Tolkien vs Rowling?

[Lairënuriel]

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/09/16/money-face-off-jrr-tolkien-vs-jk-rowling/

[Wolfchild]

Well, maybe my being on this forum suggests my answer already, but I vote Tolkien. He spent nearly all of his life not only creating these stories, but also the world and the history of the environment they are set in. He gave multiple languages to his different races, implied a pluralistic approach to his heroes (something I think many modern writers lack) and has written the story that was once known as "unfilmable". That, to me, deserves all the credit and more. Rowling, although an exceptional and inspiring writer, has not come anywhere close to the depth that Tolkien visualised and put to paper.

[Beren One-Hand]

I totally second what Wolfchild has said.  I mean the article cites some interesting stats.  Comparing Rowling to Tolkien, or voting for her over him?  That's like trying to compare Michael Crichton or Robert Ludlum with Alexandre Dumas or Dante.  Impossible to compare.  The real question is would even Rowling herself think she is better than J.R.R.?  The question is obviously rhetorical.   

[Andúnië]

I agree with everything Wolf and Beren above me have said. Although some of the things in Rowling's writing have been creative, few people have been able to put the amount of depth and detail into their works that Tolkien did. Every small detail and event that shows up in Tolkien's writing has a story behind it, a reason it was written precisely the way it was. There is no way to compare a literary classic with a simply popular book.

So why is Tolkien behind in those polls?

[Wolfchild]

I think a lot of people are afraid of reading the book because of its length and archaic style, or have tried to read it and not been able to understand it in those respects. People like this make me quite annoyed, because clearly they are running on the strength of the film and have little commitment for the literature which is, in all cases, the foundation.

[Lairënuriel]

I think Tolkien is behind because of the time difference in the release of the books.  Also Rowling now has 7 and LOTR was originally released as one.  Rowling is an easier read, hence it's widespread appeal.
I've heard some people comment that they 'couldn't get into Tolkien'  because it was too long and wordy! 
My vote is still for Tolkien.  The rich detail that allows such a similar picture to the one I had in my head with the author long gone.  The HP series is great - I have fully enjoyed it (with the exception of the last movie) but there is really no comparison.

[Insane_Monky]

Wow, is this a joke? Some sort of hoax. What was this person high on when they even fathomed to have a poll about Tolkien and Rowling. Thats sad. Whoever thinks that Rowling has anything on Tolkien needs to learn to live...

No offence or anything..

[Andúnië]

I think a lot of people are afraid of reading the book because of its length and archaic style, or have tried to read it and not been able to understand it in those respects. People like this make me quite annoyed, because clearly they are running on the strength of the film and have little commitment for the literature which is, in all cases, the foundation.

People like that: =

I understand that people like to read Rowling better because it's easier- I've been guilty of reading HP more often because it requires less energy- but popularity still doesn't correlate with quality.

[Bombadil_Ulmo]

I honestly don't think you can even compare the two of them.  They both wrote what they wanted to write: Tolkien, an in-depth world that he pretty much devoted his life to and Rowling, one story line in a fairly in-depth world that leaves a lot up to the reader.
People may like Harry Potter better because they can tie up loose ends in their own way and others may like Tolkien better because there's so much to it.
It's personal preference, I suppose.
(And then there's the in-between people like me who absolutely love both of them.)