Places to Chat
LORD OF THE
Chatterbox: Chirp at Cricket
LORD OF THE
LORD OF THE RINGS IS BETTER!
Sorry Harry Potter fans, I think it just is. It has better characters, better plot,better side characters (BILL PLEASE COME BACK), and better details. The enemies seem more lifelike, and you can almost imagine yourself as a ghost hovering over and watching the scene in the book.
So basically, this a thread for LOTRs.
P.S. Harry Potter fans, YOU SHALL NOT PASS!
submitted by Bob R.
(January 21, 2018 - 7:53 pm)
(January 21, 2018 - 7:53 pm)
i am a HUGE fan of both.
(January 21, 2018 - 10:31 pm)
(January 25, 2018 - 2:15 pm)
Fan of both. And I refuse to pit two books against one another XD.
(January 25, 2018 - 4:59 pm)
What coyotedomino said.
True, I think LOTR is better written by a long shot, and there's just a sense of reality about Middle Earth that you don't quite feel with Harry Potter. However, I do not like to compare them because I love both equally, or just about equally.
Also just randomly, I'd highly recommend watching the "Lord of the Potter" video. It's a parody on HP and LOTR.
(January 25, 2018 - 5:06 pm)
dITTO.
(January 26, 2018 - 8:32 pm)
Actually, I think most people will agree that LotR has terrible characters. There are probably only two characters in the entire series that were not stereotypical or archetypal; pretty much anyone will agree with me there. LotR is also very heavily worded and difficult to get through for a lot of people, unlike Harry Potter. I'll concede, though, that the worldbuilding in LotR is . . . well, it's unmatched by any book, let alone Harry Potter. And the plot is okay. If you recited it to someone who had no prior knowledge of the series, though, it would sound pretty silly. (evil jewelry? The book The Dumbest Idea Ever! actually made a good joke of that.)
Still. I like them both, a lot.
(January 25, 2018 - 5:35 pm)
However, to be the devils advocate here, harry potter's characters could get a bit cliche as well. Ron was just the funny guy, and he didn't have any character development. Harry Potter was incredibly unlikeable, and was painted as the 'average but is somehow the chosen one' the entire book. Snapes character development was good, but was really only touched upon well in the last book.
I still prefer Harry Potter over Lotr however. Amazing world, horribly written ( he spent way too much time on some background details). I did enjoy The Hobbit, however. That one was an easier read.
(January 26, 2018 - 5:29 pm)
Ron had plenty of character development! It was true that he was chiefly there for comic relief; but he was also a fully developed person and not always that likeable. For example, there was that instance in the fourth book where he doesn't speak to Harry for weeks - possibly months - because of jealousy. (Ron has a huge problem with jealousy throughout the series.) He's awkward, selfless (when motivated to be), and charming.
Harry wasn't build to be unlikeable; he's actually a pretty sweet kid. Though he's also pretty stupid and doesn't know how to talk to people. That's part of what makes him interesting. Protagonists in the YA genre are not bumbling, especially not the male ones (in fantasy, in any case). Harry is a refreshing change.
I won't argue with you about Snape because I hate everything about his justification
The Hobbit was definitely an easier read; maybe because it was originally a bedtime story? The Two Towers in particular was, as a person I'm familiar put it, absolute slog. J.R.R. Tolkein is a genius in terms of creating worlds, languages, and creatures. But he also didn't need to document every time Bilbo scratches his nose.
(January 26, 2018 - 7:40 pm)
@Bob R: I am quite interested in your argument!
However, could you please list it's better characters, better plot, better side characters (BILL!), etc? I enjoy reading this, but you haven't listed most of your 'facts' quite yet.
(January 25, 2018 - 10:03 pm)
I AGREE. Now I will admit I haven't read Harry Potter, mainly because, to be honest it sounds like something I'd hate. But I'm not in the mood for the old 'You can't hate a book you haven't read' lecture right now. I'm just here to say, I agree. LotR is WAY better.
(January 28, 2018 - 10:50 pm)
The Lord of the Rings is one of my very, very favorite stories. Possibly my most favorite. I enjoy Harry Potter, too. But I don't think they should be seriously, or at least heatedly, compared. They're very different books intended for different audiences, and the authors had different intentions in writing them. Still some comparison is entertaining, when we look at how the books connect.
For one thing, much of Harry Potter's plot and elements are borrowed from other stories. The idea of a school for young wizards was hatched by Urusula Le Guin in her Earthsea Cycle, as well as other minor elements. Rowling also found inspiration in the Lord of the Rings: Dementors=Ringwraiths, anyone? And what about this idea of wearing a bit of your enemy's malice around your neck, and it influencing you, and your having to destroy it? HORCRUX. There's some more "Evil jewelry" for ya, St. Owl. ;)
I'm not saying Rowling's books are any less because they contain elements taken from other books. lots of stuff. Every book we have written today is borrowing from some story told/written before. Tolkien borrowed owling's talent lies in her ability to collect all these interesting ideas and present them to a wider teengage readership, while retaining some of the depth and inner meaning. In some ways, Harry Potter is, though not necessarily a rebuttal, a reply to the Lord of the Rings and other landmarks of Fantasy. Dumbledore, with his brokenness, weakness, and fallibility, stands against Gandalf, who, though certainly not infallible himself, demonstrates inhuman strength and wisdom (which makes sense, seeing as he's not human).
I've heard arguments for both the Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter being poorly written. These arguments are usually based on personal opinion. The Lord of the Rings is said to be too dense and rambling, with too much detail, not enough character development, etc. To those of us who love the novel (yes, it's technically one novel!), the density is depth, ad the rambling detail enfolds us into a colorful world where every shadow of every leaf is defined before our eyes. The character development is subtle, touching, and believable, especially as Tolkien was attempting to write a myth for England, and not a New York Times Bestseller. (In my mind, he accomplished both.)
Harry Potter is described as shallow, and rambling in a different way, with too much attention focused on random aspects of Harry's school life and not the overall story arc. The characters are said to be empty and stereotypical. This also depends on personal opinion. Harry Potter attains a different kind of depth, in the way it reaches minds and conveys its messages. There are considerably more plot holes than in the Lord of the Rings, but you're generally having too much fun to stop and notice-- proof of Rowling's ability to Suspend Disbelief. The school setting provides readers with a way to connect with the characters, and gradually breaks them in to the deeper story, while exploring the truly fascinating aspects of everyday life, especially when those aspects are spruced up with a bit of magic. Personally, I don't find the characters overly stereotypical. There's a reason why we have stereotypes-- because they're believable, and they work. Nobody dreamed up the idea of the Everyman Hero, the Bookworm Girl, or the Wise Mentor-- they are found in real life, and the caricatures springing up from them give us another way to connect, consider, and process the world around us.
Okay, that was long and random. Does anyone have any thoughts?
Your comment "Every book we have written today is borrowing from some story told/written before" reminds me of a literature class I took on the Bible. It taught that every great theme in literature (good vs. evil, love, suffering, quest, jealousy, joy, etc.) can be found in the Bible. I like both series (by Tolkien and Rowling) and can't say one is better than the other. They're just different.
Admin
Admin
(February 6, 2018 - 5:04 pm)
I agree, Admin! Thank you. The Bible is the ultimate story, and every story, deliberately or no, reflects or twists it.
(February 6, 2018 - 6:54 pm)
And there is Esthelle's rant, which is long and beautiful. I enjoyed it very much. *Claps for Esthelle*
(February 7, 2018 - 10:37 am)
I have to disagree that LotR is badly written. In terms of writing technicalities, sentence structure, and all that, it is very, very good. It isn't hard to understand if you're familiar with older, more complex language structure. If you've read Shakespeare, the Bible, and excerpts of old historical documents, you'll know what I mean.
Also, I don't think the characters are cliche, and here is why. Lord of the Rings, when it was published, was unlike anything else that had been written. It was basically the beginning of what we know as the genre of fantasy today. Now, on to the actual characters. Frodo, of course, is the protagonist. He is a hero, but I have never read a book with another character quite like him. He's a hero, but his personality is hard to describe. I think he does show a lot of development towards the end, when he and Sam are almost to Mt. Doom, when he's completely exhausted and almost ready to give up. Also when the Ring is slowly having more effect over him, and his struggle with its dominance in parts of the book.
It would take too long to go over Sam, and Merry, and Pippin, and Aragorn, and Eowyn and Faramir, etc, etc. To be brief(er), other characters, in books that came after LotR, were slightly inspired by those in LotR, and that is why they seem to us kind of cliche. And going even deeper now, why do you think the reason is that the heroic main character and triumph of good over evil shows up over and over again, in book after book after book? Is it just an unoriginal storyline labeled cliche? Or is that story so beautiful, such a perfect picture speaking to who we are, that we can't help but bring it back into our writing, even in the subtlest ways? And where was that first story of the ultimate battle between good and evil? I will leave you to find that for yourself.
(February 7, 2018 - 12:23 pm)
Thank you, Leafpool! :D
I concurr with your thoughts very strongly, Aspen! Especially the last bit about the deeper truth behind story-cliches.
(February 7, 2018 - 3:58 pm)