Game: This or That

Oh sorry. Other way around.

Neither one, and I don't want to be Jughead, either.

Who had it worse, Dracula or the Incredible Hulk?

I think Dracula because of his lack of freedom, and while the hulk is not entirely free, at least he has some control over his condition. also, he can be a force for good.

however, if you watch Dracula untold, the "force for good" message comes across there too, and makes him a much more sympathetic character. theres a Sherlock holmes story with Dracula, and if I remember rightly, holmes more or less lets Dracula off the hook so to speak because the only people Dracula was preying on were murderers.

twilight is interesting this regard also---the cullens (the vampire family in question) have eschewed human blood and only hunt animals. the family patriarch is a doctor and Edward (the main character) is aware he is a sort of monster and doesn't have a life to be envied.

the story line concept behind star trek: deep space nine, or the one behind star trek: voyager?

oh heck I was thinking that was going to be a fun one that everyone would jump all over!

STV by a gnat's hair. I binge-watched STDS9 and STV back to back to keep me awake in the wee hours a year ago on Netflix. I especially liked the temporal stories on STV.

Martian Man Hunter or The Green Lantern ?

Martian Man Hunter. As for Green Lantern:

Hal Jordon, Kyle Raynor, Guy Gardner, or John Stewart?

I read green lantern comics when I was a kid, and liked the movie from a few years ago (though I guess many green lantern fans didn't), but too esoteric of a question for me.

I had to go looking and even found this: http://www.comicvine.com/forums/batt...john-s-611509/

my meager green lantern experiences (or at least my memory) are restricted to hal Jordan, but I think that would be missing the spirit of the question.

maybe someone else can answer?

Well, since I asked the question, it would be anyone besides Guy Gardner. He stunk as Green Lantern.

Anyone else?

Guess not.

Dostoyevsky or Turgenev?

Dosto by a mile, not to say I don't like Turgenev though.

Tolstoy or Chekhov?

I think the push on Turgenev in 21st century academia had to do with his downplaying religion. He was/is seen as a more socially acceptable Dostoyevsky. But I'm with you, accept no substitutes.

I used to love Chekov, but I haven't read him in maybe 35 years. :( So I'll have to say Tolstoy, but it's really a toss up. And I can't decide between Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, either, so don't ask. Okay, maybe Dostoyevsky is a photo finish, but not really.

How about you? Dostoyevsky or Tolstoy?

Dostoyevsky's novels are more interesting to me and Dostoyeveky novels were the first "serious" literature I ever read, so have a special place in my heart. He wins by a fair bit, but I do like Tolstoy as well and I'm under the impression that virtually every Russian critic considers Tolstoy to be miles ahead so it may be that reading both authors in translation is to blame. Also beside being exactly contemporary Russian greats, I don't think Dostoyevky and Tolstoy share many similarities by which to compare the two.

Virgil or Ovid?

I was just thinking about my answer to your question about Raskalnakov, and I will give the character this. He believes that his actions are personal and apart from the norms of his society. I said that if it had been me, I would have taken my own life in remorse almost immediately. Part of that, on reflection, is that I would not choose to be arrested, judged, and punished according to the norms of my society. I would want to take care of my disposition personally. So it's not like I don't get Raskalnakov, even if I wouldn't have killed. But then, suicide is a kind of killing, isn't it? Arriving at that kind of self-knowledge, for me, is what reading Dostoyevsky is all about. There is something Stalin is supposed to have said about Dostoyevsky, probably spurious, I'm not sure, but it makes the point whether or not Stalin actually said it. He is supposed to have said something like : "No one ever understood the human soul like Fyodor Dostoyevsky--and that is why we ban him in the Soviet Union."

Ovid.

Norse myth or Greek myth?

Greek mythology is richer by far in its source material (and Latin remakes) which consists of much better works than the Norse counterparts (Elder Edda, Volsung, Icelandic Sagas, etc). However to me the Norse seems to be more accommodating of modern reinterpretations/remakes, and probably because of its low fantastic (compared to Greek) universe someone like Wagner can do more interesting things with characters like Sigurd or Fafnir than I would expect to see from modern enactments of heroes like Heracles, Oedipus, Tereus, Jason, etc. Also if you're following western culture/literature you're probably more versed in Greek myth and classical references than Norse so maybe I find Norse reimaginings more interesting than Greek because I'm less used to seeing them. The Lord of the Rings is obviously a popular example of an author adapting Norse mythology.

Anyway that paragraph made it seem like I think Norse had a chance when I don't, so, Greek.

Tales about Charlemagne or tales about Arthur and his knights?

Arthurian tales, whose sources went through more plebeian channels (village folk songs, etc.) in early modern times and picked up more humor and whimsy than The Song of Roland.

German folktales (like Grimm) or British folktales (like the fairy ballads)?

I've only read the Charlemagne stories in Bulfinch's Mythology so I barely know anything about them.

For British Folktales I'm not sure I've experienced any. Do the Mabinogion and Yeats' stuff count? I suspect not. Anyway I like Grimm's quite a bit so that's my choice.

Sappho or the author of The Epic of Gilgamesh who was definitely a girl? ;)