HP2 is such a shameless copy of LOTR2

[Strawberry]

Hmm,

I've never considered myself a plagerist, but by JRRRowling's definition, I am. I use Elves and moving trees in my stories. It's hard not to take offense, but with a description as vague as the one he's given, I'm left with nothing else to think than "ridiculous".

You're argument is incredibly weak, JRRRowling.

[Shadow]

If you're using elves, then I don't know who would consider you a plagerist, because there are all kinds of them.

[Cokey Kitty]

If Rowling had really sat down and examined the PRINCIPLES of team sport and come up with something truly fantastic, I would be the first to congratulate her creativity. But I see Quidditch and think to myself - well I can really come up with something BETTER, and I do not respect any talent that I see cannot be better than what I can invent.

I have a small and quick challenge before I say anything else: If you believe that you can invent a better game with the principles of team sports (and yet still have the magical possibilities of magic and flying broomsticks and balls that can be used to attack you), then do it. I'm more than willing to hear about your ideas and even scrutinize them as I see fit.
JKR INVENTED a game that witches and wizards across the world could play and enjoy; and that's the whole focal point of her books: a magical world of wizards and witches. And her story is about Harry Potter, a young boy who overcomes his hardships to be a better person. He's the hero of the story, and what good would it be without him always coming out on top? Besides, it may not always be that way in the remaining three books to come.

And also, I would truly like to call you a hypocrite at this point. (Look it up in the dictionary- it says "one who affects virtues and qualities he does not have." I'm sure you're capable of understanding at least that.) We're all hypocrites at some point about something; I myself am one because I vowed to never play a Harry Potter video game, and yet i find myself desperately trying to defeat the Chamber of Secrets on my brother's Nintendo Gamecube. And to support my opinion of you, Mr. RowlingstoleLOTRideas, you said so yourself that you've only read CHAPTERS of the HP books. Excuse me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean that you don't know everything about the books? Or perhaps you said that to give yourself a good appearance to us, and meanwhile you may of only ever seen the movies?

Try reading the books before criticizing them.

And also, just for the hell of it, I'd like to mention that both the LOTR and HP books have a main character who's fighting for one ultimate thing- to defeat the bad guy. But may I point out that Frodo is trying to save the world of Middle-Earth, while Harry is basically only trying to avenge his parents. Sure, he'll also be saving the wizarding world and Hogwarts, but his driving force is what the bad guy did to his parents.

And also, I'd like to let you know that plagiarism is defined in the dictionary as: "an act or instance of plagiarizing; to steal and pass off as one's own work." Rowling has never, EVER copied Tolkien's works word for word and passed them as her own. As all my teachers in my school have beat into us(And Luna can back me up on this), this is illegal. Don't you think she would've been punished for it by now if this had actually happened? The similarities are mere coincidences. Movable trees (and Ents are certainly not trees unless they become dormant), elves, dwarves, gnomes, etc. are all usually basic properties that make a novel an excellent fantasy work. And giant spiders are things that are feared by most people, so why shouldn't they be included in a novel to make it even more frightening, hmm?

[Scellanis]

Let's see - a spider called "Aragog". Sounds a bit like "Balrog" and "Shelob" doesn't it? Tolkien was a linguist, which is why the names he gave to elves or creatures of Mordor followed consistent linguistic phonetics. To have Rowling give a name to a creature that clearly follows the SAME linguistic phonetics as the language of Mordor clearly shows she is a plagiarist, whether subconscious or not.

Clearly "Aragog" does not follow the same cutsie childish names she typically gives like "Voldemort" or "Dumbledore". Since Rowling is not an expert linguist like Tolkien, one obviously raises the brow when Rowling goes off on a tangent in her naming style. Her inconsistency is a sure sign of inconsistent talent, and is consistent with plagiarists who copy from different sources. True geniuses like Tolkien/Blyton were never "off kilter" when it came to their style because it was wholly their own. Simple logic!

i have just found the reason for the use of aragog

posted by Harad on Lotronline forums....
The obvious answer for "aragog" is:

"ara" related to arachnid or spider and

"gog" a biblical giant.

Put 'em together and ya gots "giant spider."

Now why didnt I think of that?

see she didnt copy lotr at all.....she is a linguist herself...hahaha

[hermionegirl09]

hehe! go Sonkem!

[Sirius Black]

And if it makes you a plaguerizer by making a name that distantly sounds like a different author's creation, then we're all guilty of that. What's more, you have *way* too much time on your hands.

[star_light]

I'm just going to give my two cents to this discussion. I don't think that J.K.Rowling is guilty of plagerizing. Sorry I know I can't spell for a hill of beans. Anyways. As has been said countless times during this discussion is that all fantasy works have a lot of the same carachteristics. However, this is where the beauty of Harry Potter comes in. It is a cinderella like story, (this doesn't mean she copied cinderella, this is now a very common story line because of cinderella) where a boy who has no real family discovers that most of the mythological and magical creatures he has always heard about are real and he is immeadiately accepted and becomes even more legendary then he already is by stalling evil from rising again. J.K. Rowling uses the creatures she does because everyone has heard of them and others have used them but most people believe that they never existed. The fact that harry has a cinderella experience is what causes some people to like the books. I mean really, if suddenly everything in your life went from more horrible than imaginable to more wonderful than imaginable wouldn't you enjoy it? This plot is used in countless other stories. A particular one that comes to mind is Willy Wonka and the Chocolate factory (I know thats a movie but it is based on a book and at least the plot stays the same). If you ever decide to read the books JRRRowling I suggest you read the 4th one. Although the 3rd is my favorite I thnk the 4th would give you a better sense of the story line, carachters, quidditch, and harry's veiws on his fame. It seemed to me like he got the curse of fame and glory. So what if he doesn't have to work hard at being a great seeker and can always beat the bad guy? Those are his talents. Everyone has them. I think that is also a major thing that distinguishes HP from LOTR. I haven't read all of the LOTR's books ( Only the 1st and about half of the 2cd) but I got the feeling that Frodo is somewhat of weekling, the last person whose hands you would expect the fate of the world to lay in while with Harry you can expect it. You know there is something remarkable about him and you expect him to defeat evil.

JRRRowling you also mentioned something about how it was the fact that is was the fact that the similarities came up in the 2cd book bothered you. This is my reasoning on the subject. LOTR is 3 books HP will someday be 7 so the first 2 and one third books would equal the first book. I can't really explain this so that it makes sense and maybe it doesn't so oh well.

Someone also mentioned something about portals between worlds. In HP they stay on earth (I only used the term world because it is like how different countries can be like different worlds). In the other books that were mentioned the left earth in HP they didn't, they just went to an unseen portion of it.

All in all, I don't think JKRowling plagerised in any way. Yes there are similarities between her works and others but thats the beauty of her books (I kind of said this already) they use things that most don't believe to be real and takes you to a place where they are. She is in a sense doing a great favor to these creatures and ideas because they are dying out, I bet in 50 years most people will not have heard about half of the books you think she is immitating and if they have it will only be through movie versions. She is at least bringing them to life in writing. I'm sure that many of the creators of the creatures and ideas she uses would be greatly honored and pleased that she uses them. If you read the Narnia Chronicles and LOTR you can find subtle similarities between the way creatures are described (its actually almost funny, its like tolkien and lewis sat their writing thier books and reading what eachother wrote and said "Oh I like that! YOu wouldn't mind if I blended it into my book would you?" but thats not on topic) there are only a few of these similarities and maybe they really don't exist but you would never accuse the two of pledgerism, would you. No, it just happened that way. Its the way creatures and ideas had always been explianed to them so they wrote them that way. In fact, seeing as JKRowling and Tolkien are both English its understandable that they see things in the same way and have similare ideas.


P.S. JRRRowling before you accuse someone of pledgerism please read their entire works. How would you like it if someone accused you of pledgerism because you had a dog name Lassie in one of your stories?

P.S.S. Sorry this is so long.

[Luna_Puella]

*lol* Good Sonkem! *claps hands*

[Quicksilver]

*thinks*
Now where have I heard this argument before? Oh yeah, over at the RETARD house.

I agree, there are several things they have in comon, but just go look up all those other people who've accused JKR of stealing plotlines. Nancy Stouffer for one. She got her @$$ kicked. And good too.

LoTR is a good book, a good plot, but is not nearly as good as HP. HP has characters that you can actually empathise with, while LoTR is based on just plain ol plot. The only characters you get to know are Bilbo and Frodo. Now, I've only read up to Two Towers, and I just stopped because they bored me.

I agree wholeheartedly with star_light, and wish you good luck to wherever you're hiny lands when you get booted.

[Luna_Puella]

*lol* Owch, Quicksilver's in the house!



But I love Lord of the Rings even more than Harry Potter--but Harry comes awfully close.

The average person would think that you would get the point by now, JRRRowling, that unless you want to stop bashing the whole reason people took their time and resources to make such a Forum as this, you really need to get lost. We don't mind opinions--everyone is entitled to their own, but when you start totally disregarding what we tell you--clear off before we have to clear you off ourselves.

Just look at the 'To Boot or Not to Boot' poll, if ya don't believe me.

[Scellanis]

um...would like to say....i think u do get to know the lotr characters...must get to know them or how come my fav lotr character is Sam and not frodo...though bilbo comes close....

[star_light]

I thought I got to know them but my friend disagrees with me on that and I haven't actully finished the series so who knows.

[hermionegirl09]

*thinks*
Now where have I heard this argument before? Oh yeah, over at the RETARD house.

I agree, there are several things they have in comon, but just go look up all those other people who've accused JKR of stealing plotlines. Nancy Stouffer for one. She got her @$$ kicked. And good too.

LoTR is a good book, a good plot, but is not nearly as good as HP. HP has characters that you can actually empathise with, while LoTR is based on just plain ol plot. The only characters you get to know are Bilbo and Frodo. Now, I've only read up to Two Towers, and I just stopped because they bored me.

I agree wholeheartedly with star_light, and wish you good luck to wherever you're hiny lands when you get booted.

Go Quicksilver!

[star_light]

Ok , I have seen the two towers twice already and i just can't see how you can see a similarity in plot.... at all. Besides the fact that it is the classic good against evil fight that so many other stories have i don't see a similarity. Mind that I haven't read all of the books. JRRROwling, if you wouldn't mind could u please list the similarities that you see between the two books if your still even reading these posts wich u probably aren't because u haven't been lets just say appreciated here very much.

[TDM]

still on this? well, if that is considered plagerism, then why hasn't anybody sued JKR yet? oh yeah, i know why! because she didn't copy. big deal, so they both have DIFFERENT magical realms that could never have a crossover in a million years (a non-fanfic crossover, that is). whoopty doo. so then, maybe the people behind LotR should sue pokemon, and then the matrix, and everything else like that.