The Chronicles of Narnia
discussion
Narnia vs LOTR vs Hunger Games
date
newest »
newest »
LOTR and Narnia are very different from the Hunger Games in the way they're written, the genre, the time periods and who the audience is, so it's pretty hard to compare all three. I found The Hobbit to be hard to get into because Tolkien spent so much time developing setting and character. Not like that is a bad thing, I just find that sort of thing to be slow-paced and dragging.
The HG series was good in the sense that it was written basically like a Hollywood movie (which it became). However, I just found the third HGs to be terrible.
I read the first couple Narnia books and they were good. They weren't terribly slow in the beginning and the magical world was creative and, well, magical. However, I didn't finish the series because I didn't enjoy the writing style.
No offense, but the three books spotlighted are not the three that I hold in the highest opinion.
For me I'd say LOTR just because it deals with more complicated themes and is smart (though I have seen the movies I am planning to but have yet to read the books.) then the Narnia series which I have recently finished and think it is awesome. The themes within were obvious yes (in fact Tolkien criticized Lewis on this) but they were and still are effective. I have NEVER read The Hunger Games and don't plan on doing so ever. I may have had a slight interest in reading but on this site I have heard nothing but negative criticism on the trilogy and it seems that it is more of a fad than a true good book series. No offense to anyone who liked them though.
LOTR is definitly on the top of my fave list, and right below, or pretty much right next to is Narnia. I started the Hunger Games, but never finished. I also think that after the movies are done, the big Hunger Games fad will die. They just aren't as good as Narnia or LOTR. Like everyone else said, No offense to those who like Hunger games, I didn't.
Narnia's characters are less distant. There is more complexity and depth in LotR, but it helps to keep in mind that Narnia was written for children, while LotR was written for adults.A better comparison would be LotR vs The Space Trilogy, only as far as depth goes. Otherwise even those are very different books.
I don't think it is fair to compare the two writers. Tolkien was meticulous, often revising manuscripts dozens of times before submitting to a publisher, while Lewis was known for submitting drafts to publishers.
Narnia would be better compared to L'Engle's Wrinkle in Time series, or even Harry Potter would be a better comparison than LotR.
I tell people that Lewis is my favorite author, but that LotR is my favorite book, followed closely by Narnia.
They're different. Not better. The question is like asking whether apples are "better" than bananas.(This is bound to be followed by a list of people explaining that oranges are "better" than nectarines. Please: give it a miss.)
I personally think LOTR is the best (honestly it's one of my all-time favorites). Narnia comes in a close second... both are great series and are classics. I definitely don't think Hunger Games is on par with those two. I recently read the HG series and it was really good and very interesting... I was pretty excited about it at the time, but as more time has passed since I finished reading it I think its a series that I'll easily end up forgetting about, which is something that will never happen with LOTR and Narnia.
Peter wrote: "They're different. Not better. The question is like asking whether apples are "better" than bananas."True. I do think the three book series are different but I also agree with comparing them all because they all have that fantasy/battling theme going on (except The Hunger Games is supposed to be a future version of the world as is my understanding and not in a totally fantasy-submersed land).
Yeah, I know it's a bit much to compare all of them considering they're diff. genres. And it really is just a matter of opinion. But all of them are war-submerged, and the main characters are all similar in one way or another.
No offense to hunger games fans, but to me Frodo is cooler than Katniss (even though I wish I was as spunky as her rofl)!
No offense to hunger games fans, but to me Frodo is cooler than Katniss (even though I wish I was as spunky as her rofl)!
Like a lot of others I also personally think Lord of the Rings is better, possibly because it's more complex, the characters are amazing, and it's just so creative and Middle Earth and its history is so vast. I don't think my opinion is very biased, since before I had a huge huge huge Narnia fan craze and I used to say it was better than Lord of the Rings (it is not!).
But I think you shouldn't put Narnia, Lord of the Rings, and the Hunger Games together, since the Hunger Games is totally different from Lewis' and Tolkien's works.
So there's my two cents.
But I think you shouldn't put Narnia, Lord of the Rings, and the Hunger Games together, since the Hunger Games is totally different from Lewis' and Tolkien's works.
So there's my two cents.
"Which one of these is not like the others" (sings)
Putting Hunger Games with LOTR and Narnia is almost like putting Captain Underpants in a triumvirate with War and Peace and Brothers Karamazov.
I'm glad someone likes my sense of humor. I am dead serious though, Hunger games is simply nowhere near worthy of being considered equal to the other 2 works.
This is the type of questions which aims for a short review concerning the qualities of a book overall for an answer by no means can be given by anyone. Strongly individually as it is, one is attracted by a dazzlingly speedy action in a novel, another by slow and detailed descriptions of the characters, third by some kind of mixture of the aforementioned features.I am going to start with The Chronicles of Narnia. It is a childish book, undoubtedly. It features some kids who enter a magic world through a wardrobe while playing hide-and-seek. This wardrobe is their connection between the outer, real world, and the inner fictional world. Which makes me think that had some of them been in a grave danger and eventually killed, they would still live in the outer world. Knowing that a danger in book is fictional for the heroes themselves doesn’t make you thrilled at all. So, let’s go forth! The kids seek another kid kidnapped by a villain, well known in other fairytale. Of course, the rest of the party set off for the castle where the boy is kept. Wonderful, but not great! Should the ‘good forces’ not be able to continue on, beat the evil servants or just get frustrated somewhere, there comes the Great Aslan, who saves them. Knight battles and anything else you've already seen. Here prevails the action and in my opinion, the thrill is lost with that unnecessarily suppressed impending danger which gives you goosebumps. The descriptions aren't that strong and picturesque as these in LotR.
As for the latter, its magnificent, detailed and its enormous world is still unfully discovered despite there having been published many books about it, and shall never be sadly.Nevertheless, it gives us food for thought and imagination. The descriptions are quite vivid and the described flashes in your mind as you read. Every single trifle is flamboyantly recreated in your mind. It is much more attracting to me than Narnia because while you read you hold your breath and expect the Black Riders to emerge from the nothing and kill the poor powerless hobbits . Well, this is the initial threat. The second is much more cunning – will to rule over everyone. No, this is between friends, which makes it the biggest threat. Vicious will to make good by acquiring an important object giving a tremendous power. Treachery might have been committed. An imminent danger literally prosecutes every good creature everywhere in particular the burdened party. Frodo and Sam have to rely on themselves which is an idea wonderfully developed here. They can no longer trust any ‘big man’ having seen what Boromir has attempted to do. Frodo and Sam are true friends, staying together no matter what the circumstances are and even though they are both exposed to grave dangers in the heart of Mordor, they always stick together. They are friends in the beginning of a great story as well as in its grand and perpetuated melancholy finale. The other characters are as well developed as the main heroes. Aragorn with his modesty, uncommon for a king of a vast kingdom, is a great hero whom we can learn much from. Gandalf is one of the most arguable characters. His soul, woven by mystery and peculiarity, predictability, grandeur and ordinariness, is simply unique. One of his antagonists, Saruman, is an even example of how easily white can turn to black without some stunning outer difference. Gimli and Legolas, despite their different races, can be friends. Not only are they good friends, but supporting ones.
So I consider I’ve already made myself plain as to which book I like better. As I’ve already stated, it is clearly a personal choice and everyone should make it. I haven’t read Hunger Games so I can’t comment on it.
Thank you! :)
I don't hate HG, but I sincerely hope it will not become a "classic" which will be read 50 years from now in America's schools. The writing IS good, and so it might end up with the same popularity as Of Mice and Men, or something like that. It's just so popular, but without the good cultural impact like LOTR or Narnia. It does have morals, but its really overrated.
Daniel wrote: "I love Narnia the best. I found it just as deep as Lord of the Rings. But I CANNOT say which is "better" than the other. They both are so different.
Plus, you can't even compare Hunger Games with ..."
Lol. I know. I liked the Hunger Games when I was watching the movie, but only then. It doesn't make any of today's kids want to cherish friendships, as long as your life is on the line. And that just makes bullying worse. If kids can mistreat their friends for their own advantage, than what will they do to people they don't like? Suzanne Collins deserves credit, that's for sure. But dwelling on the good things of this world is far better than watching people your own age hurting each other for food...
Plus, you can't even compare Hunger Games with ..."
Lol. I know. I liked the Hunger Games when I was watching the movie, but only then. It doesn't make any of today's kids want to cherish friendships, as long as your life is on the line. And that just makes bullying worse. If kids can mistreat their friends for their own advantage, than what will they do to people they don't like? Suzanne Collins deserves credit, that's for sure. But dwelling on the good things of this world is far better than watching people your own age hurting each other for food...
I haven't read Lord of the rings yet. I want to read them! I like The Hunger Games best. I like Narnia too, but The Hunger Games is just so good. i am a huge fan of harry potter too... But i would say The Hunger Games, i really love them.
LOTR, no contest. I was introduced to both The Chronicles of Narnia and LOTR at around the same time in my life when I was 9 or 10. But only LOTR stuck although I did enjoy The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. I haven't read Hunger Games yet.
Lord of the Rings cannot be compared to Narnia and Hunger Games. Especially not Hunger Games.....enough said. :)
Considering that Tolkien and Lewis were best friends and Tolkien encouraged Lewis to write I find it funny how often these two works are compared. I must admit that I am confused how/why Hunger Games is even in the same list. Tolkien is hard to compare to other non-literary professors. He wrote the W section of the Oxford Dictionary. Additionally he translated Beowulf, the version is still the most widely used. In order to truly compare LOTR you'd have to find another author with the same caliber of understanding of the English language. For me LOTR will win out against most anything, but then I'm a bit of a huge fan of Tolkien and all his works.
Lewis wrote Narnia as a way to express his journey to finding Christianity (he converted because of Tolkien). So for me Narnia has a special place because it was based on such a personal journey. However, I don't think it is on the same level as LOTR. They are too different. The only things they have in common is a fantasy theme.
I have not read Hunger Games, nor do I intend to. So I have no place to comment on it or the story itself.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
I personally think LOTR is better, then Narnia, then Hunger Games. I'm very biased, though. I've known about LOTR and Narnia since very little. As for the hunger games I've never really liked it, no offense to anyone.
PS: I spent almost all of 1-3 grades obsessing over Narnia. It wasn't until about 4th grade that I started understanding LOTR hype. I only heard about the HG through friends.