posted
Ok, so when I was at Pirates last night I saw a poster for the film version of Eragon, so I feel the need to place my querry before you. Is Eragon worth reading? I have heard very mixed reviews from friends. Thoughts? Opinions? Rants on topics that have noting to do with Ben Kingsley?
Posts: 242 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Every once in a while there's an Eragon thread here. I haven't read it; someone once told me that the plot is very much like Lord of the Rings meets Star Wars.
posted
Scott has a good write up about it and Eldest on his website, read that and determine if it's worth reading.
Personally, I would certainly not waste any money on it. Check it out from the library if you must, but be prepared to mourn the hours you lost reading it.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The book on tape for this one is good enough to pass the time on a daily commute or on a long road trip, but I would not have wasted my time on actually reading the book. It's not very original, and too often it does read like the writing of a fifteen year old, admitedly a talented 15 year old.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's what I figured when I heard about the trip. Be nice to your sister, though a few pranks would be funny.
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
Find the logged archives of the Hatrack YWW. Read through the story section. You'll find similar quality or better.
Posts: 1735 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's okay. I found it engaging. I couldn't get into Eldest because it had been two years since reading Eragon and I forgot just about everything. I might read through it again, but I'm working through different works at the moment.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I found it to be the worst piece of anything I have ever encountered in my entire life. After reading it, I can safely say I know what it's like to be stabbed.
I say you should read it... because misery loves company.
Posts: 2121 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I dare someone to attempt to count the number of times that Paolini makes reference to Star Wars or LOTR, directly or indirectly, in those books.
Including plot points and twists.
I tell you, it's impossible to count them all. It's essentially Star Wars with a Tolkein makeover.
And, as has been mentioned, the writing's pretty bad. Paolini's career will forever be marked by this initial attempt to create something great, and stumble doing it.
Posts: 292 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read Eragon because there was so much hype about it and I was out of books on reading agenda. For a first book in his young career, I'd say it was okay. -Just- okay. The plot was intriguing enough (until I read Eldest and realized just how many SW and LotR knock-offs were converging in it). And yes, the vocabulary is extremely odd and annoying at times. I don't understand how it got so much attention and praise--enough to make a movie. I wonder if these books will be helpful or harmful to the rest of his career. No matter how bad they were written, any media is good media, right? Maybe his writing will mature in time.
On the bright side, a movie is now in production that will likely be bettter than the book it's based on, for once.
Posts: 21 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
777, I take your challenge! I just need to know one thing... how many words are in the book? Once we know that, I can tell you. He masks bad writing by using elaborate descriptions to show off his vocabulary.
Posts: 2121 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't understand how it got so much attention and praise--enough to make a movie. I wonder if these books will be helpful or harmful to the rest of his career.
Did it get praised? I know I gave it props for have lots of swashbuckle...
I think that this book, and DaVinci Code are important books for young writers more than young readers. They show that style is NOTHING to the market. Brown and Paolini share similar stylistic weaknesses-- a love for verbose descriptions, for example. Their style of writing is so poor, most high school students enrolled in a creative writing class could outdo them.
But. It. Doesn't. Matter.
Not to the market, anyway. And not to the folks who devoured the books. What matters, in Eragon and Eldest's case, is the plot. Yes, that tired, trodden down, soppy old saw about the kid with the special birthright, the hidden parentage, the inner magick. In Paolini's novels, its even more trodden down with other sickly cliche's-- of elves and dwarves, no less. Elves and dwarves! Imagine! Every writing teacher I've had, every book I've read, all the advice unanimously agrees-- stay away from dwarves and elves.
Paolini doesn't. And his books made him rich.
DESPITE the weakness in his style, people love his books. DESPITE how often we've seen the Karate Kid trope, people love Eragon. There's something going on here that's beyond the writing craft, perhaps. Paolini rode the wave that that Rowling woman started-- and his marketing of the Eragon books was spot on. Additionally, its not a terrible STORY. Sure its worn-- welcome to the fantasy genre. It's built on ancient, well worn foundations. Marketing and passable story-- can't begrudge him. (Well I can, but then I'd appear bitter. I'm not bitter. Much.)
I don't know how Dan Brown succeeded. I just don't. The DaVinci Code is the worst book I've ever read. It's poorly plotted, poorly researched, poorly written, poor, poor, poor. Its only claim to fame was the controversy-- and that seems to have been enough.
The success of the DaVinci Code is one of the best arguments for the general stupidity of human kind. Still, it is an important book for writers to read, because they can learn so much about what to avoid stylistically. And Dan Brown's methods of marketing are important to study, too...
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I liked it. I'm not a stickler for how fancily a story is written though, to me a good story is a good story.
Posts: 104 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's the point. Eragon and Eldest WERE written in oppressively fancy language. And people still liked it. Not me, certainly. And I admit, I hope most of those adoring fans grow out of liking Paolini about the same time they reach puberty. Because there are a LOT of wonderfully written swashbuckling books that deserve the attention that Paolini's marketing has garnered for him.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hear Mortal Engines is good-- I haven't read it, though.
Honestly, I'm not reading lots of sci-fi right now. Sorry. I'm trying to branch out my reading to things I don't write. Cross genres, I hear that's good for the soul.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not that my opinion matters much, but I really enjoyed the books. I'm also looking forward to reading the conclusion of the trilogy.
I don't pick up every book I read with the intent of classifying it into my "All-Time Favs". Many books echo plots and storylines of others - that's just the way it is. How many versions of the Bible are there? Yet many people continue to read and live by each.
If you're looking for a book to read, just read - not necessarily change your views on humanity and literature and fantasy themselves - then why not pick it up?
Posts: 1355 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
P.S. I live in a bit of a 'non-media as it pertains to literature' bubble. (I enjoy forming my own opinions on books I've heard about through word of mouth.) I'd not heard anyone but the one who recommended it to me speak of Eragon or Eldest until now... I guess I should break out of that bubble every now and then!!
Posts: 1355 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I liked 'em too. And I'm not going to try and analyze why. They were fun and different and asy to get into - and out of when necessary.
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scott... I mean this in no way to be combative - but perhaps the strengths of the books you're writing about are due to the fact that they rejected the advice of their teachers?
Perhaps they were tired of someone else's version of dwarves and elves and whatever else... and dared to put their own to print...
posted
I greatly enjoyed both 'Eragon', which by the way has absolutely nothing to do with Aragorn (character from LotR), it is Dragon with the first letter changed, and I further enjoyed 'Eldest', and can't wait for the final installment, which should be out soon.
As to the accusation that Paolini uses pompous overbearing langauge - hardly. Yes, the book did send me to the dictionary a couple of times, but mainly because Paolini is thoroughly knowledgable in medieval armaments. He is an extremely intelligent person with a superb vocabulary, and has a thorough and intricate knowledge of the background of his story and that shows in how he writes.
Normally, needing a dictionary to read a book would be very off putting for me, but I did not find that true of Paolini's work. I found it more inspiring, and if I chose not to reach for my dictionary, it didn't detract from the story. I was able to follow the story very nicely.
As to the accusation that this is a combination of a Lord of the Rings plus Star Wars rip off, that is completely untrue. Any story set in a fictional mysterious time and fictional mysterious place with a slighly medieval feel is going to be accused of being a LotR rip off. But keep in mind that Tolkien was not the first to use this genre, and he certainly borrowed from existing legend and myth. Personally, I found the Hobbit and the LotR Series impossible to read; it was boring, tedious, and confusing. However, Paolini has created a very unique and interesting world filled with interesting characters. Characters that he moves through a very intriguing and captivating story.
Am I going to tell you that the books are without technical flaws - hardly. But, for the record, I can find plenty of technical flaws in the continuation of the Ender story.
In the first book, 'Eragon', while the story is interesting and captivating, Paolini's immaturity does show through. Still that lack of maturity does not distract from a very interesting and unique story.
In the second book. 'Eldest', Paolini has matured, and he weaves two captivating and exciting stories in one, but he is saddled with the same problem that all series authors are saddled with when it comes to writing the next-to-the-last book in a series. While he has an interesting story to tell in the moment, he also has to move the story in directions that setup the final book, and that limits the story he can tell.
Eragon and Eldest were both books that I had trouble putting down, and I am eagerly waiting for the last in the series. Yes, there may have been techincal flaws, but while technique may be the test of an author, but it is certainly not the test of a storyteller, and Paolini tells a story that is far more interesting, captivating, and easy to follow that anything I've read by Tolkien.
The same could be said for J.K.Rowling, she may not be techincally the greatest author, in fact she may be a very flawed author, but she is a superb storyteller. The same is true of Paolini, regardless of technical criticisms that some may level, he tells a very good story.
I highly recommend reading the series. The first book is out in paperback now, so you won't outlay much money. If you like it, then the second books should soon be available in paperback, and the third and final in the series should be out next year. Well worth the read if the story sound remotely interesting to you.
Just passing it along.
Steve/BlueWizard (who is WELL out of puberty)
Posts: 803 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cmc: Scott... I mean this in no way to be combative - but perhaps the strengths of the books you're writing about are due to the fact that they rejected the advice of their teachers?
Perhaps they were tired of someone else's version of dwarves and elves and whatever else... and dared to put their own to print...
And someone read.
: )
They didn't at all, not unless Tolkien was somehow reading their minds.....
Along with George Lucas.....
..50 years ago.
I have rarely read anything less original, and that includes a lot of crappy ripoffs over the years.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I subtly pointed out Tolkien did not invent that particular vision of dwarves or elves. For the most part he merely followed through on the accepted vision of the creatures in folklore, fairytale, legend, and myth. Remember 'Snow White and the Severn Dwarves'? What did the dwarves do? They worked all day in the mines. So, the concept of Dwarves as miners far predates Tolkien. If fact, if anyone's vision of Elves and Dwarves was stereotypcially predictable, it was Tolkens.
People give Tolkien far too much credit for inventing this particular genre and the characters found there in, when in reality, he simply borrowed them, with slight modifications, from existing literature. Tolkien absolutely DID NOT invent dwarves with axes and long lived elves with pointed ears.
quote:perhaps the strengths of the books you're writing about are due to the fact that they rejected the advice of their teachers?
Perhaps they were tired of someone else's version of dwarves and elves and whatever else... and dared to put their own to print...
:shrug: I don't think that's one of the strengths of Paolini's books, because his elves and dwarves are, without question, cardboard elves and dwarves.
Now, Tad Williams' Sithi and Norn-- THAT'S an original take on Elves. And (I think) Raymond Feist's Dwarves are wonderfully done. Those are splendidly original reworks on the old mythologies.
quote:As to the accusation that Paolini uses pompous overbearing langauge - hardly. Yes, the book did send me to the dictionary a couple of times, but mainly because Paolini is thoroughly knowledgable in medieval armaments. He is an extremely intelligent person with a superb vocabulary, and has a thorough and intricate knowledge of the background of his story and that shows in how he writes.
To each his own. I found the prose and dialogue stilted and purple. I don't think Paolini's knowledge of medieval armament means diddly-squat, as he has no clue how to reveal the information to us in any way except through clumsy detail.
quote:As to the accusation that this is a combination of a Lord of the Rings plus Star Wars rip off, that is completely untrue.
No, I'm afraid it isn't. As I noted above, Paolini's creation is embarassingly derivative. USA Today, Entertainment Weekly, and more critical reviewers than I can count have seen the same thing. Paolini admits Eragon was an attempt to "to explore the standard fantasy traditions that I enjoyed reading so much."
Later on in the interview he comments that even HE thought Eragon was full of useless descriptions and "overwrought."
quote: I was listening to the end of the book and I was on the floor with my jaw open, thinking, I can't believe how many details I put in the book. And I can't believe how overwrought it is!
So, nyaah. Even the author realizes he's a hack. Too bad he didn't learn from his first experience and make Eldest a better book.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Tolkien did not invent that particular vision of dwarves or elves. For the most part he merely followed through on the accepted vision of the creatures in folklore, fairytale, legend, and myth. Remember 'Snow White and the Severn Dwarves'? What did the dwarves do? They worked all day in the mines. So, the concept of Dwarves as miners far predates Tolkien. If fact, if anyone's vision of Elves and Dwarves was stereotypcially predictable, it was Tolkens.
Alas, you're wrong. While it's important to note that Tolkien did draw from Norse, Celtic, and British mythologies, his Elves are NOT copies of the elves in any of those cultures. There is not much similarity between the spiteful and capricious Tuatha De Danaan, or the Sidhe, or the somewhat brutal elves of Freyr and Tolkien's elves.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Just answering your response, Steve. This is a forum for discussion, after all. If you say something I disagree with, the logical thing for me to do is write back and explain why I disagree.
Do you feel like I was too harsh or too personal in my critique of Eragon/Eldest?
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I feel like he isn't the only one ripping off the genre. I feel like the fact that his books have done well says that there is some sort of appeal. I feel that people can take too condescending a tone when critically analyzing another person's work.
Yes, I feel that you've been much too harsh.
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scott R, I think you should link your blog here. You did say there that it's worth a read (after you explained why you didn't like it of course) but for me it was easier to understand the whole picture when your opinion was all together (as opposed to chopped up here).
(Edit to say that I would do it but it felt weird for me to link your blog. That and I'm not so good with the linky's)
Posts: 697 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I feel like he isn't the only one ripping off the genre.
Well... Winona Ryder isn't the only person that shoplifts. Does that mean we can't call her a shoplifter?
Anyway, look, you've got a hero in Paolini, and I'm not trying to convert you. You're going to ignore all my critiques of him anyway. Good on you. People should listen to their own feelings more.
quote:I feel like the fact that his books have done well says that there is some sort of appeal.
Oh, heck yes! Even when I slammed him for intellectual dishonesty, even when I cringed at his style and word choice, I recognize that Eragon and Eldest hold some appeal. I'll even read book 3. I won't buy it-- but I'll read it from the library.
quote: I feel that you've been much too harsh.
You could be right. I'll try to keep my comments to critiquing the work and not the writer next time.
quote: Well... Winona Ryder isn't the only person that shoplifts. Does that mean we can't call her a shoplifter?
But shoplifting and pouring your soul into a piece of work only to have it bashed by critics are two different things.
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree, and just because someone pours their heart and soul into something doesn't mean that something is immune from criticism.
And frankly, I think it's rather insulting to presume that Paolini should be "protected" from criticism. The young man wants to be taken seriously as a speculative fiction writer, and with that comes accepting criticism. Would you rather we just figuratively patted him on his head and said "Oh, what a wonderful job you did young man! So cute to see a young person trying to be a writer." To me, that's much more insulting than standing up and saying "Your work is not on par with others" because at least that implies that Paolinie deserves the respect of being treated like a writer, instead of as a little boy playing at being a grownup.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even I acknowledge Paolini's faults, but as I pointed out, technique is nothing, if it is not used by a first-rate storyteller.
J.K.Rowling is virtually a high school English teacher's nightmare. She breaks every rule in the book; parenthetical asides, all caps, etc.... Instead of long flowing rich flower descriptions intended (but usually failing) to 'paint a mental picture', JKR write is short concise 3, 4, and 5 word sentences.
I usually challenge people to add up all the descriptions of Ron in JKR's books. If you do you will see, especially in the beginning, that the description of Ron is very sparse. No Enlgish teacher would allow that.
Yet, whether intentionally or by accident, JKR has found a concise way to stimulate my imagination. I have a very detailed mental picture of Ron, despite JKR not giving it to me. She knows that no flower prose can every equal my imagination, so she writes just enough to stimulate my imagination to fill in the blanks.
How does this apply to Paolini? It is the difference between a technician and a storyteller. You can technically write so that it satisfies every whim and desire of your high school English teacher, yet still tell a poor story. To the point, a good story trumps technique every time.
As I side note, Paolini is creating a wholly unique world whereas JKR is creating a world that is the real-earth-world slightly twisted (London, Scotland, Surrey). Paoline needs to describe his world in detail because he can't make references to the real world the way JKR can. He has to recreate an entire world for us.
Paolini tells a good story, a very good story. Again, if the adventures of a boy who finds a dragon egg, and that event leads him on a series of heroic swashbuckling adventures through a land of interesting characters and events appeals to you, then you will probably enjoy this book regardless of any technical flaws it may have. If that story does not seem appealing to you, then regardless of technique or storytelling ability, you probably won't enjoy it.
Someone once said that Shakespear told every story there was to tell, and that all authors after him, are simply retelling a version of Shakespear's stories reframed in a different context.
Yes, Paolini is telling a typcial adventure fantasy story. It is set in an 'other land', not earth, it is set in an 'other time', not now, not then, not later, but in some mysterious indeterminent time and place. But that is the story. That is how it has to be told. It is not an earth story, it is not earth history, it is 'other time' and 'other place'. Tolkien does not own that concept, many many authors have chosen to disassociate their stories from earth and earth history, and that is extremely difficult to do without venturing into the realm of Science Fiction.
So barring science fiction, when else and where else can his story possibly take place? Does writing a science fiction story that takes place off earth, mean that said author ripped off the first person who ever wrote a story that took place off earth? There are only so many place a story can take place. Does writing a story that takes place on earth mean that you are ripping off the first person who ever wrote a story that took place on earth? I don't think so.
Both Paolini and Tolkien chose to set their stories in 'other place/other time' as have many other authors, but that does not mean anybody is ripping anybody off. As I said, there are only so many possibilities.
The story has to take place somewhere, and Paolini, like many or virtually every author in this genre, has chosen to create a time and place for his story to take place. I happen to think he created a very vivid 'place', it is filled with many very distinct geographic features and many distinct cultures. It is a vivid well drawn world with a very distinct sense of place. For me far more vivid and well drawn than my experience with Tolkien.
I think he has created a unique story with engaging interesting fully developed characters. You can complain about how stereotypcial Paolini's Dwarves are as a whole, but the individual dwarves, in my not so humble opinion, are incredibly interesting characters with distinct and unique and interesting personalities as well as captivating backstories.
Is this book techinical perfection? Is it the greatest story every told? NO, but is is a good story, so good that I am more than willing to over look a few technical flaws to be carried away into a living world filled with people I care about.
A good story filled with people I find interesting and that I care about outweighs technique any day.
Two points - for the record-
I really don't know that much about LotR and Tolkien. I tried reading the Hobbit, but was bore to tears. I was the most tedious book I've ever read. LotR came in a close second. Too many strange place and character names, it made it impossible to keep track of the story, consequently I never knew what was going on and finally gave up. So, to be certain, I am no expert on the details of Tolkien.
Second, in the continuation of the Ender story, I had the uncontrollable urge to reach in through the page and choke the author every time I read 'teeth, lips, and gums'. OK, we got it the first time, you don't need to keep saying it over and over. Further, I found it tedious that the author felt compelled to re-explain things that he had already re-explained in detail several times before. These and many other things represent 'technical' flaws, but I easily overlook them because of a good story.
Trust me, the story carries far more weight than the technique. So, don't let Scott's comments about technical flaw put you off. If the story itself sounds like something that you might enjoy, then you most like WILL enjoy Paolini's story.
posted
If you enjoyed Jeremy Irons' acting in the Dungeons and Dragons movie... in fact, if you liked the Dungeons and Dragon's movie at all... you'll probably enjoy Eragon quite a bit.
To me, that's two hours of my life I will never get back. Thankfully, I got my money back for Eragon - the same can not be said for the Dungeons and Dragons movie.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
As someone who HAS read Lord of the Rings and didn't really enjoy it, let me let you know: Paolini's work is embarassingly derivative of Tolkien's worlds.
Tom Davidson critisized Terry Brooks' 'Sword of Shannara' on this site a couple years ago. I remember defending Brooks' work pretty stridently. Then I made the mistake of going back and re-reading both LotR and the Shannara series-- and discovering Tom was absolutely correct.
Maybe you should give Lord of the Rings another shot. It's an enormously influential work in the fantasy genre.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's nothing wrong with using dwarves and elves. That the notions of those creatures have been firmly established by Tolkien, reiterated by Dungeons & Dragons and derivative works of both (Dragon Lance, et. al.) doesn't mean that no one should ever use them again.
It is, of course, preferable that the author have something new to do with them. In that, certainly, Paolini does not particularly succeed. Still, I did enjoy his descriptions of the underground dwarven kingdoms.
I suspect Paolini's works drew praise as much for their author's youth as their own merit. There's both better and worse available in both "mainstream" and "young adult" fantasy shelves, and I don't doubt that Eragon could as easily have remained on someone's slush pile on a different day or with a different editor. The things that bother me, more than lack of originality, is the predictability of certain plot lines, the lack of subtlety in foreshadowing, and certain presumptions (the ease with which someone who's never read picks it up in days, the degree of independence and competence in certain matters of a fifteen-year-old...)
If early fame doesn't sink him into a "I'm the famous author, editors should get out of my way" rut, he might have potential.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Every once in a while there's an Eragon thread here. I haven't read it; someone once told me that the plot is very much like Lord of the Rings meets Star Wars.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
