[Proverbs 3-5]

Need I remind anyone (again) that the well known Christian apologists C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkein both had "good" charcters who use magic in their fantasy series?

One difference between Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings is in HP power for good and evil emanate from the same source and there is no real good and evil, its all moral relativism. In TLOTR good and evil are distinct. Also while TLOTR has magic and wizards it is not the main focus, in fact those that try to use the magic of the rings are consumed by the evil and become wraiths and servants of the ultimate evil. What was Frodo's task? To use the magic for good, or to destroy it?

(from an article) ...Christian fans of Harry Potter insist that the series is no different than C.S. Lewis’ The Chronicles of Narnia.

It is true that both authors create fantasy parallel worlds involving young British children who encounter magical creatures. Both develop admirable characters and evil villains. But this is where the comparison ends.

The difference between the two hinges on the concept of authority. From a Christian perspective, authority and supernatural power are linked.

When we read Rowling’s series, we find that she effectively divorces power from authority. There is no sovereign person or principle governing the use of the supernatural.

Magical power is gained through inheritance and learning. It is not granted by a higher authority, because there is no Higher Authority — at least none higher than Harry’s mentor, Albus Dumbledore, and the evil Lord Voldemort. The two are equal, antagonistic and unaccountable to a higher authority.

In C.S. Lewis’ Narnia, power and authority are welded together. That authority is Jesus, in the character of the great lion Aslan — creator and sovereign ruler of Narnia, son of the Emperor Beyond the Sea. Good power is power that is bestowed by Aslan and exercised in accordance with his will. This good power is at work when the children Peter, Susan and Lucy use gifts bestowed on them by an agent of Aslan.

Evil power, on the other hand, is power that is seized or conjured — rather than bestowed — and exercised for selfish ends. Those who resist the temptation to use such power are commended, as was Digory, in The Magician’s Nephew. But those who wield it (such as Jadis, also in The Magician’s Nephew) and the White Witch (in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe) are eventually vanquished by Aslan.

Despite superficial similarities, Rowling’s and Lewis’ worlds are as far apart as east is from west. Rowling’s work invites children to a world where witchcraft is "neutral" and where authority is determined solely by one’s cleverness. Lewis invites readers to a world where God’s authority is not only recognized, but celebrated — a world that resounds with His goodness and care.
source: www.family.org/cforum/citizenmag/coverstory/a0019032.cfm

also see
Lord of the Rings' has resounding ring of the Christian Lord, Southern prof says

[malakhi]

There is no sovereign person or principle governing the use of the supernatural. Magical power is gained through inheritance and learning.

How is this different from science?

[Frank_Discussion]

Your first paragraph is enough:

"One difference between Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings is in HP power for good and evil emanate from the same source and there is no real good and evil, its all moral relativism."

"In TLOTR good and evil are distinct."

How more so than HP? Galadriel, a magicaly elf, was tempted by the ring, Saruman (a wizard) had formerly been good, but was corrupted, Boromir went off his nut for a bit, but was a good guy, etc. Evil and Good get blurred aplenty in TLOTR. The point of both series is to show how evil is to be fought, not embraced.

"Also while TLOTR has magic and wizards it is not the main focus, in fact those that try to use the magic of the rings are consumed by the evil and become wraiths and servants of the ultimate evil..."

HP: Upon a magical background of Hogwarts School and Voldemort's assaults upon it, watch the heros do good against harrowing odds.

TLOTR: Upon a magical background of Middle Earth and Sauron's assaults upon it, watch the heros do good against harrowing odds.

The two are undoubtedly different stories, but your assumptions are wrong.

[what's up]

Thanks for the explanation of the difference between the movies.

I think the Harry Potter series is junk-food trash for kids as so much garbage is on TV. But I didn't see the difference in the way magic is portrayed in Potter vs. LOTR.

I loved LOTR.

[discostu]

I wouldn't say there is no Higher Authority in HP, just that the Higher Authority doesn't take the kind of active hand He does in Lewis's work. And with good reason, Lewis was making parables, Rowling is making stories. Narnia is informed by faith, Potter is is informed by the long tradition of British prep school coming of age stories. That doesn't mean the magic in Potter is evil or leads kids to Satan, it just means the books were written by different people for different audiences.

[kevkrom]

In C.S. Lewis? Narnia, power and authority are welded together. That authority is Jesus, in the character of the great lion Aslan ? creator and sovereign ruler of Narnia, son of the Emperor Beyond the Sea. Good power is power that is bestowed by Aslan and exercised in accordance with his will. This good power is at work when the children Peter, Susan and Lucy use gifts bestowed on them by an agent of Aslan.

Another very selective interpretation. There are other "good" characters with mystical powers that come from study or innate ability. The Hermit in The Horse and His Boy, Doctor Cornelius in Price Caspian, and the magician on the island of the Dufflepuds in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader are examples of the former; the fallen star (Ramdan?) in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader an example of the latter.

[Cobra Scott]

So you must not be aware that Tolkien's models for TLOTR and The Hobbit were pagan epics? Where do you think the plot about the ring itself came from? The Volsung, of course.

The Kelevala, a Finnish mythos, is where the whole middle earth scenario comes from, and helps explain why the ME languages resemble Finnish. Tolkien was a linguist, after all.

In fact, the name Gandalf comes from the Icelandic Voluspa, and the Elder and Younger Edda contain the forest of Myrkwood, as well as the Dwarven kingdoms. Still Pagan mythology. The name, however, is also a Norwegian King's name in The Heimskringla.

Tolkien was also enamored of Beowulf, by his own admission (he was considered a leading authority on Old English). And Welsh was another specialty of his, The Mabinogion being an influence on his Red Book of Westmarch (Sustitute the Red book of Hergest...).

I won't deny your analysis of "power divorced from authority", but from a purely Christian standpoint, the fatalism of Nordic and Celtic Mythology is more akin to Islam ("It is Allah's will that we suffer") than to Christianity ("God gives one a choice, it is up to us to take responsibility").

[steve-b]

When we read Rowling’s series, we find that she effectively divorces power from authority. There is no sovereign person or principle governing the use of the supernatural.

So what? There is no "sovereign person or principle" governing the use of firearms -- they work just the same for cops and crooks. By what passes for you "logic", I don't see why you're here, instead of at the More Moms Than We Can Count On Our Fingers March.

[StoneColdGOP]

You seem to be forgetting the fact that there was MUCH magic working FOR the Fellowship and the Free Peoples in their fight against the Shadow.

Gandalf, a wizard; the inherent "magic" of the Elves like Elrond and Galadriel; etc. use their powers on multiple occasions against evil.

Yes, Frodo was tasked with destroying the One Ring, and had the aid of much magic along the way.