wrote:It may not have been for you, but there are a million other people who will say otherwise. Yes, Eragon has nothing on LOTR or some other works of Nix or Brooks. I am not saying his book is great, but it is not as bad as some extreme critics make out.
Yes he certainly could improve in writing, but I am sure that will improve. I have to read his third book before making a decision on that.

I don't think it will improve. He doesn't listen to critics and what he's doing now is selling because little kids gobble up epics between reading Harry Potter. Learn the difference between marketable and good.

wrote:Think of this: Paolini is 15yrs old, your average boy. He has read great books such as LOTR and Belgariad. He is thinking; why should'nt I write a book and see how it goes? He had no idea this book of his would be a bestseller, but at that time it was a good time-pass. He decides to base the foundations of his tale on his personal favorites and just begins. He has taken considerable time on the written part and after publication he discovers what a hit the book is.

Except for the not-so-minor fact he decided to publish it and accept Knopf's offer, which is unforgivable if you want to use the 'but he wrote it for fun' argument. If he wrote it to pass the time, he shouldn't PUBLISH IT, especially when it's a fanfiction. Get it? But he was faced with the money advance from Knopf, and so he sold a book, which means he's instantly vulnerable to criticism of his book despite his age and inexperience.

wrote:Now he is older and more mature (you can spot this in parts if Eldest) but there is one thing.......he can not change what he has done in Eragon. He has to write sequels for a story which is a rip-off of several others. But you can see that Eldest was not such a rip-off as Eragon.
Think of the authors point of view too.

He's not more mature. He's a pseudo-mature person who attempts to incorporate mature things into his writing: hairless elf groins, Saphira attempting to rape an elder dragon a hundred or so years her elder. Eldest was ripped off of Star Wars. The entire story is. I'm sorry, but it's too close to be the archetypical hero story.

wrote: let me explain some of these 'mistakes':
Leather-thing: Elves cannot eat meat, do you know why? Because they have seen the animals' point of view of life, therefore they consider such a thing similiar to cannibalism if you KILL THE ANIMAL TO EAT IT.
But as some elf said, if the animal is ALREADY DEAD, an elf can cut its hide of and wear it or use it for decorating purposes.
5-foot sword: Yes the sword is held from Eragon's waist, but did it occur to you that half of it may be sticking out the upper side?
Brindle-saving-injuries: Yes the wounds would require maitenence, but Paolini already describes so much that there is no need to for added explanations of wound maintenance.

So it's okay to find roadkill and eat it, as long as the animal doesn't care? They are so in tune with nature that they are practically part of it and sing songs to warp the trees to their bidding. 'cept that they defile the animal by slicing off its fur and wearing it around. And leather is not practical, because Arya wears it as casual clothing. Leather clothing is far too uncomfortable for that...THE HORRIBLE CHAFING.

wrote:5-foot sword: Yes the sword is held from Eragon's waist, but did it occur to you that half of it may be sticking out the upper side?

Wait, it's sticking out of the upper side? So it's up through the belt and up his back or his side? Well, that would certainly make no sense, seeing as how when it's through the belt then it'd be nearly impossible to move in that direction because the sword would act as a splint. That's why you would wear a five-foot sword on your back. Put a broom through your belt and lean in that direction, and notice that it makes no sense to travel with a solid, straight object sticking up your side. If Zar'roc was up his back, the middle or so of the blade would be held in place. Unless it's hanging from the belt at the middle and free to move around, in which when he walks the blade would always slap against his legs and the handle would slap his shoulder. Very smart way to travel.

I don't know what you're talking about concerning bridle injuries, so I won't pretend to.

wrote:I admit Paolini overdid it with the paragraph of berries, but what can one do about it? The guy obviously likes describing. Inexperience and youth drives many to do foolish things. No one says this book is perfect or even close to Tolkien. Just that it is an interesting read. Your average person would prefer a good story to a well-written but uninteresting one.

He likes describing, sure, but he published it, to a world that is becoming more minimalist every day, intending for it to be read, despite that the description is his personal style. Not to mention that he actually had an editor, that didn't notice things like it's impossible to eat a blackberry one corpuscle at a time because it'd just be crushed into a pulpy mess. You can't use inexperience and youth for a defense, because he published it to the public, which instantly destroys any credibility that the story is simply written for himself. Why not read a story that is somewhat original, entertaining, and interesting? They exist. George R.R. Martin's series starting with A Game of Thrones (sure, it's an epic, but he does things in an original and realistic way) and Perdido Street Station by China Mieville. If you like description, take the Gormenghast Trilogy by Peake; it's the most descriptive book I've ever heard of, with the biggest vocabulary and most beautiful prose and best characters imaginable. If you think Paolini's description of everything is good, you'll weep tears of joy reading Peake...

wrote:No I am not atheist, but by the looks of it Paolini is. His Philosophies and religions were all mildly interesting and although not Tolkien stuff, they surely were not poorly articulated.
It will be decided whether Paolini is worthy or not after his third book, and I am sure he will have improved. Tolkien was an old man when he wrote LOTR and Paolini will have improved considerably at that age. I predict a flourishing career for him.

I don't. You can't just predict a flourishing career of someone just because they could possibly become better. Face it, he's not so good literary-wise right now. He does know how to make a Frankenstein's Monster of other books and make it appeal to fans, but he will never become as good as Tolkien, let alone people like Phillip Pullman and George R. R. Martin. Yes, Tolkien was an old man, and he waited until he was an old man to publish his books. Paolini decided to ride the young author gravy train with an inexperienced book.

Unless sheltered Paolini drastically changes so that his parents no longer control his life (he has said his mother has expressly forbidden him to speak of religion, and his father deletes posts on IF that criticizes Paolini even if they're just pointing out mistakes in prose and whatnot).

The philosophies were poorly articulated, because he inserted himself into the perfect race of his world. Imagine that, the all-knowing wise people who are perfect and so in tune with the world they sing to trees, also share Paolini's ideals. But the big bad dwarves who are only known for mining and fighting, and are a superstitious bunch, are instantly bashed by Arya while she is talking 'politely' about why their entire religion is wrong.

Didn't Orin perform an experiment with a barometer or some such? Carnoc, of the anti-shurtugals, noted something like Surda would have to be like 20,000 feet above sea level for the results to turn up. Paolini just really doesn't know what he's talking about, and has no one to contest the idiocy of what he's doing.

And by the way, I am not jealous of Paolini. I can write better than Eragon, and I'm fourteen. No, I'm not bragging saying I'm some fantastic writer of epic porportions who will probably be the best Shakespeare, but I know the writing mechanics. Show, don't tell; use adverbs sparingly; do not use unnecessary variants of the word 'said'; and last but not least, I do not derive my plot from my idols. I know how to write literature, not Da Vinci Code.

wrote:"I'm sorry," apologized Brom.

Don't think that's bad? Well, don't become a writer.

I'm not jealous of him, sorry. I argue against him because he's supposedly the representative of young authors, being the big one of this generation with his movie and game deals. But I don't want this person to be what other people judge my writing by, like you are here: 'you're just jealous because you can't write like him'.

Sorry, try again.

Wow.

This has become one intense debate.

And, though I like the books, I kind of have to agree they are a bit of a rip-off on a lot o of fantasy/sci-fi books. Seriously, follow the plot lines and compare them to The Dragonriders of Pern, Lord of the Rings, and Star Wars.

And if Eragon ends up with Arya I think there might be a law suit.

Oh, I just finished reading the hate mail.

Again I fear for the human race.

PAOLINI IS SATAN, AVERT YOUR EYES LEST THEY BURN

He's not that bad.

He has potential, just not that much.

Ok, fine, I'm being nice because I read his book and liked it for entertainment vaule when nothing else was in the library.

But still....

But still...? ELABORATE OR SUFFER HELL!

Ok.

Basically, he's a sort of "poser" author who's rewriting already written stories and tries to add mature content to make people think he's mature.

But the books are enjoyable if you forget that.

wrote:But the books are enjoyable if you forget that.

Heh, you forget the other failings. Faulty descripting, lack of good flow yadda yadda...

I don't want to be torn apart by the Eragon fans.

But then again I don't to be torn apart by the haters either.

Neutrals will be torn apart by both sides.

I know.

But I don't hate the books.

But in all honesty I can't say they're all that great either.

Ambiguity will not be accepted.

Oh, whatever.

I refuse to say the books are brilliant, but I refuse to burn them.

Get over it.

Impudence and Lack of clear stand will not be tolerated.

Oh, stop pressuring me.

Let me read book three and then I'll either flame it or say it's good.

Never brilliant.

Request for time to prepare molotovs granted.

Yeah.

Though I have something to post...

I read in an article that you like Tolkien. Did his books help inspire you with Eragon?

I enjoyed Tolkien's world of hobbits, elves, and dwarves, and the epic quest of the ring. Like Tolkien, I also drew inspiration from Nordic, Old English, and Icelandic sagas.

Yeah, he drew inspiration through Tolkien, which Tolkien drew through the myths.

It's like Homecoming again.

Who are you talking to?

wrote:I read in an article that you like Tolkien. Did his books help inspire you with Eragon?

I enjoyed Tolkien's world of hobbits, elves, and dwarves, and the epic quest of the ring. Like Tolkien, I also drew inspiration from Nordic, Old English, and Icelandic sagas.

That's an interview with CP that Shurtagal.com did.

you could have quoted it.

And lies. No one does that anymore. Paolini simply conformed to archtypes.

Hence what I said above the above post.