Whether Diane Can Read Harry Potter or Not

We believe that the differences and/or similiarities between the "Harry Potter" and "Young Wizards" universes, their respective magic systems, their plot themes, and the characterizations of Harry, Ron, Hermione, Lord Voldemort, et al. vs. the characterizations of Nita, Kit, Dairine, the Lone Power, et al. are such that:

The 2 universes are wildly different so far, but there will be other books in both. (Hopefully many other Young Wizards)

With the way lawsuits seem to go, the fear that at some future time an overzealous publisher or author might decide that, in 2 series with teenage wizards, something was similar enough to sue, is real.

And besides, Diane has expressed the personal preference, and IMHO she writes better then J.K.Rowling anyway.

There is no other wisdom, and no other hope for us, but that we grow wise
- Surak of Vulcan

[worlebird]

What has it got in its pocketssesssss?

Oh, sorry, wrong fantasy series. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

Anyway, the only possible answer thst doesn't imply they are almost exactly the same is the first one. In fact, 2 and 3 are almost the same answer. I would prefer an answer like: "While there are some themeatic similarities, both the stories and most of the basic foundational concepts are quite different. Only the most casual of observers would confuse one with the other."

As far as influence goes, I don't think anyone can deny that Harry potter has had some impact on the Young Wizards; not on the stories as such (especially when you consider that this series was started over a decade before Rowling's), but certainly the Young Wizard's series has recieved more attention because of Harry Potter (note all of the "If you liked Harry Potter, you might also like..." references you see). It's not unlikely that Ms. Duane's publishers have this in mind when they agree to more books in the series. This is not to say that they wouldn't be published otherwise, but I'm sure the Harry Potter phenomenon helps.

Worlebird
------------------------------------
!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)

if you consider similarities or possible conflicts between Duane's and Rowling's books, you must also take into account the Chronicles of the Chrestomanci, by Diana Wynne Jones, and any other series with young wizards/sorcerers/etc. At least, that is what I would think.

Dai-stihó,
Rhiow-chan.
http://www.geocities.com/booknightmoon

i, being the avidly, frighteningly obsessed harry potter fanatic that i am, can definitely see the similarities between rowling's universe and duane's--but, as the avidly, frightenly obsessed fanatic, i can also see the differences. obviously they're similar; any books, with the possible exception of lotr, about wizardry and those who use it are going to have some similarities. people have come to expect certain aspects of witchcraft/wizardry/magic to be a specific way--such as the use of a wand or a staff to channel magic or magical energy. also, as worlebird pointed out--and, no matter how obsessed with harry potter i am, since i'm also a young wizards fan, i'll hold true to this--young wizards was begun long before rowling was even inspired to write harry potter. it might even be logical to say young wizards has influenced harry potter (not to say that it couldn't work in reverse too). in the 'about the author' section of one of philip pullman's books, he relates a quote he says is true for all writers: that he "reads like a butterfly, writes like a bee."

[Em]

Well, all fantasy books of this time seem to have a certain degree of similarities... probably because the just sell better that way. I know tons of people who pay attention to those "if you like this book, you would like...". I figure, it must have to do with the way people think: if you read a book you absolutely love, you want to find others like it, right? But, I mean, if the YW series wasn't similar to other fantasy books in any way, than it wouldn't be considered fantasy. I don't think that it's the similarities that matter at all, because no one really pays much attention to those anyway if it's a good enough book, but the differnces that matter the most. No one I have ever talked to here likes these books because they remind them of Harry Potter...everyone likes them because they are new and exciting and different from what else is out there. The argument about similarities and differences could go one forever, but in the end, does it really even matter if these books are so good? I really don't think so.

~Em~

"Before you judge someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes." Frieda Norris

[Polly6]

Even though they are starting to move away from this a bit ,they have to as they age, ther harry potter books are more like childrens books. Where the YW books are alot deeper.

As much as I love Harry potter DD is a much better author.

Harry Potter Young Wizards huummmm...

Nope I just don't see the simalarties yes they are both Wizards but you sure don't see Nita going to Hogwarts now huh. And the YW books implie that no wizardry is done without a price while in Harry Potter they can do magic and fly on there brooms all day and they aren't completely exhausted at the end of the day.
Ok I am going to stop because I can go on all day talking about non-simalarites and simalarites.
In short I did find the YW books at the If you like Harry Potter you'll like table but I will always like the YW books better Diane Duane is just a better author no doubt in my mind.

*Nita*

Not old enough to love as yet-but old enough to die indeed.
--DD Deep Wizardry

[Birdhead]

I'va always thought that, of course, there are similarities in many different series in the same genre-and that's neither a good or a bad thing. I think that, if you're writing, you're influenced by everything that you've read- but to call it plagiarism is ridiculous... If you're writing about teenage wizards, you're obviously going to have some similarities, if you're doing the job right- teenagers are going to have similar thoughts/issues whatever the series, which lend themselves slightly towards plot- but in HP I just can't dee anything YW like, actually. Timespan, setting, even theme, are really different.
I wouldn't neccesarily say that DD should read HP, but I think not reading stuff in your own genre is pointless. Everything influences each other- and, well, some fantasy authors (Like, i think, Goodkind) are rather proud that they never read in their genre, because they don't want to plagiarise. However, the result (and now I'm thinking specifically of Goodkind's the Sword of Truth) is painful. Re-hashed, boring, repetitive, hyper-similar plots, characters and settings live!(No offense to Goodkind fans; but...)So, yeah, I'm not sure where I'm actually going, but definitely, HP is completely different.
bye!
B

Tuibird in Aotearoa
Conservationist, Scientist, and proud of both!
Chocolate lover extraordinaire... mmmmyummmm
*whimper* Exams, 17th to 3rd. Feel for me!

[Aurora]

Harry Potter is sooo different from YW, its IMPOSSIBLE for a good reader to think one influenced the other. Granted, there are the basic similarities, but beyond the fact that they're young, teenaged wizards, they're completely different. I can't see how ppl could EVER confuse them.
And DD is equal, if not better, than JKR. End of story.

Aurora the Phoenix

I agree with Aurora. The only similarities are the common ones that appear in all fantasy books. What about in A Wizard of Earthsea? That's about a young boy who goes off on a journey to become a wizard. They are all the same, because they are all fantasy. It seems to me that the person who wrote the first post on this with the poll was thinking that like Diane Duane copied J.K. Rowling, or vice versa, which is absolutely not true, considering that copying is the same thing as playgerizing (I didn't spell that right), which is umm illegal. Well, I have to go now, ttyl!

I was one of the few people at the Washington, DC booksigning (because of the sniper incidents) and we (the 6 or so people there) were able to have a normal conversation/discussion with DD. This subject came up, and one thing I mentioned was that YW is more complex, in a good way. In HP, a wizard just has to wave a wand and say a word for something to happen. Yes, this is a little simplified, but that's basically what happens. Judging by this basic idea, just about anyone could be a wizard. In YW, a lot more science, and seemingly effort, goes into it. A wizard in the YW world has to, it seems to me, have certain qualities and abilities, beyond just being able to wave a wand and say a word. Not that I am trashing HP, it's just that its format is meant for younger readers who don't have the ability to take things at more than face value. DD expressed the opinion that, seeing as JKR has not explained this yet, and the series is more than halfway finished, she will not get into it because it is the sort of topic that would need to be introduced in the first book.

[Rysade]

Lessee, I was recently reading essays published online pertaining the magic aspect of Harry Potter, and they were quite interesting. It seems muggles use technology as a substitute for magic. If magic were available to muggles, what would they need with electricity? The wizardry of DD's books is a muggle science. It's just higher science. Like Arthur C. Clarke said, "Any suffieciently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Yes, I know how worn out that phrase is, but it's still true. However, in JK Rowling's books, the magic there acts like another branch of science, one that is available only to some, and has nothing to do with the other, more mundane science.

I don't know whether that difference is anything like a big enough difference to make the series REALLY dissimilar or not.

"Ed is hungry"

-- Dai Stihó

[Quill]

For an interesting take on the differences between technology and "magic"--and on the influence of the Divine in both one's life and society--I suggest Zenna Henderson's People series. Looks like most of her paperbacks are out of print, but they can sometimes be found in used bookstores, and an anthology of her People stories is still available, titled Ingathering. This is good stuff.

Zenna Henderson at Amazon.com

Inside every cynic there's an idealist desperately yearning to be let out, and when they are let out they're usually a real pain and cause all sorts of trouble. --Chris Boucher

[Rowen Avalon]

Very interesting topic. I tend to look at the two series as both very good but very separate. I read each of them when I'm in different moods. JKR's work in Harry Potter is a more comedic sort of book (although DD has her moments. Soggy beermat indeed!) with lots of action. A drama, if you will. Something fun and light hearted to read while still staying in our cosy fantasy niche. It focuses more on a typical teenage life, I think, that does DD. Afterall, let's face it, Nita and Kit don't seem to really socialize too much with the "normal" world. They deal more with big issues. I read them when I am needing some affirmation of reality.

DD's books are also much deeper. She like to try to tie the world world together through this series. Every idea out there has it's place in the YW series. On the other hand, JKR is focused more on ethics, in my opinion. Her books are about learning when to break rules, when to keep them, and what's the right thing to do.

So bringing this back on topic, if DD wants to avoid JKR's books so she won't be influenced to the point of copyright infringement, that's fine. However, I don't feel it's really possible for her to copy Harry Potter much. The essential plots of the stories are so incompatible - JKR loves to use tons of characters, DD doesn't; the wizardry styles are essentially different; see above and etc. I don't think she really needs to worry and she's missing some funny books if she doesn't read them. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

Besides, I hope JKR would have learned from her suit with whats-her-name and the "Rah and the Muggles" lawsuit that it's not worth grasping at copyright straws.

By the way, I'm a newbie here, so feel free to give me a nudge in the right direction.

Yours till the bes spreads,
@->-- Rowen Avalon
mysites/ravensiggys/constitutionality