Trip/T'Pol and Edward/Bella Similarities

[Elessar]

So, JT recommends that I come out of the closet with my Twilight addiction , and loving it though I do, I see several similarities between the 'ships. The genders are reversed, with Trip->Bella, T'Pol->Edward. These are the similarities I've noticed:

1. The "danger" element - T'Pol cannot show her emotions for Trip for two reasons, one because it's frowned upon culturally by other Vulcans, and two because it's like walking the edge of a blade. She has to succumb only slightly because giving in all the way might mean losing control and hurting him. The same is true of Edward, but it would seem to an even stronger degree. He struggles just to be around her, to smell her, and especially to touch her.

2. The Bond - Trip and T'Pol have one we all know about. For those who may not know, there is also a telepathic connection between Edward and Bella, a little more subtle and somewhat turned upside down. First of all, Edward can always sense if Bella is in trouble. Second of all, he can read everyone's mind except Bella's. That part is explained in the 4th book but regardless, it's still part of their unique connection.

3. Never Been A Pair Before - this is kind of general, but the fact that to the characters' knowledge there's never been a pair like them before makes the entire thing very similar... some people close to them think it's wonderous, others think it's dangerous, morally wrong, and disgusting.

4. The close-friend/competition - Jacob/Archer.

Spoilers for Book 4, Breaking Dawn:

SPOILER!!!:

5. The Hybrid Child - While not a part of canon, many if not MOST fanfics about Trip and T'Pol involve them having a child together, a child that there has never been before, whose pregnancy sometimes threatens T'Pol's life, requires assistance to be carried to term, and usually with very unique characteristics. For anyone who has read Breaking Dawn, that's certainly an accurate description of Renesme.

I'm running thin on more... but what do you guys think, Twilight/Trek fans out there

[justTripn]

Having read 1/3 of book one I'll say . . . hmmm . . . . okay. You need enterprikayak. I think she read these.

[Distracted]

Indirect spoilers for book 4 follow....

SPOILER!!!:

I can see the similarities that you point out, but Bella is much more of a naiive character than Trip, and Bella's physical state in the 4th book (and the tremendous danger it poses) is not something T'Pol would permit Trip to suffer if she were the responsible party, IMO. When Trip was in a similar condition it wasn't T'Pol's fault and they weren't yet involved. I can't see her deliberately threatening his life that way when there was a way to prevent it. The Edward/Bella situation was an unnecessary danger to add to everything else, and I thought it contrived, introduced just to add more danger. If he loved her so darn much, even if fertility was unlikely between them, don't you think he would have used protection?

[justTripn]

Indirect spoilers for book 4 follow....

SPOILER!!!:

I can see the similarities that you point out, but Bella is much more of a naiive character than Trip, and Bella's physical state in the 4th book (and the tremendous danger it poses) is not something T'Pol would permit Trip to suffer if she were the responsible party, IMO. When Trip was in a similar condition it wasn't T'Pol's fault and they weren't yet involved. I can't see her deliberately threatening his life that way when there was a way to prevent it. The Edward/Bella situation was an unnecessary danger to add to everything else, and I thought it contrived, introduced just to add more danger. If he loved her so darn much, even if fertility was unlikely between them, don't you think he would have used protection?

[Elessar]

Indirect spoilers for book 4 follow....

I can see the similarities that you point out, but Bella is much more of a naiive character than Trip, and Bella's physical state in the 4th book (and the tremendous danger it poses) is not something T'Pol would permit Trip to suffer if she were the responsible party, IMO. When Trip was in a similar condition it wasn't T'Pol's fault and they weren't yet involved. I can't see her deliberately threatening his life that way when there was a way to prevent it. The Edward/Bella situation was an unnecessary danger to add to everything else, and I thought it contrived, introduced just to add more danger. If he loved her so darn much, even if fertility was unlikely between them, don't you think he would have used protection?

Interestingly, this is more like what the case would be if Trip accidentally got T'Pol pregnant because they were under the impression it wasn't even possible to conceive. Would it be as reprehensible? I mean I think it should go without saying that one would assume it's a deadly endeavour for a human to carry a vampire child, as it would be considered for a Vulcan to carry a human child, since it's the first of its kind, different species, etc. All of the same reasons.

But what about a woman who has had her fallopian tubes sealed or tied or whatever and has a boyfriend/husband and what if she had her tubes tied because after her last child she was told that her reproductive system was damaged or something and that having another child could be life threatening -- would you feel the same way about the husband, or the both of them, if they did not use protection in that scenario and then she became pregnant? Even after her tubes were tied? Or even after her tubes were tied AND he had a vasectomy?

I think it's the same level of impossibility, perhaps even more, for Bella and Edward. For two humans where one has become infertile, there's at least biological compatibility and viable sperm. For a human and a vulcan, there's at least two living, breathing creatures with "similar" biological makeup, though with completely different internal reproductive arrangements (one would assume).

For a human and a vampire though, we're not even in the world of science anymore, not even in a world where anything can be done with enough time and technology, enough know-how, enough comprehension and manipulation of the laws of science & medicine. This is an area wholly irrational by its very nature, and I think we are to understand that from Edward's perspective, it's never happened before.

PLUS, he fights her tooth and nail every step of the way, he doesn't want to give in and give her what she wants but she begs for it (no joke intended), and they finally do, and after he sees the damage, he absolutely swears off of it. I think he gives in one more time...

I have another plus... I don't think it's solely the man's responsibility to "use protection". Especially not when the woman doesn't say anything. I'm not suggesting "it's her fault" unless she protests, and sure there's a degree of social pressure NOT to object if the man goes right along like there's nothing wrong without protection, but even so, it's not all in his court. She has a responsibility too. It would be different if she had said something and he assured her there was no reason to worry, but she didn't. I don't think anyone's at fault in their situation.

[Distracted]

Twilight biology is even more sparsely justified than Star Trek biology. I don't remember any biological justification for infertility between Bella and Edward, just that it's "never happened". Of course, I wouldn't imagine that a relationship between a human and a vampire that lasts much past the next meal is too common, so there may just have not been the opportunity. The reason why I lay the responsibility mostly at Edward's feet is that I expect more mature self-restraint and forethought from an obscenely strong >100 year old vampire than from an 18 year old little girl. She begged, sure, but he should have said no. It wasn't like she could force it on him. The whole relationship sorta creeps me out anyway. He may look teenaged, but he's not. It's almost pedophilia.

[Elessar]

Yeah I know what you mean... I realize the whole age thing is there, but I thought not only in the movie (which has the advantage of having cast a 19-20something year old actor) but even in the book, S. Meyer did a good job of somehow managing to avoid him looking like the creepy old guy. I think the objective was to paint him as "perpetually 17" since he was bitten at 17. I do see where someone wouldn't be able to see past it, but I didn't see him as 100+, going after a child. Plus, and this has no effect if you're of the opinion that biological age is biological age and there's no moral weight to the idea of "emotional age" or "mental age", but S. Meyer clearly intended Bella to be perceived as a lot older emotionally than she is physically... based on her whole "took care of her mother", "took care of Charlie", and generally emotastic, somewhat-misanthropic worldview.

I guess it was just two ways of looking at "his love" - either he should have been more responsible about it... or that he was just so consumed with a need much deeper than conventional affection or capitulation, that he had to give her what she wanted.

Then again, changing her was a moot point anyway since the Volturi pretty much made it a choice of changing her or killing her.

[enterprikayak]

But why - oh WHY - did Stephenie make him TWINKLE???


It's not THAT rainy here for F-'s sake!



I live about 1.5 millimeters away from "Forks" on the world map, and I would sit in my backyard, reading Twilight in the blasting bright sunshine and laugh and laugh about the twinkly vampires. Who are, like, from Forks, where, like, the sun does not shine.

It's very mystical, you know, in the "Pacific Northwest" as you guys call it. Vampires everywhere. I'm actually a vampire. And Lee is my human victim whom I lecherously married at an unsightly young age. And Aureilia and Abigail are our half-human spawn. Pretty common story around these parts. On account of the tall trees and the rain and what have you.

[justTripn]

[Bether6074]

I haven't read any of the books, but did see the first movie with my daughter. She had become hooked on the books and read all four in about 2 weeks.

I don't know exactly how Bella was portrayed in the books, but she seemed so underplayed in the movie. You don't scare me... Please take me five hundred feet up in the air so we can hang out together on the branches... I mean, whatever happened to romances where the biggest obstacle was something like the families feuding? A vampire? yikes! I'm sure we'll be the first in line at the movie come November.

Similarities between Trip and T'Pol? I'll have to think on that one. I suppose the "unlikely match" is one.

[Distracted]

Yeah I know what you mean... I realize the whole age thing is there, but I thought not only in the movie (which has the advantage of having cast a 19-20something year old actor) but even in the book, S. Meyer did a good job of somehow managing to avoid him looking like the creepy old guy. I think the objective was to paint him as "perpetually 17" since he was bitten at 17. I do see where someone wouldn't be able to see past it, but I didn't see him as 100+, going after a child. Plus, and this has no effect if you're of the opinion that biological age is biological age and there's no moral weight to the idea of "emotional age" or "mental age", but S. Meyer clearly intended Bella to be perceived as a lot older emotionally than she is physically... based on her whole "took care of her mother", "took care of Charlie", and generally emotastic, somewhat-misanthropic worldview.

Yeah, I can see that viewpoint. But the other thing you have to look at is that the book was mostly written from Bella's POV, and I've never met a teenage girl who didn't consider herself to be all grown up and a lot more mature than anyone else gives her credit for. And then she generally turns around and does something REALLY stupid.

I guess it was just two ways of looking at "his love" - either he should have been more responsible about it... or that he was just so consumed with a need much deeper than conventional affection or capitulation, that he had to give her what she wanted.

Ah, yes. The "overpowering need" schtick. Romance writers have used it to justify everything from rape to murder. I personally think it's baloney, but it is a bodice ripper staple.

[Linda]

I only read the first Twilight book. It was an enjoyable read but I didn't go on with the series. My daughter and granddaughter are avid fans, though. Granddaughter Image has read the first book five times and the rest of the books multiple times. She must be a walking encyclopedia of Twilight knowledge! I think I will print off this thread and show it to her.

[Kevin Thomas Riley]

I'm actually a vampire. And Lee is my human victim whom I lecherously married at an unsightly young age. And Aureilia and Abigail are our half-human spawn.

That explains a lot...

I haven't read/seen Twilight, and have no intention of doing so either, so I cannot somment on the TnT similarities, if there are any. I'd just like to mention that the age differences between human and vampire romances are common in these types of stories. Did people freak out about Buffy and Angel, or Buffy and Spike ( ) from the age point of view?

[Asso]

I followed this thread, lurking.
I don't know. Maybe I'm a little too old, but for me vampires are the EVIL.

[Elessar]

But why - oh WHY - did Stephenie make him TWINKLE???


It's not THAT rainy here for F-'s sake!



I live about 1.5 millimeters away from "Forks" on the world map, and I would sit in my backyard, reading Twilight in the blasting bright sunshine and laugh and laugh about the twinkly vampires. Who are, like, from Forks, where, like, the sun does not shine.

It's very mystical, you know, in the "Pacific Northwest" as you guys call it. Vampires everywhere. I'm actually a vampire. And Lee is my human victim whom I lecherously married at an unsightly young age. And Aureilia and Abigail are our half-human spawn. Pretty common story around these parts. On account of the tall trees and the rain and what have you.

"On account of the tall trees and the rain and what have you."

Take me, EP. Take me as your human slave

lol, Asso. "The evil". Thank you MemeMan