In Your Opinion, What is the Better Book Series? LOTR, Potter, or Twilight?

[zarx]

non-gravity said:

zarx said:

binary solo said:

Harry Potter obviously. Twilight is truly awful. LOTR is a single book so doesn't qualify as a series. Anyway A Song of Ice and Fire is the kickassest series.

surely you jest 

The Lord of the Rings is a trillogy (The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King) with 2 prequels (The Hobbit, The Silmarillion (also contains many short stories)) 2 companion books made up of short stories (Unfinished Tales, The Adeventures of Tom Bombadil), there are also 12 history of middle earth books. 

 

Tolkien finished the LOTR as a single book, which his publisher then wanted to release as three volumes.

Then again the LOTR is also 6 books, with 2 books per volume.

 

Also The Hobbit isn't a prequel, but LOTR is the sequel :), and Silmarillion wasn't finished by J.R.R.

True the Hobbit is not a prequel it's been a long time since I read up about the books I forgot it was written first. 

But the fact that LOTR was origonaly put forth as one manuscript doesnt change the fact that it was published as 3 seperate volumes (and the majority of the different edditions are published that way), It qulifies as a series. Tho it probably would be more accurate to refer to the LOTR as a part of the greater tales of middle earth or mythopoeia. 

Also the fact that the Silmarillion wasn't finnished by JRR doesn't really have any real importance, many series include works not from the original creator and JRR did write almost all the content (and some of it was clearly left unfinnished) so it's not like it's not his work even if he didn't get the chance to put it together himself.