Magical Middle Earth - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Isowen · 08-12-2004, 08:22 AM

Yey! finally someone who agrees with me on this!

Lady Gamgee · 08-12-2004, 06:44 PM

I for one do not like Harry Potter. And to compare the 2 in the slightest way is an injustice to LOTR. With HP, it's just like a bunch of kids playing around and having fun with magic. LOTR on the other hand, can make you think it's real, like there really is a ME with Hobbits and Elves and such. I watched the 1st 2 HP movies, and needless to say, I was highly disappointed, even though I thought Haggard was pretty cool ... that's his name, right?? Anyhow, Tolkien knows how to grab & hold you with his work, and PJ helped bring it all to life.

Lhundulinwen · 08-12-2004, 07:34 PM

I read hp before LOTR. (Notice the capitalizations...) I like hp still, but after LOTR... well, after reading that book that is your absolute favorite, the one that changes your life, nothing else can compare. LOTR and hp both deal with good and evil, but LOTR, to me, deals with it in a much more complex way. hp is a book directed at children (but children are not its only audience) and therefore has more frivolous, fanciful, magical parts. LOTR does not have many if any 'childish' scenes. The Hobbit, on the other hand, is directed at children too. The goal of the Hobbit is much lighter than LOTR, and seems to me more magical. (Think of Bert (that was his name, right?) the giant compared to the giants in LOTR) LOTR is much deeper and complex and deals with issues in layers, while hp's morals are laid out and more obvious. I will buy the next 2 hp books, but nothing will ever (EVER) top LOTR. But that's just me...

Laitoste · 08-12-2004, 07:59 PM

Okay, first of all, I really do enjoy Harry Potter. They are excellently written, amusing books (the fifth one makes me so mad at the characters that I often find myself walking away to calm down! Tell me that's not well written.). But, I think they cater to different audiences. After I had read Harry Potter and LotR, I thought, "Hey, this is really cool! The Wizard of Oz is fantasy for little kids, Harry Potter is for older kids, and The Lord of the Rings is for teenages and adults!" Not to say that people can't read them whenever they want, of course.

Finally, I don't think that Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings are comparable. They are about completely different subjects. They have different types of characters, different plots, and different settings. There may be a few similarities (Wormtongue-->Wormtail?), and the themes are similar, but for the most part, they're completely different.

Isowen · 08-13-2004, 03:20 AM

I do like the hp books, but they tend to get boring, but lets keep it about Tolkien. I really wanted to know what your OPINIONS were, rather than if you think LOTR could be compared to hp.
Sorry, I just thought that we were straying off track a little, soooo lets get back to Tolkien please.

Lhundulinwen, very well said thankyou and I agree muchly (is that a word?!?!)
Laitoste, also well said etc. And good point about Wormtail and Wormtongue.
keep it coming........

Silmiel of Imladris · 08-14-2004, 04:45 PM

I am going to get it for this, but I stop caring. Actually as I see it Hp and Lotr can be compared in some ways and here they are. Each author spent a lot of time studying mythology for there creations. Every creator in both Lotr and HP can be found some were in mythology. For example elves were believed to live on this earth once but they accended to a higher plane aka go into the west and dissapeared forever. In HP Nicholas Fammel was an actual alchemist who lived from 1330 to 1418. Did he turn lead into gold? No one knows except that he died very very rich. So Tolkien didn't just make stuff up and Rowling didn't just make stuff up and that is why I love them both so much for they expand on a history we already have.

Encaitare · 08-14-2004, 05:19 PM

Interesting, Silmiel, I didn't know that Nicholas Flamel was a real person! My respect for JK Rowling just increased a notch.

Back to the original question: "Could Middle-earth be more magical than it already is?" Well, as someone said already, there are different types of magic. There's the HP-style, wave your wand and say a couple of magic words and get instant results type of magic, and then there's the magic of Gandalf's intagible inner power, and there's the magical power of Saruman's voice... etc etc.

As I see it, the magic of Harry Potter is more fanciful. The magic of the Lord of the Rings is more subtle but so much more powerful. I mean, come on. Gandalf would so own Dumbledore in a fight. Or he could pull his Denethor moves and just bludgeon Dumbledore to death

(Such a massive departure from the book but amusing all the same

)

08-12-2004, 08:22 AM	#1
Isowen Haunting Spirit Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: The blackened depths Posts: 86	Yey! finally someone who agrees with me on this! __________________ I hope Butterbur sends this promptly. A worthy man, but his memory is like a lumber -room: Thing wanted always burried, If he forgets, I shall roast him.

08-12-2004, 06:44 PM	#2
Lady Gamgee Animated Skeleton Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: The Shire Posts: 30	I for one do not like Harry Potter. And to compare the 2 in the slightest way is an injustice to LOTR. With HP, it's just like a bunch of kids playing around and having fun with magic. LOTR on the other hand, can make you think it's real, like there really is a ME with Hobbits and Elves and such. I watched the 1st 2 HP movies, and needless to say, I was highly disappointed, even though I thought Haggard was pretty cool ... that's his name, right?? Anyhow, Tolkien knows how to grab & hold you with his work, and PJ helped bring it all to life. __________________ "....though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater." ~~ Haldir

08-12-2004, 07:34 PM	#3
Lhundulinwen Wight Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Wishin' and hopin' in the Shire Posts: 139	I read hp before LOTR. (Notice the capitalizations...) I like hp still, but after LOTR... well, after reading that book that is your absolute favorite, the one that changes your life, nothing else can compare. LOTR and hp both deal with good and evil, but LOTR, to me, deals with it in a much more complex way. hp is a book directed at children (but children are not its only audience) and therefore has more frivolous, fanciful, magical parts. LOTR does not have many if any 'childish' scenes. The Hobbit, on the other hand, is directed at children too. The goal of the Hobbit is much lighter than LOTR, and seems to me more magical. (Think of Bert (that was his name, right?) the giant compared to the giants in LOTR) LOTR is much deeper and complex and deals with issues in layers, while hp's morals are laid out and more obvious. I will buy the next 2 hp books, but nothing will ever (EVER) top LOTR. But that's just me... __________________ ~Just call on me, and I'm there. I'll always be your Sam~

08-12-2004, 07:59 PM	#4
Laitoste Wight Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Behind the hills Posts: 164	It isn't THAT bad! Okay, first of all, I really do enjoy Harry Potter. They are excellently written, amusing books (the fifth one makes me so mad at the characters that I often find myself walking away to calm down! Tell me that's not well written.). But, I think they cater to different audiences. After I had read Harry Potter and LotR, I thought, "Hey, this is really cool! The Wizard of Oz is fantasy for little kids, Harry Potter is for older kids, and The Lord of the Rings is for teenages and adults!" Not to say that people can't read them whenever they want, of course. Finally, I don't think that Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings are comparable. They are about completely different subjects. They have different types of characters, different plots, and different settings. There may be a few similarities (Wormtongue-->Wormtail?), and the themes are similar, but for the most part, they're completely different. __________________ "If we're still alive in the morning, we'll know that we're not dead."~South Park

08-13-2004, 03:20 AM	#5
Isowen Haunting Spirit Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: The blackened depths Posts: 86	I do like the hp books, but they tend to get boring, but lets keep it about Tolkien. I really wanted to know what your OPINIONS were, rather than if you think LOTR could be compared to hp. Sorry, I just thought that we were straying off track a little, soooo lets get back to Tolkien please. Lhundulinwen, very well said thankyou and I agree muchly (is that a word?!?!) Laitoste, also well said etc. And good point about Wormtail and Wormtongue. keep it coming........ __________________ I hope Butterbur sends this promptly. A worthy man, but his memory is like a lumber -room: Thing wanted always burried, If he forgets, I shall roast him.

08-14-2004, 04:45 PM	#6
Silmiel of Imladris Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Looking into a crystal ball- still see nothing Posts: 395	I am going to get it for this, but I stop caring. Actually as I see it Hp and Lotr can be compared in some ways and here they are. Each author spent a lot of time studying mythology for there creations. Every creator in both Lotr and HP can be found some were in mythology. For example elves were believed to live on this earth once but they accended to a higher plane aka go into the west and dissapeared forever. In HP Nicholas Fammel was an actual alchemist who lived from 1330 to 1418. Did he turn lead into gold? No one knows except that he died very very rich. So Tolkien didn't just make stuff up and Rowling didn't just make stuff up and that is why I love them both so much for they expand on a history we already have. __________________ Legolas 20 ales later: I feel something, a slight tingling in my fingers. I think it's affecting me. Figwit on his name: Are you suggesting that I have the wit of a fig?

08-14-2004, 05:19 PM	#7
Encaitare Bittersweet Symphony Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: On the jolly starship Enterprise Posts: 1,814	Interesting, Silmiel, I didn't know that Nicholas Flamel was a real person! My respect for JK Rowling just increased a notch. Back to the original question: "Could Middle-earth be more magical than it already is?" Well, as someone said already, there are different types of magic. There's the HP-style, wave your wand and say a couple of magic words and get instant results type of magic, and then there's the magic of Gandalf's intagible inner power, and there's the magical power of Saruman's voice... etc etc. As I see it, the magic of Harry Potter is more fanciful. The magic of the Lord of the Rings is more subtle but so much more powerful. I mean, come on. Gandalf would so own Dumbledore in a fight. Or he could pull his Denethor moves and just bludgeon Dumbledore to death (Such a massive departure from the book but amusing all the same )

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode