# what is the difference?



## pickngrin (Aug 11, 2002)

OK I have a question and let me first say I am really trying to get an answer, not be a smart a**. I run a small video store and today these people came in and were asking me about Lord of the Rings, and did I think it was ok for kids. Well I told them maybe small children would be scared by some of the darker images and loud noises, but mayeb older kids would enjoy it. The father said he loved the books and had seen the movie (which seems silly to ask ME about it if he has seen it). But anyway, I said have your kids seen Harry Potter? (thinking if the kids were not afraid of the scary images in HP they would ok with LOTR) and they said, "Absolutley not, we don't do witchcraft and wizardy!" And I said well then you aren't going to like LOTR. and then the dad said, no, LOTR is ok! So my question is, how come Harry Potter is bad and LOTR is ok? I mean there are wizards and magic in both movies. Good and Evil in both also! I am wondering if LOTR is being accepted by those who shun Harry just because the Tolkein books are classics and they read them when the were younger and Harry is being shunned b/c of all the hype and bad stuff they have HEARD. Please someone explain to me why Lord of the Rings is ok but not Harry? I love both of them and encourage everyone to see/read both!
Thanks for any comments.


----------



## Bilbo Baggins57 (Aug 11, 2002)

I agree, LOTR is more 4 teens & adults so more parents are familiar w/ it that they are w/ Harry Potter. And wizards are only a part (although an important one) in LOTR, while they are predominant in HP. There's also a lot more magic of the evil kind in HP too. Although we know Saruman's gone bad, we never actually see him putting curses or hexes on people. He used other ways to cause trouble. But in HP, we see the bad guy sucking the blood from a unicorn to give himself unnatural life, as well as doing evil magic of other kinds.


----------



## HLGStrider (Aug 11, 2002)

The Lord of the Rings draws a clear line between good magic and bad magic, especially in the book. It's a little blurry in HP... though I personally, from just seeing the movie, wouldn't make a big deal out of it.


----------



## Legolas_lover12 (Aug 11, 2002)

well, i personally think that harry potter would be better for small children than LOTR. i mean, what would u rather ur kids saw a guy drinking unicorn blood in a scene that really isn't scary at all: or orcs, uruk hai coming outta pods, nazgul stabbing ppl, and strider cutting everything's head off. and many images that have seen my 13 yr old friend get freaked out and almost scream her head off about??? i think i would say HP. much more child friendly. also funnier. children seem to like funny things.


----------



## HLGStrider (Aug 11, 2002)

Maybe it's just me, but I was not scared by the Lord of the Rings in the slightest and Harry Potter ... burrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....

To quote Sam, it was an eye opener. It frightened me, that creepy thing...

OK, I know why it did. I knew what was going to happen in the LotR... but stil.


----------



## Legolas_lover12 (Aug 11, 2002)

i wasn't scared either but boy was she. i laughed so much we almost got thrown out. that's how funny she was.


----------



## ltas (Aug 12, 2002)

Well, maybe the father saw HP as more threatening to his kids' sanity (  ) because in HP the main characters are _children_ who are practicing witchcraft and wizardy?
I mean, when reading LOTR the child will not probably identify himself with the wizards unlike in HP.


----------



## Legolas_lover12 (Aug 12, 2002)

yes, i agree with u there. i heard ffrom one of my friends that a little girl in england i think got a broomstick and jumped off her roof with it cuz she thought it would fly. i think she lived though...


----------



## HLGStrider (Aug 12, 2002)

How young was this girl? 

Personally I wouldn't let anyone under ten watch that. I think a ten year old is smart enough to discern fact from fiction, especially if you talk it over with them first... but I can see where a six year old might get the wrong idea.


----------



## Legolas_lover12 (Aug 12, 2002)

i don't know how young she was. maybe 5 or 6 i think. not sure though. i forgot.


----------



## pickngrin (Aug 12, 2002)

Thanks for all the replies. I do see the point of kids taking Harry seriously and may begin to want to practice witchcraft. But then I must argue the point that if a child doesn't know the difference in reality and fantasy then maybe the parents should step in and try to explain insteasd of banning Harry or Lord of the Rings from the child. As far as the story about the little girl jumping off of the roof, from what I have heard is that story came from a spoof site called www.theonion.com
But like I said, I am not 100% sure this isn't a real story but I have seen it on theonion.com. And by the way where were the parents when this child was grabbing a broom and climbing on the roof?
Thanks again!


----------



## HLGStrider (Aug 13, 2002)

> Harry Potter was likely being a Hypocrite. He himself had probbaly been a fan of LOTR for many years and so was willing to let his children watch the movie.



I would hardly judge him that harshly. The HP books (I've only seen the movie, but I've read...) do deal lightheartedly with subjects that need serious consideration. Very few men want children growing up with an occult obsession. The Lord of the Rings were written by a Christian, I assume this man was such since most atheists don't have a big problem with it, and has a decidely Christian world view. There is a clear line between the magic of the big bad guy and the good guys... where as the difference in HP is not where the magic comes from but what is being done with it. There are also a few doubtable morals in kids running around disobeying adults, though all films for children have that now a days. The Lord of the Rings has been acceptable for ages... much like Narnia except for older readers and with no direct allegory. Tolkien abhorred allegories... 

I personally think there is at least one good moral lesson in HP... for instance Draco gets in trouble for his spy work, Ron's sacrifice in the chess game... etc. Still I would not take it too lightly, and I respect any concerns anyone has over it.


----------



## Legolas_lover12 (Aug 13, 2002)

well, i think she had a babysitter. i'm not sure if it is true. but that does sound like something a kid would really do.


----------



## ltas (Aug 14, 2002)

Where I live we had some years ago a kid doing a spiderman stunt off the balcony (true story) and that was before the movie came out...

About HP, IMO the negative effect on children is more of psychological nature. Besides the wizardry, the morale of the story is quite weak, basically it's a fairy tale about a disobedient boy who mostly does what he pleases.


----------



## Aerin (Aug 15, 2002)

"it's a fairy tale about a disobedient boy who mostly does what he pleases."?
Have you read the books yet or just watched the movie?

In Rowling's books, the story had much more depth and meaning than the movie did. No movie can truly capture the essence of the book it's based on, but I think Harry Potter came very close.

True, Harry did disobey rather direct orders from his teachers at Hogwarts, but he did it because he felt no-one was taking him or his warnings seriously. The professors were trying to protect him, while Voldemort was trying to kill him. In that respect, yes, I suppose he did do what he pleased. But if you look at it from his point of view, it was the only way he could have prevented Voldemort from regaining his power immediately. In that light, Harry did what he felt was right.

As in all things, there are always at least two sides to the story.


----------



## ltas (Aug 16, 2002)

I've read the book, it would be kind of weak to comment it otherwise, wouldn't it? 



> True, Harry did disobey rather direct orders from his teachers at Hogwarts, but he did it because he felt no-one was taking him or his warnings seriously. The professors were trying to protect him, while Voldemort was trying to kill him. In that respect, yes, I suppose he did do what he pleased. But if you look at it from his point of view, it was the only way he could have prevented Voldemort from regaining his power immediately. In that light, Harry did what he felt was right.



In HP the disobedient decisions proved to be the best ones in the long perspective, but that won't necessarily happen in the real world. (That's the weakness of the children's stories in general - the kids always seem to know everything and they get away with it as well...  ) If a child does happen to take those books seariously, the reality will one day bite him quite hard...


/wondering how did I end up discussing HP HERE :-O /


----------



## HLGStrider (Aug 17, 2002)

Hey, my lil' sis wrote this essay on a similar subject a while ago, and I thought you might be interested, Itas.

Actually harmful, or just Stupid?
an essay by RLG age 15
When I babysit any girl between the ages of three and ten I always get to see a lot of dumb movies. Among the most popular of these are the Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen movies. Mary-Kate and Ashley are twin girls who have been making movies (and money) since they were about two. In their movies they have to do three things: get the bad guys, show their parent or guardian that they can disobey them and it will still be okay, and get a steady boy friend. Is this a healthy example for young, impressionable girls or is it harmful to them?
A. Ever since I was little I have always hated watching shows where children are able to beat up on adults. Children need to be taught that they are not invincible. Adults are stronger than kids and if you tell a kid to fight an adult the adult will always win. Children need to be taken care of and helped through difficult situations. They can't conquer the world on their own.
B. The plots of Mary-Kate and Ashley movies is always basically the same. Corny jokes rule and the Olsen twins always learn some great lesson by the end. The acting is horrendous; the Olsen twins are air-heads, and they dress in the ugliest, in-style clothes ever.
C. Mary-Kate and Ashley are only supposed to be fourteen and yet they are allowed to wander around any crowded city they want to... completely alone. It is positively ridiculous to think that a fourteen year old could do this and yet remained unharmed and out of trouble. Not to mention that they always pick up a couple of boys-- usually right off the street, and that is always okay.
Conclusion: I don't want to sound prudish or self-righteous, but I do not think that it is safe for girls to watch this stuff. Most children take on things they see on TV. or read in books and make those things personal to them. If kids watch 14 year old girls playing super woman and having unchaperoned dates (or any sort of dates for that matter) with boys they meet on the street they will think they can do the same.
So is this just a stupid form of entertainment or is it harmful to a child's mind?


----------

