CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

I love this series. Anyone else?

Yes, yes yes!!!!! Great books! I actually haven't finished Brisingr yet (even though I started it over a year ago), but it has excellent quality! And I've heard rumors that the fourth book cover is going to be green...

I like it too. YOu know, I really hate how people think Christopher Paolini is ripping off people. Don't they realize nothing's original anymore? Heck, even Star Wars borrowed from other sources.

rocklobster (post: 1373265) wrote:I like it too. YOu know, I really hate how people think Christopher Paolini is ripping off people. Don't they realize nothing's original anymore? Heck, even Star Wars borrowed from other sources.

I was trying to avoid this thread, Rock. But you present an issue that needs to be clarified.
Mr. Paolini did not borrow from sources (i.e. previously written books about dragons that talk to their riders through thoughts by Anne McCaffrey), he copied from them almost directly. There is a difference between being inspired from and copying.
I just wish you wouldn't make accusations before you know all the information, Rock.

At any rate, to not dampen the thread to the point of extinction, the books were okay, writing wise. I've only read up to the second one and thought that was a rather rushed. I'm curious to see what ending he will come up with though.

rocklobster (post: 1373265) wrote:I like it too. You know, I really hate how people think Christopher Paolini is ripping off people. Don't they realize nothing's original anymore? Heck, even Star Wars borrowed from other sources.

The mark of a good writer is not to create something that nobodys ever heard of before but to take something people have already written and make it your own

goldenspines...I would have to disagree whith you...

To be honest, I haven't even read Anne McCaffrey's stuff.

SeraphicCharm (post: 1373200) wrote:Yes, yes yes!!!!! Great books! I actually haven't finished Brisingr yet (even though I started it over a year ago), but it has excellent quality! And I've heard rumors that the fourth book cover is going to be green...

Yup! Mr. Paolini has confirmed that the fourth cover will portray "greeny" (the green unhatched dragon, who it has also been confirmed will hatch in the fourth book.) keep reading! I know there are several slow parts in Brisingr but there is always an exciting part waiting to jump out at you from behind the corners!

Lynna (post: 1373339) wrote:The mark of a good writer is not to create something that nobodys ever heard of before but to take something people have already written and make it your own

goldenspines...I would have to disagree whith you...

S'all good. I can understand why people like the books, it's a good idea and a good story. I don't have anything against the fans of the series, just the author himself.

rocklobster wrote: To be honest, I haven't even read Anne McCaffrey's stuff.

Then it may be good to not make statements like that when you don't know where Paolini got all his ideas when you do not. Simply saying you like the series would have sufficed without dragging in this issue.

If I want to read Anne McCaffrey, Tolkien, etc., then I'll read their respective books.

Lynna wrote:The mark of a good writer is not to create something that nobodys ever heard of before but to take something people have already written and make it your own

goldenspines...I would have to disagree whith you...

I disagree with you, in turn. I agree, the mark of a good writer IS to take something people have already written and make it their own. George Lucas did this with Star Wars, which he has stated is inspired by the Akira Kurosawa film The Hidden Fortress.

I have seen The Hidden Fortress. I can see the inspiration George Lucas took from the movie. However, Star Wars does not feel like "The Hidden Fortress, but in space!" This is in direct, absolute contrast to Eragon which is "Star Wars, but with Dragons!"

This is why Paolini is not a good writer.

Can we at least agree that the movie should never have been made?

I can't agree with that because the Rifftrax for Eragon is absolutely hilarious.

Or, as Kevin Murphy put it,

"But mostly it's an opportunity to watch John Malkovich turn in a performance that had to - HAD TO - be a direct challenge to the director, 'Please, fire me.I'm begging you to fire me. I'll do a take like this and then you'll have to fire me. Wait,I'm still not fired?'"

Nate (post: 1373418) wrote:I disagree with you, in turn. I agree, the mark of a good writer IS to take something people have already written and make it their own. George Lucas did this with Star Wars, which he has stated is inspired by the Akira Kurosawa film The Hidden Fortress.

I have seen The Hidden Fortress. I can see the inspiration George Lucas took from the movie. However, Star Wars does not feel like "The Hidden Fortress, but in space!" This is in direct, absolute contrast to Eragon which is "Star Wars, but with Dragons!"

This is why Paolini is not a good writer.

I in turn would disagree greatly with that, because I don't really like star wars (at all, acctually) But I Absoluly and tottaly love the Inheritance cycle. However, let us not argue on this further. Agree to Disegree, I say, and be done with it
I know that at the begining it is very much like Star Wars, However as the sieries progresses it becomes less abnd less like star wars till there is hardly any resemblance at all

And I agree with rocklobster. The movie was really flimsy and even more like star wars than the book---the only thing that made it worth watching was Brom. His acting was amazing and he was really funny

Lynna (post: 1373549) wrote: And I agree with rocklobster. The movie was really flimsy and even more like star wars than the book---the only thing that made it worth watching was Brom. His acting was amazing and he was really funny

I agree with this. Jeremy Irons was the best actor in the movie. Sadly, he was in only half of it.

I think Paolini needs to take a few writing classes and use a thesaurus less. I see potential in the whole story, but it doesn't reach that potential. Many times while reading these books, I felt like I was reading drafts that were heading in a good direction, but going astray in many places. Then I remembered that they were the final copies and it made me sad.

That being said, there has been improvement since the first book. I felt that in Brisingr, Paolini was finally writing some good prose. Eragon was too choppy and Eldest was the epitome of purple prose. Brisingr seems to have more of a balance between the two and it works a bit better. Also, there were like two or three fantastic character developing moments in Brisingr that showed me that Paolini is growing as a writer. The most notable one is the chapter with Arya where she's portrayed as something more than Eragon's unrequited love who rejects him all the time (and the thing with the litte grass ship that flies on the wind or whatever). That was a beautiful chapter. The whole book should be like that, but it isn't. I really could've done without the 200 plus pages of dwarven politics and dwarf ninja attacking Eragon (although I found that part rather amusing). I also could've done without the furry elf guy who makes women swoon at his scent (I was so mad when Nasuada fell for it too. She's one of the more interesting characters in the series).

It annoys me that Paolini claimed that he split the third book in two because the plot was "too big to give all the characters justice." Seriously, more than half of Brisingr was filler and not even half of the important plot points were covered. I assume that the third dragon and rider are important characters, so they probably should've been introduced in this book. Number four will probably be 1,000 pages long or split up again because only two important things happened in Brisingr.

Despite how much I dislike Paolini's writing and his attitude about his writing, I will still finish out the series for a few reasons. One is that reading what I don't think is good writing and figuring out reasons why it isn't good writing helps me not do those same things in my own writing. Another is that I really do see growth and potential in the story. Since so much is supposed to happen in the fourth book, it should be the most interesting. Also, I heard that Paolini is taking writing classes or something, but I'm not sure if that's true. If the fourth book ends up being bad, then at least I'll have something to laugh about.

P.S. The above isn't meant to make anyone who likes the books feel attacked. I only have problems with the author and the writing, not anyone who likes it.

Well the reason I can enjoy reading the inheritance Cycle is because, 1, I just want to be entertained (rather tragic thought), 2, I don't look for these literary kinds of things much, and 3, I'm not a good enough writer to pick them out even if I wanted to. lol.

That said, I can enjoy literary classics of prose and thought, but usually only if my hand is held through some the way to point out what is so great about them. Otherwise, I'll just miss major things, or not feel inclined to think about things too much to get them anyways. I think the reason I like this kind of fiction is because its so simplistic. Not too much to think about if you just want to read without too much consideration. Its entertaining, but not deep.

Like, I really really enjoy Asian Literature, if it can be called that, like Ha Jin, Yasunari Kawabata, Haruki Murakami, Min Jin Lee, stuff like that. Most of it is translated, so perhaps much of the prose is lost or inserted. Maybe its not such a literary masterpiece, though Kawabata won a nobel prize, but I like the ideas, depressing though they may be. I dunno. I have no say in any of these things as a literary person.

I personally think that Christopher Paolini is a very good writer and that the books are very good litriture...that's just my opinion though

I won't say much because I'm sure to inspire rage in Paolini fans.
It's widely known that I'm not a fan of Paolini. I've read the first two books to see what the fuss was. I admire his dedication to writing (and finishing) his big books but I wish he was more original and improved greatly in his writings before publishing them. It's one thing to take an old story and and put your own personal take on it, it's another to make a carbon copy of famous fiction and call it your own. Paolini did the latter. Also, as mentioned previously, he swears by the religion of Purple Prose and it is a false religion. Finally, the young man has quite an ego! Ick.
I found Eragon to be the most annoying protagonist I've encountered in fiction (even worse than Shinji from NGE). The only characters I liked in the books were Murtaugh, Elva, the cursed girl and Angela the witch.
Murtaugh - because he was the only character with any measure of character development and he was less Gary Sue-ish than the rest, Elva - because her character and circumstance were very interesting and Angela, because she was eccentric and rather amusing. Sadly, Elva's curse doesn't effect her for the worse but instead for the better! It doesn't make story-sense. Imagine how more rich her character would be if she were angry with Eragon and wanted him dead for cursing her? (think, finally a character who didn't kiss the dirt at Eragon's feet). She could become the main antagonist or something.

Lynna (post: 1374080) wrote:I personally think that Christopher Paolini is a very good writer and that the books are very good litriture...that's just my opinion though

I should probably say something like I have never read any of Christopher Paolini's books and don't really care to]He removed both his boots, then stood and dropped his trousers, so that his only garb was his shirt and woolen underpants. “Top that if you can,â€

Imagine how more rich her character would be if she were angry with Eragon and wanted him dead for cursing her? (think, finally a character who didn't kiss the dirt at Eragon's feet). She could become the main antagonist or something.

That would be so awesome.

I found Eragon to be the most annoying protagonist I've encountered in fiction

I think this is largely due to the fact that he isn't allowed to be his own character. What I mean is, Paolini forces him into the "hero that everybody loves except the bad guy." There were like two or three moments in the third book when I felt his real character started to show through, but then it was back to the cookie cutter and into the oven for him.

I think Arya and her mother have a really interesting and complex relationship, yet that's hardly dealt with and I doubt it'll be touched on again. Yet another area with potential that's gone ignored.

Another thing that bothered me about the third book was Saphira's chapters. The idea behind them is fine, and I'm all for practicing with different voices when speaking through different characters, but it was still inconsistent. All those hyphenated words certainly sounded more animal-like, but for all of the other chapters she refers to a human as a human instead of a "Two-legs-something-or-other." This is one of the reasons why I wish these books were drafts instead of final copies.

I should probably say something like I have never read any of Christopher Paolini's books and don't really care to; HOWEVER, I have been informed that one of his books actually contains the following excerpt.

Originally posted by Christopher Paolini is such a great author you guys:
He removed both his boots, then stood and dropped his trousers, so that his only garb was his shirt and woolen underpants. “Top that if you can,” he said, and pointed to the inside of his thighs. A riotous combination of colors mottled his skin, as if Eragon were an exotic fruit that was ripening in uneven patches from crab apple green to putrefied purple.

Whether Christopher Paolini is good, and possibly even more controversially whether he is actually a writer, is something I'll pass on for the good of this thread and my own health. That said, filing anything in a book containing the previous quote as standard form under "Good literature" offends me and the occasional actually literary quality authors I sometimes read.

What you've hear is correct, Fish. That passage comes from the beginning of the third book. I liked it for its bit of lightheartedness and humor, but that comparison is. . .something else, XD. Eragon is a fruit. He is an exotic one. LOL. I agree with you on your last point too. Inheritance could potentially have had so much significance worked into it. Everything down to the colors of the dragons could have some form of higher meaning if the author knew anything about symbolism.

LadyRushia (post: 1374158) wrote:
Another thing that bothered me about the third book was Saphira's chapters. The idea behind them is fine, and I'm all for practicing with different voices when speaking through different characters, but it was still inconsistent. All those hyphenated words certainly sounded more animal-like, but for all of the other chapters she refers to a human as a human instead of a "Two-legs-something-or-other." This is one of the reasons why I wish these books were drafts instead of final copies.

I think that what Paolini was trying to do with that was to convey that there are certain human things and concepts that don't translate well into the dragon mindset, and was trying to show certain things from how they understand it/what they call it. It wasn't unique to Saphira; in Glaedr's chapter later in the book, some words appear the same way, so it's more of a dragon thing. It's trying to show an alien thought pattern and a language barrier: certain idioms and expressions in one language have no direct parallel in another. The reason that she doesn't talk like that when she's speaking to Eragon is because they are talking about the same things, but Eragon sees them through his filter of names and human experience, and gives them a name from the human side of things. In my view, it's one of the books' better points, showing that the dragons aren't just humans with wings; they see the world in extensively different ways.

Another (better) example of this separation is the Orz in the game Star Control 2 (*cough*freeware*cough*), who, unlike the rest of the species you meet, are so alien that not everything from their language carries over. Like the dragons in the Inheritance Cycle, you can kind of understand what gets lost. (Maybe.) It adds to their aura of "we're not from around here." (The great voice acting helped, too.)

Anyway, if I were to write the last book, the elves would have been using Eragon as a tool from the start, to get Galbatorix out of the way so that they could rule the world instead, possessing absolute dominion over the humans. This would be presented as a good thing. It'd be the only logical conclusion, seeing how much Paolini talks about how awesome the vegan, atheist/agnostic, nature-loving, free love-practicing elves are.

I think that what Paolini was trying to do with that was to convey that there are certain human things and concepts that don't translate well into the dragon mindset, and was trying to show certain things from how they understand it/what they call it. It wasn't unique to Saphira; in Glaedr's monologue later, some words appear the same way, so it's more of a dragon thing. It's trying to show an alien thought pattern and a language barrier: certain idioms and expressions in one language have no direct parallel in another. In my view, it's one of the books' better points, showing that the dragons aren't just humans with wings; they see the world in extensively dfferent ways.

I wouldn't have a problem with this if in the other two books and in every other chapter besides those dragon chapters, Saphira/other dragons spoke that way. If Paolini wanted the dragons to sound different, he should've made them use that hyphenated-language-speak earlier on or just written those chapters differently. I know exactly what he's trying to do with those chapters, but it doesn't work because the dragons sound like humans when we're not reading from their perspective. It makes no sense.

Anyway, if I were to write the last book, the elves would have been using Eragon as a tool from the start, to get Galbatorix out of the way so that they could rule the world instead, possessing absolute dominion over the humans. This would be presented as a good thing. It'd be the only logical conclusion, seeing how much Paolini talks about how awesome the vegan, atheist/agnostic, nature-loving, free love-practicing elves are.

That would be an interesting direction for the series to take.

That's true. It felt really black and white. Not too much of the intrigue that gray characters bring. Eragon and the elves were good, Murtagh looked good, but predictably turned bad the first chance he got instead of thinking it over much. Galbatorix is probably evil through and through. And no one really had me wondering which side they were on for too long. But kids like that kind of stuff, where right is right and wrong is wrong. Its a sort of Heroic thing I guess, though it makes for flat characters. Fun to read, not much to think about when you're done. Entertainment.

Strafe (post: 1374178) wrote:Galbatorix is probably evil through and through.

Of course he is, he has an "x" in his name.

Eh, ether way, I've read Eragon, Eldest, and I'm trying to force myself to read Brisingr. Too much of it is too cliché. Paolini has a massive ego and far too many times I've noticed a feel of "looky me, I've taken this and made it my own. I'm so intelligent." Even the supposed fictional language used in his books? Yeah, it's just Old Norse. I enjoyed Eragon to some extent but I pretty much dropped this series a while back.

Not to mention he relates dragons to cats. e.e

You made it further than me Crimmy... I didn't clear the first chapter of Eragon. In fact, I think I lost it after 2 pages due to what looked to be grievous continuity errors.

LadyRushia (post: 1373559) wrote:I think Paolini needs to take a few writing classes and use a thesaurus less.

I think we need to lead an expedition to rescue his poor abused thesaurus. No thesaurus should have to suffer through so much for just four books.

Lynna wrote:I personally think that Christopher Paolini is a very good writer and that the books are very good litriture...that's just my opinion though

The problem is that isn't really an opinion. "Christopher Paolini is a very good writer" is a statement that can be proven false by looking at his writing and showing how it is not very good. You can't have an opinion about objective facts. If I say "The sky is green and that's my opinion," that isn't an opinion because it can be proven wrong by looking at the sky.

However, saying "I enjoy reading Christopher Paolini's books" WOULD be a statement of opinion, because it is subjective. It is entirely possible to enjoy a bad writer or a bad movie. I myself like the movie Snakes on a Plane. It's a terrible move, extremely stupid, poorly written, and badly acted. But I still love it. It's so bad that it's good.

So if you like the books, that's awesome. That's your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But again, Christopher Paolini's status as a writer is provable to be bad, and so again, while you may enjoy him despite the fact that he is a bad writer, that doesn't change the fact that he IS a bad writer, any more so than me believing the sky is green would change the fact that it is blue.

Well, she did preamble her statement with "I personally think," so I don't think she's meaning to state anything as fact, XD.

I think one of the more interesting things that's happened with the Inheritance fandom is that some people who think the books are awful have sat down, rewritten then, and posted them on fanfiction.net. I haven't really read many of the stories like that, but it sounds like a fun thing to do.

*voluntarily jumps out of a window in despair*

(As others have said, liking these books doesn't mean you're a nitwit. One of my best friends loves these books, and I certainly don't think the less of her for it. But I think those of us who aren't Inheritance fans have the right to hate them with a passion if we want to I daresay some of the things we read would suffer as much censure by others as Eragon does by us.)

Well, let me just say that I enjoyed the first book reasonably well - after slogging through the unbelievably boring first 100 pages - and thought it showed promise. Hey, I thought, this is his first book, and he's only like nineteen or something, so I can cut him some slack. I liked the way he did Eragon and Saphira's relationship; Brom, Angela, and Murtagh were pretty fun characters; and overall I thought the series showed promise as an okay, if typical, fantasy adventure story. So I cheerfully went ahead and bought Eldest and started reading. The only way I got through that book was by making jokes with my little sisters about the "tooty-fruity Elves" who are so beautiful and fair and enviable because they get sick if they even think about eating meat because it'll probably ruin their delicate digestion, and they can't bear to hurt even an ant because the ants are so cuddly and fuzzy and their lives are on exactly the same level as human beings.

Then along came Brisingr, and I gave it the benefit of the doubt because second books are often my least-favorite anyway, and I reasoned that after a whole big book of him just training and lollygaggin' around and moping after Arya, letting the Empire wreak havoc everywhere, he'd have to do something interesting. -_- Only by sheer force of will did I make it through those horrible pages, and I've now decided that I can wait ten years until I can get the last book easily at a library and flip to the end to find out how it all ended. What a waste of time and money.

I will grant that Paolini had some potential and some interesting ideas, like dragon's hearts, the way dragons look at the world, dwarf clans, etc. Roran was pretty awesome (comparitively speaking) in Eldest; I'll admit I never saw his part in the story coming, and he was okay in Brisingr too. He kind of reminds me of Perrin, my favorite character in the Wheel of Time series.

But for every good idea Paolini gets, he has about a hundred pages of over-written tripe that just makes you fall asleep and forget why you even care about the cool parts anyway. Instead of improving with time, Paolini's writing seems, to me, to have only worsened. When you look at a passage closely, forgetting for a moment the rest of the book, I believe he's gotten better. But as a whole, I think he has even less of an idea of how to write a story than he did before. I honestly don't understand why his books got so popular, and hope that when the fallout comes Paolini's head will get deflated and he'll actually learn to write.

But that's not to say that nothing good comes of the Inheritance series! I myself would never have gotten an idea for my own dragon rider story if I hadn't been so annoyed at his books and the Dragonriders of Pern series. It's true that when you read something as unbelievably horrible as these books, for one thing it encourages you when you know that at least you won't make your readers suffer through hundreds of boring pages (whether your own writing is better than his or not), and for another you can see precisely what you don't like about his books and can then go and do other things in your own writing.

Davidizer13 (post: 1374168) wrote:Another (better) example of this separation is the Orz in the game Star Control 2 (*cough*freeware*cough*), who, unlike the rest of the species you meet, are so alien that not everything from their language carries over. Like the dragons in the Inheritance Cycle, you can kind of understand what gets lost. (Maybe.) It adds to their aura of "we're not from around here." (The great voice acting helped, too.)

Thank you for mentioning that game! *puts on overly cheerful voice* "The campers...are so...squishy!"

CrimsonRyu17 (post: 1374193) wrote:Not to mention he relates dragons to cats. e.e

And what's wrong with that, may I ask? When writing about my dragons, I draw parallels to cats, dogs, and birds (even a little bit of snakes), mainly because humans are much more used to those animals, so when you go about describing a kind of animal that doesn't exist in our world, you have to make comparisons. So my dragons purr, stretch like cats and dogs, prance around like puppies, fly like falcons, etc.

the_wolfs_howl (post: 1374481) wrote:And what's wrong with that, may I ask? When writing about my dragons, I draw parallels to cats, dogs, and birds (even a little bit of snakes), mainly because humans are much more used to those animals, so when you go about describing a kind of animal that doesn't exist in our world, you have to make comparisons. So my dragons purr, stretch like cats and dogs, prance around like puppies, fly like falcons, etc.

You seem to misunderstand me. I'm not saying Paolini related the actions of his dragons to those of cats, but he literally thinks that a dragon acts and thinks the same way as a cat.

And when I write about my dragons, I draw parallels to monsters and reptiles. Western-style (Medieval as well) dragons are creatures that practically represent destruction and pride. Claws for shredding, teeth for ripping, horns for impaling, wings to hunt their prey from above, and last but certainly not least a breath of all-consuming fire. I don't want to see these creatures prancing around like puppies I want to see them acting like dragons.

If you want to see a wonderful example of a real dragon that hasn't been watered down to suit the tastes of a witless boy, I highly recommend checking out the PS2 game Drakengard and its sequel. The gameplay can be repetitive but there are amazing dragons in this game (they still have riders, mind you) and are of the quality I speak of.

Or y'know, you can go to the "poor misunderstood creature" type of dragons that are so easy to find.

EDIT: Also, I forgot that you mentioned that dragons don't exist in our world and thus we should relate them to modern day creatures. Yet, if you read up on dragons in mythology and Medieval tales, these creatures are very "real" in the sense they are treated as though they actually existed. I suggest reading this for some sources on dragons, especially the Germanic or Old Norse section.