have been twittering on my behalf, so I thought a brief visit was in order just to prevent any more confusion!

However, I should flag up now that although I could twitter endlessly, I’m afraid you won’t be hearing from me very often……….

By the end of Friday, she already had more that 25,000 followers.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

I was poking around the internets the other day, and I discovered an amusing list of cliches that aspiring fantasy novelists should avoid — among them were making sure you didn’t have a character who could be described as a “forgetful wizard,” and steering clear of making up races that use the “half-” prefix.

But the one that caught my eye advised writers to avoid writing a book thicker than a New York City phone book.

There was a time when a decent-sized novel was about 400-500 pages. You felt like you were getting your money’s worth. Depending on how fast of a reader you are, it could be a journey that took you some time to complete. But recently it’s almost become the norm to create tomes of 1,000 pages or more, and anything less feels like easy reading.

How did we get here?

Well, the most obvious answer is that The Lord of the Rings, the seminal work of fantasy that basically created the genre, is a weighty 1,008 pages in its entirety, and that’s not including the 100+ pages of appendices. Of course, when it was first published, Rings was famously split into three books, and is often misconstrued as being a trilogy, when it fact it is meant to be read as a single novel.

Why so long? Tolkien was doing more than just writing a simple novel. He was also providing a window into a world no one but him knew, and that required a lot of description. Though touched upon in The Hobbit, light had to be shone more thoroughly on elves, dwarves, ents, and orcs, and while many people criticize the books for its large amount of pages in which characters are traveling to and fro (check out Kevin Smith’s Clerks 2 for a good laugh about the film version), it is that traveling that allows the reader to get to know this foreign terrain. And it’s a testament to Tolkien’s genius that it’s so engaging.

But as for the modern abundance of lengthy novels? I blame Harry Potter.

It’s no secret that J.K. Rowling’s beloved series began modestly with a few slim books aimed at young children, only to balloon into an epic, sprawling masterpiece meant for readers of all ages. (I recall Stephen King a few years ago writing that he was tired of hearing new works heralded as “Harry Potter for grown-ups.” As he pointed out, Harry Potter is Harry Potter for grown-ups.)

The series, which peaked page-wise with the fifth installment, Order of the Phoenix (almost 900 pages!), proved that there was a market for lengthy novels in the teen-to-young adult market, as well as for older readers.

Each one of Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight Saga books, for example, are increasingly long, starting with Twilight at 498 pages, and capping with Breaking Dawn, which came in at 756 pages.

Is this a good thing, this trend towards books heavier than most toddlers? It depends. While it can be a joy to take a long journey with a book, they can’t all be The Lord of the Rings. One of my favorite books of all time is The Mists of Avalon, which can put a small-town phone book to shame with its girth, but that’s not to say I don’t enjoy a book that one can finish on a long train ride, either.

I worry that aspiring fantasy novelists now might feel that they have to make their books long just for the sake of being long, and not in service of their story. To them I give this advice, start small. After all, the original British publication of J.K. Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was a svelte 223 pages, and look where she is now.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

Everyone has their favorite fantasy novels — those special books that you read over and over again, hoping each time to find something new that you might have missed in your last reading. It could be the daring swordfights that draw you in. Maybe the cleverly coded symbolism. Or maybe it’s steamy in the way that a hot summer day isn’t.

Whatever the reason, certain books just speak to us. Here are a few of mine.

The Princess Bride

When I was a kid, The Princess Bride was one of my favorite movie for three reasons:

1) The sword fights.

2) It starred Andre the Giant.

3) Mandy Patinkin used the phrase “son of a bitch.” (I was a kid, remember. Swearing automatically equaled awesome.)

When I picked up the book the first time in high school, I was utterly bewildered by the ruse set down by the book’s author, William Goldman, who claimed that the book was actually an abridged version of another author’s work, and then goes on to provide surprisingly intimate details of his life. It was all a trick, I later learned — he was using it as a literary device. But for his sly sense of humor, this book is one I keep dear to my heart.

The Marvelous Land of Oz

Though The Wizard of Oz gets all the attention, I have always been a huge fan of its first sequel, The Marvelous Land of Oz, which features the young lad Tip, the ward of Mombi, and his own crew of misfits: Jack Pumpkinhead, the Saw Horse, the Wogglebug, and the Gump.

Author L. Frank Baum continued his sly brand of feminism (in The Wizard of Oz, all the characters with any real power are female) by having the Emerald City overtaken by an army of militant young women, and what’s more — SPOILER ALERT!! — he includes what might be the first transgender character in children’s literature, as it’s revealed that Tip is really Princess Ozma, who was transformed by Mombi in her infancy into a boy, in order to conceal her identity. At first hesitant to return to his true state, Tip is convinced by his friends and allows the spell to be cast that transforms him back into Ozma. Not something you read every day.

Interview with a Vampire

Long before she found Jesus and stopping writing readable books, Anne Rice emerged from the shadows of literary erotica and wrote this fascinating gothic fantasy, which earned her a legion of fans and an A-list film adaptation. Told from the point of view of Louis, a vampire who is less Bela Lugosi’s Dracula and more the kind of kid that today we’d call “emo,” it is a fun little book, never too wordy or challenging for a high schooler, which is when most people seem to discover it, and for all its pomp and audacity never seems to run that deep beyond the repeating sentiment that being a vampire, well, sucks. (Get it?)

Sexuality was always a prevalent theme in Rice’s works. As the books went on, homosexuality and bisexuality became more prevalent themes, despite her bold choice to render all of her vampires physically impotent. (I suppose this saves us from imagining squirm-inducing undead sexual scenarios.) All in all, Interview remains one of the strongest and, thankfully, least bombastic books in her Vampire Chronicles, and is an enjoyable escapist piece.

The Mists of Avalon

I love, love, love this book. This novel, by Marion Zimmer Bradley, took the utterly complex mythology of King Arthur and turned it on its head by emphasizing the power of the women in these stories instead of the men, and while much of Arthurian tale champions pure Christian values, this story places the Pagan Druids as the protagonists, with the encroaching Christian Church as an oppressive tyrant. But rather than being an anti-Christian piece, the main character, Morgaine, realizes it’s not the teachings of Jesus that are opposed to her, just the men in the Church who are threatened by another religion.

But beyond the basic themes, it’s a fascinating character study of four incredible characters: Morgaine, a woman reared in Avalon and dedicated to keeping the ways of the Old Religion alive; Gwenhyfar, a devoutly Christian woman who is terrified of the world; Arthur, the man whom greatness was thrust upon; and Lancelet, a warrior who is struggling with his forbidden love for his best friend, Arthur.

This novel really has everything you could ask for in a fantasy novel, and it’s an incredibly mature piece. And if you’re worried, no knowledge of Arthurian legend is needed to appreciate it. If you haven’t read it yet, get your ass of the internet and go to a bookstore right now. You’ll thank me. (But then come back to the internet. We need you.)

The Harry Potter Series

I resisted this series for a long time. I was one of those cantankerous twenty-somethings who utterly refused to indulge in a series of books meant for children. I was WAY too highbrow for that sort of thing. But then a friend of mine, one whose opinion I greatly respect, read the first few books and told me they were actually pretty good. I told her that although I value her input, I wasn’t about to cave. But then my late grandfather, a greatly distinguished writer and very literate fellow, told me he read them and they were delightful, so I figured it wouldn’t hurt to at least peek at the first one. I did, and was hooked.

I loved how the characters grew over the course of the books, truly maturing and changing as the stories evolved, and how J.K. Rowling carefully crafted Harry to slowly evolve into a true literary hero of the old school. Does the Potter saga borrow liberally from Lord of the Rings? Yes, but what fantasy literature doesn’t?

At the end of the day, there’s some real art to be found in the bajillion pages of text that Rowling puts down, but none more so than in the conclusion to her epic, Harry Potter and the The Deathly Hallows.

The Iliad

I know it sounds like pretentious garbage to put The Iliad as one of my favorite fantasy novels, and perhaps even erroneous, as it isn’t technically a novel. And if I wasn’t such a foaming-at-the-mouth Greek myth nerd, I probably wouldn’t be too interested. But as it happens, I Greek-geek out with the best (or worst) of them, and The Iliad takes place during one of the most exciting and action-packed moments in all of Greek mythology.

One of the reasons that 2004’s Troy, which claimed it was based on The Iliad, felt so weak is that it ignored the best part of the story — the gods. Sure, the mortals in the film talked about the gods, prayed to the gods, worried about offending the gods, but it all came across as religious hooey that had no dramatic stakes, because for all we knew, the gods didn’t really exist, and these were just silly people running around in skirts.

Homer’s epic makes for great reading — if you’re a devoted fan of Greek myths. If not, and if you somehow got through school without having to read it, I’d say don’t bother.

The Lord of the Rings

Like you didn’t see this one coming.

Okay, listen closely, because I’m going to admit something incredibly shameful to you. It’s very embarrassing, and I only ask that you don’t judge me too harshly.

Okay, here we go.

When Peter Jackson’s Fellowship of the Ring came out in 2001, I went in cold.

Because I hadn’t read the book.

I hesitate to admit that, because I feel like it may compromise my integrity as the Associate Editor of a fantasy website. But when that first film came out, I just hadn’t read the books. I can’t give you any reason. I had read The Hobbit and loved it. I had read other fantasy works. I’ve always loved the genre. It just seemed like such a big undertaking, and it was always something I had meant to do, but I had just never got around to.

But then the cinematic version, which is a masterpiece in its own right, washed over me, and I knew I had to read the books before the next film came out. And I did. Twice, actually. And The Silmarillion.

By the time I sat in the theaters to watch The Two Towers, I was a Tolkien expert, and have read the books at least half a dozen times since then.

The Lord of the Rings is, quite frankly, my favorite book of all time. Every sentence is a pleasure. If I could read no other book for the rest of my life, it would be that.

Okay, well, that’s enough out of me. I want to hear what YOUR favorite fantasy novels are. I know you’ve got them. Now it’s your turn.

Looking to buy any of these books (or any other media)? Support TheTorchOnline.com by purchasing it through this link.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

I just finished re-reading all the Harry Potter books again. Just like the first time through, I was sucked into J.K. Rowling’s stunning world of magic. I want a wand! I want to play Quidditch! I want to buy everything the Weasley twins sell in their joke shop!

Mostly.

As cool as these things are, I’m not sure the benefits of being a wizard make up for the downsides. There are some very good reasons I’m glad I’m a muggle:

My Teddy Bear Can’t Turn Into A Giant Tarantula

Remember why Ron was afraid of spiders? Because his brothers turned his teddy bear into a giant spider while he was hugging it. I can’t imagine anything more horrific. I think this would scar me a lot more that just making me afraid of spiders. I think I’d pretty much be terrified of stuffed animals in general, every species of bear known to humans — and, uh, especially sadistic brothers.

I Don’t Have A Slave and My School Doesn’t Have Slaves

The magical world seems awfully blase about the idea of having a slave around the house. I’d like to think I’d be in Hermione’s camp! It would be particularly difficult to go to school in a place where the cooking and cleaning is done by slaves — elf or otherwise.

The Imperius Curse

Can you imagine not knowing whether the mind of your best friend, boss, or spouse has been possessed by your mortal enemy? Could you ever trust anyone again? Give that it’s so incredibly horrible — and given that it happens a fair bit in the books! — the wizarding world doesn’t really have a good way of dealing with this problem. (And I’d add on to this the memory charms. It’s remarkably easy to make people forget their memories, which means you can’t trust your own mind either. Great!)

Earwax Flavored Candy

‘Nuff said.

I Can’t Be Thrown Into Azkaban Without A Trial … Let Alone Evidence

Hagrid was suspected — with no proof! — of opening the Chamber of Secrets and letting out the monster. The first time he was suspected, he was expelled from school, which is bad enough. The second time, though, the Minister of Magic threw him into Azkaban for two months just to be sure it wasn’t him!

Really, Minister? Just because he’s suspected of a crime, you’re going to toss him into a soul-sucking prison that drives its inmates crazy? Does that punishment really fit the crime? In what world can that possibly be all right?

I’ll take my Bill of Rights intact, thank you very much.

The Principal Doesn’t Keep A Three-Headed Guard Dog At School

Perhaps wizarding parents are just more accepting of putting their kids in mortal danger. In the first book, Dumbledore puts a three-headed guard dog a school hallway and then just tells students not to go in. Is he kidding? There wasn’t a better place to put it? Like … oh, anywhere that’s not a school?!

This is also a good place to point out that the Forbidden Forest is on school grounds, which means that there are talking killer spiders on school grounds. That’s basically like having a corner of the playground filled with land mines.

There’s also a giant racist killer basilisk in the school basement, just for good measure. I suppose if it weren’t there, though, you’d just be worried about the poltergeist in the hallway, so maybe it’s there for putting things in perspective.

So, yes. Spare me the basilisks and the awful candy and the jinx that makes me dance. I’m happy to stay a Muggle … although I still wouldn’t mind a game of Quidditch now and then.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

Last Saturday, student debaters in Seattle argued which is the better fantasy series: Harry Potter or Twilight. A panel of expert judges, and a standing-room-only audience, heard it all and both came to the same conclusion.

TheTorchOnline.com was there to record it all, including the results, and we now present the video highlights:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »