Places to Chat
I wasn't awfully
Chatterbox: Blab About Books
Eragon
I wasn't awfully...
I wasn't awfully impressed. They were sort of draggy... I didn't make it past the first book, and that took me forEVer to read. Saphira was rather irksome, Paolini killed the best character (Brom) before the series was even halfway written, and it was all unoriginal. And way too verbose. Can we have another page of description regarding the exact appearance of that elfish tunnel thing?
Does anyone agree, or have a believable argument for enjoying them?
submitted by Mary W., age NJ, 11.38
(June 2, 2009 - 5:06 pm)
(June 2, 2009 - 5:06 pm)
The second one, IMO, dragged even worse than the first one. Paolini FAILS the multiple narrator test forever. *nodnod* It didn't have anything close to a cliffhanger at the end- certainly not enough to motivate me to read the third one (and I usually finish a series even if I hate it).
(June 4, 2009 - 11:06 pm)
Yes. Well, maybe not 2, but I thought 3 was much better than the first two. Yes, Paolini's writing is extremely verbose, and he completely copied Star Wars/Tolkien, but I think that the third book is worth reading.
On a different note, I first read Eragon when I was about nine and thought it was just fabulous. Last year I picked it up again and couldn't get past the first page because of all the above-listed reasons. I think the books kind of grew up with Paolini. You can definitely tell that the first one was written when he was 15, but older when he wrote the sequels. And the movie is absolutely horrible, in my opinion. :)
(June 4, 2009 - 11:45 pm)
All right. I now have no motivation whatsoever to read the sequels. Thank you all- now I won't feel guilty. :)
(June 5, 2009 - 6:48 pm)
:D:D:D:D You're welcome! :D:D:D:D:D
(June 6, 2009 - 1:21 pm)
I liked the first one, and I enjoyed the parts of Brisingr that were narrated by Eragon. The author really isn't very good at the multiple narrator thing. I really hated Eldest, but I'm not sure why. Oh, but I liked the parts that were Eragon's training. That was cool. What I don't like about the series is that every time CP comes out with a good character, he kills them off. (Brom, Oromis, Glaedr, at least he hasn't killed off Angela or Solembum(yet).)
The movie was good as a movie, but as a movie based on the book, it was horrible. (I liked the movie just as a movie.)
(June 6, 2009 - 1:49 pm)
Personally, I didn't mind Eragon (the book, not the character, whom I hated). Eldest, however, was just horrid. The training scenes were slow, the romance with whats-her-face not nearly thought out enough (I thought he would end up with that leader whose name began with N) and completely one-dimensional, and the battle disappointing. In short, total fail. And as you can see, none of the characters were memorable enough for me to remember their names. I actually enjoyed Brisingr somewhat, but there was too much angsty soul-searching and curses and a hopeless ending. Also, all the characters, with the possible exception of Brom and Morgath, were flat. And of course, she kills of Brom right away and turns Morgath evil, rendering him irrelavent. And the surprise "brom-is-your-father"? Star Wars! It's really not a great series.
(June 7, 2009 - 7:59 am)
WHAT? WHAT? WHAT? Brom turned out to be Eragon's FATHER? WHAT was Paolini THINKING? Are you KIDDING?
Sorry... too many caps. :( But that... that is... I don't even know how to phrase that, that's so bizarre.
(June 7, 2009 - 11:47 am)
Actually, it's Murtagh, whom I don't find rendered irrelevent due to evillness: I have plenty of faith in a last-minute turn around, probably in the showdown at the very end. Remember, he himself is not evil, Galbatorix bound him in the elven language. I actually liked the training scenes in Eragon (let's see if the italics come out in Eragon! I was so excited when a post or two back, the Admin. put italics in!!!!) though I thought the whole dramatic "oh, I can't do anything I'm crippled!" scenes were blegh inducing. I agree that Eragon's "romance" with Arya was the most terrible romance I've ever seen ("I can't love you because I'm immortal and a hundred years older than you!" "But I'm immortal too!" As an aside, Rapunzel was hundreds of years older than her prince.)
(June 7, 2009 - 12:39 pm)
Yeah, the Arya thing was a stupid plot device. So she's a hundred years old and he's, what, 20? That's only 80 years. Let's see about this, shall we?
1. Angel was over 200 years old when he started dating a 16-year-old Buffy. Over 184 years difference.
2. In Magician, the queen of the elves marries a human of about 18 years. As I recall, more than 500 years difference.
3. In The Vampire Chronicles, Elena is ~17, and begins dating a 500-year-old vampire, Stefan. Oh, and she's courted by Stefan's brother Damon, same age. 483 years difference.
4. Spike was also over a hundred years older than Buffy.
5. Aragorn was a human, Arwen was a (quite old) elf. They still managed ok.
6. (Though I hesitate to use this as an example...) Edward was 107, Bella was 17. Precisely 100 years difference.
7. Heck, even outside of fantasy there's still massive age differences running rampant in fiction. Judge Turpin, after all, was mid- to late-fifties when he (tried) to marry 16-year-old Johanna.
Bottom line being, in the realm of fantasy where massive age differences in humanximmortal relationships are extremely common, the 80 year difference between Eragon and Arya is practically nothing, especially since they're both immortal. Now if Arya had turned him down because she didn't like his whingeing, angsty character "development", that I can understand. But, you know, Angel was almost 200 years older than Buffy- and one of the creatures she was sworn to kill- and he certainly didn't hesitate much. Or wangst nearly as much as Eragon did (Angel being a vampire who psychotically killed hundreds of people, and then had his soul returned to him by a tribe of gypsies. He then spent the next eighty years or so brooding about all the people he killed, and living off rats. And he wangsted less than Eragon, who got to fly around on a dragon and learn how to do magic and basically fulfill his wildest dreams.)
(June 7, 2009 - 2:52 pm)
Rapunzel's the girl in the tower... and I didn't know she was immortal...???
(June 7, 2009 - 5:02 pm)
You mean sleeping beauty. :)
(June 7, 2009 - 7:10 pm)
You know, that's the second time I did that. Oy. I need my head checked. Yes, I meant Sleeping Beauty. *Goes off muttering under breath about long hair and long naps* :):):)
(June 9, 2009 - 5:13 pm)
Sorry to bring up Twilight here, but apparently the age thing didn't matter to Smeyer.
(June 16, 2009 - 4:45 pm)
Like I said. *facepalm for quoting the Twilight movie*
(June 25, 2009 - 10:13 am)
Yay!!! Murtagh fans unite!!!
(June 16, 2009 - 4:40 pm)