rushmore223

There was a discussion in another thread (a short one) where book sales of LOTR were compared to POTTER. Of course LOTR has been around for 50 years and Potter only 5. My question is, do you think that decades from now, even half a century, do you think Harry Potter books will have anywhere near the attraction or hold on the imaginations of readers as Lord of the Rings has had for so long.

What is the Potter lifespan?

Is this a new classic or merely a flash in the pan forgotten with the next craze?

Jackskeleton

well, considering their is still 3 books left it's not done yet.

as for life span, its a good bunch of books (so far) I don't see why it wouldn't be good in the long run. I'm sure I'll read these stories to my kids in the future.

on the subject do we really need to compare LOTR with everything? it's a great book, and so far the movies have been good, but this is not the best thing since sliced bread folks. Where was the major fan base for LOTR's when there wasn't a movie planned or hyped? it's like that for everything. after the movies for LOTR are done, I'm sure you will have some hype still, but it will be dormant for the most part left for the movies and the books. How many folks never even read the LOTR series intill the movie in the first place?

Lets enjoy the LOTR series for what it is and try not to over hype it. We really don't need to compare it as a trilogy, or start Star wars vs LOTR wars, nor do we have to compare it to Harry potter since it's a different league of books.

Lets put it this way, the harry potter series started in the roughly mid to late 90's and it's still around as good books to read. it's safe to say that it is not just a forgotten craze come 10 years from now.

rushmore223

Actually, I may have started off on the wrong foot with the title. I am really not interested in a versus, or in even comparing the quality of the books, since in my opinion there is no comparison. Really the meat of the question is whether Potter has what it takes to stay in the public eye for so long. I am sure it is off to a good start, 5 years and people are still chomping at the bit for more; that is nothing to sneeze at.

I was just wondering how likely it was that my Grandkids would be taking the literary trip to Hogwarts sometime in the distant future.

so, please, Jack is right, lets not turn this into a LOTR is better than potter or vice versa, I get quickly bored by those myself.

Jackskeleton

Well the life of Harry potter is going to last a long time. It's really a good set of books and I was on one of those ends that was against the whole Harry potter mentality intill I picked up the books which I throughly enjoyed. with the other 3 books coming out in the future, you can tell it will indeed last a bit long and look at series like The Chronicles of Narnia. It's 7 books for goodness sakes, thats a lot to just "forget" in the future for kids reading. Considering it is one of those books that can be read by the young aswell, it's a pretty good sign that it will have some life to it.

m0nkeybutler

harry potter isnt going anywhere. and you really need to change that thread title if you arent trying to pit lotr and hp.

silentbob007

It will really depend on how the rest of the books go to really know about longevity. I don't think these novels will fade away quickly though.

TheMadMonk

As long as the religious fanatics (any religion) don't take over the country or planet (which I think they are trying desperately to do!), both of these should be around for a long time. If some religion succeeds, though, I could see both series being burned as being heretical. (as has already happened in some small towns.)

Kal-El

I don't know about the others but personally, I plan to read the Potter books to my future kids but have no such plans for LOTR. That goes for myself too. I think one reading of the 3 books is enough for me. I'll just stick to the movies.

And I believe Potter won't fade out so quickly if it even does.

Groucho

Potter is based in the contemporary world, and many of the characters' problems and concerns are grounded in that world. LOTR is more timeless, as it reads more like history and/or mythology.

Both series will last a long time, but LOTR will outlast Potter.

DeputyDave

LOTR has had an EXTREMELY active fan base for over 50 years and is the basis for most fantasy worlds (including Harry's). LOTR has had a rabid fan base among adults, where as I feel the Potter books are more based on a younger audience. Today’s kids are so fad based I can't see Potter lasting much past the last book. My kids (who, along with their friends, are my gauge of today's youth) say that Potter is "old" and no one at their school would be caught dead with any Potter paraphernalia. Besides, most people agree the LOTR are simply better movies (all kids I know agree to that).

Kal-El

You'd be surprised how many adults are into Potter even more so than kiddies.

Philzilla

well, Tolkien is a difficult read in some cases

DeputyDave

i know how popular they are with all ages, I just don't think they will stand the test of time like LOTR. I guess I'm a little jaded after going through so many crazes with my kids. First pokemon then Dragon Ball Z, and now Yu Gi Oh. God save me from trendy fads (and expensive! I know the $50 in cards I got them for Christmas will be in the trash by summer. What ever happened to cards being cheap and then becoming more valuable over time, not the other way around- Ok, end of rant).

Jackskeleton

You state that today's kids say that Potter is "old". thats a childs view based on a fade. Just wait intill the next book or movie is released and interest is sparked again.

You know, LOTR's has a big fan base, but so does D&D, both worlds have common grounds and the same myth. But you do realize not everyone has read the LOTR books, nor have many even read the Hobbit. We are looking at these series with a Jaded view point on these series because we are fan's of the type they fall under.

I can't tell you one thing for sure, Harry Potter is not your typical Pokemon, Power rangers, Dragon Ball Z, Yu Gi Oh fade. It is a series of books which have merchindise license to "Card games" like the above.

To say LOTR's hasn't faded in Society is like saying Magic:TG hasn't ever faded from it's fans. It's a book, it has been over looked many times and a lot of times it just slips into a little Niche market for a while before it goes back into the main stream. So in a sense, you can say that LOTR has had it's Fads when it comes and goes.

LOTR is a series of books you will read on your own at whatever age you want. But HARRY POTTER on the other end of the field is a book Parents will read to their childern as a bed time story and those kids will grow up without the thought of "Harry potter is a fade" but will see it as something they were read to. Thats not down playing HP, I look fondly at the books my parents read to me and I plan on reading those same books to my childern when I eventually have them.

So will they stand the test of time? You bet it will. Books really aren't fad's. They live for aslong as they are being printed and aslong as people can read freely what they want to read.

Playitagainsam

Bull$hit.

Sorry, I just couldn't resist, but what some of you are saying is plain wrong.

First of all, you are all English-speaking people, and most of you live in the States. Remember that. You are more or less in a cocoon, a shell, but there's more out there.

I have not seen much (actually, not at all) interest in the Potter books in the rest of the world. Don't be fooled by what you might find in the media. Just talk to people. Maybe one of the reasons is because, as someone mentioned earlier, the Potter books are rooted too much in the modern (Anglo-Saxon, Western, Christian) culture, rather than going for the deep, rich vein of primordial myth.

I bet you'll have people in places you can't even find on the map reading Tolkien and never giving a second of attention to the rabbit-infatuated Rowling.

I believe that it's Potter that will fade away after a few years, just like Frank Baum's writings did. Hype does not mean anything - anyone here remember the books that were madly popular in 1989? Does anyone here remember how, even earlier on, people were swearing that Eugene Sue's books were "da bomb" ? Does the name "Pardaillan", (or the one of his author, Michel Zevaco) ring a bell?

I believe Tolkien's "Ring", along with Frank Herbert's "Dune", represent the Himalayas of this branch of literature. "Potter" is like the Stone Mountain in Georgia.

Another thing you should consider: Tolkien did his work alone, almost unknown, and poured a life's work in it. He was truly dedicated to his project, and had an excellent reputation as a language scholar to rely on. He did not work in the spotlight of the tabloids, was not pulled in the money-making schemes of the media conglomerates, and in general couldn't care less. He painstakingly and lovingly crafted his "Ring", without the pressure and demand of a publisher's contract for an X amount of pages/sequels. He was a true artist, and a real writer. Rowling is a Salieri to Tolkien's Mozart.

Kal-El

Pretty much describes what you wrote.

DeputyDave

Playitagainsam,

Although I agree with some of your opinions on why Potter is a flash in the pan compared to Tolkien, I can’t agree with your elitist attitude in the first paragraph.

silentbob007

It is amazing that Harry Potter's appeal is so limited that it has been translated into how many languages ... 26? More? And it sells well in almost every translation. If you want to call English speaking people shallow, just say it instead of writing a convoluted mess that puts down everyone but your (self, race, country, etc).

Playitagainsam

So, instead of carrying out a conversation, and crush me with some intelligent and well-documented replies, you are attacking the person, and say I'm too elitist.

Strange, I thought I can carry out a conversation slightly above high school level. That's called "elitism"? Bringing into discussion ideas that seem to elude you? Rather, this appears to have the same effect as a piece of red rag waved before a bull...

So we have Kal Jedi here, who says what I wrote is ********, but offers no counter-arguments. Well, considering that he wants to raise his (?) children on Pot(ter), and that reading the "Lord of the Rings" once in a lifetime was enough of an experience, I believe that I'm in good company.

Then along come SilentBob007, who brings into discussion exactly the same notions that I warned against. This is actually funny, because it's one of the common fallacies of the American way of thinking - a fascination for (as high as possible) numbers. You're a product of your environment, which relies too heavily on quantification and almost forsakes qualitative notions (with fascinating results, when you compare the two approaches). Dude, the books were translated into 26 different languages, but maybe you also should check out the final sales? I'm not going to go into explaining how publishing houses make strategic investments into selling the rights to "fad" or "fashionable" books to other countries, at exorbitant prices. Just bear in mind that these "behind the curtains" moves take place. Every year, thousands of books originally written in English are translated in the non-English speaking world. The subtle difference is that they really have to compete with other translated books, even those written originally in languages that are not as widespread. Therefore, the quality of the literature is what matters in the long run.

Just like with movies: how much did the new version of "Spiderman" make in the opening week in the U.S., how much hype was around it, and how many people watch it right now? Or how much playing time will it enjoy in, say five years? Will anyone really remember it in 2023? I seriously doubt that. Then, were the people who flocked to the theaters to see it in the opening week wrong? Well, it depends on your point of view. Certainly, the media hype played a big part in artificially raising the film's value. Otherwise, the emperor was rather naked (thanks, H.C. Andersen, you'll surely outlast Rowling).

So, Silentbob, is this what you meant when you accused me of calling English-speaking people shallow etc, and said that I extoll the virtues of other cultures? I'm merely presenting some facts, and you react like an angry child who's told there's no Santa Claus. Sorry, if I might seem rude to you, but I'm being brutally honest. Methinks you should read again my post. You can't even figure out what you want to send out as a message to those reading the thread after you.

To round it up: I'm saying that the Potter phenomenon is hyped up in the English-speaking world, that other cultures might not be as crazy about it, and that the Potter-mania will go away, just like other icons before it did. Meanwhile, Tolkien (and it's why I put him alongside Frank Herbert) will continue to make people in many other countries gather around in circles of friends and talk about the theme of the Ring, the Elvish language and the geography of Middle-earth.

OK, so again I'm showing off with my culture, and I'm being pompous and an elitist in the eyes of some of you people. So what? Isn't this what a discussion is supposed to be, a sharing of opinions? Well, you have mine. You can choose to ignore me altogether. Or you can become furious and wish you'd Saddam(n) me. Like I said, if you want to counteract, you're welcome, I just hope it'll be in a more intelligent manner than up to now.

DeputyDave

It's sad that you can't simply rely on your well thought out arguments (which I agree with) and save the pompous ass act for another thread

m0nkeybutler

Yep. You arent coming off as arrogant, condescending or elitist at all with your replies and attacks. I agree with the people that are choosing to NOT try to carry out a "conversation" with you because your initial attitude really displayed how this is more about feeding your ego than discussing the subject. So dont pretend you are entering here trying to discuss the subject, or that you're a victim when your first thought is to declare that everyone is wrong except you.

(btw. i dont disagree completely with your thoughts but your attitude definitely takes away from your argument. It always is good entertainment to watch people who cant control themseves though. So i await your response in which you respond by talking down to everyone even more.)

Groucho

I agree with some of your arguments but let's be realistic here. Sue and Zevaco were never as popular as Rowling. Not even close.

Jackskeleton

the moment you said BULL$HIT and called the board English-speaking people who live in a cocoon because we speak a language" You lost the crowd and all ability to carry a "conversation" about the topic because you come off as an elitest and that you have other issues that you are pushing or at the very least, are driving your view points that could have a thread to themselves. Those issues with "English speaking" countries might drive this thread into a flame war because you are very bold to point out the difference in language all throughout your post which makes one wonder when you will just snap and call us English Pigs.





In "English-Speaking countries" we call that just being an internet Trolls and starting a FLAME WAR when one is not needed. We could discuss this different and with respect to one another, but the moment you start standing on your soap box and yelling how us capital pigs have our heads up our arse in a sense, it sorts of pushes the envelope in another direction.




Like I said, the moment you started the conversation with "BULL$HIT" you started a flame war, and really, You showed a lot of your thought process with cursing when it really wasn't needed in the forum. As for reading to his future childern, You know I red LOTR when I was in my early teens. On my own might I add. Why you ask? I was read other books. Some might think that LOTR is a bit to heavey of a read for the younger crowd and you should stick to the hobbit. Harry Potter on the other hand is a very simple book to read. I could picture myself reading it to my future childern. Of course other titles aswell, but Potter has that Childern story feel to it. If you disagree, Fine. You have every right to read Mein Comf or the Communist Manifesto if you truely like. they are your childern. So I really don't see why you are bashing on kal here. As for the lack of counter arguements.. I guess he just felt with your opening that it was pointless to argue with a brick wall, if you get my meaning. I suppose I have more time on my hands to attempt the discussion.




Well In my post later on, I go on a sales figure, please don't think i'm a capitolist dog for using such a number But you do realize that we need a way to measure sales and in turn convert that into numbers to see how popular or how many units sold. I'm not going to go into explaining how humans count and make a strategic approach to guess how something sold in a certain location, but we use numbers to count up how much sold vs. How many were made or how many should be made. It is always clear that Thousands of books are translated to nonenglish speaking countries, but apperantly the book has sold just as many copies as a certain little Red book in china, so thats an indication on how it's pretty popular if you ask me. But then again, that's just one "English-speaking" Resident. though I do speak other languages if that makes my view points valid. In this case quality can be considered if that many folks are reading them, Not to mention Buying them.





On that same arguement you can pretty much call on anything. Lets put it in examples of say star wars. Look at the opening week of TPM or hell for that matter, the opening week of any of the star wars flicks. They were crazy with "the hype" as you call it. But what happened after their release. Did those films just die off and go away forever? Sure they are not playing at your local theater anymore, but really you can't say that the "FAD" is dead because they are not showing it in theaters year round. Your examples make it seem like everything about spider man has fallen off the face of the planet after the initial hype is done. Wrong, I know people who still watch spider man on a daily basis. Childern for that matter, and though they might not be the typical type to be considered in YOUR thought, those memories as a kid watching the movie will carry on and they will keep that movie alive just like the childern at the time keep any movie alive such as star wars, and hell for that matter the success of Back to the future sales.. Because you saw it when you were younger and you enjoyed it. Taking this example with the Harry Potter series, Kids are being read to and it is getting them to read more or atleast in some cases, discover the wonders of reading. Those kids get older and the book is still in the mind as something they read as a kid and they pass that tradition over. You could say the same thing about LOTR. I saw more reading of the Hobbit then of LOTR as I grew up. Can't you apply the rule that once the hype which of course has been a big part of the movies dies off, that so will it's popularity? Or should that hype be the only element keeping it alive? I mean honestly, I went into a book store the other day and on the sides of the books were pictures of the movie characters. If you need to place the stars of the movie on the book to sell, You have a problem. Though it is useless to tell you that Rowling will last the test of time simply because in your eyes you really look down to her with such examples as "(thanks, H.C. Andersen, you'll surely outlast Rowling)" So thats a hopeless war. Tolken's books have had the same sort of effect that you say will happen with Harry Potter, they went out of the spot light and were just their hiding in the dark corner for folks who search for it to discover. It wasn't always on charts with ground breaking sales numbers and those folks who just gather around to discuss the LOTR books. I have meet folks who play D&D who still haven't read the books. Thats pretty amazing if you ask me. I wouldn't say it's more or less the reason that folks in the "english-speaking countries" read less then those who are in those "other-language-countries". I would just call it that some don't need to read them. Their is other things to discuss you realize and just because folks aren't talking about a certain thing that brought upon a lot of hype at one point, doesn't mean the books or movies are dead, Just that there's more things to read, see, hear and little time to cover it all in the media.



You come into a thread and stomp your feet like a child with a temper tantrum about how we should look beyond the states at the real world. METHINKS you are just trolling around, and further more, it's pretty bad when the people who agree with you are also the ones saying that your views might be a little to hard on the right.


So...what you are trying to say is that it's just a fad in english speaking countries, but you non-english speaking folks clearly see through the Potter-Mania, right? So why is it that in china
it was a smash hit:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/books/news/09/26/china.potter/
and brought about it "fake" new books that were created such as "Harry potter and the walk-up-to-dragon"

click to read more..


These must be words you really hate to hear:
"An official box set of the first three Potter books was published in October 2000 with an initial printing of 600,000 copies, which means Rowling may be China's biggest author since Mao."
and if you are going to say thats not saying much or the sales numbers are lacking always remember that the big bootleg market is also cutting into her real sale figures. Well regardless of that, I am sure that Harry Potter series will still be a success and live on at the very least in the English speaking countries, as has been proven by USA TODAY's list of top selling books of 2002
http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/n...op-books_x.htm Part of a fad? Eh, Highly doubt that it's just a fad.


You do realize that we can discuss this without you bringing in your country/race/sex/age/etc. into the topic. You bringing up Saddam in a harry potter thread is just showing your views on americans. Please leave the Flaming at the door aswell as your "english-speaking country" Views aswell. this is about discussing a book, not about taking it to personal levels which you will do if you talk about items such as that. If you call your post Intelligent, please realize that aswell as intelligence, your post reek of arrogant and a lot of Tolken Loving. One of the main reasons why this thread or harry potter shouldn't be a competition against Tolken because the books are different in almost all aspects besides relating with wizards and myth.

Just wondering, What "Non english speaking" country are you posting from anyhow?

DeputyDave

Why, he's Canadian:

2nd post from the top

Hmmmm...

Jackskeleton

Damn, I would say a joke, but I promised ViewAskewbian
not to go Canuck joking anymore. It's funny that he goes on about how "us english-speaking countries..." when Canada of course has both French and English in it's languages, Makes you wonder how high on his horse he is to start just this dispute and make it an issue of culture and language. I guess he has a little french in him with his views on other locations though. Though I didn't see him fart in our general direction.

Funny that I got the sales figures and pictures from a CANADIAN based Harry potter fan site:
http://harrypotter_ca.tripod.com/archives.htm (two pop ups) hee hee, looks like some folks to the north enjoy Potter just as much.

Though I guess from the post you linked Deputy, he has a pretty harsh and blunt view and style of posting that might not go well with a "discussion". Though in my post above, I believe I countered as best as one could on the points. Will this be just another "You american pigs need to look outside the box" post