Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings

One question that often comes when people debate over Harry Potter is something to the effect of “Isn’t Harry Potter similar to The Lord of the Rings?” This has proved to be a thorn in the side of thise who are against Harry Potter being read. But truth be told, doing this is comparing apples and oranges, so to speak. There are three categories to this argument: Literary, Morals, and Dimensions.

Literary:

Many Harry Potter fans have proclaimed it as a literary masterpiece. Others, including renowned literature critics, say otherwise. For instance, Harold Bloom says of the Harry Potter books, “They’re just an endless string of clichés. I cannot think that does anyone good. That’s not Wind in the Willows. That’s not Through the Looking Glass…it’s really just slop.” [1]
While Mr. Bloom is, by far, the harshest on the literary value of Harry Potter, he is not alone in his thinking. Roger Sutton, editor for the Horn Book, a literary digest, called the series “critically insignificant.” and he went on to say that Rowling’s books are “nothing to get excited about.” [2]
These two are some of the top literary critics in the world and there are also many others who, though they are not often heard, speak just as clearly as Mr. Bloom and Mr. Sutton.

Morals:

Contrasting the morals between The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter should not be a debated area. The black-and-white morality portrayed in Tolkien’s works being contrasted with the grey-on-grey principles (if indeed they can be called that) shown in Rowling’s creation should not prove to be a problem. Many have heralded that Harry Potter is a about a great battle between good and evil. As I will show below, this is not the way it is! [Please note that the following bulleted information is found in Fantasy and Your Family by Richard Abanes.]

• Harry: is {1} a liar (Book II:128, 209; Book III: 155, 246, 283-285), {2} a thief (Book II: 186-188), {3} a cheater (Book IV: 324-329, 341), and {4} a law-breaker (I would include the references to these instances if there were not so many of them!).
• Ron: is {1} a liar (Book III: 289), {2} a lawbreaker (Book I: 153-158, 209-212, 237-241; Book II: 69, 164-165), and {3} he uses profanity (Book II: 259).
• Hermione: is {1} a thief (Book II: 186-188), {2} a cheater (Book IV: 338-339), and {3} a lawbreaker (Book II: 164-165).
• Other character like Mr. Weasley, Fred and George Weasley, the Leprechauns, and even the Headmaster of Hogwarts, Dumbledore himself commit wrongs throughout the books.
  In many cases, when Harry and his friends do something wrong, they often push away their guilt (if they have any) with their “ends justifies means” philosophy. And when they commit their sins, they are often rewarded and go unpunished.

Dimensions:

In this category, there are two major topics: placement and magic/magick. First, placement. The Lord of the Rings is set in the mythical world of Arda, in the lands of Middle-Earth, a place that is completely separated from our own universe. It is impossible for a Tolkien reader to completely imagine the world of Frodo Baggins. However, in Harry Potter, Hogwarts is placed in modern-day England, somewhere that is nearly believable and almost within reach of Harry Potter’s readers. Tolkien often said that fantasy should be in what he called the “Secondary World” while we should live in the “Primary World.” Basically, it means that fantasy should take place somewhere else, a place that doesn’t exist.

In the magic/magick area, I have already written an article regarding the magick in Harry Potter (Harry Potter: To Read or Not To Read?) So, I will not go in depth like I did the last time. The thing about the “magic” in Tolkien is that first of all, he never wanted to use that word but because he could find no other was stuck with it. Second of all, magic in Middle-Earth is not really magic, as it were. As Tolkien says in his Letters: “Their {i.e., the Elves, Maiar, and the Valar} “magic” is Art…And its object is Art not power, sub-creation not domination.” [3]

In conclusion, you have read all of the above explanations and I have but one last chart for you to look at. Below is a short contrast chart for you, the reader, to see the differences a little easier.

-Harry Potter – Moral relativism is rampant.
-Lord of the Rings – Good is good and evil is evil.

-Harry Potter – The enemy and the hero use the same weapons.
-Lord of the Rings – Only good will conquer the enemy’s weapon.

-Harry Potter – “Ends justify the means.”
-Lord of the Rings – The Truth will conquer all.

-Harry Potter – There is no “evil” (Harry, the lesser evil, battles the greater evil, Voldemort.
-Lord of the Rings – Evil exists and has a strong presence in Middle-Earth

-Harry Potter – Magic(k) is central to the theme and the plot.
-Lord of the Rings – “Magic” is used sparingly and only in the darkest of situations (and even then, it is used reluctantly).

[1] “‘Harry’ and Hype” – http://edition.cnn.com/2000/books/news/07/13/potter.hype

[2] Richard Abanes, Fantasy and Your Family, pg. 44

[3] Humphrey Carpenter, The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, pg. 146