Within the past month, I put a pick up on the Vampires Spot asking about people's favorite book series about vampires. In the comments of this pick, I got into an argument about whether the vampires of Twilight are actual vampires (lame to argue about this, I know hahaha).
Specifically she was telling me that Edward wasn't really a vampire because "he has no fangs and doesn't need blood to survive, also the sun thing...". I replied saying that just because Stephenie made her vampires different doesn't mean that they're not vampires. In the end we agreed to disagree.
Personally, I feel that the Twilight vampires are so much better because they are
different. I love that they don't fit into the stereotypical definition of a vampire. It's actually really refreshing, I think. I like that they don't have fangs or need to rely on blood or any other difference they have from the stereotype.
I don't know why this bothers me so much. I mean, I just don't understand why a vampire has to fit the whole definition of a vampire to be considered one. Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy other vampire books, shows, movies, etc. "Buffy" started my whole obsession with vampires.
I guess one reason it bothers me so much is because that girl I argued with said she only read the beginning of the first one. I noticed that in the comments of picks from the Vampires Spot, she was always putting down Twilight and bashing on it. I finally got fed up and said something to her, hence the argument we had.
Please tell me your thoughts: do you consider Twilight vampires to be considered vampires even though they don't fit into the definition?