TO ROWLINGISATOLKIENCLONE!! READ THIS!

[Scellanis]

um.....harry potter dont have elves......it has house elves...small knee high extremely magical creatures that basically work as slaves to wizard familys.....other than that theres no elves in harry potter.....well none that ive ever heard mention of and ive read all four books.....

and spiders is obvious....want a scary monster...gotta be a giant spider....arachnophobia is a very common fear.....who wouldnt want to use a giant spider in a book....its bound to terrify the vast majority of readers.......

anyway.....im fed up of talking to u......and i dont want this disscussion to ever show up on my forums...ive already informed people on another harry potter forum that ur about and trying to cause trouble......

[JRRRowling]

you guys are just weird. I don't know where you get the idea I'm trying to cause trouble. All I'm doing is saying it how I see it. One does not watch HP2 and say to oneself - well that's original. One goes away just like after watching Star Wars episode 2, and think - "great effects, but I've seen this before".

Rowling even ripped off her own Quidditch game from the first episode. Let's see - let's have someone meddling with the match, let's have Slitherin be winning, and then let's have a surprise upset win by Potter catching that winged ball - exactly like the first movie.

Then there's of course the impossible to escape ending in both movies, but somehow something ridiculous comes along to save HP at the last minute. In the first movie, it was his super power independence day hands, in the second movie it was the bird who of course had magical healing tears - wonderfully convenient. Even HP admits it: "of course, Phoenix tears have healing powers" - of course I reply, very convenient.

You are a majority against a voice of one, yet you all act like I'm Godzilla running through the city. Gee - can't you "fight" a battle without whining to the umpire "sir! sir! disqualify him, he's not playing fair!".

I'm quite happy to admit that Rowling can write something entertaining - is it so difficult to admit that her stories are all passe, been there done that? If you really don't believe it - then that's okay too, I'm not going to be forceful, not like some people who have to resort to booting people off, because they just can't take diversity of opinion. Sounds just like a dictatorship doesn't it?

I just want to hear one compelling argument that Rowling dreamed up anything noteworthily original - and I mean regarding PLOT, not plot-distractions (like Quidditch).

I'm not here to insult Harry Potter, nor any of these forum's members. I'm just here to criticize Rowling for her lack of originality - I'm just talking out loud. If you have good REASON to argue otherwise, I'd be happy to be persuaded. HP would be a fantastic movie series, it's just puzzling why such derivative material is being praised as if it were equal to something from Tolkien, Blyton, Dahl, Twain or Lewis.

Modern fantasy writers ALL admit to being influenced by Tolkien - Raymond E Feist, David Eddings etc etc. I can quite happily read their Tolkien-inspired novels and wonder at their creative talent. Why is it so hard for Rowling, and Rowling fans to admit the same? It's sunk so low that Rowling has to say she hasn't even READ Tolkien - as if she is so original. Why does she have to pretend when her novels are so much more derivative than Feist or Eddings books?

[JRRRowling]

.. sorry forgot to add:

Like I said before, an HP fan forum is the perfect place to find differing opinions to my own. If I can't find a decent defense of Rowling from HP fans, where WOULD I be able to find it?

I'm not looking for trouble, I'm looking in the right place to get answers. If Rowling has an original bone in her body, then an HP forum would be the perfect place to start looking for it - wouldn't you agree?

There is nothing wrong with derivative work - Star Wars is a good example of an entertaining derivative story. Can't you guys just admit that Rowling is NOT original, not a genius, but just an entertaining derivative writer?

If you can't admit it, do you have a compelling reason why not? Did you come out of the HP movies thinking to yourself - well that's an original story?

[Scellanis]

harry potter r books not movies...the movies came second as an after thought....

i refuse point blank to compare movies.....lotr movie is not lotr book...pj has messed too much with it in the same way hp movies r not the hp books...if all ur using to say shes copied is the movies then ur missing a large portion of the true story and therefore ur arguments r not valid....u cannot says shes a plagarist if all u have seen is the movies

'of course pheonix tears have healing powers' is actually what tom riddle is meant to say (or something to that effect in different words) if u read the book

i would not say quidditch is a plot distraction....the cursing of the broom in book one is a major part of the plot of book 3...snapes saves harry's life in payment for the time harry's father saved his life with is important in book 3

in book 2 the breaking of harry's arm by the bludger and the loss of all his bones confines him to the hospital wing which normally he could have been mended and in his dormitory and so harry gets to see the petrified colin creevy and hear the teachers talking about the chamber of secrets which if he had not been playing quidditch he would not have heard....

if ull note....harry's father was seeker on the quidditch team also...its been mentioned, it could well be important in later books.....i could go on for ages on the importance of quidditch......but i cant be bothered.....i have maths to do instead....

having read all of harry potter books and lotr books many times and seen all the movies at least once......i would have to say that all this comparing books is just a huge waste of time...what is the point...i cant see any....why cant u just enjoy each book for what it is and leave it at that....picking on the tiniest of things is just a huge waste of time because no real fans care for anything u have to say....

i for one have far better (or more important) things to do than read ur argument over and over and over again.....

come back when uve reread all the books concerned....not the movies...the books.....although i doubt ull find anything new to say since u seem to enjoy repeating urself so much......

i suggest u find something productive to do with ur time......uve obviously got far too much free time on ur hands if ur prepared to sit and nit pick over books......u mentioned childish arguments but i really think ur the childish one here...its very childish to sit and nit pick over a book just because its currently extremely popular

[Strawberry]

Rowling,

What are you trying to prove? This is a site of Harry Potter fans. You're getting no where with this. We love Harry Potter. If you're looking to complain, why don't you find an "Anti Harry Potter" discussion board where you can spew your jealousy. You might accomplish a little more there. Honestly, if all you can do is spout negative comments about the stories we love, You're *NOT* welcome here.

You're just causing trouble. We don't want trouble here.

So either leave, or trying to state your disagreements in a more tactful/non offensive way. Got it?

[Strawberry]

*Laughs and points at number her number of posts*

I'm a muggle.

[Strawberry]

Okay,

Personally, I felt JRRowling was very original in her story line. I'll agree, however, that Harry Potter in the beginning is a lot like Cinderella. But, in the story, what other books do you know that has the witchcraft schooling? And then of course, thier's the 4 different houses within the schools, all original.

The reason Rowling made Harry Potter like Cinderella was to get the reader/watcher to sympathize with Harry. It builds character in him. He lives in two opposite worlds, the Muggle world, where he's made fun of and criticized for everything, and the Witch/wizard world, where he's famous and awed over.

Take a look at Peter Parker in Spiderman. The same cliche beginning. He's made fun of, he's a geek and then suddenly he realizes he has powers that no body else has. And later on through the story, he's cool. He's a superhero.

Look at Frodo in Lord of the Rings. He's a simple hobbit that's never been away from home. And suddenly he's cursed with destroying a ring that the world is after and only he can be trusted with it. Same thing as HP and Spiderman, only Frodo wasn't picked on in the Shire.

JRRowling was a genius for writing about a boy who's in all of us. He's a character that plays off our emotions and thoughts. She was a tremendous writing for giving us all a world we want to be in. She brings out the inner child in all of us.

Of course, I can easily say that Tolkien is a genius. Personally, I think he's a better writer. And the fact that he inventied 3 (I think only 3) languages takes some dedication. But, I'm a fan of both stories.

And cr*p, I'd say more but now I have to go.

Crappy.

[Scellanis]

um...u mean jk rowling...ur confusing author's name with nasty person's username im guessing

[JRRRowling]

aww Sonkem, I'm not a nasty Malfoy, I'm just a curious annoying little house elf!

Look - I appreciate your comments in your second last post. Although I think the actual rules of the game (ie. allowing a person to completely win the game by catching that winged ball - thereby voiding the efforts of the rest of the team and making the whole team thing obsolete) absolutely ridiculous, I agree that Quidditch is an interesting way to help the story along.

I think you're wrong in saying that nitpicking is a childish affair, because that would make all the movie critics a bunch of childish men and women.

I don't want to annoy the people on this board any longer, that was not my intention - my intention was to engage in some interesting counter arguments, but since few are willing or capable I guess I'll leave this subject in peace.

8)

By the way - how come Dobby seems to be more powerful than Lucius?

[Luna_Puella]

Nasty Malfoy...nasty nasty Malfoy...

I'd like to remind you--Quidditch is USUALLY won by the seeker's 150 points, but not always--if the other team is much farther ahead, it is still going to win. For example--if Hufflepuff has 180 points and Slytherin has only 20, and their seeker gets the Snitch, they are still going to lose-150+20 is only 170.

I personally think it's a absolutely brilliant game, one of the only sports I have any joy in at all. Perhaps it's because you can fly...

I'd like to see you try to come up with a sport as good as Quidditch.

[Scellanis]

i posted on the subject of quidditch is a team sport in the other thread.....

and as for dobby and lucius....*runs off and gets her books out*

by Fred Weasley 'put it this way - house-elves have got powerful magic of their own, but they can't usually use it without their masters' permission.'

thats the best quote i can find.....of course...when dobby uses his magic on lucius at the end lucius has just set him free by giving him a sock (clothes) so dobby doesnt need permission to seriously splat malfoy....which is brilliant cos malfoy needed splatting.....

of course...house elves dont use wands....

[JRRRowling]

Ok thanks, but what I don't understand is why would a "house elf" let himself be enslaved by what appears to be an inferior magic user?

[Scellanis]

Ok thanks, but what I don't understand is why would a "house elf" let himself be enslaved by what appears to be an inferior magic user?

hmm....

by Dobby 'Dobby is a house-elf - bound to serve one house and one family for ever ...'

unless of course they r dissmissed (given clothes)

theres a house elf in book four whose family served the same wizard family for generations....house elves seem to enjoy being servants...they dont get paid...

i should imagine it was probly something started many years ago at the time that muggles would have been in the habbit of having slaves......house elves rnt people and therefore at that kind of time would have been considered inferior and its stuck due to the nature of a house elf

[snuffles360uk]

House elves like being enslaved. It is seen as the deepest shame if they r set free. There is a quote in Book4 but I can't be bothered to go get the book but is says summat like Dobby likes freedom sir, but he likes work better.

Dobby is unsual in House elves as he likes being free but all the others don't like the idea of being free (Winky).

So they like being enslaved, they like serving wizards. It's in their nature to look after humans.

[Luna_Puella]

Ok thanks, but what I don't understand is why would a "house elf" let himself be enslaved by what appears to be an inferior magic user?

Because it's their nature. Their father's father's father has looked after humans--they look at it as what they are there for. Everyone looks for a purpose--they look at this as theirs. Do you understand the concept of duty? Of purpose?

They look at this as theirs. They like it, they enjoy it. To quote the book like snuffles said: "Dobby likes freedom sir, but he is liking work better."