Skip over navigation

A Battle to End All Battles: Harry Potter VS The Hunger Games

A Battle to End All Battles: Harry Potter VS The Hunger Games

By Contributor

Well, Sparklers, Crazywritergirl and I (Metalhead865) have once again returned! And after my Indiana Jones fanhood was completely crushed by all but two–TWO–commenters voting for Han Solo, I have to concede that war to CWG. But today, we have a topic that, as I have said many, many times during this article’s development, is GUARANTEED to tick you all off.

We’re debating two of everyone’s favorite book series this week, and things are going to get heated up in here. But before you throw our names in the drawing for the Quarter Quell or send a Hungarian Horntail after either of us, we’d like you to read this Disclaimer:

Our opinions are for the purposes of this argument only. Metalhead865 very, very much enjoys Harry Potter (and sort of actually fears the Killing Curse). And Crazywritergirl does not actually hate The Hunger Games; as a matter of fact, she has an enormous crush on Finnick. (AHH!!! HOLY CHEESEBALLS METAL!!! YOU WEREN’T SUPPOSED TO SAY THAT!!!—Crazywritergirl).

As big fans of BOTH series, neither of us would like to receive any hate mail, death threats, bodily or emotional harm threats, or drone strikes, so kindly do not attempt any of the above. Our secret fortress is defended by tracker jackers and Dementors alike, so any attempt on our lives may not end well for you.

(Note from Crazywritergirl: Also, I am personal friends with Neville…I’ll sic him on you all!)

(Note from Metalhead: She WILL!)

Metalhead: In Defense of Hunger Games

Here’s a few reasons why Harry Potter has NOTHING on The Hunger Game:

-It’s so unrealistic. Hunger Games has arrows, explosions, trees, and strange–but sort-of possible–genetic hybrids. What does Harry Potter have? “Magic.” Wake-up call! NONE OF IT IS REAL. Hogwarts only exists in Florida at Universal Studios. But there’s a slight possibility that Panem could be us in the future.

-When reading them, you feel embarrassed because they’re in the kids’ section of the library. The KIDS’ section. At least The Hunger Games are in the Young Adult section.

-Some of the main characters are wimps and/or nerds. Harry doesn’t do well in class. Hermione’s a nerd. Ron is a wimp. “Why couldn’t it be follow the butterflies?” Now Katniss? She kicks butt. She’s beautiful. She can think on her feet. From the start, too. It took Harry and the gang seven years to get as badarse as they are.

-It goes from funny to serious in, again, an unrealistic fashion. Sorcerer’s Stone was all lighthearted and fun, but Deathly Hallows was so dark and not fun but kind of exciting. Hunger Games sticks with the dark, serious, and mature theme the whole way through.

-What else has J.K. Rowling written? A book about a town council. Suzanne Collins wrote the Gregor the Overlander fantasy series, among other children’s books. Oh, and Collins is the best-selling Kindle author of all time. Take that, Ministry of Magic.

Crazywritergirl: In Defense of Harry Potter

Quick note before we begin: You all may notice that this next section is written in a voice that differs from my own. Let me explain. I have this smashingly awesome cousin who shall only go by the name of Immagoldensnitch. As soon as I heard that our next topic would include Harry Potter, I thought of her. You see, she is a veritable wealth of Harry Potter fanliness and knowledge! She amazes me…she is a legend in her own time! AND…she happened to be staying with me the very day that I was supposed to write this article! So what did I do? I let her write this section. And she did a simply smashing job! Heck, the job was so glorious that I couldn’t possibly take the credit myself! So here you have it guys…Immagoldensnitch in all of her Harry Potting glory!

-Well, after that obvious and disgusting bit of….slander. UNREALISTIC!?!? Of course it’s unrealistic, There’s nothing wrong with a piece of FICTION writing being a little unrealistic; the more unrealistic the better, really. What every Potterhead loves is the characters who have relatable emotions, but exist in a fun and magical world. Also, to quote Dumbledore: “Just because it is in your head, doesn’t mean it isn’t real.” Harry Potter is real for us, and it’s amazing! Also, if you read The Science of Harry Potter, you will see much of the magic is based on fact; actual theories, inventions, and history can be related to things in Harry Potter. As for Panem being in the future, is that the negative message we want to send to young people? “Humans are disgusting, awful people who have no hope to improve so give up on your entire species! “

-You shouldn’t be embarrassed about something you love, especially if it’s Harry Potter. If they’re in the kid’s section, I’d gladly be a child, Dumbledore makes the point various times that young people are underestimated, so you having a problem that it’s in the kid’s section just proves his point that people look down on kids when they shouldn’t.

-Hermione is a nerd & Ron can sometimes be a wimp, I will not lie. But there is nothing wrong with being intelligent; it proves useful to Hermione many times! And Ron is only wimpy a few times, he always pulls through in the end. It’s not like he’s a horrible person to sometimes feel fear when he and his friends faced insurmountable odds. Also, the main character of The Hunger Games, Katniss, becomes fearful many times; she's not an emotionless female warrior lady. She shows weakness quite a bit, like Ron, but there’s nothing wrong with that; you can have emotions and feel sad but still kick arse. Also, you mention she’s beautiful. How superficial! Beauty is not what counts—a point proved by none other than Hermione Granger. In Harry Potter, even the homely characters find love, but Collins felt she had to make everyone picturesque to keep the romance thing running. Also, they did plenty of badarse things in all of the books, they just get more badarse over time because they age SEVEN years from beginning to end. You say Katniss was a badarse the whole time, but the time span of The Hunger Games is quite considerable despite it’s puny three books, but did she grow MORE badarse like the Harry Potter cast of characters? NO.

-The tone of the books only change because the characters develop and change. Change in characters to fit the situations is a GOOD thing. The Potter books cover SEVEN MOTHA FLIPPING YEARS; if all the characters stay serious, child-like, or immature, then a message isn’t made to the readers about how life changes.

-The argument about what else JK Rowling has written is irrelevant. This is series vs. series, not author vs. author. But since you brought it up, let me remind you Rowling wrote twice as many books for Harry Potter than Collins did for Hunger Games & three of those were bigger than your head! Also, “best-selling Kindle author”? Try the first person to become a billionaire by writing books.

BAM! Your move.

(Note from Metalhead: I think that deserves some serious applause.)

Back-AND-Forth (Note: Immagoldensnitch did NOT participate in this section. This is all me, crazywritergirl.)

MH: You and your ridiculous opinions! What makes you think that you can say that Hunger Games is that much worse than Harry Potter?

CWG: Well for one, HARRY POTTER IS AWESOME TO THE POWER OF INFINITY!!! And Hunger Games is weak…

MH: Weak? WEAK?!? Hunger Games has explosions, arrows, and genetic hybrids. Harry Potter has “magic.”

CWG: Katniss whines too much…she even whines about free makeovers and smashing outfits. Besides, if Hagrid’s creature creations aren’t considered “hybrids,” then I don’t know what is! And are you MOCKING the magic, sir?

MH: Am I mocking the magic? Is Ron a hopeless scaredy-cat? (Answer: YES!) Ron whines five times as much as Katniss.

CWG: Now you go after the ginger? Classy…real classy. Anyways, Ron eventually caught the badarsery.

MH: Eventually being the key word. Harry had to catch the badarsery too, as did Hermione. Katniss was a badarse from the start…and not a bad-looking one either.

CWG: You attack their courage and their looks?! Dear Sparklers, please note that this boy just called your favorite characters ugly (by default).

MH: Well, looks isn’t the only thing that Hunger Games has going for it. It’s so much more mature than Harry Potter.

CWG: How is that? Harry Pooter had a SWEAR WORD in the 7th book! If that’s not mature, then I don’t know what is! Hee hee…Harry Pooter. Typos are funny.

MH: Mature much? Anyway…Harry Potter took seven whole books to get mature. Hunger Games was mature from the beginning.

CWG: Harry Potter never had a bad book. They were all awesome. (Mockingjay was a disgrace).

MH: You did NOT just go there! Mockingjay was the most poignant and sad book, so many important characters died!

CWG: Yah…too many. Collins killed Finnick. She is a horrible lady.

MH: Rowling killed the somewhat likeable Cedric. She also killed Dumbledore AND Snape! You don’t call that horrible?!

CWG: Of course it is! But you forgot the worst part…

MH: What is that, pray tell?

CWG: She killed Dobby…and Fred.

MH: Yah…

CWG: :’(

There you have it. Possibly the most vicious fake argument ever recorded. And again, neither of us hate either series; our opinions are for the purposes of this argument only. But we want to see what YOU guys think. Do we have secret factions just itching to do battle? Or are you all going to rise up against us and our differing, not-that-true opinions and force us to unleash an army of Muttations and Acromantulas to destroy you all? Let’s see what you got! Hit those comments!

We can't wait to witness the apocalypse about to take place in the comments. REMEMBER TO KEEP IT CIVIL, BUTTS.

Both images courtesy of B&N.com

Topics: Books, Life, the hunger games
Tags: harry potter, books we love, the hunger games, suzanne collins, sparkler series, controversy, debates, hermione granger, jk rowling, katniss everdeen, mankler series

Write your own comment!

OR