Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter?
By Rittings
@Rittings (673)
February 12, 2007 9:03am CST
Now whilst we all are aware that from a literary point of view, Lord of the Rings is far more in depth and intelligent. Tolkien not only offers you a story of power struggles, love and hope, but also offers a complete mythology for England. With full new languages created by Tolkien, and a time line of Middle Earth and historic references throughout the story line, it is easy to see why the Sci Fi connoisseur prefers the Tolien classic to the Rowling bedtime stories.
I don't mean to put down Potter, because he's fun and so are the books, but they just don't grasp the entire world and offer an alternative reality like Lord of the Rings does. But I hear so many people rave about Harry Potter and putting down Lord Of The Rings and saying that Potter is better, but most (if not all of them) have never read Tolkien, and only make their judgement according to the movies.
I have read Potter (which I found ok to read (easy since written with a younger audience in mind)) and I compare them only to The Hobbit (which was also written originally for a young audience). Even then I prefer The Hobbit, but that's probably because it lead on to a much bigger and greater experience (would I have preferred it if The Lord Of The Rings never existed???).
I'd like to hear what you all think about this one.
Tolkien or Rowling? Frodo or Potter? Dumbledoor or Gandalf? Hermione or Sam? Ron or Pippin? Aragorn or Hagrid? Hogwarts or Middle Earth?
Let's see what and why shall we ?? hehe.
Thanks in advance!
6 people like this
26 responses
@blueskies (1186)
• United States
12 Feb 07
I think the heart of their ignorance may lie in the fact that they are relying on the movies, rather than the written works when making their assessment of which saga is more worthy. Oh wait, you said that already :)
IMO, you can't fully appreciate The Lord of the Rings unless you have read each book, beginning with The Hobbit. The movies may be phenomenal, but the books are the true works of art. I read each book cover-to-cover when I was in 6th grade (age 11?). I was fully immersed for weeks in the worlds of Middle Earth, frolicking the shire with Bilbo Baggins and trembling in fear at the great evil that the ring personified.
When reading Harry Potter, it was a comletely different experience. I consider the Harry Potter books to be light reading, great for a few chapters a time, but easy to set aside when something more pressing calls for your attention.
@Rittings (673)
•
14 Feb 07
I totally agree with you mate. Reading the books is essential to getting the full picture and strength of Tolkien's imagination. And I agree, Harry was forgettable and easy to put down (easy to read too! haha), whereas there is so much thought and dedictation required to read the saga.
Thanks dude. Great comments.
@recycledgoth (9894)
•
12 Feb 07
Lord of the Rings definitely.
I live in Birmingham, fairly close to Sarehole Mill which was one of Tolkien's inspirations for Hobbiton. His depth of perception and his imagination fuelled many authors and painters to explore the world of fantasy, I was hooked when I first read the Hobbit as a child and I still love the fantasy genre to this day
2 people like this
@Rittings (673)
•
14 Feb 07
Wow you live pretty close to me. I live near Cannock Chase, which of course was also used as an inspiration to Tolkien's works. Amazing. I never expected to get a reply from a brummie haha!!
We sound similar, The Hobbit hooked me into Sci Fi Fantasy books by all authors, but none of them ever match the magic of Tolkien. Genius.
@kostar07 (386)
• Indonesia
12 Feb 07
of course Tolkien is better. He can speak in old language of Europe such as classic-latin, anglo-saxon and an old Finland language. With these skills he create an elf language such as Quenya (old elf language) and Sindarin. It is an expert skill.
2 people like this
@fchuki (48)
• Nigeria
14 Feb 07
You are right in your analysis. It is hard to think of books that display literary genius as the LOTR. Most people just don't have the ability to sit through a long book or movie. they forget the plot rather too easily, so they prefer to watch the Bond series. not much brain power to keep up with all the events.
A lot of people will never understand the kind of drama in such works as Beowulf (Thirteenth Warrior).
Still, Potter's more fun than Frodo. But Rowlings other characters cannot match the match the majesty of Tolkien's. Not even Dumbledore can match Gandalf, nor Voldemort match Sauron's evil (perhaps he is closer to Saruman in grand plans). And I don't think Ron's a better companion than Samwise Gamgee.
Glimli (son of Gloin) is more interesting than Hagrid, and Legolas is as intelligent in his own way as Hermione.
In short, the baddies are badder and the good guys hotter. I'm sure skeptic females will rather hang out with Aragorn, Legolas or Boromir than Potter or what's the name of the guy Hermie fell for in book 4?
@tomfade (134)
• Norway
14 Feb 07
Lord of the rings by far. i must say I really enjoy the Harry potter flicks, but as I have read the books by Tolkien and seen the films ofcourse, this strikes me as a very intelligent and thourough tale. It really impresses me that he in a way spent a lifetime perfecting this story, by making own languages, historic references, maps, and characters that come to life in a vivid matter. to be honest I feel every movie or book of this type is a spin off. Tolkien is by far the master of this genre. Without him, there would probably never be so many stories about magic, mythic countries, creatures of fantasy and so on. I,m really a Tolkien fan, so this was an easy choice. Do you by the way, know if Tolkien got some inspiration from nordic mythology, the viking religion. Norse mythology,I don,t know, but I feel he did in a way. It,s also interesting to hear about english references that you and other tell about. I,m learning more about tolkien and his complexity. Thanks for a great discussion Rittings.
1 person likes this
@Rittings (673)
•
14 Feb 07
Yup he got a lot of inspiration for his languages and myths from Norway. He also uses the Welsh language (sounds rather than words) as a basis for his common elf language. The Viking religion is something you would have to ask someone else about, because I am not quite sure, but I have heard someone say or ask that before...
You're welcome dude. Thanks for the great response and the religion thing is gonna have me thinking now for days. I will find that out.
@Rittings (673)
•
14 Feb 07
I totally agree dude. Harry is totally fictionally based with no thought as to "why" the world is like that. It's so one dimensional with no historic feeling to it. It just feels like a bedtime story to me. It's the work of a good imagination, that's for sure, but that imagination is not matched with the dedication to the surrounding world of the books like Tolkien.
I recommend reading the trilogy.. you'd love it.
@stutiaquarian (394)
• India
12 Mar 07
i like the both equally
ya lotr was a lil mature but that innocence i liked in harry.....................
@AuthenticPeach (283)
• United States
20 Feb 07
That's a hard one because I love both of them. My butt however chooses Harry Potter if you're talking about going to the movies and watching it. Three hours oh my gosh! LOL!
@aissar (414)
• Malaysia
17 Mar 07
I agree with blueskies' statement. It would be unfair to simply judge a great literary masterpiece based on the adaptation to movie. Many people judge them through the movies they've watched. Take Harry Potter for example; the book portrays to a greater extend the life Harry's living, the friendship he has with Ron and Hermione and his destiny in confronting Voldemort. You don't see all that in the movie.
Yet, I'll still side with LOTR. This is because I've always loved Tolkien's works and LOTR portrays a more realistic world which we can relate to. HP on the other hand relies too much upon magic to draw readers' attention; LOTR itself has a deep storyline that requires readers to ponder and not simply immerse in the story.
LOTR fares better. =)
@thehate2k6 (51)
• Israel
4 Mar 07
harry potter isnt even a choice
of course lord of the rings
harry potter is really unrealistic while lord of the rings have nice pictures..cool views
while all you can see on harry potter is the castle(hogwarts) and some spells that when you hear them casting you would laugh about
@Phoniex (74)
• India
12 Mar 07
No dout that Lord of the rings is far more better than harry potter but still both are best of the best on their stands. Lord of the rings is a mythological story about love,power,mans's feelings(bravery,greed,friendship) and a lot more but we cannot compare Harry potter with lord of the rings because it a Story for kids And of a Kid. And yes the movies of Harry potter are quite brief but the Book Give has everthing in details.
@mskzalameda (4023)
• Philippines
17 Mar 07
harry potter. i love the plot of this. i think i haven't really had a time to really go beyond the world of lord of the rings that's why i love potter.
@joanna08 (394)
• Philippines
17 Mar 07
uuhhmm.. this is hard since im a fan of both, but lets look at it in two different perspective...
for kids and young adults... harry potter is definitely a choice, because harry is going through stuff, that the kids are experiencing nowadays.. like confusion, puppy love and that stuff... it is some kind of an adventure.. you can undesatnd the story with its surprising plot...
in the othe hand...
LOTR is very different in many ways... it has many stories to further understand... inshort, it's quite complicated for kids... but it does give wider imagination to tackle for adults...
@unusualsuspect (2602)
• United States
14 Feb 07
Long stretches of LOTR are boring enough to bring on tears, but overall, it has substance, and universal themes that most people can relate to. I haven't read any of the Harry Potter books but have caught a few of the movies on TV. If the movies are true to the books, then I can't see that they have much substance at all. The characters don't really develop; they just grow up. And all problems are solved by magic. Okay, Harry is brave when he needs to be, but magic usually saves the day.
@Myrrdin (3599)
• Canada
15 Feb 07
I have read both and I love both. But compare them, its like comparing hot dogs to a perfectly done steak. Sure the hot dogs are a great quick meal, but who would ever choose processed meat to a prime cut of beef?
Tolkien is the master of Fantasy, Rowlings is but a follower. Without Tolkien and his group (C.S. Lewis and others) there would be no such thing as a Fantasy genre it would remain forever mired in the realm of fairy tales. Harry Potter is a great series and I think that J.K. Rowlings is a great childrens writer, on of the rare writers who can bridge the generation gap and write something both children and adults can both love. That being said Tolkien was the the master at this, the Hobbit must be one of the most beloved childrens books that parents and children alike love.
Now I know I seem to be harping mainly on the fact that Tolkien was first, but that's not the only thing. As you mentioned LoTR has so much more depth than Potter, the history and legends worked into the books are powerful, and the writing itself is second to none. Your asking a guy that for five years in a row in school did his book reports on the Lord of the Rings though, so my opinion might be a bit biased ;)... I could be considered a militant Tolkien fan.
@aira0123 (16)
• Philippines
15 Feb 07
i've read both books....
Lord of the rings has that depth that it can't easily be understood by some, while Harry Potter is much easier to understand if compared to LOTR.
I love both books and i do not prefer one over the other, for me, they are both different things. Even if they have the same genre, i must say. Well, i still think that they're both really good stories,,,
i'm looking forward to reading the 7th book of Harry Potter which will be released this July, i am SOSOSO excited.!
@Xanatos390 (72)
• United States
17 Feb 07
They're both fantastic stories, and Tolkien and Rowling, I think are fantastic storytellers.
However, I'm going to have to put Tolkien on top in this one. Just the complexity of the entire world of Middle Earth--Tolkien's first reality, I think. I read a book on his languages he created, and if you wanted to, you could make Elvish your native tongue. He has complete rules and how words are formed, etc.; it actually IS a language.
@The_Mafia_Man (42)
•
20 Feb 07
By comparing the movies Lord of the Rings is 1000x better then Harrp Potter. The movies have deperately let Harry Potter down.
Book wise, I would say Lord of the Rings is better as it is much more in depth and he has created a whole new world, whilst in Harry Potter some things are taken for granted, and it is set is a modern world with much less depth and detail then Lord of the Rings. Also, with Lord of thr Rings, you get much more addicted, and there is much more to read as The Hobbit and The Silmarillion are also very good and helpful, and in Harry Potter there are a lot of things she holds back to draw in tension, but because they move onto the next book it kind of spoils the book.
@The_Mafia_Man (42)
•
18 Feb 07
Lord of the Rings as there is a whole new world he has created, and the depth and detail is unrivalled. I've read Silmarillian, Hobbit and LotR, and they are all amazing reads and will grip you until the end, when you want to read them again. Harry Potter is gripping whilst you read it, but afterwards you don't really want to read it again.
