Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings

[goldfoy]

No: HPFGUIDX 107652

I came to HPFGU while searching the web for comments and opinions 
about something that struck me after seeing the film version of the 
Prisoner of Azkaban. I was surprised to find that what seemed to me 
so obvious was not a subject for general discussion, so I offer the 
following for your consideration.


All writers are influenced by other authors to a greater or lesser 
extent, sometimes without even being aware of their influence. I 
believe that one of the main influences, conscious or otherwise, on 
the Harry Potter series is The Lord of the Rings. There are some 
interesting parallels between J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter and
J.R.R. 
Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, quite apart from both authors being 
published under their initials.

* The basic plot of both concerns the quest to prevent an extremely 
powerful "Dark Wizard" (Sauron/Lord Voldemort) from taking over the 
world. 
* In both works the "Dark Wizard" has suffered a defeat which has 
reduced them to a spirit state, both stories revolve around their 
attempt to regain corporeal form and their full power. 
* Both "Dark Wizards" are countered by an equally powerful "White 
Wizard" (Gandalf/Professor Dumbledore) who prefers to act as a 
counsellor and support to others, rather than taking the lead in 
preventing the "Dark Wizard" from taking power. 
* In both stories the main burden of the quest falls on those 
apparently least able to fulfil it (Hobbits/children).
 
Keen readers of Tolkien will immediately object that, unlike Gandalf, 
Sauron is not a Wizard (Istari). However as both Sauron and Gandalf 
are Maiar the analogy is surely valid. 

There are other similarities, some superficial such as the encounter 
with a giant spider (Shelob/Aragog), problems with aggressive trees 
(Old Man Willow/The Whomping Willow), or the similarity in appearance 
and effect of the Nazgul in their Black Rider incarnation and the 
Dementors. But others are more substantial like the introduction of a 
major character who is killed off prematurely (Boromir/Sirius Black), 
or the character who would be expected to play a leading role in the 
opposing the "Dark Wizard" but in the event proves to be totally 
inadequate (Denethor/Cornelius Fudge). 

Although these parallels are striking it would clearly be wrong to 
suggest that the Harry Potter series is just a retelling of The Lord 
of the Rings story set in a boarding school. The fact that
Tolkien's 
creation has spawned a whole genre of fantasy fiction is proof of his 
influence on twentieth century fiction. In an interview J.K. Rowling 
has confirmed that she has read The Lord of the Rings so she is at 
least aware of the basic plot of The Lord of the Rings, even if she 
had not studied it closely. J.K. Rowling has definitely paralleled 
Tolkien in one respect; there have been a multitude of books written 
seeking to emulate her success. 

Similar parallels could probably be found in the works of
Tolkien's 
friend and fellow Inkling, C.S. Lewis, but I will leave others to 
find them. 

Given these remarkable parallels it would not be unreasonable to 
suggest that the conclusion to the Harry Potter series would be 
similar to that of The Lord of the Rings.

* In Lord of the Rings, Frodo manages to take the Ring to Sammoth 
Naur in the flanks of Orodruin but finally succumbs to the Ring and 
fails to cast it into the fire where it would be destroyed. 
* The task of destroying the Ring is unexpectedly completed by 
accident, Gollum takes the Ring from Frodo and falls into the fire in 
his excitement at regaining the Ring taking it with him to its final 
destruction. 
* After Sauron's destruction, Frodo, who has received many hurts
in 
his journey to destroy the Ring, goes into exile in the west with the 
elves where his wounds are healed.

There are perfectly good practical reasons why the conclusion of the 
Harry Potter series should be similar to that of The Lord of the 
Rings. 

* The books are principally intended for children and young adults. 
* The hero of such a book is likely to be seen as a potential role-
model for its intended audience. 
* It would be undesirable for such a role-model to be a murderer, 
even if the murder was totally justified and carried out purely in 
self-defence.

It would obviously be preferable for Harry Potter to be reluctant to 
actually kill Lord Voldemort because of his inherent goodness. His 
reluctance would put him at Lord Voldemorts mercy, but before Lord 
Voldemort can kill him someone else is able to save him by destroying 
Lord Voldemort. 

When Lord Voldemort is finally destroyed Harry Potter's link with
him 
is broken and so are his magical powers. Harry Potter will therefore 
have to go into exile with the muggles because he is reduced to the 
level of a Squib. 

The problem with this ending is that it seems to contradict the first 
prophecy: 

"The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches

born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month 
dies

and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power 
the Dark Lords knows not

and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live 
while the other survives

the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the 
seventh moon dies
" 

This would seem to imply that only Harry Potter can kill Lord 
Voldemort. However it could be interpreted as meaning that for Harry 
Potter or Lord Voldemort to live as a wizard with their full powers 
one must kill the other and in so doing gain the power held by the 
other. This interpretation would also imply that if one does not kill 
the other and one of them dies then the other will be unable to 
continue living as a wizard. 

It also clear that Lord Voldemort is not immortal and there is every 
reason to believe that he could be killed in an accident or some 
similar circumstance. 

It would be easy to create a scenario where Lord Voldemort lures 
Harry Potter somewhere for a final confrontation the logical 
conclusion of which would be the death of one of them at the hand of 
the other. Then unexpectedly, while they are intent on each other, 
someone else is able to step in and somehow destroy Lord Voldemort. 

J.K Rowling has already introduced a location where Lord Voldemort 
could be destroyed by someone other than Harry Potter and has given a 
hint as to how this could be achieved. Through Professor Dumbledore 
she has even given a hint as to which character will fulfil the role 
of Gollum and actually destroy Lord Voldemort. It would be reasonable 
to suppose that they would die in the process. 

Having not fulfilled the terms of the prophecy Harry Potter loses his 
magical powers and has to go and make his way in the world of 
muggles, a situation eased by the gold inherited from his parents and 
Sirius Black. 

This ending has the advantage of leaving Harry Potter as a hero 
untarnished by murder. 

The book ends as it began with Harry Potter in exile which seems to 
be a natural and satisfying conclusion to the story, though this 
ending would arguably be more C.S. Lewis than Tolkien. 

I believe that the parallels between the two works will be reinforced 
in Book 6 when Cornelius Fudge is replaced as Minister for Magic by 
someone who appears at first sight to be a most unlikely candidate 
for the job. When we first meet Denethor's replacement it as the 
disreputable, travel stained, Strider, not the noble born Aragorn. 
Again a superficial similarity but still worth noting. 

And don't forget, it's Sam who gets the girl, not Frodo