Yet another call by me.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Imladris

Is it okay to illustrate a point using Harry Potter? Yes...it is. But don't bring your own opinion into it.

For example: The Istari are not like the HP wizards.

I would say that it is hard to make this comparison, for example in commenting on the nature of the Istari, without going on and explaining why you think that they are not like the wizards in Harry Potter. Which would be opinion.

But I think that Imladris has identifed a point here. It is unfair for people to make gratuitous opinion-based criticism of Harry Potter (or other non-Tolkien material) when those who wish to defend it cannot do so without taking the thread further off-topic. And by gratuitous, I mean irrelevant to the topic at hand. If the criticism is relevant, then it should be possible to defend it by reference to the topic. If not then, as Rimbaud suggested, challenge the criticism by PM.

[Lalwendë]

First of all, Imladris does have a fair point, as many Tolkien fans do have a tendency to criticise the Harry Potter books quite vehemently, and I'm not excluding myself from this. I'm not embarrassed to say I enjoy the Harry Potter books and I can't fault the plotlines which keep me turning the pages (and I especially love the Ministry of Magic and the bad guys), but as a long time Tolkien obsessive, I do have a weird relationship with them. This manifests in an urge to be sceptical. I wonder how many other 'Downers do love those books but feel they must somehow criticise just to prove the point that Tolkien is the master. I know this is something I do quite often, although it has mainly been face to face, in duels of words with workmates.

This topic shows though, yet again, how text based discussions can sometimes not come across the way that they were intended; I'm sure we've all written e-mails that have come across in totally the wrong way, and this is a similar thing.

[Mithalwen]

My original posts have been taken out of context. They may have been "casual" illustrations but they were not gratuitous. The thread has been up for about a month. It is very Tolkien... I have never received so much rep. Read it and report if you feel it necessary. As someone else said thius is really not the place... butwhen I am attacked .... I will respond ....and that was an attack.

[mark12_30]

Two points.
One: Quibbles abound; it is the nature of discussion. If you go to Books, you will see innumerable places where someone states their opinion, introducing external facts or figures or sciences or theories or theologies, with personal preference. If lucky they do it politely. If not, one either ignores it or deals with it as Rimbaud has suggested and Sharku has endorsed.

Second point: What do Sharkû, lindil, Mithadan, and Mister Underhill have in common? Answer: longevity, respectability, and reputation that completely transcends "points". They're also all either mods or administrators. I'll leave it at that.

[Amanaduial the archer]

Are you entitled to your opinion? Definitely. Just...don't proclaim it on a board devoted to Tolkien please.

I disagree a little actually, Immy. Not that I am in favour of an all-out flame war against all things Potter, but it does relate to the context. For example, if some topic starts:

Hi, jst sayin tht, like, Harry Potter *drool* wizards are, like, soooo much betta thn the wizards in Lord of the rings,c os they dont actually use, like, proper magic. I mean, lord of the rings wizards don't even use magic.

Now, whilst this topic isn't really worth responding to, for the sake of the example, we must press on: in response to this, I think it would be acceptable to include some opinion of your own about Harry Potter itself - do not engage in a flame war, it does not help things! But then, this is a discussion forum - and discussion is all about exploring different viewpoints. Opinion generally helps, y'know

Oviously, Harry Potter is the other most popular fantasy/'magic' series which has been talked about in the last few years, especially being as the books do seem to have alot which is easy to compare, and as the films came into direct competition with each other: the two are easily comparable, and alot of people seem to have taken the opinion that sides must be taken rather than joining in one big sci-fest of magic (aww, harmony in all the geeky wizarding community (joking!*ducks flying objects*)) This is where the problem comes in: it can easily errupt into a slightly volatile subject from innocent intentions, where with other series it might not. For example, some time ago there was a topic comparing the trials of Frodo the Ring-bearer, and Will, the main character and bearer of the infamous Subtle Knife in Philip Pullman's 'His Dark Materials' trilogy. These two characters are really incredibly similar in the responsibilities they have to bear - but it was nowhere near as likely to errupt as, for example, if you compared Frodo's burden with the burden that Harry carries with the scar, his name, and his history. The topics have been discussed so often that they can very rapidly become repetitive to some participators and develop into 'my character's better than yours' flamewars with anti-maturity.

So I think that, no, opinion should be allowed - but keep it related, and don't descend into the murky depths of flame

("fairy Harry Potter karblasto wizards" - genius. I shall be storing that one up for later use )

[Kuruharan]

But if all discussions that mention the work of other authors are banned, that is going to put quite a damper on comparative discussions on the boards.

A lot of what might be considered rarified discussions here have been comparative in nature and have referenced other authors. Such things are necessarily going to involve opinions on the quality of the works

[HerenIstarion]

Good long Tolkien discussion with lots of HP in it

[Bêthberry]

But I think that Imladris has identifed a point here. It is unfair for people to make gratuitous opinion-based criticism of Harry Potter (or other non-Tolkien material) when those who wish to defend it cannot do so without taking the thread further off-topic. And by gratuitous, I mean irrelevant to the topic at hand. If the criticism is relevant, then it should be possible to defend it by reference to the topic. If not then, as Rimbaud suggested, challenge the criticism by PM.

And let me say I think Saucepanman is on to something here. I, too, felt that there was some merit to Imladris's initial point, however polemically she expressed it. (She does love her polemics.)

The BarrowDowns prides itself on the quality of its discussion. That means, I think, fair analysis and comparisons, witty rejoinders and clever reparte. But if or when we resort to, as SpM says, "gratuitous" slams of other authors, whether it be Rowlings or Pullman or some other fantasy writer or modern, we foresake good quality discussion for silly and cheap rabble rousing, name calling in the hopes of making us "Tolkienites" feel smug or superior or some such aura of exclusivity. Ad hominem comments aren't us-- I really don't think that the Downs is about that kind of "put down".

So, yes, as Rim, Sharkey and SpM have all suggested, handle that with a PM or consider how the issue can be addressed in an on-topic manner.

Edit: cross posted with Lalwendë here.