Keith Ward's Blog - Posts Tagged "harry-potter"
Lord of the Rings vs. Harry Potter, Round One: the World
I haven't posted here in a looonnnngggg time. For various reasons, but I'm back. I'm about to add a fantasy book that I finished recently. In the meantime, I'm starting a new series of blog posts on Lord of the Rings vs. Harry Potter. Hope you enjoy it, and join in.
“Harry Potter is to my generation, what “The Lord of the Rings” was to my parents’ generation.” These words were written by my daughter Megan on the wonderful blog she and her friend Katie maintain. And I think she’s absolutely right.
J.K. Rowling’s “Harry Potter” series has had an incalculably large effect on the current generation. Pretty much everyone has either a) read the books, b) seen the movies or c) done both. I’d be willing bet that “c” is the answer for the majority.
For me (51), the Lord of the Rings was the massively influential book series. It started previous to my generation, but its success spanned several generations. I suspect Harry Potter will as well.
The Father of Us All
LotR captured my imagination like nothing else, before or since. Without LotR, remember, there is no “Game of Thrones” or “Name of the Wind” or “Dragonriders of Pern” or, likely, Harry Potter. In that way, Tolkien is the father of us all.
Harry Potter has similarly spawned a host of imitators; like LotR descendants, these are all pretty much pale copies written by lesser authors.
Given the popularity and influence of both, I thought it would be fun to compare the two series in a number of categories. Let me say at the outset that I have no dog in this fight: I love them both, and have read both of them to my family. I’ve also read them myself multiple times, and have seen all the movies multiple times. So I’m not here to raise one by tearing down the other. (I’m also including “The Hobbit” in the Lord of the Rings series.) They’re both great in their own ways, but each also has their flaws. So please don’t think I’m hating on one when I say the other is superior in some way. That’s the Internet disease at work, and you need to resist it.
Hogwarts vs. Middle-earth
We’ll start with the worlds themselves. It’s Middle-earth vs. Hogwarts. Yeah, there are other places in the Potter world like Hogsmeade and Diagon Alley, but it’s really all about Hogwarts. In this showdown, it’s a first-round knockout: Middle-earth is an entire universe as richly detailed as any. Just look at the languages alone, which have entire vocabularies. Tolkien has multiple appendixes devoted to the various races, and an entire boring book — “The Silmarillion” — devoted to backstory. (Hey, just because I love Tolkien doesn’t mean I’m blind to his weaknesses).
There is no single location in LotR that’s anywhere near as detailed, of course, as Hogwarts. It’s a fantastic place, with surprises everywhere. Secret passages, ghosts on horseback (and another one that lives in a toilet), talking pictures… What’s not to love? But it’s just one place.
Middle-earth has serious history, and we visit most of it in the course of the novels, from the northwest corner of Hobbiton to the southeast corner, where Gollum grabs the ring from Frodo and falls into the Cracks of Doom. Through LotR and The Hobbit, we experience wonders everywhere. Each region has a distinct feel, and its own well-developed past. Fangorn is a forest, just like Lothlorien, but they are not anything alike. This distinctiveness runs throughout the books, and provides a richness that only deepens as the books are re-read.
The Verdict
To me, this is the most one-sided win between the two books: LotR crushes Hogwarts.
But that isn’t to say that Harry’s world is lame. Not at all. Who wouldn’t want to take the Hogwarts Express to the castle, and have Hagrid row them across the lake to the entrance? But if I had a choice of being transported to either place to live for the next 10 years, it’s Middle-earth, hands-down. I don’t even have to consider for five seconds which place I’d rather be.
What do you think? Make your best counter-argument!
“Harry Potter is to my generation, what “The Lord of the Rings” was to my parents’ generation.” These words were written by my daughter Megan on the wonderful blog she and her friend Katie maintain. And I think she’s absolutely right.
J.K. Rowling’s “Harry Potter” series has had an incalculably large effect on the current generation. Pretty much everyone has either a) read the books, b) seen the movies or c) done both. I’d be willing bet that “c” is the answer for the majority.
For me (51), the Lord of the Rings was the massively influential book series. It started previous to my generation, but its success spanned several generations. I suspect Harry Potter will as well.
The Father of Us All
LotR captured my imagination like nothing else, before or since. Without LotR, remember, there is no “Game of Thrones” or “Name of the Wind” or “Dragonriders of Pern” or, likely, Harry Potter. In that way, Tolkien is the father of us all.
Harry Potter has similarly spawned a host of imitators; like LotR descendants, these are all pretty much pale copies written by lesser authors.
Given the popularity and influence of both, I thought it would be fun to compare the two series in a number of categories. Let me say at the outset that I have no dog in this fight: I love them both, and have read both of them to my family. I’ve also read them myself multiple times, and have seen all the movies multiple times. So I’m not here to raise one by tearing down the other. (I’m also including “The Hobbit” in the Lord of the Rings series.) They’re both great in their own ways, but each also has their flaws. So please don’t think I’m hating on one when I say the other is superior in some way. That’s the Internet disease at work, and you need to resist it.
Hogwarts vs. Middle-earth
We’ll start with the worlds themselves. It’s Middle-earth vs. Hogwarts. Yeah, there are other places in the Potter world like Hogsmeade and Diagon Alley, but it’s really all about Hogwarts. In this showdown, it’s a first-round knockout: Middle-earth is an entire universe as richly detailed as any. Just look at the languages alone, which have entire vocabularies. Tolkien has multiple appendixes devoted to the various races, and an entire boring book — “The Silmarillion” — devoted to backstory. (Hey, just because I love Tolkien doesn’t mean I’m blind to his weaknesses).
There is no single location in LotR that’s anywhere near as detailed, of course, as Hogwarts. It’s a fantastic place, with surprises everywhere. Secret passages, ghosts on horseback (and another one that lives in a toilet), talking pictures… What’s not to love? But it’s just one place.
Middle-earth has serious history, and we visit most of it in the course of the novels, from the northwest corner of Hobbiton to the southeast corner, where Gollum grabs the ring from Frodo and falls into the Cracks of Doom. Through LotR and The Hobbit, we experience wonders everywhere. Each region has a distinct feel, and its own well-developed past. Fangorn is a forest, just like Lothlorien, but they are not anything alike. This distinctiveness runs throughout the books, and provides a richness that only deepens as the books are re-read.
The Verdict
To me, this is the most one-sided win between the two books: LotR crushes Hogwarts.
But that isn’t to say that Harry’s world is lame. Not at all. Who wouldn’t want to take the Hogwarts Express to the castle, and have Hagrid row them across the lake to the entrance? But if I had a choice of being transported to either place to live for the next 10 years, it’s Middle-earth, hands-down. I don’t even have to consider for five seconds which place I’d rather be.
What do you think? Make your best counter-argument!
