Discussion in 'Debates' started by Tatharlin, Dec 22, 2004.
Anyone who thinks Harry Potter is better than LOTR should be punished severely.
Preferably by being forced to read the Chronicles of the Narnia until their eyes bleed (not a fan of CS Lewis...grrr!)
Dark Lord? Check.
Well seems it's no contest. Lord of the Rings all the way. As entrancing as the wand wavers are in Harry Potter, I'd prefer to take a tour in that far different world of Middle-Earth. For all its bizzareness, Harry Potter's world is too much like ours to hold my sustained interest. On second thought, it is our world. Guess I gotta go with Tolkien.
well i don't disagree, but wen u consider how many young people have already, and will in the future, move from rowling to more serious fantasy i don't think she can be discounted so easily
i voted LOTR tho
Tolkien wins for sure, he was practically a genius
i voted LOTR, but honestly, i think its too hard to compare harry potter and lotr because they are completely different things. its like comparing saving private ryan to zoolander *two COMPLETELY different things*
The Life works of the Father of Fantasy V Childrens bedtime stories.
No competition really is there !!!!!
***Game over, Insert coin***
I never really got into the idea of LOTR but I like Harry Potter
I voted Tolken cause honestly his books are the only ones i can really get into... I tried Rowling but i couldn't get bast the first pages ( i read all book though my mom who informed me of everything that was going on)
Though i'm still mad cause of what happened to Harry's God father, I'm even madder for what happened to Tonks and Lupin, and i am Angry cause of what she did to my twins!
I really enjoyed Harry Potter when it first came out but it was far from a favorite, but I was a child then. As I've grown older, my interests have shifted significantly. Now I have to vote for Lord of the Rings simply because of plot, and the world. Oh the world that simply makes my knees tremble thinking about its richness and completeness. The history, the love and care into its crafting.
Meanwhile Harry Potter seems just another 'secret society hiding from the normal people using amazing magic and everything'. I just think its silly how they use magic for *everything*.
Regardless, to many Harry Potter is good, I simply prefer Tolkien.
I voted LOTR. Tolkien was immersed in the world he created - he lived it, he breathed it. He spent years creating the languages and the mythology. Harry Potter pales in comparison in terms of majesty and intellectual depth. Of course, Tolkien never intended LOTR to be viewed as a children's book, so the comparison is somewhat unfair, but either way Rowling will forever be a footnote in literary history while Tolkien actually made history, for he spawned a genre in which others have meekly followed.
I have to agree with 4th Musketeer on that.
Tolkien's mythology is just epic.Harry Potter is something a bit different and in a much smaller scale.Sorry.
Hooray! At last, something we agree on! Break out the champagne!!!:draught:
I like LotR movies, but books are rather boring to me (I dont like Tolkiens style, too much descriptions <_<) so.... I voted for HP
Hmmm, different strokes for different folks I guess. I've never seen the appeal of HP myself, though I can't argue with its success.
There are indeed some parts and some chapters in LOTR where Tolkien uses description too much when it comes to the landscape.I remember I've had some bad time in some parts of LOTR when it came to that but it's nothing compared to that chapter in the Hobbit where Bilbo is hiding in the Wood Elves' palace for days.I don't know why but for some reason reading that chapter was a torment.
Still Tolkien's LOTR is a masterpiece and it's not just the plot,the characters and the action but also the descriptions that make it epic.
Of course it works because it's Tolkien.If another writer did the same thing and his books where far inferior in plot and characters he would end up with boring books full of ridiculously detailed descriptions of everything.
Tolkien's prose is of a stately nature, for sure, but only because he was trying to invest the world he had created with a feeling of majesty. It just wouldn't have worked if he had used vernacular. Rowling, basing her world in modern times, can get away with prose that her target market finds easier to read, but again it comes back to the fact that Tolkien was creating a mythology for the English, while Rowling was just writing a children's book. I still think comparing the two is like comparing a whale with an ant...
Not to mention the characters which are one more very powerful element in Tolkien's mythology.
Separate names with a comma.