Narnia versus Lord of the Rings

Which do you think is better?

I personally think Narnia>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Lord of the Rings.

They are better paced, they have smoother, more economical prose , they are filled with nothing but story whereas Lord of the Rings has tons of boring "traveling/scenery" filler.Lord of the Rings quickly bores me with it's longwindedness whereas the Narnia books are prime examples of strong storytelling that keeps the events in motion in an economical way; IMO Lord of the Rings fails at this. The only Narnia book I don't care for is Voyage of the Dawn Treader because it doesn't have much of a story. It's more of a "journey".

Another reason I like Narnia better is that I don't give a crap about "lore". I only care about story and character interaction.

Just to be clear, I'm comparing the books, not the movies.

I was ok with Narnia, until the obvious christian references came into play. Once they started shoving religious idealism down my throat, I couldn't stand it. Gonna have to go with LOTRNibroc420

I don't think that the Chronicles of Narnia shoves it down the readers throat tho.

Sure, there's alot of crap in the CoN that to IMO is problematic in all kinds of ways (Susan getting kicked out of Narnia for wearing lipstick and flirting with boys is just the tip of the iceberg), but the books are always telling a story and don't get preachy unlike Ayn Rand's books, which have a whole bunch of preachiness disguised as dialogue. Narnia is all story even if does have tons of Christian references and symbolism.

Yeah, LOTR might have less of the references and what not, but IMO, it's not nearly as well told.

Lord of the Rings.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]I was ok with Narnia, until the obvious christian references came into play. Once they started shoving religious idealism down my throat, I couldn't stand it. Gonna have to go with LOTRGreySeal9

I don't think that the Chronicles of Narnia shoves it down the readers throat tho.

Sure, there's alot of crap in the CoN that to me is problematic in all kind of ways, but the books are always telling a story and don't get preachy unlike Ayn Rand's books, which have a whole bunch of preachiness disguised as dialogue. Narnia is all story even if does have tons of Christian references and symbolism.

Yeah, LOTR might have less of the references and what not, but IMO, it's not nearly as well told.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]I was ok with Narnia, until the obvious christian references came into play. Once they started shoving religious idealism down my throat, I couldn't stand it. Gonna have to go with LOTRNibroc420

I don't think that the Chronicles of Narnia shoves it down the readers throat tho.

Sure, there's alot of crap in the CoN that to me is problematic in all kind of ways, but the books are always telling a story and don't get preachy unlike Ayn Rand's books, which have a whole bunch of preachiness disguised as dialogue. Narnia is all story even if does have tons of Christian references and symbolism.

Yeah, LOTR might have less of the references and what not, but IMO, it's not nearly as well told.

I'm not sure that Tolkein was anymore original than Lewis TBH. They both had sources they were drawing from.

Even if Tolkein was more creative, it wouldn't matter to me because the LOTR books are such a chore.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] To be fair, i only read the first one, i watched all teh movies tho :P As soon as Asland made the whole reference to being god, and his kingdom being heaven, i hated that I'd wasted all my time for a religious BS ending. Makes me glad i didn't actually read it. At least Tolkien was original and creative. "Rofl, talking Jesus Lion, the kids will love it!" ExoticAnimal

Yeah, the movies are pretty awful.

I mean, the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe was just kinda mediocre, but Prince Caspian was awful.

[QUOTE="ExoticAnimal"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"] To be fair, i only read the first one, i watched all teh movies tho :P As soon as Asland made the whole reference to being god, and his kingdom being heaven, i hated that I'd wasted all my time for a religious BS ending. Makes me glad i didn't actually read it. At least Tolkien was original and creative. "Rofl, talking Jesus Lion, the kids will love it!" GreySeal9

Yeah, the movies are pretty awful.

I mean, the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe was just kinda mediocre, but Prince Caspian was awful.

[QUOTE="ExoticAnimal"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"] To be fair, i only read the first one, i watched all teh movies tho :P As soon as Asland made the whole reference to being god, and his kingdom being heaven, i hated that I'd wasted all my time for a religious BS ending. Makes me glad i didn't actually read it. At least Tolkien was original and creative. "Rofl, talking Jesus Lion, the kids will love it!" GreySeal9

Yeah, the movies are pretty awful.

I mean, the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe was just kinda mediocre, but Prince Caspian was awful.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="ExoticAnimal"] The books are so much better than the Narnia movies You really should read it you do get a chance.cheesyjon

Yeah, the movies are pretty awful.

I mean, the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe was just kinda mediocre, but Prince Caspian was awful.

I agree completely.

I'm not a big fan of the LOTR movies (because I'm not a fan of LOTR), but there's no doubt that it was an inspired and extremely well done adaption.

The Narnia movies were so limp by comparison.

[QUOTE="ExoticAnimal"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"] To be fair, i only read the first one, i watched all teh movies tho :P As soon as Asland made the whole reference to being god, and his kingdom being heaven, i hated that I'd wasted all my time for a religious BS ending. Makes me glad i didn't actually read it. At least Tolkien was original and creative. "Rofl, talking Jesus Lion, the kids will love it!" GreySeal9

Yeah, the movies are pretty awful.

I mean, the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe was just kinda mediocre, but Prince Caspian was awful.

Would Narnia even exist if it weren't for Lord of the Rings?

Oh, and Narnia is filled with moronic children that are not likeable. Lord of the Rings for me.

Only going my the movies here, and I know the limitations against the books but... Narnia always struck me to be the Gobots to the LoTR transformers. CreasianDevaili

It might seem like that going by the movies, but book wise, they are both giants of fantasy literature and they are totally different, so it's not like one is an imitation which is what Gobots seems like to me.

Would Narnia even exist if it weren't for Lord of the Rings?

Oh, and Narnia is filled with moronic children that are not likeable. Lord of the Rings for me.

LORD_BLACKGULT

The first published Narnia book was published before LOTR.

Even if Narnia was inspired by LOTR, I would still consider it to have way better storytelling.

[QUOTE="cheesyjon"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Yeah, the movies are pretty awful.

I mean, the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe was just kinda mediocre, but Prince Caspian was awful.

GreySeal9

I agree completely.

I'm not a big fan of the LOTR movies (because I'm not a fan of LOTR), but there's no doubt that it was an inspired and extremely well done adaption.

The Narnia movies were so limp by comparison.

Yeah, in my opinion, Peter Jackson makes the best movies. (close is Nolan) :P

But yeah I took to the polls considering books, not films, so I voted Narnia. :)

But the thing I like, too, is that Lord of the Rings (in movies) isn't rushed, where as in Narnia, they want to make the movie shorter, so everything happens too fast. That's what bugs me about so many newer movies.

The first published Narnia book was published before LOTR.

Even if Narnia was inspired by LOTR, I would still consider it to have way better storytelling.

GreySeal9

I seem to have gotten my dates mixed up. :P

As for storytelling, if the characters are not likable, then the storytelling is meaningless.

I can't seem to find a single redeemable feature of Narnia....

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="ExoticAnimal"] The books are so much better than the Narnia movies You really should read it you do get a chance.Nibroc420

Yeah, the movies are pretty awful.

I mean, the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe was just kinda mediocre, but Prince Caspian was awful.

I'm not surpised that VotDT was terribad since the book is pretty mediocre compared to the others IMO.

As for that scene, I don't really see it as indoctrination. I just think it's an artistic expression of the authors view. It's no more indoctrination than His Dark Materials is (HDM is actually my favorite of all the big fantasy series).

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

The first published Narnia book was published before LOTR.

Even if Narnia was inspired by LOTR, I would still consider it to have way better storytelling.

LORD_BLACKGULT

I seem to have gotten my dates mixed up. :P

As for storytelling, if the characters are not likable, then the storytelling is meaningless.

I can't seem to find a single redeemable feature of Narnia....

Really?

I mean, I don't really like LOTR too much, but it obviously has some things going for it like a well fleshed out world and what not.

I also don't really agree with the idea that characters have to be likable. Characters IMO do need to be developed well, but I see no reason why they need to be likable. Actually, I think that authors often trip up when they try hard to make you like characters. I think characters are who they are even if that means they are unlikable.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]Only going my the movies here, and I know the limitations against the books but... Narnia always struck me to be the Gobots to the LoTR transformers. GreySeal9

It might seem like that going by the movies, but book wise, they are both giants of fantasy literature and they are totally different, so it's not like one is an imitation which is what Gobots seems like to me.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]Only going my the movies here, and I know the limitations against the books but... Narnia always struck me to be the Gobots to the LoTR transformers. CreasianDevaili

It might seem like that going by the movies, but book wise, they are both giants of fantasy literature and they are totally different, so it's not like one is an imitation which is what Gobots seems like to me.

Oh, OK. I get it.

Yeah, movie-wise, I think you're entirely right.

To some sure it sucked due to length but I got to say I enjoyed that aspect. Where as in Narnia.. at the very least the movies, seemed to not do so well with the inter movie pacing. CreasianDevaili

Just to bring some controversy into this thread:

This is what Philip Pullman had to say about the two of them:

"I dislike his Narnia books because of the solution he offers to the great questions of human life: is there a God, what is the purpose, all that stuff, which he really does engage with pretty deeply, unlike Tolkien who doesn't touch it at all. "The Lord of the Rings' is essentially trivial. Narnia is essentially serious, though I don't like the answer Lewis comes up with. If I was doing it at all, I was arguing with Narnia. Tolkien is not worth arguing with."

Just to bring some controversy into this thread:

This is what Philip Pullman had to say about the two of them:

"I dislike his Narnia books because of the solution he offers to the great questions of human life: is there a God, what is the purpose, all that stuff, which he really does engage with pretty deeply, unlike Tolkien who doesn't touch it at all. "The Lord of the Rings' is essentially trivial. Narnia is essentially serious, though I don't like the answer Lewis comes up with. If I was doing it at all, I was arguing with Narnia. Tolkien is not worth arguing with."

Just to bring some controversy into this thread:

This is what Philip Pullman had to say about the two of them:

"I dislike his Narnia books because of the solution he offers to the great questions of human life: is there a God, what is the purpose, all that stuff, which he really does engage with pretty deeply, unlike Tolkien who doesn't touch it at all. "The Lord of the Rings' is essentially trivial. Narnia is essentially serious, though I don't like the answer Lewis comes up with. If I was doing it at all, I was arguing with Narnia. Tolkien is not worth arguing with."

GreySeal9

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Just to bring some controversy into this thread:

This is what Philip Pullman had to say about the two of them:

"I dislike his Narnia books because of the solution he offers to the great questions of human life: is there a God, what is the purpose, all that stuff, which he really does engage with pretty deeply, unlike Tolkien who doesn't touch it at all. "The Lord of the Rings' is essentially trivial. Narnia is essentially serious, though I don't like the answer Lewis comes up with. If I was doing it at all, I was arguing with Narnia. Tolkien is not worth arguing with."

cheesyjon

He's the writer of His Dark Materials which includes The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Dark_Materials

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Just to bring some controversy into this thread:

This is what Philip Pullman had to say about the two of them:

"I dislike his Narnia books because of the solution he offers to the great questions of human life: is there a God, what is the purpose, all that stuff, which he really does engage with pretty deeply, unlike Tolkien who doesn't touch it at all. "The Lord of the Rings' is essentially trivial. Narnia is essentially serious, though I don't like the answer Lewis comes up with. If I was doing it at all, I was arguing with Narnia. Tolkien is not worth arguing with."

CreasianDevaili

Yeah, it definitely is a journey story and I do understand why people like that kind of thing. It's just not really my thing. I'd rather the author cut to the chase if you know what I mean.

Really?

I mean, I don't really like LOTR too much, but it obviously has some things going for it like a well fleshed out world and what not.

I also don't really agree with the idea that characters have to be likable. Characters IMO do need to be developed well, but I see no reason why they need to be likable. Actually, I think that authors often trip up when they try hard to make you like characters. I think characters are who they are even if that means they are unlikable.

GreySeal9

LOTR has decent storytelling. Good lore, and likable characters. Narnia, on the other hand, has boring lore, good storytelling, and non-likable characters. If a character makes me think "Gosh, you are a moron, and rather bland excuse for a person. You have no cool properties. I hate the text that represents you." then it makes reading become a chore.

All I want is a good story, decent storytelling, and characters that are interesting, if a bit shallow. Narnia may have good storytelling, but its lore andcharacters are not to my liking.

After all, who wants to read a bookthat has more elements that they don't like than they do like?

Man, Narnia's getting slaughtered in the poll.

I did expect that tho.

LOTR by a country mile

Narnia is ridiculous... Its so campy and they don't seem to understand the word subtlety at all... I mean seriously just call the Lion Jesus and save us some time here.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Really?

I mean, I don't really like LOTR too much, but it obviously has some things going for it like a well fleshed out world and what not.

I also don't really agree with the idea that characters have to be likable. Characters IMO do need to be developed well, but I see no reason why they need to be likable. Actually, I think that authors often trip up when they try hard to make you like characters. I think characters are who they are even if that means they are unlikable.

LORD_BLACKGULT

LOTR has decent storytelling. Good lore, and likable characters. Narnia, on the other hand, has boring lore, good storytelling, and non-likable characters. If a character makes me think "Gosh, you are a moron, and rather bland excuse for a person. You have no cool properties. I hate the text that represents you." then it makes reading become a chore.

All I want is a good story, decent storytelling, and characters that are interesting, if a bit shallow. Narnia may have good storytelling, but its lore andcharacters are not to my liking.

After all, who wants to read a bookthat has more elements that they don't like than they do like?

Well, if likable characters are your thing, then yeah, it's perfectly reasonable that you don't like Narnia. I just personally don't put that high of a priority on likable characters.

That being said, to your credit, there are certain characters that are so irritating that it makes the book hard to read.

Man, Narnia's getting slaughtered in the poll.

I did expect that tho.

GreySeal9

LOTR by a country mile

Narnia is ridiculous... Its so campy and they don't seem to understand the word sudlety at all... I mean seriously just call the Lion Jesus and save us some time here.

VendettaRed07

When you say campy, are you talking about the movies? Because yeah, those are campy as hell.

But the books I would never describe as campy.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Man, Narnia's getting slaughtered in the poll.

I did expect that tho.

cheesyjon

That's true.

It's really too bad that the Narnia movies were so badly executed. It gives off a really bad impression of the series.

[QUOTE="LORD_BLACKGULT"]

Would Narnia even exist if it weren't for Lord of the Rings?

Oh, and Narnia is filled with moronic children that are not likeable. Lord of the Rings for me.

GreySeal9

The first published Narnia book was published before LOTR.

Even if Narnia was inspired by LOTR, I would still consider it to have way better storytelling.

Narnia likely wouldn't exist without Tolkien at least. It was essentially Tolkien who was responsible for Lewis' shift from Atheism to Christianity. As far as the original question: maybe, maybe not. The first book have have been published before the first book of the 'Lord of the Rings', but Tolkien was writing 'LotR' before Lewis started writing Narnia, and they were close friends who often read portions of each other's work as it progressed. I've never read any of the Narnia books (never took an interest frankly), but to me nothing can touch Tolkien and the pseudo-history/mythology he constructed.

[QUOTE="cheesyjon"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Man, Narnia's getting slaughtered in the poll.

I did expect that tho.

GreySeal9

That's true.

It's really too bad that the Narnia movies were so badly executed. It gives off a really bad impression of the series.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Just to bring some controversy into this thread:

This is what Philip Pullman had to say about the two of them:

"I dislike his Narnia books because of the solution he offers to the great questions of human life: is there a God, what is the purpose, all that stuff, which he really does engage with pretty deeply, unlike Tolkien who doesn't touch it at all. "The Lord of the Rings' is essentially trivial. Narnia is essentially serious, though I don't like the answer Lewis comes up with. If I was doing it at all, I was arguing with Narnia. Tolkien is not worth arguing with."

Yeah, it definitely is a journey story and I do understand why people like that kind of thing. It's just not really my thing. I'd rather the author cut to the chase if you know what I mean.

[QUOTE="cheesyjon"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Just to bring some controversy into this thread:

This is what Philip Pullman had to say about the two of them:

"I dislike his Narnia books because of the solution he offers to the great questions of human life: is there a God, what is the purpose, all that stuff, which he really does engage with pretty deeply, unlike Tolkien who doesn't touch it at all. "The Lord of the Rings' is essentially trivial. Narnia is essentially serious, though I don't like the answer Lewis comes up with. If I was doing it at all, I was arguing with Narnia. Tolkien is not worth arguing with."

GreySeal9

He's the writer of His Dark Materials which includes The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Dark_Materials

AHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA ........The writer of the Golden Compass and The Amber Spyglass calling THE LORD OF THE RINGS trivial nonsense that isn't worth discussing? Oh my god, I think I am going to die. Not only that, he hates on the Narnia books but even though I am not crazy about them they are 20 times better than the poorly written drivel he put out

Well, if likable characters are your thing, then yeah, it's perfectly reasonable that you don't like Narnia. I just personally don't put that high of a priority on likable characters.

That being said, to your credit, there are certain characters that are so irritating that it makes the book hard to read.

GreySeal9

I suppose there are a few different types of readers: Those in it for the crafting of a good story (like you), and those in it for both the story the cast, and the lore(me). The end goal is always enjoyment.

At the end of the day, If the unlikable characters make me not want to read, then that's a bad sign for me. I don't read to be annoyed by text that is supposed to represent a person. :x

Edit: Where's the Eragon love? :lol:

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="LORD_BLACKGULT"]

Would Narnia even exist if it weren't for Lord of the Rings?

Oh, and Narnia is filled with moronic children that are not likeable. Lord of the Rings for me.

worlock77

The first published Narnia book was published before LOTR.

Even if Narnia was inspired by LOTR, I would still consider it to have way better storytelling.

Narnia likely wouldn't exist without Tolkien at least. It was essentially Tolkien who was responsible for Lewis' shift from Atheism to Christianity. As far as the original question: maybe, maybe not. The first book have have been published before the first book of the 'Lord of the Rings', but Tolkien was writing 'LotR' before Lewis started writing Narnia, and they were close friends who often read portions of each other's work as it progressed. I've never read any of the Narnia books (never took an interest frankly), but to me nothing can touch Tolkien and the pseudo-history/mythology he constructed.

That's a pretty good point. Never thought of it that way.

As for that last part, yeah I realize that's what people really love about LOTR and it is quite an achievement for sure, but I'm more interested in present incident and what's going to happen next than history and what not.

But all the same, it is a hell of an achievement that fantasy writers have been trying to duplicate since the books gained notoriety.

[QUOTE="VendettaRed07"]

LOTR by a country mile

Narnia is ridiculous... Its so campy and they don't seem to understand the word sudlety at all... I mean seriously just call the Lion Jesus and save us some time here.

GreySeal9

When you say campy, are you talking about the movies? Because yeah, those are campy as hell.

But the books I would never describe as campy.

Well I haven't read them since middle school, but then I saw the movies and it probably exagerrated what I remembered from them. But I do remember a ton of weird religious imagery constantly popping up though that is what kind of made me loose interest... I don't really have a problem with them doing that or putting religous imagery in books, especially seeing as when it came out that stuff was everywhere but it was just waayyy too obvious for my liking

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="cheesyjon"] Who's Philip Pullman?VendettaRed07

He's the writer of His Dark Materials which includes The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Dark_Materials

AHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA ........The writer of the Golden Compass and The Amber Spyglass calling THE LORD OF THE RINGS trivial nonsense that isn't worth discussing? Oh my god, I think I am going to die. Not only that, he hates on the Narnia books but even though I am not crazy about them they are 20 times better than the poorly written drivel he put out

I'd definitely disagree with you on that. I think His Dark Materials is easily the most creative out of the three of them, and has more three-dimensional characterization than either Narnia or LOTR. Whereas those two stories essentially have black and white morality (as does Rowling), HDM explores moral grey areas. I also think it deals with much deeper themes than LOTR does.

Also, I find the prose to be quite gorgeous. What do you think is poor about the writing?

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Well, if likable characters are your thing, then yeah, it's perfectly reasonable that you don't like Narnia. I just personally don't put that high of a priority on likable characters.

That being said, to your credit, there are certain characters that are so irritating that it makes the book hard to read.

LORD_BLACKGULT

I suppose there are a few different types of readers: Those in it for the crafting of a good story (like you), and those in it for both the story the cast, and the lore(me). The end goal is always enjoyment.

At the end of the day, If the unlikable characters make me not want to read, then that's a bad sign for me. I don't read to be annoyed by text that is supposed to represent a person. :x

Edit: Where's the Eragon love? :lol:

Well, as Eragon is essentially a really bad imitation of LOTR, I don't think you're going to find Eragon love in a poll in which LOTR is an option. :P

Well, as Eragon is essentially a really bad imitation of LOTRGreySeal9

Thus sums up most fantasy.

Well, as Eragon is essentially a really bad imitation of LOTR, I don't think you're going to find Eragon love in a poll in which LOTR is an option. :PGreySeal9

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]Well, as Eragon is essentially a really bad imitation of LOTR, I don't think you're going to find Eragon love in a poll in which LOTR is an option. :Pcheesyjon

I vaguely remeber that series (didn't read it, but knew about them), but I can't quite put my finger on it. What were they about?