|
Post by skinnykitty on Jun 16, 2013 19:48:46 GMT -5
hi my name is skinnykitty(not really) and i am 14 years, i love to read, i could not tell you how may books i have read because i have lost count lets just say it over a five hundred. i love to draw and paint, almost anything artsy i enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by Mod Blackbolt on Jun 16, 2013 20:39:59 GMT -5
Welcome to the forums, hope you enjoy your stay
|
|
|
Post by Snowfeather on Jun 16, 2013 22:10:26 GMT -5
Hello ^^ Welcome to the forums
|
|
|
Post by Dawnsky on Jun 17, 2013 14:08:12 GMT -5
Welcome! I love to read too!
|
|
|
Post by skinnykitty on Jun 17, 2013 14:37:00 GMT -5
thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Snowfeather on Jun 17, 2013 16:49:31 GMT -5
Whats your favorite book series?
|
|
|
Post by Willowleaf on Jun 19, 2013 22:42:46 GMT -5
Welcome! Nice to meet you!
|
|
|
Post by skinnykitty on Jun 20, 2013 11:33:31 GMT -5
snowfeather, i like lots of series, i'm never good at picking favorites. i like harry potter, warriors, and i'm starting the lord of the rings. what's your favorite series.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 20, 2013 14:30:57 GMT -5
Belated welcome to you
|
|
|
Post by Snowfeather on Jun 22, 2013 15:52:12 GMT -5
snowfeather, i like lots of series, i'm never good at picking favorites. i like harry potter, warriors, and i'm starting the lord of the rings. what's your favorite series. -forgets to respond to things- I LOVE the hunger games books, They're just written so well.Warriors is somewhere in the top ten ^^ It has gotten a little old to me because a bunch of the same things happen but it is really good as for the other two you named, how are they? I've never watch the movie or read the books of HP or LOTR
|
|
|
Post by skinnykitty on Jul 4, 2013 11:56:44 GMT -5
(as you can see i'm not good at replying either)
The happy potter series is has a little more detailed writing then the warriors but it still pretty simple, i like it a lot.
The lord of the rings is good as well, although it's a lot more complicated and there's way more description which is good although it can be a bit much. it's probably why some people find it boring because it make's the story stretch a little more.
|
|
|
Post by Mod Blackbolt on Jul 4, 2013 17:43:10 GMT -5
The Lord of the Rings pays a lot more attention to detail (If the history is not mentioned in the book it is surely in Tolkien's appendices and notes) it is the product of over 50 years of development (The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, The Silmarillion ect). Tolkien even worked on it in the trenches during World War I..... There is no way that Harry Potter could be better developed or have a stronger story then the Lord of the Rings and that is simply why it is the better book (series). All of this was gathered from Tolkien's notes and the appendices at the back of his books, it is worth a look if only to see the vast amount of detail that he put into it ---> lotrproject.com/The Family Tree, Timeline, Map, and the Statistics are all worth a look...... If only Tolkien was eternal we would have more then just a small collection of tales (in the Silmarillion and the book Unfinished Tales) and books covering a small period of time in the 3rd age (was something like 50 years spread out between LOTR and the Hobbit). He was a perfectionist and so only the best work was published during his lifetime (he would not dare publish the Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales because they where not complete, so they where published after he died..... The Silmarillion was being worked on during WW1 (1914-1918) and was still being worked on when he died 1973..... Nearly 60 years of revision and he still did not deem it ok to publish (he wanted to publish it alongside the Lord of the Rings but it was not ready (either that or the publisher rejected it.... Cannot remember exactly) and it was not ready 20 years later when he died......)
|
|
|
Post by Dawnsky on Jul 6, 2013 17:17:47 GMT -5
Harry Potter has a lot of detail/planning too. JKR planned for years before she started to write the Sorcerer's Stone and she also apparently has several notebooks filled with details and history that never came into the books. You're right that Lord of the Rings has more history and planning, but that's not all that makes a book/series good. Other things, like suspense, theme, foreshadowing, and other literary methods come into it too.Personally, I don't like the style in which Lord of the Rings is told. All the names and places (many of which are irrelevant to the storyline) are hard to keep track of, and it makes the book hard to follow when a poem about people you've never heard of and have no idea of their importance goes on for several pages. The writing style just doesn't engage me very well. The storyline is great, but the way it's written makes it not one of my favorites.
Harry Potter, however, is written in a way that is pretty easy to follow and very engaging to read. The writing style doesn't seem very sophisticated in the first book, but it grows monumentally as the series goes on, just like the characters (and the readers that read the books as they came out) grow up. The characters are very realistic and well-developed, to the point where you really care about them (or hate them). The plot is nothing to sneeze at, either. I have read the series at least 20 times, and I have yet to find a plot hole that is at all major and cannot be very easily explained. It also has lots of themes, allusions, wordplay, and other things that are rewarding to explore.
I guess I just like Harry Potter more because I like books that are more for the heart than the head, while Lord of the Rings seems to me to be more for the head than the heart. How much of the Harry Potter series have you actually read?
|
|
|
Post by Mod Blackbolt on Jul 7, 2013 18:48:35 GMT -5
That is because Tolkien wrote the book like it is a history, cannot do anything if you do not like the style but perhaps reading a book the way it was intended will help. Those elements do have relevance (I never said they did not) and I find Tolkien's books have those as well (I feel theme, and foreshadowing are particular strong points), likewise in Harry Potter the Lord of the Rings allows you to grow close to the characters (When *SPOILER* Gandalf fights the Balrog in the Mines of Moria, I found it particularly heart breaking when I thought that he had perished *SPOILER*), there are no `super-characters` in the Lord of the Rings, they all have good and bad qualities (Gandalf is weak with more spells then he is proficient in, he is also prone to wandering this often gets his friends in tough situations and they cannot really rely on him (because he often barely does anything when he is around anyway ). And this is from one of the strongest `demi-gods`. Harry Potter`s plot is nothing to laugh at for sure, Harry Potter`s plot deviates a bit but then fits into a much bigger piece of the plot, I find though that LOTR stays on a much straighter course (because the book focuses on the direct events leading up to *SPOILER* the destruction of the one ring *Spoiler* not other things happening in the world (because the world is so large and diverse there are so many things happening at once in his world stating it all in detail would pretty much be impossible. This gives Tolkien`s world a bigger feel and I think the plot benefits from knowing things that are happening in the background, which may or may not be relevant). I have read up to the Half-Blood Prince, mainly because I sort of find it tiresome and boring to read, if I had any interest I would have been done ages ago. (and I have the Deathly Hollows around here somewhere so maybe one day I will , I have no idea as to why, it just does not seem to be to my liking.... What confuses me the most is why I like books like Warriors but cannot stand Harry Potter)
|
|
|
Post by Dawnsky on Jul 8, 2013 10:47:44 GMT -5
I think our difference here is just a matter of taste. Both HP and LoTR are great literary works, and you can acknowledge that and still not like one or both of them very much and that is just a matter of taste, like in this case. I can respect when people don't like a book because it's not to their taste, what I don't like is when people say a book is trash just because they personally didn't like it.
|
|