On all fiction saga fanbases, Lord of the Rings came first. It's successor is the Harry Potter series. Many claim Twilight is Harry Potter's. What do toi think? Is Twilight the successor of Harry Potter?

The term fantaisie means a genre of literature that origins from fairytales, legends and myths and for its setting, plot ou theme uses Supernatural elements like magic.
J. R. R. Tolkien is, with his The Lord of the Rings (and other livres like Hobbit, Silmallirion...) know as the father of modern fantasy.

Now, Harry Potter series and Lord of the Rings have much in common. They are both epic ou high fantaisie in which main theme is conflict between good and evil, hero`s struggle for victory etc.
I would never dare to say that Harry Potter is better than Lord of the Rings, although I like it plus (simply because it is closer to my time and way of thinking).

Twilight and great works of epic fantaisie have almost nothing in common, except maybe for large fanbase and a couple of mythical creatures.
Yes, Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings have l’amour to, but it`s not used as main plot issue. And no, chit chat between the Volturi and Cullens is not exactly good vs evil.

Twilight is not successor of Harry Potter because a romance "fantasy" story does not have what it takes to set foundations for suivant generation of (good) fantaisie writers.

I don't think Harry Potter is necessarily the successor of Lord of the Rings because that would imply that it has replaced it, which it hasn't. I think that, plus accurately, Harry Potter is the suivant fantaisie series to rejoindre the ranks of Lord of the Rings and the Chronicles of Narnia as a timeless fantaisie classic which will be remembered for generations to come. Twilight will never be part of this group.

Twilight is not an epic fantasy, a timeless classic, well written, ou anything plus than a fad. It's a cheesy romance novel, so for it to be "the suivant Harry Potter," literature must surely die first.

That was something the Press came up with to hype the series even more. LOTR, Harry Potter, and étoile, star Wars are in the Same league. But Twilight will never live on as long as those three fanbases. Twilight is a fad. That is why they are coming out so fast in theatres. For fear of lack of interest. But that really erked me when they a dit " Twilight is the suivant Harry Potter" ou " Stephanie Meyer is the suivant Jo Rowling" Really? Give me break. ou I'll have the Death Eaters Give toi a visit. Everything the press is fabricated and untrue.

No way.

Are toi kidding me?Totally not!Not even close!

No, I don't think so

twilight is like one étoile, star (albeit an overly glittery, sparkles covered one) in a galaxy compared to lord of the rings ou harry potter :D.
It only scratches at the surface in comparison to their originality creativity and depth :P

No, I don´t think Harry Potter is the successor of Lord of the Rings and I don´t think Twilight is the successor of Harry Potter either.
They do not base on each other, but on some elements out of old legends (like dragons, wizards, vampires,...) and on the creativity of their author.
In my opinion, it just happened par accident that LotR was the first great fantaisie saga.
If Twilight ou HP were the first ones, we would say that the others base on them.
But the only thing these three series have in common is the existing of magic/magical elements. Apart from that, they are completely different.

No, because in 200 hundred years, people will still be lire HP. People will also be saying "Stephenie who?"

No, because Harry Potter is actually GOOD, as opposed to Twilight. -_-

Too tired to give real reasons, sorry. I might come back later and éditer my answer. :)

LOTR and harry potter are just great livres that took the authors soo much time to put together. if anything narnia should rejoindre the leaque of harry and frodo.
twilight has no place on its shelf.
twilight can sit in the bin where it belongs

If I had to ordered them it would go like this 1lord of the rings 2harry potter 3twilight