CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

I say that when it comes to fiction everything can be done right; and everything that can be done right can also be done horribly wrong. Eragon did dragon bonding horribly wrong, but it isn't the fact that his dragons are the usual poor misunderstood monsters that made it wrong.

What made it wrong was the flat characters and overwritten prose. It was like he had a thesaurus and no dictionary and had never tried to imagine another person's thoughts in his entire life. He just didn't know what other people would think when they hear words like mottled.

And I definitely agree about the ego, this guy has an in inflated ego the size of Asia. His first book was even self published at first, which is why his editor didn't hack it to pieces, he didn't have one.

So yeah, I have to agree with The Wolf's Howl on this. Dragons can be done wrong and they can be done right, it has nothing to do with whether or not they are evil.

Wikiwalker (post: 1374513) wrote:I say that when it comes to fiction everything can be done right]

I never once said it was wrong. I'm pretty sure I made it clear that my previous post was an opinion on why I rolled my eyes at Paolini's dragons = cats and not dragons. Throw in some distaste of the modern day "dragon" not being anywhere near a dragon at all and there's my post. I agree though that Eragon's dragon bonding is practically nonexistent.

Wikiwalker (post: 1374513) wrote:So yeah, I have to agree with The Wolf's Howl on this. Dragons can be done wrong and they can be done right, it has nothing to do with whether or not they are evil.

No idea what you mean there.

I'm kind of bitter toward this guy because he wrote a sub-standard book and gets fame, respect, praise, and money for having done it. Woe unto the rest of us aspiring writers who work hard at our craft and get nothing for it (except better writing skills).

Much of the praise I've heard in regards to Paolini's writing style has been an emphasis of success story as he was only a teenager when he started writing (and got published, I believe). Formerly working in the book industry I'd heard a rumor that the stories started out as a Lord of the Rings fanfic which kind of made me laugh, but regardless. I didn't care for the books myself, but people enjoy them so whatevs. The movie was terrible, though. We played it for a Bad Movie Night gathering I used to do with friends back in the day. It's funny because most of us were reaming the movie all night and at the end of the flick my wife was actually a little sore because she'd watched the movie and decided she actually really liked it. lol

As for cats versus dragons, I'd like to point out that's been done before (not the point of my statement) by something that I love dearly.

Etoh*the*Greato (post: 1374529) wrote:Much of the praise I've heard in regards to Paolini's writing style has been an emphasis of success story as he was only a teenager when he started writing (and got published, I believe).

Yes.

By his parents' publishing company.

Yes, well, not everyone can be the next S.E. Hinton. :p

[SIZE="1"]Wish my parents had a publishing company...[/SIZE]

Etoh*the*Greato (post: 1374529) wrote:As for cats versus dragons, I'd like to point out that's been done before (not the point of my statement) by something that I love dearly.

Well that's actually pretty cool, cause it is a catdragonthing, not a dragon acting like a cat or a cat acting like a dragon. That bottom pic is pretty awesome.

I love the series. The running joke in each game is that the dragons following you are just babies, and no one will believe them when they say that they're actually dragons. Everyone insists that they are just freakish talking flying cats. When they gain their adult forms they're incredible. At the time I'd not seen anything like it.

They also get pretty cool Human forms as well. If you're not planning on playing the series and don't care about potential spoilers, just do a google image search on "Lunar Nall"

I'm not going to pretend I'm a fan of the series, but I'm not coming here to make fun of it. I have an honest question and I'd like to know if there is an answer in the third book or the parts of the second I didn't really read.

My question is this: why are there exactly two black people?

Normally I would have assumed otherwise, but Eragon specifically thinks that Nasuada and her father are the only ones he's ever seen. They're some of the only characters I like, so where do they come from? Eragon travels through many of the major regions of the Empire early on, and Surda doesn't seem very diverse (same with dwarves or elves). It would make a lot of sense for them to be from the big desert in the middle, but the only characters I remember from there are the random slavers, though presumably there are other peoples living there.

That...is a very good question, actually. I've thought about why there are only two black people, never came up with an answer.

I think the books are okay, and I like them well enough to tolerate them, but they're a far cry from my favorite books, and I think that they leave a lot to be desired. There's a lot of potential, but...no, it doesn't quite make it.
There's a lot of stereotyping, which gets to be REALLY boring once the tolerance level has gone down. The idea of elves shaping themselves to be like different animals is interesting enough but they're still the SOOPER PRETTY ELVES!

And the movie...ugh. The only good thing my friend and I took from it is...
Wait for it...
Durza says NI.

Yeah. My friend was sick one day and his dad made the mistake of renting it, so he watched it and made this sort of observation that Durza says NI at one point.

But the final battle...with Saphira's sceathers, the giant bat, magic user against EVIL magic user, reminds me too much of the final battle in Elfstones of Shannara (I think it was that one. I don't have the book so I can't check, but I'm sure it is.)

But why are the elves so against eating meat, hug and kiss and worship the earth etc. but then they wear lots of leather clothing? Hypocrisy, it's got to be, hypocrisy.

Because the elves are the PeTA of the Inheritance world.

I'm begining to regret ever creating this thread T.T

[quote="Wikiwalker (post: 1374513)"]I say that when it comes to fiction everything can be done right]
His parents were editors/publishers. He was 15

Sorry about the way your thread is going Lynna, I saw this happen to an Eragon thread on the NaNoWriMo forums a few years ago. Two or three posts were from actual fans, then there was debating for about a hundred pages, and then it devolved into just making fun of the books for another thousand pages. So yeah. Sorry.

Lynna (post: 1374710) wrote:His parents were editors/publishers. He was 15

I know, but they were terrible editors.

Sure some good books have been self published (I think I know of a few but I don't remember which they were), but they are the exception, not the rule, and when it comes to writing it's best not to think of yourself as the exception. Of course no one should take that rule too far or they'll never write anything.

Anyway, I think Paolini is smart--or at least diligent--he just isn't very creative.

And CrimsonRyu17: I thought what you were getting into was the whole "Dragons should be evil" argument that annoys me so very much. I guess you weren't so I won't go into this.

Oooh, those cat-dragons look very cool! What series/novel is the fan-art from?

Actually, Paolini was about 18 when his book was published but you can be forgiven for thinking he was 15 at the time (it's not like the media didn't push that idea).

Wikiwalker (post: 1374745) wrote:I thought what you were getting into was the whole "Dragons should be evil" argument that annoys me so very much. I guess you weren't so I won't go into this.

Oh, absolutely not. I've loved dragons (hence why I read Eragon and even the "ryu" in my name means dragon in Japanese) since I can remember, despite being repeatedly told dragons are the symbol of Satan and should be despised, yada yada. xD That is why I'm quite knowledgeable on the subject of dragons in myth. I'm just one of the "oldschool" dragon fans who likes seeing dragons act like dragons. It's similar to enjoying a lion hunting its prey, nothing wrong with it, it's just doing what a lion does afterall.

alagaesia.com wrote:Christopher was fifteen when he wrote the first draft of Eragon. He took a second year to revise the book and then gave it to his parents to read. The family decided to self-publish the book and spent a third year preparing the manuscript for publication: copyediting, proofreading, designing a cover, typesetting the manuscript, and creating marketing materials.

This would put him at 17 when the self-published version released, but I think the "official" version was published when he was 19.

I came across an interesting essay arguing that Eragon is a sociopath. Very intriguing points. I also read a crazy theory on Impish Idea* that would be totally awesome, but probably won't happen. It basically says that Eragon is forcing the narrator of the books to portray him as a hero who everybody loves, but the narrator throws in subtle hints that Eragon really isn't a hero at all.

Lynna wrote:I'm begining to regret ever creating this thread T.T

No one here is attacking you or anyone else for liking the books. If that started happening, I'd stop it immediately. We're just stating our opinions and asking questions. Just as we're explaining why we're critics of the series, you can explain why you like it. The discussion has stayed pretty civil so far, so I'd hope you'd feel safe telling us what you think and why.

uc wrote:My question is this: why are there exactly two black people?

Normally I would have assumed otherwise, but Eragon specifically thinks that Nasuada and her father are the only ones he's ever seen. They're some of the only characters I like, so where do they come from?

I was always under the impression that a portion of the Varden were of Nasuada's race. There's a scene in Brisingr where someone challenges her for control of the Varden, and the book says that according to their custom they each make slices in their arms until one passes out. I don't recall if we're ever told where they come from (I want to say Surda), but I'm fairly certain there are more than just two of them.

*The site may contain some offensive content. I advise younger members not to look around too much.

According to Wikipedia He was about 15 when he started writing it, his parents appear to have published it when he was 17 or 18, and he was 19 when Knopf picked it up (at least I think that's what it says it's bit confusing about the ages, I could ad up the publishing dates, but I'm horrible at math:shake:).

By the way nice avatar Warrior 4 Jesus, I love Tintin.

Edit: wow, two whole posts happened while I was writing this one O_O

LadyRushia wrote: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.

Let me try to explain that, once again: When Saphira talks to non-dragons, her thoughts and the images she explains things in the way she sees things, are filtered through the way the people she is speaking to see things. Usually, when she talks, we see it from the non-dragon point of view. When she's by herself or when we see things from her point of view, her side of the conversation, the filters are not necessary, and that's what we read. It's still an interesting idea]
I'm kind of bitter toward this guy because he wrote a sub-standard book and gets fame, respect, praise, and money for having done it. Woe unto the rest of us aspiring writers who work hard at our craft and get nothing for it (except better writing skills). [/QUOTE]

Insane theory: Perhaps this series and the Twilight one, popular and reviled as they are, are part of some insane plot to revive literature through people reading them and thinking, "This book blows. I can write better than this," and then doing so, thus revitalizing the medium. Pretty doubtful, but it's a nice idea.

the_wolfs_howl (post: 1374481) wrote:
Thank you for mentioning that game! *puts on overly cheerful voice* "The campers...are so...squishy!"

"Why did your bridge turn purple?"

"That's a good question with a very interesting answer!
The fee for this information is twelve million credits."

I want to read them a lot. *TGJesusfreak goes to find library card*

LadyRushia (post: 1374750) wrote:This would put him at 17 when the self-published version released, but I think the "official" version was published when he was 19.

I came across an interesting essay arguing that Eragon is a sociopath. Very intriguing points. I also read a crazy theory on Impish Idea* that would be totally awesome, but probably won't happen. It basically says that Eragon is forcing the narrator of the books to portray him as a hero who everybody loves, but the narrator throws in subtle hints that Eragon really isn't a hero at all.

No one here is attacking you or anyone else for liking the books. If that started happening, I'd stop it immediately. We're just stating our opinions and asking questions. Just as we're explaining why we're critics of the series, you can explain why you like it. The discussion has stayed pretty civil so far, so I'd hope you'd feel safe telling us what you think and why.


I was always under the impression that a portion of the Varden were of Nasuada's race. There's a scene in Brisingr where someone challenges her for control of the Varden, and the book says that according to their custom they each make slices in their arms until one passes out. I don't recall if we're ever told where they come from (I want to say Surda), but I'm fairly certain there are more than just two of them.

*The site may contain some offensive content. I advise younger members not to look around too much.

Nasuada comes from a group all called "The wandering tribes" and they are all black. She mentions in the book when the leader of the wandering tribes came to visit her, she felt uneasy not being the only one stared at (for being black) and it also mentions that there are many people of the wandering tribes in the Varden

TGJesusfreak (post: 1374759) wrote:I want to read them a lot. *TGJesusfreak goes to find library card*

Come back alive!

TGJesusfreak (post: 1374759) wrote:I want to read them a lot. *TGJesusfreak goes to find library card*

Yes! read them yourself!

CrimsonRyu17 (post: 1374507) wrote: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.

Well, the "prancing around like puppies" in my story only happens with a baby dragon who can't breathe fire yet anyway, which I think makes sense because he kind of is a "puppy." That's just my interpretation of hatchling dragons, though. As the dragon grows up and gets huge and powerful and learns how to breathe fire, he becomes more along the lines of the kind of dragon people normally think of. While I think it's a mistake to just make dragons act exactly like cats or dogs or lizards or whatever, I like the idea of playing around with various animal qualities or mannerisms and integrating them into what a dragon is.

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.

Hmm, I think I need to rephrase myself. Because we don't have dragons flying around outside our window, we can't say, "C'mon, everyone knows that dragons are like this!" Have you ever seen the Disney movie Bolt? There are these pigeons in it that act precisely like pigeons, and if you've ever spent time in a city park watching pigeons waddling around and twitching their heads around, you'll know that the Bolt animators did an excellent job of capturing the essence of pigeons. But it's not like that for dragons. There's not really a "right" way to do dragons; sure, there are common things that almost every dragon has like fire breath or scales (*glares at Eragon movie*), but the mannerisms and that kind of thing aren't quite as universal. Or, at the very least, though they might have been portrayed in mythology as acting in certain ways, I think there is great potential for looking at them in new ways. I mean, if we went exactly by mythology, there would never be any potential for dragons to be anything but rampaging, virgin-eating, treasure-hoarding monsters, right?

I guess what I'm saying is that, because dragons aren't real creatures like dogs or cats, there can be a great variety in what they're like because there are no real-world equivalents outside of mythology. That's why my dragon purrs and licks his rider's face with much slobber - and also roars and breathes fire and crushes knights in shining armor.

Wikiwalker (post: 1374792) wrote:Come back alive!

I'll try! lol

I read the first two a few years ago. They were ok. There's nothing to compel me to read on, other than idle curiosity. Better than the dumb Twilight craze at any rate.

Hey, Paolini and Meyer should hook up. They can write strange/creepy fiction together.