posted
No, he is not Dylan Thomas or even J.K. Rowling, but I think that he has been treated unfairly by reviewers. The thought process that went into reviews seems to have been "a 17 year old author! News" and then, "a popular author, taking him down is news."
His books deserve credit, and not because he is young. Children my sister's age enjoy them, a fairly major consideration in Y.A. fiction, ne? The second one, in particular, introduces some interesting concepts. And his prose is not as bad as has been alleged, although there is an undeniably derivative nature to the plots.
But is being derivative really so bad? Tolkein and Lewis would have been the first to admit that their works were highly derivative, being based on ancient myths. Even J.K. Rowling, whose work is less derivative, admits to being part of an established genre with established norms to work within or play with. In a sense, is not all literature derivative and connected intertextualy, particularly in such a subgenre as the fantasy coming of age quest?
Finally, he has been routinely criticized for using "SAT Words." There is a reason that those words are on the SAT, and that is that they are all fairly common and used in literature. Were Mr. Paolini 42 instead of 22, no one would criticize him in such a manner. They might criticize his diction, but not is such a patronizing manner.
He has said he doesn't pay attention to reviews. He might learn something from doing so, but I still can't blame him. So many reviews seem spiteful, rather than critical. A good critic seldom finds any work entirely without merit, or without fault.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Even J.K. Rowling, whose work is less derivative
By what standard did you arrive at this conclusion?
"Child discovers they have special talent, must go to special place to learn how to control that talent" is one of the oldest stories in fiction. Just off the top of my head I can name well known examples...X-Men, Ender's Game, and I could go on and on.
Oh, I'm certain Paolini may be stung by the occasional negative reviews...but worry not. I'm sure his legions of fans and the Huge Piles of Money (tm) he has comfort him. Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think there is certain amount of spite for someone who is so successful when young. However, I do not think Mr. Paolini is a very good writer yet. I know I write a whole lot better now than I did three years ago.
I'm sure in a couple of years he'll be going "ouch" himself.
posted
My daughter, who loves reading and loves fantasy and is the target market for these books thinks they're terrible. She came to that conclusion on her own, before I had read the books, and she didn't even bother finishing the second one.
*shrug* Just wanted to point out is isn't only stodgy old folks like myself who don't like him, here is someone who loves that genre and is the right age and thinks he's a hack.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, you know what they say about cliche plots: if they didn't work, we wouldn't have them. Even so, it is possible to take a fairly common idea and put an original spin on it. From what I understand, Paolini has not done this particularly well.
But now you've made me curious -- what prompted this? A particular review or post?
posted
In my opinion, basing your books on myths isn't nearly as derivative as using the same names for locations in your world that have been used already in other popular books in your genre.
I read a lot of YA fiction. A good friend of mine is a YA writer who has multiple contracts under Harper-Collins. She's introduced me to an awful lot of great YA stuff and taught me a lot about writing for YA audiences. Obviously she isn't a guru, and neither am I, but I feel like I know a bit about YA books. Paolini's stuff doesn't stand up to good YA writing. It's cliches galore and all the plot twists were way too easy to call. I'm sure a lot of kids like it, but a lot of kids like the Charlie Bone Harry Potter rip-off books, too.
Kids will read anything that sparks their imagination, which is GREAT. They should. I'm not saying Paolini's books shouldn't be read, especially by kids. I'm saying they don't deserve to be touted as the world's greatest YA books, which they were being for a while there. They simply aren't. They're mediocre at best.
Frankly, I'm glad everybody's gotten over the "Wow, a teenager wrote these!" craze and is now critiquing the books objectively.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:And his prose is not as bad as has been alleged
A matter of opinion. Also, seeing as your own style/word choice has been heavily scrutinized and criticized as deviating significantly from the norm, not an opinion that's representative of the norm.
Not meaning any offense there, but your writing is not average by any meaninful use of that word, making your critique of the prose of others come from a unique point of view.
quote:Were Mr. Paolini 42 instead of 22, no one would criticize him in such a manner.
Sure they would. In fact, when I started to read Eragon, I did so on the advice of my nephew without any knowledge of the age of the author. I managed to get about 20 pages, and had to return the book to Borders.
Later, when I checked hatrack for their opinions on what I thought was just a terribly written book, I learned of the author's background.
As for criticism being different because of age, that's just not the case. If someone wrote a Jane Austen book today using the same word choice and stylistic devices, it would probably not be received well - too stuffy, too unrealistic. If Henry James wrote a novel today, you'd get similar comments - too difficult to penetrate, too wordy, too stuffy.
Both of those authors benefited from the styles of their times and the expectations of their audiences. The norm has shifted since then, and their works would be outdated or, at best, "period" if written today. They would appeal only to a very small "niche" audience.
As an example of this, I read an article several years ago about a man who submitted exerpts of writing from James Joyce to many publishers with a different name. The comments he got back were astounding - almost invariably the editors felt the writing was awful and totally unfit for publication. Times certainly do change.
As for Paolini, he has found an audience, which is good (if that was his goal). Soap operas also have an audience - having fans doesn't say anything about the quality of the writing. Many excellent works have gone unnoticed, and many literary train wrecks have gained popular appeal.
With regard to the harsh criticisms of his work, I think they come from people who have gotten past the novelty of his age and are now comparing the work to other writing in the genre - and finding it lacking.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:His books deserve credit, and not because he is young. Children my sister's age enjoy them, a fairly major consideration in Y.A. fiction, ne?
YA fiction is written for children. Duh-- one would hope that a book published for children would be enjoyed by those children.
quote:The second one, in particular, introduces some interesting concepts.
Which he fails to treat with skill, or even honesty.
quote:And his prose is not as bad as has been alleged, although there is an undeniably derivative nature to the plots.
His prose is terrible. The only author who is worse than Paolini (that I've read) is Dan Brown.
His plots are the ONLY thing that redeem his books. I mean, stylistically, he's a train wreck; his characters are as interesting as oatmeal; thank goodness there are recognizable plots that allow the reader to latch on to SOMETHING he's written.
I honestly don't know what Carl Hiassen was thinking, pushing Paolini into a major publishing house.
posted
Read Eragon. Thought it was a mixed bag. Was more bothered by the central character's development (and lack thereof) than by the prose or derivative nature of the story.
Much much prefer Stroud's Bartimaeus trilogy. If I was going to point a young person to a fantasy series, that would be my first pick. (And then probably the imminently readable Harry Potter books.)
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stroud's Bartimaeus IS a good read. It's not my first pick for a fantasy series (that goes to anything written by Cornelia Funke, who is the best YA author alive), but it's a satisfying tale with a great protag and a fun world.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is so much GOOD YA literature out there, why waste time with the bad? I just finished Mister Monday by Garth Nix, which was excellent.
I wonder what aspect of the market pushes these so-so books so far into the spotlight while so many great books are ignored.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I loved Inkheart, but felt Inkspell suffered by being less able to stand on its own. Then again, few sequels can.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
I liked the review. I had much the same thoughts about Eragon, and I didn't bother to read Eldest...but as I'm thinking of trying my hand at spec-fic for the YA set, I probably should make myself read it for the reasons you specified.
Also, I thought it was dumb that Eragon's name is only one letter off from the word dragon. I kept expecting that to be part of a corny plot twist. "Of course you're gifted with dragons, Eragon! Isn't your name practically 'dragon' already?"
quote:I'm thinking of trying my hand at spec-fic for the YA set, I probably should make myself read it for the reasons you specified.
I learned a lot more about writing from reading/critiquing Eragon than I did from, say, A Wrinkle In Time.
I wish Paolini had kept a diary of everything he did, outside of the craft of writing, to make Eragon such a success. That would be a very useful read; by all accounts, he is an extremely hard worker.
I could use some of that...
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder how much of it is novelty though. Everyone I know who read it told me, "It wasn't great, but did you know that it was written by a 16 year old? That's amazing!" It seems that most of the attention is because he started writing it at a young age.
Once you have all that marketability, the movers and shakers are going to follow the money, so you get your book at the front of the store, you get a movie...
All you have to do is find a gimmick, and you're set. You need a way to get the non-readers to be intrigued enough by your mediocre book to pick it up.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
People like staring blankly into space, too - and reading the backs of cereal boxes.
Hey now, Ill be honest I do BOTH of those things often enough. Just because you havent found the virtues of those 2 activities doesnt mean they deserve sarcasm.
quote:It seems that most of the attention is because he started writing it at a young age.
I dunno-- his parents published Eragon, and he managed to sell 10,000 copies of the book before Knopf optioned him. That's not bad; Asimov's Magazine has a print run of 30,000, and it's one of the most well known sci-fi avenues in the world.
He toured with the book before Knopf optioned him, visiting schools and talking about writing and apparently boosting support for homeschooling. (The cynical side of me laughs at the homeschooling websites that hold Paolini's skills up as being particularly advanced...)
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to defend Paolini as I have in other threads on this subject in this forum.
Yes, even I can see that Paolini is an immature writer. He needs to grow and develop, and he certainly will. I can see noticable improvement in 'Eldest'(2) over 'Eragon'(1).
Further to those who complain about Paolini's vocabulary, let me point out that he is a very intelligent man with a deep that thorough knowledge of medieval armaments and the associated vocabulary. Personally, I am a person of moderately good intelligence and of moderately good vocabulary, and all my life I have had to dumb down what I say to keep the local 'hicks' happy. Local hicks who seem to revel in their home spun ignorance and hillybilly vocablulary. So, I have no problem with Paolini's vocabulary, and in fact, I was actually thrilled by it.
I'm also a big fan of Stroud's Bartimaeus Trilogy, but I found the plot predictable and plodding, and aspects of the book were technically flawed. A glaring example of one of those flaws, was the fact that it took a giant demon forever to walk across a room while another aspect of the story played out on the other side of said room. Apparently, the giant was taking teeny tiny baby steps. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed all the books and eagerly looked forward to the final installment (third book, already published and read). But, I would personally rate 'Eragon' and 'Eldest' as better stories. Maybe not better writing, but definitely better stories.
And that brings me to another point, there are two ways to read and evaluate a book; authoral technique and raw storytelling ability. J.K.Rowling is an author of adequate technique but I consider her a master storyteller. Stroud's 'Bartimaeus' also had technical faws, but I was captived by the characters and the story. Paolini has some technical faw that can be fairly criticized, but, in my view, he tells a masterful captivating story with characters I care about going places I would like to go and engaging in edvantures I would love to be part of. He moves me through a beautiful intriguing world, and does so smoothly.
I would much rather read Paolini that Tolkien. If fact, I would much rather pluck out my fingernails than read Tolkien whose long plodding convoluted storylines are nearly impossible to follow. I'll take Paolini's vocabulary over Tolkien impossible to remember people and place names.
I found Paolini an intreguing read, with captivating storyline, interesting people and places that were easy to keep track of.
As far as derivative, that is a petty and weak criticism since all works are derivative to some extent. One could even say that the Bible is derivative since parts of it parallel myth and legends found in a dozen other places on earth. Anytime a book can be assigned to a genre it is pretty much automatically derivative, but it's not a matter of whether someone is working within a known framework, it is what the person does within that framework.
We could call O.S.Card 'Ender' and 'Shadow' series Science Fiction, but in that framework Card has told stories that are far beyond normal science fiction. Keep in mind that I see technical flaws in Card's work, but I overlook it for a deeply interesting tale.
Personally, I'm not so much interested in the raw mechanics and techniques of putting word to paper. I am far more interested in the quality of the actual story I am being told.
Many of the great storytellers, especially in the oral tradition, were not that concerned with technique, the story was everything. Though, I admit that oral storytelling commited to paper is not as good has the spoken version. But my point is, that for me, the story is king, and I found the tale of Eragon to be a deeply engrossing story.
The only time I have a problem with 'technique' is when it become so blatantly poor that it interfers with reading the story.
Finally, I will emphasize what others have already said. Paolini orginally self-published, and popularity grew do to his promotion and word of mouth, until it became clear that this book would be attractive to a wider audience. Then it was picked up by a major publisher. While Paolini isn't even remotely successful on the JKR level, I would certainly say that any object viewer would have to consider the books a publishing success.
So, I found the books fastinating, and am eagerly awaiting the final installment to the series. Not everything appeals to everyone, but this series of books DID appeal to me and to millions of others.
quote:But now you've made me curious -- what prompted this? A particular review or post?
A series of reviews, I jut grew tired of them all. Most of these critics were amateur, and it showed (I know a lot of wonderful amateur critics, but these were not wonderful). A thoughtful critic is subtle and makes distinctions between they entertaining and the great, the mediocre and the awful.
quote:
quote: Were Mr. Paolini 42 instead of 22, no one would criticize him in such a manner.
Sure they would. In fact, when I started to read Eragon, I did so on the advice of my nephew without any knowledge of the age of the author. I managed to get about 20 pages, and had to return the book to Borders.
quote: If someone wrote a Jane Austen book today using the same word choice and stylistic devices, it would probably not be received well - too stuffy, too unrealistic. If Henry James wrote a novel today, you'd get similar comments - too difficult to penetrate, too wordy, too stuffy.
Indubitably true if this were forty years ago, when modernism ruled supreme. I like to think, and not without some justification, I might add, that we are more eclectic know. Eclecticism is the greatest virtue of postmodernism. Were it its only virtue, it might be enough to save it an æsthetic doctrine, or lack there of (a postmodernist manifesto is a manifesto to eschew manifestos.)
quote: With regard to the harsh criticisms of his work, I think they come from people who have gotten past the novelty of his age and are now comparing the work to other writing in the genre - and finding it lacking.
Perhaps, but their vision seems to be tainted still. The press loves nothing more than to create a hero and then to send his pedestal falling. I personally love heroes, and have several, but I prefer mine to be human and not ideal.
quote:Which he fails to treat with skill, or even honesty.
The former is certainly arguable, the later far less so. If these particular elves are his creation, how can one possibly tell whether he is being honest.
As for the more human aspects of Eragon's character, these were fairly honest, i.m.o. The character has been criticized for being too emotional, which begs the question of whether that critics was a human or a robot, as the former, a species to which I happen to belong, are very emotional.
quote: There is so much GOOD YA literature out there, why waste time with the bad?
With the possible exception of Romance or Mystery, Y.A. produces more bad books than any other genre. No, that is not fair, it just produces more bad books that sell well. Most Y.A. fiction is simply terrible. A good point made in Mr. Paoloni's favor is that his books are actually better than much of what is published in a genre which has become infamous as a place for writers who couldn't make it elsewhere.
There is good Y.A. fiction, the works of Mssdm. Funke and Rowling stands out in fantasy and O.S.C. is, of course, excellent, but such things are the exception. So calling Mr. Paoloni the worst writer ever, as a frightening number have done, is grossly unfair.
No, they would criticize him in a very different tone. As using "inappropriately high diction for his audience," or something similar, not something as patronizing as "using S.A.T. words." The later was actually offered by several critics.
quote: Yes, even I can see that Paolini is an immature writer. He needs to grow and develop, and he certainly will. I can see noticeable improvement in 'Eldest'(2) over 'Eragon'(1).
Absolutely, on both respects.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess my main criticism is that I just didn't like the book. In fact, I liked it little enough that I didn't bother to get very far into it before giving up.
It's sad, to me, that so much of what is popular is so bad. Not that it's just a different taste, which I can accept, but that it simply isn't very good. There are much better YA books out there, and I am saddened that so many people will never read them.
It's the same reason that I'm sad that there is a McDonalds every 2 miles, but the excellent Thai restaurant in town closed because it didn't get enough business. It wasn't even very expensive.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Name recognition/familiarity brings a degree of comfort. Of predictability, that many seem to like.
Paolini has become a brand. A heaping helping of Lucas, a dash of Tolkien, cooked up in the McAffery manner! Hot, familiar, comfortable Paolini.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:With the possible exception of Romance or Mystery, Y.A. produces more bad books than any other genre.
I would completely disagree with you there. Formulaic romance isn't just a 'possible' exception, it absolutely is much, much worse than even the bad YA fiction I've read.
Maybe I'm just reading YA fiction you're not, or our tastes are dramatically different but I've found lots of fresh, original, engrossing writing in the YA department and it is in fact my preferred section of the bookstore. I buy more YA than "adult" fiction these days. Garth Nix - already mentioned on this thread - is one of my favorite writers, Period. Not just one of my favorite YA authors, but one of my favorites overall.
Just curious, but what YA have you read lately that you would classify as worse than romance, or worse than Eragon?
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I need to start buying and reading good YA fiction so that Ella has something to read when she's older. I have far too many books on my shelf I wouldn't want her touching until I determine she is mature enough to read them.
Posts: 4753 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:The former is certainly arguable, the later far less so. If these particular elves are his creation, how can one possibly tell whether he is being honest.
I wasn't critiscising his creations (elves, dwarves, dragons, etc) as being dishonest, but his thought processes. I should have been more specific. You can check out my review for specifics on this-- in short, I found his take on religion to be dishonest.
quote:I can see noticeable improvement in 'Eldest'(2) over 'Eragon'(1).
Boy, do we disagree. IMO, Eragon was superior to Eldest.
posted
"Just curious, but what YA have you read lately that you would classify as worse than romance, or worse than Eragon?"
I no longer read bad Y.A., and seldom read Y.A. at all (I don't read much non-assigned fiction these days, not out of choice but out of lack of time.) As a middle schooler, I read plenty of bad stuff, and now my sister does.
Some particular offenders: the "Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants," any book in which a young person strives to become a famous athlete, and most any book which features unicorns heavily in the plot.
I am certainly not denying that there is good Y.A. fiction, Harry Potter is very good, and I love the bizarre humor of Lemony Snicket. Roald Dahl is a hero of mine, even if he said stupid things about Jews (he does not appear to have been an actual anti-Semite, given the very favorable way in which he covered the Kibutz he visited in his memoirs.) Yann Martel is, perhaps, my favority author and his most famous book is often classified as Y.A./"ordinary" literature. However, there is a general rule that 95% of everything published is bad, and this is much higher in Y.A. fiction, maybe 98%.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I like to think, and not without some justification, I might add, that we are more eclectic now.
Which is why I said: "They would appeal only to a very small "niche" audience."
There would certainly be an audience. There's an audience for everything. There is an audience for Paolini, obviously. There is, I would venture to say, a far greater number of people who would not find Paolini to their tastes than who do, however.
Mostly very young people who are also good readers are his target audience, obviously.
quote:Perhaps, but their vision seems to be tainted still. The press loves nothing more than to create a hero and then to send his pedestal falling. I personally love heroes, and have several, but I prefer mine to be human and not ideal.
Fair enough. Though, I think the hero-making was far too overblown, and the pedestal-bashing is far more expected. I don't view Paolini as a hero - you want a young writer, try John Keats.
quote:With the possible exception of Romance or Mystery, Y.A. produces more bad books than any other genre. No, that is not fair, it just produces more bad books that sell well. Most Y.A. fiction is simply terrible.
This is because most young people don't have enough experience with other examples of literature to make real distinctions between "good" or "bad".
I mean, I loved Voltron when it came out in the 80's... but I watch it now, and I just cringe. I'm sure those who loved Power Rangers look back and ask themselves why they ever enjoyed that show, too.
Young people are far more accepting and far more willing to suspend disbelief. They miss bad dialogue and character interaction because they are still forming their impressions of what dialogue and character interaction should be. And derivative works don't even blip on their radar, because most likely they never read the original work.
For instance, it's easy to make a derivative LotR book for 10-16 year olds, because it's a fair bet a great deal of them haven't read LotR yet. You don't feel like something is copied unless you've seen it already.
Personally, when I began reading Eragon it sounded like a hackneyed, overdramatic Dungeons and Dragons module run by a 14 year old for his buddies.
"There are three elves riding down the road, and they are ambushed by orcs and an evil sorcerer. The knights guarding the beautiful female elf are killed immediately, and she runs. The sorcerer tries to trap and kill her using his fire magic, but the precious artifact eludes his grasp."
"Why didn't he just use the fire magic to kill her in the first place, instead of sending the inept orcs?"
"Shush, who's the DM here, me or you? Ahem... you're walking through the forest, when the artifact appears out of thin air off to your left. What do you do?"
I couldn't stop groaning. Each page was a chore. I kept hearing the author asking me to roll initiative in my head, or to perform some skill check. I'd had enough, and took it back to the store.
I have shelves full of fantasy books that are much better, many that never achieved critical acclaim. I couldn't see what made this guy so special, until I heard that he wrote it when he was 16. I then understood why I won a Scholastic award for a story I wrote as a high school junior, which today I can't even bring myself to read -- people give young authors a HUGE benefit of the doubt.
I don't blame them for withdrawing that benefit at a later date.
[Edit to add: As an aside, I can't read Lemony Snicket, either. The author is just far too intrusive and condescending for my tastes. But, again, it's aimed at a younger demographic.]
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not necessarily wanting to change the subject, but I'm curious what people thought of 'Artemis Fowl'.
I put off reading them for a long time because I thought they were too childish, but once I started reading them, I thought they were great. Not great literature, but a great fun funny stories.
quote:I'm not so much interested in the raw mechanics and techniques of putting word to paper. I am far more interested in the quality of the actual story I am being told.
The one hand washes the other...
I didn't really care for Lord of the Rings, either; the Hobbit is the superior book, IMO.
quote:any book in which a young person strives to become a famous athlete...
You MUST read 'Power of One,' by Bryce Courtenay. I'm serious. It's about an English boy in South Africa whose main goal in life is to become the World Welterweight Champion. It is one of the most stirring books I've ever read.
quote:any book which features unicorns heavily in the plot.
Oooo... 'The Last Unicorn,' by Peter S. Beagle. Wonderful book. A unicorn discovers that her herd has been abducted by a powerful, wicked king in a distant country and leaves her forest to rescue them. It is a haunting and bittersweet novel that undoes much of the saccharine of the unicorn myth. I highly recommend it.
quote:Personally, when I began reading Eragon it sounded like a hackneyed, overdramatic Dungeons and Dragons module run by a 14 year old for his buddies.
"There are three elves riding down the road, and they are ambushed by orcs and an evil sorcerer. The knights guarding the beautiful female elf are killed immediately, and she runs. The sorcerer tries to trap and kill her using his fire magic, but the precious artifact eludes his grasp."
"Why didn't he just use the fire magic to kill her in the first place, instead of sending the inept orcs?"
"Shush, who's the DM here, me or you? Ahem... you're walking through the forest, when the artifact appears out of thin air off to your left. What do you do?"
I couldn't stop groaning. Each page was a chore. I kept hearing the author asking me to roll initiative in my head, or to perform some skill check. I'd had enough, and took it back to the store.
posted
I agree with Scott R re: one hand washing the other. To me, Eragon was NOT a quality story *because* the mechanics were so poor. There is a time and a place for overblown vocabulary. A YA novel is not generally the place, and wherever a perfectly serviceable, more average word will do just fine is not the time. Plus, the plot was BLAH. I am bored to tears when I can predict every single plot twist and then it happens three pages later. That is not because I'm an adult reading a YA novel - I was just as astute a plot-predicter when I was a kid, and I was just as bored with predictability back then.
Why are plots predictable? Because they're cliche. How do things become cliche? By being derivative beyond all reasoning. Yes, it's true that every story is derived from one before it. But that doesn't mean that every story has to be told the same dang way that the previous stories have been told.
What did Eragon have that I haven't already read in a thousand other fantasy novels - especially a thousand other YA fantasies? Nothing that I can think of.
Let's see: Orphaned boy raised by family members in small town discovers magic item, hides it, finds old mentor who begins to coach him in the ways of using magic item (in this case, a dragon). Evil guys attack village, destroy family. Orphaned boy is the only one left and decides it's his destiny to seek vengeance or something. First predictable plot twist: Old man is an ex-user of super-duper magic!!! SURPRISE! Old man tells young boy where to go to learn all the skills he'll need to fight the bad guys!
RARRGH, it just goes on and on! It's the same story I've seen a bajillion times before.
Now, you may be asking yourself how books such as the Harry Potter series managed to use the same formula without being cliche and irritatingly predictable. The answer to that is that the books are set in a world which we haven't seen in the exact same incarnation before. A school for young witches and wizards who live in a world that is half-in, half-out of the "real" world is fairly new and fresh. A pseudo-medieval world with tiny villages populated by orphaned boys who wear jerkins and boots: Not fresh. Particularly when the orphaned boy lives near a mountain range called the Spine. Boy, where have I read a setting with a mountain range called the Spine before...? Oh, that's right. The Spine of the World in...THE WHEEL OF TIME. Lordy, if you're going to derive your placenames from another fantasy series, don't make it The Wheel of Time. By the way, eventually the boy gets a magical sword that will enhance his powers, which he has to earn by trial. Also Wheel-of-Timey. Oi, vey.
There was nothing - NOTHING - original in Eragon. Not that reached out and grabbed me, anyway, because I was too wrapped up in predicting the plot and being amazed/disgusted when I was correct down to the last detail. Even Robert Jordan has originality in his derivative and epic tale with a magic system that I haven't read in any other books yet. When RJ is beating you in the originality department, you need to stop using his settings and start thinking of ways you can be more original.
Okay, Elves with an atheist agenda are pretty original, I will admit. But they appear in Eldest, right? I haven't read that one yet. I'm not entirely sure I will.
Cliche, thy name is Paolini.
And that is why I can't stand Eragon. This concludes my book report. Thank you and good night.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:People like staring blankly into space, too - and reading the backs of cereal boxes.
I don't know anyone who has listed either of those as one of their favorite novels.
If someone does really enjoy reading cereal boxes, however, I think I've got no reason to say they are mistaken for feeling that way.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
I haven't read either of the books and don't really care to, but maybe you've hit upon a big reason why these books, that many experienced readers are panning, are apparently captivating for a part of the YA. It's not cliche to them, because they don't have an extensive background to compare it to.
edit: Incidentally, the identification of a significant mountain range with a spine appears extenstively outside of Robert Jordon, both in fiction and real world mythology/history.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:If someone does really enjoy reading cereal boxes, however, I think I've got no reason to say they are mistaken for feeling that way.
Has someone critiscised someone else for liking Eldest/Eragon?
I know I expressed...er, chagrin that they were so successful; but I don't think worse of BlueWizard for liking the books.
quote:I'm sure a lot of kids like it, but a lot of kids like the Charlie Bone Harry Potter rip-off books, too.
You know, I rather liked the Charlie Bone books. I know that they piggy back on the same wavelength as Harry Potter, but there are fundamental differences in the worlds/plots/characters that make them non-derivative.
I THOUGHT CB was going to be a ripoff of Harry Potter; I was pleasantly suprised that it was not. A good case can be made that Nimmo has a better handle on suspense, two books in, than JKR did at a similar point in her career; heaven knows she puts her protagonists in a lot more emotional danger than Rowling, anyway.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
I haven't read either of the books and don't really care to, but maybe you've hit upon a big reason why these books, that many experienced readers are panning, are apparently captivating for a part of the YA. It's not cliche to them, because they don't have an extensive background to compare it to.
edit: Incidentally, the identification of a significant mountain range with a spine appears extenstively outside of Robert Jordon, both in fiction and real world mythology/history.
That is true re: the spine thing, and I've heard it before, but after reading somewhere that Paolini listed Jordan among his favorite writers, it really stuck for me.
You could be right about the cliche ideas not being cliche to kids. However, I'm thinking specifically of the many adults, including book critics such as Nancy Pearl here in Seattle, who have raved about Eragon as a book for ALL readers when they really should know better.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, Scott, Tres is just being contrary as per usual.
quote:The only worthwhile measures of the "quality" of a piece of fiction is the degree to which fans can enjoy and be moved by it.
People like Eragon. Nothing else matters.
So, nothing anyone says in this forum matters, it seems. He's settled the argument. Bully for him.
Also, you can't, say, compare the quality of the Power Rangers with that of, say, Shakespeare on any level other than fan enjoyment. Because, you know, nothing else matters.
posted
"edit: Incidentally, the identification of a significant mountain range with a spine appears extenstively outside of Robert Jordon, both in fiction and real world mythology/history."
The Appenines are almost universaly known in geography classes as the spine of Italy.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I can see noticeable improvement in 'Eldest'(2) over 'Eragon'(1).
Boy, do we disagree. IMO, Eragon was superior to Eldest.
Again I point out that we judge books on two areas; Technique and Storytelling.
Eragon was a better story and better storytelling.
But in Eldest I see a more refined, more mature writing technique.
I did like Eldest although it dragged a little more than Eragon. But I really enjoyed the two separate stories; that of Eragon and that of cousin Roran, and how they came together at the end.
(SPOILER BELOW)
Further, I will point out that I easily predicted that fate of Murtagh; not in the details but in general. I find Murtagh a fastinating and tragic character that will certainly have a substantial role in the last book. I also found him a very likable character in the first book, but didn't buy his apparent fate. I knew we would see him again, and I assumed something similar to what did happen. Yet, I was still moved when he did appeared and his intermediate fate became known.
And the whole Murtagh thing could be seen from the bottom of a valley, in the fog, eyes shut, and dizzy.
Everything that happened in Eragon could be.
George R. R. Martin totally pwns Paolini at fantasy. It's just a shame that his books aren't appropriate for kids - then they could see how some wicked cool fantasy is done.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
BlueWizard, that was ScottR, not me. I didn't read Eldest, because I never finished Eragon - I returned it to the store for a full refund after reading roughly 20 pages or so (wherever it is when he brought the dragon egg back to town and some guy wouldn't give him any money for it... at that point I'd had enough).
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kids who aren't ready for Martin may enjoy reading Lloyd Alexander's Chronicles of Prydain, or Ursula K. LeGuin's Earthsea series. Or Susan Coopers Dark is Rising sequence...or...
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
