harry potter book---

[Veronica]

Children's author J.K. Rowling has revealed that at least two characters will die in the seventh and final installment of her bestselling Harry Potter series, but was careful not to say who.

Children and adults are expected to rush and buy the final Harry Potter novel in their tens of millions when it is complete, and if the publication of the sixth book is anything to go by, secrecy surrounding the plot will be tight.

Rowling has already said that the final chapter of the seventh book was written long ago.

"The final chapter is hidden away, although it's now changed very slightly," she said in an interview broadcast on Monday on Britain's Channel 4. "One character got a reprieve, but I have to say two die that I didn't intend to die."

When asked to be more specific, she added: "No, I'm not going to commit myself, because I don't want the hate mail or anything else."

She did explain that she understood an author's desire to kill off the main character of a successful series.

"I've never been tempted to kill him (Harry) off before the end of book seven, because I always planned seven books and that's where I want to go.

"I can completely understand, however, the mentality of an author who thinks 'Well, I'm going to kill them off because that means there can be no non-author-written sequels ... so it will end with me, and after I'm dead and gone they won't be able to bring back the character'."

Rowling, 40, wrote the first Harry Potter adventure when she was an unemployed single mother, but has gone on to become one of the richest authors in history with a personal fortune estimated at more than $1 billion.

The Harry Potter series has sold an estimated 300 million copies worldwide.

 

[SnapeIsNotEvil!!!]

Check out the thread I made on the last book!!

Its on the first page of this forum.

 

[SnapeIsNotEvil!!!]

Sorry, here's the link to it. http://www.offtopicz.net/10274-deathly-hallows.html

 

[NicAuf]

LOTR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Harry Potter

And let the war begin

 

[Nyck]

I just started reading HP to see what the fuss was about. I have about a chapter left in the 1st book. Its an enjoyable light read

 

[GuesSAngel]

my cousin has a form of brain cancer called MLD and J.K. Rowling had sent him a letter and a white owl b/c he loved harry potter so much. It's really neat to read the letter. I think my dad has pictures of it, so I can post them.

 

[SnapeIsNotEvil!!!]

LOTR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Harry Potter

And let the war begin

Oh boy haha....

You do not want me to get started on this. But ok, this should be fun...

Why do you think LotR is better than HP?

 

[SnapeIsNotEvil!!!]

I just started reading HP to see what the fuss was about. I have about a chapter left in the 1st book. Its an enjoyable light read

Continue on to the later books. They get SO much more adult and more enjoyable. Like once you get to 4 onward, you'll see why a lot of people think the books are not just for children.

5 and 6 especially. Theyre the best 2.

 

[SnapeIsNotEvil!!!]

my cousin has a form of brain cancer called MLD and J.K. Rowling had sent him a letter and a white owl b/c he loved harry potter so much. It's really neat to read the letter. I think my dad has pictures of it, so I can post them.

That is awesome! Post them please!!

Sorry to hear about your cousin though. Is he doing alright?

 

[GuesSAngel]

he has his up and down days, here is his website. this doesn't have the pictures of the letter that was sent to him, i'll still have to get them from my dad.

CaringBridge.org - lucastheshrimpeater

 

[NicAuf]

Ok now about the whole LOTR vs. HP, this is just my opinon. This is why I personally find the LOTR books to be better than the HP books.

I'm not gonna go into that much cuz I don't feel like it. One reason I like LOTR better is that I feel it appeals to an older audience. Now I know I'm still young, but I have never really like books aimed at a younger audience, just a personal preference.

Another reason is that I feel JRR Tolkien loved his works more than Rowling. Yeah I know Rowling was poor before she wrote the books, but I still feel Tolkien loved his works more than Rowling loves hers. This is not to say that she doens't love her works, but come on Tolkien made up languages for his novels. These languages were fully developed, for the most part. Also Tolkien's works have much more depth than Rowlings. You could get lost in his works, there is so much to read bookwise.

I mean really those are the two reasons I love LOTR, and thats why they are better than HP in MY MIND. Don't think that I hate the HP series, its a great series. Its amazing to see younger kids really getting into reading. I praise Rowling for her work.

So LOTR trumps HP in my opinion, mostly based on person preference. We will have our different thoughts. The one thing we should have in common is mutual respect for both series.

 

[NicAuf]

Hey tell Lucas to hang in there, and I hope he gets better.

 

[Nyck]

*me thinsk of clerks 2 Star Wars vs LOTR scene*

EVEN THE FUCKING TREES WALKED IN THOSE MOVIES.

 

[NicAuf]

Clerks 2 amazing movie, Kevin Smith amazing movie maker. Even though Clerks 2 is amazing, my favorite Kevin Smith movie is Mallrats.

 

[SilentEyz]

I know I wil be buying the new HP book.. My daughter has them all.

 

[trope]

Another reason is that I feel JRR Tolkien loved his works more than Rowling. Yeah I know Rowling was poor before she wrote the books, but I still feel Tolkien loved his works more than Rowling loves hers. This is not to say that she doens't love her works, but come on Tolkien made up languages for his novels. These languages were fully developed, for the most part. Also Tolkien's works have much more depth than Rowlings. You could get lost in his works, there is so much to read bookwise.

Actually, it's the other way around. Tolkien didn't show his love my making up a language. He made up the languages first, and then created the story to showcase the language. Tolkien loved language, not the stories. The stories were just tools for him to introduce his language.

That said, I find Tolkien to be very wordy. I get bored if there's too much "Anne Rice Syndrome" (Margaret Attwood, Richard Adams, many more have it too. Basically it goes: so some important stuf happens, and blah blah blah... but THEN THERE WAS A CHAIR. And it was the most beautiful chair. The wood was made of the finest ebony, and the cushion had tiny black threads woven into it in the shape of the third letter of the alphabet, which is also the first letter of someone important's name, but that isn't really that important, because the chair creaked gently as it was sat upon and... well, you get the point).

On the other hand, I sort of like JK Rowling's stories and I understand her mass appeal. It's the same thing with The Da Vinci Code, I find (gimme a sec to make this comparison, haha). Both of them are brilliant, wonderful stories. But the mechanics of the writing drive me insane. "She did this. He did this. "Dialogue", he said somethingly. "Response", she said somethingly. There was this. This is there."

So, for JK Rowling, I find that she is a brilliant storyteller, but not a very good writer.
Tolkien was also a brilliant storyteller, but first a foremost, a lover of language. Sadly, that love of language translated into infodumps and pages upon pages of useless description.

I read the HP books out of obligation more than anything, and wince everytime she tags dialogues with excessive adverbs.

 

[NicAuf]

Well again personal preference. I love it when an author goes in amazing detail about the smallest things.

 

[Peter Parka]

I'm on the side of Tolkien in this debate. Harry Potter are good kids books but that's all they are. Tolkiens attention to detail is awesome!

 

[SnapeIsNotEvil!!!]

Though the books may be aimed at a younger audience, I don't think its fair to say that Harry Potter is a children's book. The series starts out that way, but as the books go on and the characters get older, it does turn much darker and much older. Plus it says something when half of the book's audience is made up of older teenagers/adults. It appeals to all ages which is something that not many books can do. Even Stephen King himself said that the books shouldn't be called "children's books."

I also find the characters in J.K. Rowling's books much more likeable (well in some cases anyways) and much more relatable to real life. I mean, I think anybody could relate a lot of the characters in the books to people they have known in real life. Who at one time or another hasn't known a klutzy kid who's always picked on and doesn't have many friends, like Neville Longbottom ?And who hasn't had a mean and bullying teacher like Professor Snape? Or an arrogant snob who you'd just like to beat the shit out of like Draco Malfoy? The list goes on and on.

J.K. Rowling's setting is also a wonderful part of the story. She takes this whole magical world and instead of making a whole seperate universe for them, she keeps them on Earth, right next to our own, just hidden from us. She writes in such a way where one could actually believe for a second that there is this whole world, going on right next to us, with its own politics and problems, that we're completely oblivious to. I'm not saying that J.R.R. Tolkien's world is less likeable or anything, but the whole seperate world where earth doesn't seem to exist has been done millions of times before.

Those are just a few reasons why I like the Harry Potter series better than the Lord of the Rings.

 

[SnapeIsNotEvil!!!]

Oh, just another reason why I like Harry Potter more than the Lord of the Rings that I forgot to mention above.

I like the villains in Harry Potter much more than in the Lord of the Rings. Don't get me wrong, I think that Sauron and Sauruman are awesome villains, but I think the ones in Harry Potter are much cooler because they have a lot more depth and reason to be evil instead of just trying to rule a kingdom and such.

You have Voldemort, who's mother died right after giving birth to him in an orphanage. He grew up there for 11 years, his father not even trying to find him, and he was always unloved. That's got to affect a kid's future. So obviously he became an angry and bitter child and a truly evil person when he got older.

Then there's Snape, who lived in a household where his father abused his mother and him. When he got into school, he was bullied and teased for no reason at all and hardly had any friends, so of course that was all going to affect him too and turn him into the angry, and bitter, and possibly evil man that he is now.

And Draco Malfoy was brought up his whole life in a pureblood fanatical household, probably being told all the time by his parents how much better they are than everyone else. Of course he was going to fall into that lifestyle and way of life himself. Then in book 5 when his father was throwin in jail, and when he joined the Death Eaters in book 6, he's under threat by Voldemort to do what he wants or he's going to murder Draco's family, so of COURSE Draco is going to turn out evil.

And not just them, but the other villains all have reasons too: Bellatrix, Lucius, Crouch, Wormtail, etc. etc. They just don't commit random acts of evil for no reason. Things in their lives made them the way they are.


Oh and random facts: Voldemort was recently voted number 1 villain, beating Sauron, Lex Luther, etc. etc.

And polls show that more Americans know who Harry, Ron, and Hermione are than they know who Tony Blair is, lmao.