I didn't "know" that you hadn't, I made no such assumption. But your post left open the possibility that you had rejected them on the basis of the review that started this thread instead of on personal examination (since you thanked him for the review and said "obviously" your children wouldn't be reading Potter, with no other reason given), so I suggested that you should read them if you hadn't before making up your mind.
I read the first two, with a critical eye. I enjoyed them. I would probably allow my children to read them as later teens. Not now.
I can understand that, the books are definitely geared more towards a teen audience than children your age. But that's different from the impression I got from your first post, wherein you said "mine will not be reading Harry Potter", which sounded like a permanent injunction. Sorry if I misread that.
As far as Potter versus The Lord of The Rings, go read O'Brien's "A Landscape With Dragons." You clearly are not properly grounded in the critical analysis of children's literature from a Christian standpoint to make such inane comments as you did here about Potter versus Tolkien/TLOTR.
I'm on the verge of telling you to do something physically uncomfortable to yourself...
If you have any enlightening observations to make, or specific objections to any comparisons I've made between books to offer, why don't you do so, instead of just insulting me?
If you'd get off that high horse, you might realize that my comments about Harry Potter vs Lord of the Rings were clearly meant in a more general sense than the manner in which you have chosen to deride them.
Next, Mullah Omar will undoubtedly pop in to call my book reviews "inane" because they are not "properly grounded in the critical analysis of children's literature from a Islamic standpoint"...
If you want to do a specific "critical analysis from a Christian standpoint", feel free, but I think you're out of line if you beleive you have a right to call me "inane" for choosing to make an analysis which happens not to be narrowly "from a Christian standpoint".
I am not familiar with O'Brien's books (as you correctly surmised), and barring that there was nothing else in your post which would signal, "warning, Christian discussion ongoing here, any response not built directly on Biblical principles will be summarily insulted as inane and ungrounded."
If you consider The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings to be acceptable, I fail to see how you could object to anything in Harry Potter. Plus, Harry Potter contains a great many good lessons on the virtues of honesty, loyalty, hard work, respect for authority, not judging a book by its cover, and so on.
This in partiicular was your inane statement. Tolkien was thoroughly Catholic and wrote from a Christian perspective. His subcreation was intended to mirror the fundamental realities of the real creation of God. Use of magic in Tolkien ALWAYS has negative consequences, unlike Potter. Fundamental distinctions are made between virtues --perseverence, courage/fortitude, selflessness-- and vices. In Potter, vices are made into virtues, some virtues become vices, evil (magic) is used for good, without negative consequences, the lines are not only blurred but molded together and purposely made indistinct.
This thread began with O'Brien's analysis of Potter from a Christian perspective. Please keep your attention together here, and do not castigate me for continuing along with that perspective.
And again, given the fundamental, diametrically opposed nature of Tolkien's subcreation to that of Potter, your comments noted above are indeed inane.