LOTR vs Harry Potter - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Craban · 08-23-2002, 02:22 PM

Obviously there's some anti-HP video making the rounds of some church groups, and some people choose to believe it because it makes them feel good to do so for some reason and will stubbornly stick to it no matter how many intelligent and thoughtful posts, philosophical and theological discourses, and well-researched facts you throw at them. And some people just don't like Harry Potter because they identify too much with the Dursleys.There wouldn't even be any reason to compare the two at all if they both hadn't been adapted into mega-blockbuster movies released around the same time, purely by chance. LOTR = mythopoeic heroic fantasy told in a style that's a hybrid between "epic" and "novelistic," set in a mythic landscape and far remote Age of Legends. HP = contemporary fantasy story in which a magical subculture overlaps the mundane world, told in modern conversational language, with child/teenage protagonists. I enjoy them both very much, on different levels and for different reasons. I don't think they're very similar or have much to do with each other.But, because I can't resist: for the record, I *am* a Wiccan, have been for 14 years. I've read all four HP books more than once, and there is NO evidence that JK Rowling knows jack about Wicca, or cares. All her ample magic references come from history (note the fact that Nicholas Flamel was a real Renaissance alchemist), mythology and pop culture, and her symbolism and themes could be read to be as much Christian as anything else (no surprise, because it is after all the dominant culture in the UK and is the source of many cultural references readily understood in English-speaking society, duh.)Now, Marion Zimmer Bradley's The Mists of Avalon--THAT'S a book drenched in Wiccan values and symbolism. It was even a recent (made-for-TV) movie too. And told in a style far more like to LOTR, although its story is Arthurian. Why aren't people railing about that all over this board? My best guess is because it's not popular enough that the Symbolism Police have heard of it.

08-23-2002, 02:22 PM	#11
Craban Pile O'Bones Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Dunland, USA Posts: 13	Obviously there's some anti-HP video making the rounds of some church groups, and some people choose to believe it because it makes them feel good to do so for some reason and will stubbornly stick to it no matter how many intelligent and thoughtful posts, philosophical and theological discourses, and well-researched facts you throw at them. And some people just don't like Harry Potter because they identify too much with the Dursleys.<P>There wouldn't even be any reason to compare the two at all if they both hadn't been adapted into mega-blockbuster movies released around the same time, purely by chance. LOTR = mythopoeic heroic fantasy told in a style that's a hybrid between "epic" and "novelistic," set in a mythic landscape and far remote Age of Legends. HP = contemporary fantasy story in which a magical subculture overlaps the mundane world, told in modern conversational language, with child/teenage protagonists. I enjoy them both very much, on different levels and for different reasons. I don't think they're very similar or have much to do with each other.<P>But, because I can't resist: for the record, I am a Wiccan, have been for 14 years. I've read all four HP books more than once, and there is NO evidence that JK Rowling knows <I>jack</I> about Wicca, or cares. All her ample magic references come from history (note the fact that Nicholas Flamel was a real Renaissance alchemist), mythology and pop culture, and her symbolism and themes could be read to be as much Christian as anything else (no surprise, because it is after all the dominant culture in the UK and is the source of many cultural references readily understood in English-speaking society, duh.)<P>Now, Marion Zimmer Bradley's <I>The Mists of Avalon</I>--THAT'S a book drenched in Wiccan values and symbolism. It was even a recent (made-for-TV) movie too. And told in a style far more like to LOTR, although its story is Arthurian. Why aren't people railing about that all over this board? My best guess is because it's not popular enough that the Symbolism Police have heard of it.