Lord of the Rings vs. Harry Potter

Year: 2001 - 2003 Year: 2000 - 2004 Rating: PG-13 Rating: PG Lord of the Rings Overall Evaluation: 10.0 Significance Suppositions Story Style 10.0 / 10 10.0 / 10 10.0 / 10 10.0 / 10 Harry Potter Overall Evaluation: 3.0 Significance Suppositions Story Style 3.0 / 10 1.0 / 10 7.0 / 10 6.0 / 10 Click HERE for evaluation criteria.

Introduction

I think enough ink has been spilled over both of these series that detailed comments would be superfluous. So I am going to be writing on both series in general and not making any fine distinctions between any of the films within each one. Hopefully this will help shed some light on a proper Christian perspective on them as it is often confused (by both sides).

Styles

The LOTR trilogy is rated PG-13 for epic battle sequences and some scary images. LOTR is an excellent depiction of good as good, and evil as evil. Nothing gratuitous, nothing sugarcoated.

The HP series is, so far, rated PG for some scary moments, some creature violence, and mild language. However, HP blurs the line between good and evil by keeping the "good" dark as well as the evil. HP also uses vulgarity, violence, and gross-out scenes simply for their humor value.

Stories

LOTR is without question one of the, if not simply THE, greatest fantasy stories of all time. Tolkien was a genius on many levels - a brilliant mythologist and linguist. He basically created the fantasy genre with this work. Not only are the intricate plotlines engrossing, but LOTR follows the true meta-narrative of history: the battle of good vs. evil, purity vs. corruption . . . and its story is timeless because of that.

Even many fans of the books agree that HP is not terribly well done (and critics say they are getting worse). HP is more of a popular phenomenon than a literary triumph, but the stories are pretty good overall entertainment-wise. Most of what makes HP entertaining is taken from a now fairly standard fantasy genre anyway (which itself is derived from the success of LOTR). Certainly they will not go down in history like LOTR already has.

Suppositions

The biggest difference between LOTR and HP is here. This is also where the most mistakes have been made in analysis as people have misunderstood the relation of the worldviews to fantasy elements. Overly-simplistic reviews do not adequately address the differences and thus conclude that the story elements cancel one another out and cannot function as means of comparison. This is simply false.

LOTR is not our world. Middle Earth is a fantasy world - a subcreation - where "magic" is part of the created order. Certain creatures (e.g. elves) are endowed with what appear to be magic powers but these really flow from the creature's nature. The "wizard" Gandalf, for example, is a Maia - this is not a "wizard" by the occult definition, but that is the closest word in English that can be used efficiently (Tolkien had the same problem with the word "magic"). In LOTR "magic" corrupts the non-magical (e.g. humans and hobbits). The magic in LOTR is fictional and bears little resemblance to any real practices or practitioners. "Magic" in LOTR is not neutral - good creatures use different powers than evil ones. Further, bad magic is not overcome by learning more magic - it is defeated by the strength of a good will.

HP, on the other hand, is the opposite on every count. Harry lives in our world (Rowling has said this herself). Magic in HP is a human ability residing in all of us (even outside the book), and those who refuse to practice it ("Muggles") are ignorant or simply scared of magic and are vilified. Magic is a neutral power in HP, so evil uses of magic are countered by other magic, not by strength of character. Further, in HP the magic involves real occult practices, symbols, and practitioners. In HP's world the occult is real and powerful and only the ignorant or scared do not wish to use it. This is not myth being used to point to the true, as in C. S. Lewis' Narnia chronicles or Tolkien's LOTR - it is occultism for its own sake - as well as an acknowledged gateway into the actual practice.

Significance

The second biggest difference is here. LOTR is a perfectly moral (and realistic given its suppositions) tale that exalts virtue, honor, and goodness. Evil actions are not rewarded but result in defeat and corruption, while good actions ultimately end in success. In the end, character and will to do right are what overpower the corrupt "magic" of evil - this is not fighting fire with fire.

The message of HP is that using the occult is fine as long as you are a "good" person - whatever that means. HP presents a pragmatic view of morality - if it works it is good. Thus the children feel free to cheat, lie, act rudely, and disobey authority (especially adults, who are portrayed as naive and rather bumbling). So long as they do these things "for good reasons" they are rewarded even if their actions were wrong. Yes, they fight evil so that's good - but of course defining evil is not as easy in HP due to the pragmatism inherent in the story. Both moral relativism and pragmatism are failed systems and thus cannot be counted as acceptable, and certainly not when conjoined with occultism! Only the fact that the really evil guys lose saves this from an even worse rating.