The best: Harry Potter or The lords of rings?

Question

I talk the books

For me Harry potter. The lords of rings is bored

Answer 1

There are too different things... one is made for children to teenagers and the other one is for teenagers to adults....
The only thing they have in common is magic and mystical creatures....
Movies: the lord of the rings
Books: harry potter

Answer 2

Harry Potter

Answer 3

Harry Potter

Answer 4

Harry Potter

Answer 5

They are very different books and written in very different styles. To compare them is not really fair on either. It's kind of like asking which is better a kitten or music. They are both fantastic in very different ways but not at all similar. Lord of the Rings is far more similar to the Illiad or Beowulf both in theme and style while Harry Potter is far more akin The Witches by Roald Dahl, or the BBC's fantastic range of Doctor Who novels.
Personally I have read Lord of the Rings 6 times and plan to read it several more times over my life, I doubt I will read each Harry Potter book more than twice unless I have children in which case I shall read it allowed to them when they are young. The reason why Lord of the Rings has a greater lasting appeal to me is that while each Harry Potter book is a part of the life one one boy Lord of the Rings is an epic and encompasses the whole spectrum of a world from songs in a village pub to the rise and fall of mighty empires.
I hope you appreciate my perspecive on your question, have a fun day!

Answer 6

Lord of the Rings every time, I have read both and Lord of the Rings is far better. In the harry potter books it is the same underlying story o look a bit of trouble and harry potter saves the day

Lord of the Rings has much more relevance to life today and History. WWII/War for Middle Earth, Sauron/Hitler gets together and almighty army, Saruman/Japan joins the dark side, People unite against Sauron/Hitler and Against insomoutable odds. We Win.
Factions: Gondor. The city of Minas Tirith in my opinion represents London. City of Kings, pomp and ceremony and Valour. and was heavliy bombarded. Like Minas tirith was. Gondor = Britain
Rohan: I would say rohan = Ireland/Wales/Scotland. It has a celtic feel about they are proud peoples and will defend and help at any cost
Mordor: I would say N.Korea or Iran or Some form of Terrorist Organisation. With a huge aray of weapons and arms and just full of evil.
Isengard. Same as mordor really.
Elves: I would relate them to Europe has whole, for what they have and do that is so magnificant.

However having saud that the books are remarkably similar in Creatures. Goblins, evil underground creatures, Dwarves, elves, etc..

Answer 7

The Lord Of The Rings is a classic, will Harry Potter still be as popular in 10 years time? 20? 50? only time will tell but i think they will age badly

Answer 8

Lord of the ring is great until they start off up the mountain in the finally book from then on it's just get up the hill won't you... oh look what are they doing climbing the hill there's a shock.. Harry Potter - Great first few and then it's all a bit predictable (cos it's a kids book)

Answer 9

This really is a battle of the titans, in one hand you have a literary classic that has inspired hundreds if not thousands of author's to write tales of a crusader fighting against all odds with a group of companions to do the world justice. In the other hand you have a book that has inspired a generation of young people to become readers and may have single handily brought fun to reading for hundreds of thousands of people in the last ten years. That said I believe Harry Potter has done more for people and therefor is the better of the two books even though the series is not complete. The real question is will J K Rowling continue to write books that intrigue the young and old alike and be able to have a solid career like Tolkien of King.

Answer 10

Lord of the Rings

Answer 11

This is a little bit like comparing apples and oranges. Each series is A+ for its type. The Harry Potter books were written primarily for young readers of the modern age. Its characters are cheeky youngsters who appeal to youngsters today. The stories move fast but have a lot of details, and the muggles are the sort of dull, bossy people, youngsters find many adults to be.

Lord of the Rings, on the other hand, was not written particularly for children. (Tolkien's earlier book, The Hobbit, was, and thus it is perhaps more comparable to the Harry Potter books.) Tolkien was a university scholar whose specialty was Anglo-Saxon (or Old English) literature, primarily folk literature originally transmitted by oral tradition. LOTR was a way for him to produce 20th century novels using the kind of characters and magical world that he found in this ancient literature of the Angles, Saxons, Celts, and the like. It is intended for more sophisticated adult readers, and in some editions even has scholarly addenda relating LOTR to Anglo-Saxon and Celtic traditions.

The movies based on LOTR, of course, had to be simplified; therefore, it's not surprising that they have achieved a more popular mass audience than the books themselves.

I have read and enjoyed both series, but I would have enjoyed the Harry Potter books more if my children were still young and I could share with them. On the other hand, I read and enjoyed LOTR as an adult. As much as I enjoyed the special effects of the movies and some of the acting, they were still a let-down for me after I had read the books.

The best? Both--judged on the basis of what their authors intended them to be.