Harry Potter V Lord of the Rings? (Page 3)

LOTR is meant for a more mature audience - someone who is willing to sink in their teeth into a book with a complex plot and an old-fashioned style of narration with poetry and song intervowen into the prose at regular intervals. The poetry itself tells you a lot of the story. Its very rich in detail and rather complex.

HP captures a universal audience - people who like moving quickly through the novel without really getting into the history or details from the very beginning. The language is simpler too and more modern.

If people wish to start reading LOTR, I recommend reading "The Hobbit" first. It is much simpler and more like an Enid Blyton style book. The Hobbit will help you understand LOTR much much better as well.

I love HP, but now I have begun to read LOTR once more and I'm beginning to see why its called a classic. It is fabulous as well.

There are some books which are meant to be read when you get older. You appreciate them more.

I agree!!I think the Narnia and Harry Potter series are geared more towards young readers and are easier for them to read. I tried reading Tolkien when I was a kid and just couldn't do it. . That's not to say that all children are incapable of reading LOTR but I remember reading the Narnia books in one sitting and not being able to get past chapter one of the LOTR. It wasn't until I was older that I was able to read Tolkien and become a fan of LOTR

I like LOTR.It's a nice book.But Harry Potter is  awesome!It's simply incomparable!

Edited by devashree410 - 21 April 2007 at 3:53am

HP
wen i read LOTR it was hard 2 understand, i had 2 read it ova n ova agen, then i understood it

i honestly havent read LOTR.... but i looooove HP