I've seen the movies, but i enjoy reading books more. Which books would be better for reading, the Harry Potter series or the Lord of the Rings series?
2007-01-15 14:07:48 · 18 answers · asked by adlaz 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Books & Authors
Read them both. I'd go ahead and read Lord of the Rings first, because it's a shorter series and all of the books are finished. The seventh Harry Potter book isn't out yet, so if you read fast you may be done with all the other books then have to wait. Personally, I like Lord of the Rings better, but still, read both series definitely.
2007-01-15 14:13:08 · answer #1 · answered by Jess 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think both are worth reading, especially if you enjoy reading books more than seeing the movies. Both are much better in their published forms than in their screen forms.
I have read the Harry Potter series a number of times (I've lost track how many) and have read The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings once (it took me 6 months to get from the beginning of The Hobbit to the end of Return of the King).
Please don't think that my single reading of LotR is any indication of the quality of the story. I love the story a lot, I just had a hard time with the language and all the time spent on description, but I'm very glad I have read it and do plan to read it again sometime soon (hopefully more quickly the second time around!)
If you are looking for something to really sink your teeth into, start with Lord of the Rings. If you're looking for something to read in spare time, etc. I'd start with Harry Potter.
Happy reading!
2007-01-15 14:39:05 · answer #2 · answered by Kate 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There's not even a question. Lord of the Rings. Harry Potter is good, don't get me wrong, but there really isn't any comparison between these two. It's like comparing Mozart to the Beatles. They're both good in their own right, but Lord of the Rings is a long standing literary classic. Harry will eventually reach that point, but he hasn't earned that status yet. Tolkien can be very difficult to read for someone who is unaccustomed to his long winded descriptive style. But if you kinda skim over the descriptions of landscapes and poetry, it's easier to get through.
2016-05-24 19:43:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you are 15 or younger, Harry Potter, otherwise, LOTR.
The Harry Potter series does touch on a number of deeper issues, mostly coming-of-age stuff, but some time is spent on valid reasons to distrust authority, particularly school-rulemaking authority, the nature of friendship, and the potential for good and evil in each of us. It mostly tells the stories, but it definitely qualifies as literature with multiple levels of meaning. You do have to think about it to notice, however.
LOTR, on the other hand, tells the story AND weaves in the layers, all at once. You "catch" the meaning on several levels at once. One or two readings is all it takes to tune in to the environmental issues raised by the Ents, the conflict with our notions of "progress", the inherent tendency among men to lust for power and risk not only their own lives and fortunes to get it, but the lives, fortunes, and well-being of others as well. One reading is all it takes with respect to the return to the shire and the risk a nation runs of sending its fighters off to war and risking opening domestic governance to the unscrupulous.
If you have no idea what I'm talking about, it's because the movies are too short to capture all of this. With LOTR, you really need to read the books to get it all, and it will take several times through before you dig out the literary gems. Harry Potter is an easier read and the literary concepts are closer to the surface.
Both are worthwhile; so is "The Hobbit". The "Silmarillion" (a prequel to BOTH the Hobbit and LOTR) is a much tougher read; it essentially is historical fiction written as epic poetry, making it less accessible than either The Hobbit or LOTR.
Hope this helps!
2007-01-15 14:48:52 · answer #4 · answered by Captain Obvious! 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Harry Potter! I never enjoyed reading Lord of the Rings, even though I absolutely loved the movies. It just seemed to drag on and on...
2007-01-15 14:20:21 · answer #5 · answered by Britt 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think that the Harry Potter series is an "easier" read. I'd start with Harry Potter, then go on to the LOTR series. They're both good. If you like audio books, check out the Harry Potter series narrated by Jim Dale or the LOTR series read by Robert Inglis.
2007-01-15 14:20:17 · answer #6 · answered by smm1974 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Harry Potter series, I've seen both set's of movies.
2007-01-15 16:45:06 · answer #7 · answered by amazon 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think it would depend on your reading ability and experience. LOTR is more difficult reading and has lots of Middle Earth historical references, languages etc.
The Harry Potter series are lighter reading but still fabulous. I have to credit both authors for incredible imaginations and being fantastic writers that pull you into the story.
2007-01-15 14:21:06 · answer #8 · answered by Alan Anderson 1 · 4⤊ 0⤋
i like harry potter better from the books
but i like lord of the rings movies
2007-01-15 14:15:59 · answer #9 · answered by ohdearmeEe 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
harry potter is an easy read, compared to lord of the rings. lord of the rings takes time to interpret the symbols behind the characters and scenes.
harry potter's audience targets the young. i don't think children would be able to appreciate lord of the rings because of the heavy substance and themes.
2007-01-15 16:50:12 · answer #10 · answered by yawmee 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋