[HPforGrownups] Tolkien vs. Rowling

[Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch]

No: HPFGUIDX 32304



--- luminary_extraordinaire <ktchong73 at yahoo.com>
wrote:
> The Lord of the Rings is at its best in imagining
> Middle Earth--its 
> wonderous places and encounters.  J.R.R. Tolkien is
> a master in 
> inventing the magnificient epic world, its races and
> creatures, and 
> the histories and languages of its inhabitants. 
   No argument. Tolkien is undeniably the champion
subcreator of all time. 

> However, 
> characterization is NOT a strong point of Tolkien.
> With very few 
> exceptions, Tolkien's characters rarely grow.  There
> is very little 
> narrative arc (i.e., character growth and
> development) in Tolkien's 
> books.  Of course, the positions and placements of
> the characters 
> change, but they remain essentially the SAME
> characters with the SAME 
> personalities throughout the whole book.  For
> example, Samwise 
> started out as a FAITHFUL, LOYAL servant of Frodo,
> and he ended up as 
> a FAITHFUL, LOYAL friend of Frodo.  Aragorn started
> out as a NOBLE 
> ranger, and he ended up as a NOBLE king. 

   The transition from servant to friend is actually a
rather large one. All the Hobbits are transformed by
their part in the War of the Ring. Merry, Pippin and
Samwise become strong, responsible leaders of their
people and poor Frodo is changed to the point that he
literally can't go home again.  
   As for Aragorn, considering the fact he is
eighty-seven years old when we first meet him I would
pretty much expect his character to be fully formed.
Agreed he doesn't change but what does change is our
perception of him as we learn more about him. He
enters the tale as a slightly sinister stranger,
becomes a trusted friend and protector and finally a
powerful leader of the Forces of Good.


> I can see the lack of narrative arc is a reason why
> Peter Jackson 
> (the director of the Rings movies) made changes to
> the charactes.  In 
> the Fellowship of the Ring movie, Frodo started out
> as a scared, weak 
> hobbit.  However, he will slowly "grow" as a
> character during the 
> course of the next two films.  The three movies will
> gradually 
> develop Frodo into a strong and brave hero.  

   Excuse me? That's exactly what happens in the
book!!!!

Peter Jackson "scale 
> back" the character of Frodo to allow Frodo the
> "room" to grow as a 
> character.  I'd have to say it's a wise choice on
> Peter Jackson's 
> part.  (of course, legions of Tolkien fans are
> complaining and 
> insisting that in the movie Frodo should have faced
> the Black Riders 
> alone and bravely at the fork.) 

   I think you mean ford, and in both cases Frodo is
saved by the flood. His defiance of the Nazgul in the
book is empty, he couldn't have resisted them - and
there is some question whether Arwen could stand off
all nine at once either. Personally I think the Frodo
in the movie is almost identical to the character in
the book. 

> Harry Potter books, on the other hand, are better in
> 
> characterization.   Rowling's "magical" world and
> its settings are 
> pale in comparison to Tolkien's.

  Like whose aren't? 

  However, Rowling
> is much, much 
> better than Tolkien in creating lively, endearing,
> realistic 
> characters who develop and grow over time.  

   Maybe. The Hobbits and Gandalf are pretty lively,
and the former at least to grow and change. 
   I would agree however that character growth is far
more central to the HP books than LOTR since the
former are 'coming of age' stories, and the latter an
epic quest. Really it's like comparing apples and
oranges. As somebody else has observed they are
different kinds of books written for different ends. 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com