Young Writers Society

They're both good, but I'm LotR all the way.

I do agree that LOTR is amazing. It's a lifetime's work of a genious. I know this. I defend Harry Potter because it gives me a quick escape from reality, because it's a modern work that I can readily relate without thinking too much. Is it so wrong to love a book because it gives my life a quick and easy retreat?

I have read the LOTR and all the Harry Potter books, I enjoyed reading them but I don't think I could choose between them because they are not in my list of favourite books. I really hated the movie versions especially Harry Potter *dies* it was not as good as the book was.

I don't think people should compare the books because they are very different, the only same thing about them is the witchcraft/magic.

My favourite is definetly Lotr, and i'd like to explain to the ignorant rabble who disagree with me,exactly why. Harry Potter is just a story, in essence a "quick-fix" and nothing more. Lotr is, however, so much more. i hear the whine: "there's too much discription" repeated, and to those that state this i say: that tolkiens brilliance derives from his descriptions, in that he isn't merely telling a story, but rather he is and has created a WORLD!Coupled with this are Tolkiens characters,real characters that speak to us, coz he doesnt focus on their being non-human (hobbits,dwarves,elve etc), rather he focuses on their differences and how they overcome them and forge friendships. Friendships that endured throughout.throughout seperation,battle,the corruption of power and pure evil.Tolkien also explores power, or more specifically how power corrupts + we see throughout the epic tale, the characters resist the lure of absolute power (frodo + the ring, Aragorn and kingship). Added to this tolkien tests the endurance of the human body and soul through heart-renching experiences.
Tolkien's is a tale spanning generations that explores themes still relevant today. Tolkien is regarded as the Godfather of epic fantasy and is a literary legend. Finally i have this to say: whenever a book is released today you will see it compared to Tolkien "rivals tolkiens works" or "doesn't measure up to Tolkien". J.K.Rowling is not mentioned.

I think, that, perchance thou art too harsh
If it were the way you explained, no book could compare to it! However, there are many great reads, and each of them has something unique and something someone can relate to. That is why some may not like the LR! In this modern age; the 21st century, we are not as exposed to the 'clean' fantastical elements found in the LR, which is 50 years old(and written by an English Professor/Linguist/Theologian etc.), and of course the spoken and written word has changed much since that time(just compare a teen born around the late 80's, to one born 60 years ago persay!), so despite the fact many may hound the LR for its 'boringness', they in turn don't deserve to be hounded, to be honest, it's quite true that more 'modern teens' can relate to Harry Potter, because it delves into areas which they understand and go through themselves!

I'll add that I am a LotR fan all the way!

Definitely LOTR. I was a huge fan of Tolkien's when I was a really lil girl, and I don't really like Rowling's writing style, although I do think she has some brilliant ideas.

As far as books, HP all the way! The HP movies, on the other hand, disgust me, and they have absolutely nothing on the masterpieces that are the LOTR movies. I actually enjoyed reading LOTR books as well, once I read them a second time. Tolkien's descriptions are unnecessarily long, and that really slows them down, but they really are good books, once you get past the twenty-odd pages that describe the grass on the hill in a place that really isn't significant to the plot. Victor Hugo is bad about that too.

I am a big fan of both Harry Potter and LOTR,both the books and movies, but I'd have to choose LOTR as my favorite. In my opinion, LOTR is definitley the better of the two in both the books and movies.LOTR is much more epic in scale and is a bit more serious.

As far a long-term survival of literature, I would have to say that LOTR will really survive for a much longer period, just because of the literary quality of the works. However, I find many of Tolkien's descriptions as boring as I find the HP4 movie painful to watch.

For short-term enjoyment, I say Harry Potter all the way. And I think the fifth and sixth books really are very good works of literature.

Now, as far as movies- LOTR overwhelmingly takes victory. Although I tire easily from the extended editions (don't take offense, JHs)

I think, Jessie, that you may have exagerated that a tad too much ^^;; As a matter of fact, I think there is a neat balance between dialogue and narrative. In fact, there might indeed more dialogue(just scan through a few pages). But yes, I too do think the LotR will survive longer, however! Harry Potter has made such a huge impact in the world of childrens(and even beyond that) literature, and it might become somewhat of an immortalised Grimms' classic! But LotR will indefinately endure, even as Beowulf or the epic tales of the past have. And because it is translated into many languages, and not just one or two, it will be preserved even the longer. In short, epics were made to last, else the Oddysey was writ yesterday!

I've read and watched LOTR and it isn't so great as most fans make it out to be and Harry Potter just doesn't interest me. I only read them and watched them because they were made into movies and people were so mad about them (at least a lot of people I know), if they hadn't had so much publicity I wouldn't have picked either to read or watch.

While I must contend with saying each to his or her own, I don't think you can say that the LotR isn't as great as most people make it to be-some people just love it, and if it weren't that great, as you say, why do they (including me) like it so much? Ok, maybe some people over-glamorize their love, and surely the movies fuel this, but many there are who despise the movies, and are content, yet love, the literature.

Just a question: haven't any of you LOTR haters had to read books like the Odyssey and the Scarlett Letter in school? I'm wondering because the way you talk about how terribly boring the LOTR is, it would make me think you have never had a proper english class. What about Brit. Lit.? American Lit.? I mean, come on guys, if you have been through high school or are currently in it, you must know that LOTR isn't the hardest, most boring thing you can read. I think everyone's making a bit too much of a fuss about a book which is much easier than many things you must read in high school english classes. And better too. So why not read it? And while descriptions help you visualize the world, you don't have to get hung up on them because its the characters and plot which make this such an incredible book to read.

Maybe the movies were so good you decided there is no way the books are better. Well, your missing out because while the movies captured the plot quite well, they took out a lot, including some rather large parts.

Yes, HP is easier to read. And gives you more instant pleasure (almost every page is enjoyable). But LOTR contains comments on humanity which go far deeper than any HP book. JRR Tolkein was in WWI. After coming back he was so traumatized that he released the stress by writing a book: the LOTR. And it shows. You can see the WWI influences in this book. Tolkein didn't understand the meaningless slaughter of human beings in WWI so he wrote the book in an attempt to give it meaning (I think thats why, but don't take my word for it. Read the book. Read about the author. Then start making some connections of your own. Theres enough to go around). I think that the reason the LOTR is so much darker than the Hobbit (besides it being aimed at adults rather than children) is this influence. The plot is great in this book, but its the small things that really matter: friendship (cross species, even. It shows how you when you stop looking at the differences between people and focus on the similarities, they are not so different after all), good vs. evil, how war changes a man (or woman), and having a clear sense of what your fighting for. Those are just a few of the things I got from the book.

I personally am a fan of Harry Potter. They really are great books, and I've grown with the books, so I can appreciate how the simple plot and happy characters have changed drastically. I enjoy JK's writing style, but she isn't very descriptive.

I have yet to read LotR. I have the Fellowship on my shelf, but its a bit tedious for me, and I'm know to read two hundred pages in an average day. I have trouble reading something if it doesn't catch my eye immediately, and I'm usually a good pick of books from just the first paragraph. I've never gotten a book I didn't enjoy (besides the Series of Unfortunate Events books. blech.) However, I feel a bit guilty for skipping such a great piece of literature. I think The Fellowship is the next book I will attempt to read.

Personally, I don't understand why so many LotR fans must look at the HP lovers and scoff. It's kind of hypocritical if you haven't read the books. I personally do not say "Oh HP is soooo much better than long LotR", because its very different and I haven't read it completely yet. Please LotR fans, even those that have read HP, don't look at us down your noses. We're just fans of different literature! THe same for HP fans. We can disagree without being hostile. I understand this being a Christian HP reader whose best friend often cites the devilish qualities of the books. Yet he wants so badly to see the movies....

I prefer Harry Potter to LotR. While I understand that part of what makes Tolkien such a genius the immense world he created and the mythology and all... He's extremely long winded. I struggled through The Two Towers and The Return of the King, and probably still couldn't tell you what they are about, despite having read each book more than once and seen the movies. I loved The Fellowship of the Rings, probably because I was actually able to follow the plot. I also loved The Hobbit. However, as a series, I greatly prefer the Harry Potter books. They're simpler, and they make more sense. I find the plotline of the later two LotR books to be so convoluted that I just didn't get it.
Also, IceCreamMan, I'm taking American Lit this year, and like every other eleventh grader I know, I read The Scarlett Letter. I loved it. So how does that fit in? Hawthorne's style is similarly long winded. However, the book is shorter, the plot less complex, and I just found it to be more interesting.