Harry Potter and The Stolen Plot...

[Rumil]

Goodness me, this is an old thread!

Maybe one day I'll figure out what I was trying to say about sleeping dragons!

HP versus LoTR is a bit of an unnecessary fight in my opinion. Both use traditional archetypical characters, eg Gandalf/Dumbledore/Merlin/Obi Wan Kenobi, and plots - orphan saves world from ultimate baddy, so its not that surprising that similarities emerge. Baddies - Nazgul and Dementors - are dark shadowy figures, but so are traditional ghosts, ghouls etc, and bright yellow figures just don't fit as bad-guys!

Maybe this is one of the reasons that both books are so accessible?

But the differences are marked as well, JRRT was far more interested in philology, landscape and history and the broad sweep of time and story in his sub-created world. Rowling grafts the fantasy on top of the familiar muggle world that we all know, and is more concerned with feelings and relationships. Tolkien rarely if ever says what his characters are feeling, we get to know them through their words and deeds. Rowling, in common with most modern authors, explicitly shows what Harry is feeling, a very different approach. She also draws on traditional boarding school stories (going right back to the Victorian 'Tom Brown's Schooldays') as much if not more than Fantasy.

For me, there's room for both on my shelf, but it's the Tolkien that I'd save from a house fire by a long way!

[Nerwen]

Oh, hello, "tumil"!

Originally Posted by Rumil

Goodness me, this is an old thread!

Maybe one day I'll figure out what I was trying to say about sleeping dragons!

Just that the Latin motto on the Hogwarts crest (Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus) is probably inspired by "Never laugh at live dragons".

Originally Posted by Rumil

I'm sure JK Rowling put these snippets in to pay homage to the great man.

Which is an important distinction– authors can put in those kind of minor references as a tribute. If the line appeared as dialogue in a quest fantasy starring a little person, that might qualify as theft.

So I don't know why that particular post sent the Potter fangirl bananas, actually. Incidentally, I'm rather curious as to where the young lady got all her theories about Merlin and fascism from, since I'm pretty sure she was bluffing about having read "Lord of the Rings".

[Inziladun]

This is indeed an interesting thread.

I started reading the HP books around 2003, mainly because my wife had read them, and I found myself conscripted to go with her and see the movies.
I was surprised to find myself enjoying them, though it got a bit predictable by the time Books 6 and 7 rolled around.

Originally Posted by Rumil

Tolkien rarely if ever says what his characters are feeling, we get to know them through their words and deeds. Rowling, in common with most modern authors, explicitly shows what Harry is feeling, a very different approach.

That's a good observation. Rowling certainly does spend a lot time explaining thoughts and motivations. But, to be fair, she really only does it with Harry.

Tolkien does that some too though, doesn't he? Frodo and Sam come to mind. Frodo, in pretty much the first half of FOTR, and Sam in ROTK.
Not to mention Bilbo in The Hobbit. But there are certainly differences in the ways the information is presented to the reader from one author to the other.

Originally Posted by Rumil

For me, there's room for both on my shelf, but it's the Tolkien that I'd save from a house fire by a long way!

A nice summary! Rowling doesn't have the narrative or linguistic chops to stand with Tolkien at the end of the day (I'd never have spent ten years hanging around a J.K.Rowling forum!), but the HP books are pleasant enough for what they are.