Sashia’s answer to “Why so much haters!?!?! IT'S A GREAT BOOK!!!!!!!! >:(” > Likes and Comments
34 likes · Like
I'll get right to it. Paolini is a clumsy writer. Clunky dialogue that actually was a struggle to get through. His being 16 at the time didn't impress nor embittered me. I just wanted a good story. You don't get that here. There are much better fantasy stories out there.
It is inconceivable to me that anyone with any experience in the fantasy genre or the "Star Wars" saga could make the claims you have. The prologue of "Eragon" alone matches up so perfectly with the opening of "Star Wars: A New Hope" it's absurd. And the infinite number of cliches are not even worth mentioning next to the specific things he blatantly rips from Tolkien and "Dragon Riders of Pernn."
We all have guilty pleasures. I have books and movies I love that are hated by masses of other people. But when someone rants against the crude toilet humor of "Barry Trotter," the wackiness of "Snow Crash" or the clumsy writing of "Star Trek: Voyager," I don't crusade to change their minds. I just accept that the thing I love isn't Shakespeare, and it's inevitable that a number of people will hate it, and move on.
"Seriously, to really hate this series you must either not like traditional fantasy at all, or not have very good intuition to see all the questions and points, Paolini weaves through his writing." Woah there, buddy. Woah, there.
Did you seriously just tell me that I better read this book and not hate it, or I'm stupid? Um, excuse me? I haven't read this book myself, but if I hate this book, then I hate it, If I just don't like this book, then I just don't like it. If I like this book, then yay! We agree. Taste is subjective, and I am not stupid simply because I don't like what you like.
And reading boring books hailed by everyone when you're seven and ten does not make you an expert at anything!
I've never read Anne of Green Gables, but I enjoyed To Kill a Mockingbird. For what it's worth, I thought Eragon was crap.
It was bad because it was boring and took too long on details. As a writer AND reader, he did what writers try NOT to do, write too much about pointless things.
I will include a description of something and a general idea of something if important it will have more, character designs, have to have more. I have this one story that is of a person that kills others, now the comparison is the detail it needs more detail because of the torture devices.
However, I put enough to give the general idea AND gave more to this item that will be important-it will give some info on something later on, it took a while but I had give a feeling to the reader of the scene (didn't take long, already did that in the first half) it is dark and mysterious the vibe, had to show how the character felt and his dying moments (yeah he died, and it was gruesome), it was necessary for more detail but with simple words that Paolini DID NOT do.
Later showed the person that did the whole torture device thing on the other person do some stuff with the items the other person had which was to escape, it was to show they are smart and it was detailed.
One-showed how the character was like
Two-Showed they are a planner and have depth
Three-Showed that they are level headed but when angered will yell and say some things to the person
Four-They have a plan and intend to carry on (hinted at with phrases, more stately said)
Five-They must be rather influential or at least posh and with money based on the design and the moment he has the suit and all that
Six-The mysterious woman portait shows that there might be more to it than meets the eye
This was one chapter by the way, long? Yes but for good reason, it had simple words with a few posher ones and that was it. Paolini probably didn't have much thought to it while I had to have a lot to know thee general way it will go and the character.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
I'll get right to it. Paolini is a clumsy writer. Clunky dialogue that actually was a struggle to get through. His being 16 at the time didn't impress nor embittered me. I just wanted a good story. You don't get that here. There are much better fantasy stories out there.
I've got concrete evidence. But to you it might just sound like a rant.
1. Character has no depth. I cannot sympathize or empathize with this character. Occasionally the author reveals a little of what Eragon is thinking, but to me Eragon seems like an average guy who just happened to find a dragon egg.
2. Where's the action,adventure, suspense, peril?
It seems to me that everything just seems to land in Eragons lap at the right moment for him to succeed at EVERYTHING. Yes, he gets hurt a few times, but not life threatening. Plus, so far he's only been traveling and talking about stuff.
3. My complaint.
Brom is teaching Eragon fighting and magic. But all the author says is that they practiced a lot and Eragon was "magically" a natural.
4. Explanations and secrets.
It seems to me that there are overly too many secrets. That aren't revealed at all in a normal quick pace of a novel. Granted, most authors want to unveil their awesome ideas for mind blowing secrets in a slow pace to string the reader on like a puppy on a leash. But this author doesn't tell me,the reader and fellow writer, anything.
5. Word explosions.
I love the fact that at least one author I've read knows a huge amount of adjectives,adverbs,etc.(unless he had a thesaurus).
But he ,not on purpose (I hope) , makes some of the paragraphs totally boring in wordage and then in the next sentence he throws out some unusual words to help the sentence. This just either confuses the reader or jars he or she.
All these errors can be corrected in time, practice, and study.
My question is:why didn't the editor or publisher NOT see these flaws.
But overall so far the story is ok. I think it is worth looking into the series.
Ps, I've also seem comments about cliches. But so far I haven't seen any, or else I haven't read enough books to find any.
1. Character has no depth. I cannot sympathize or empathize with this character. Occasionally the author reveals a little of what Eragon is thinking, but to me Eragon seems like an average guy who just happened to find a dragon egg.
2. Where's the action,adventure, suspense, peril?
It seems to me that everything just seems to land in Eragons lap at the right moment for him to succeed at EVERYTHING. Yes, he gets hurt a few times, but not life threatening. Plus, so far he's only been traveling and talking about stuff.
3. My complaint.
Brom is teaching Eragon fighting and magic. But all the author says is that they practiced a lot and Eragon was "magically" a natural.
4. Explanations and secrets.
It seems to me that there are overly too many secrets. That aren't revealed at all in a normal quick pace of a novel. Granted, most authors want to unveil their awesome ideas for mind blowing secrets in a slow pace to string the reader on like a puppy on a leash. But this author doesn't tell me,the reader and fellow writer, anything.
5. Word explosions.
I love the fact that at least one author I've read knows a huge amount of adjectives,adverbs,etc.(unless he had a thesaurus).
But he ,not on purpose (I hope) , makes some of the paragraphs totally boring in wordage and then in the next sentence he throws out some unusual words to help the sentence. This just either confuses the reader or jars he or she.
All these errors can be corrected in time, practice, and study.
My question is:why didn't the editor or publisher NOT see these flaws.
But overall so far the story is ok. I think it is worth looking into the series.
Ps, I've also seem comments about cliches. But so far I haven't seen any, or else I haven't read enough books to find any.
It is inconceivable to me that anyone with any experience in the fantasy genre or the "Star Wars" saga could make the claims you have. The prologue of "Eragon" alone matches up so perfectly with the opening of "Star Wars: A New Hope" it's absurd. And the infinite number of cliches are not even worth mentioning next to the specific things he blatantly rips from Tolkien and "Dragon Riders of Pernn." We all have guilty pleasures. I have books and movies I love that are hated by masses of other people. But when someone rants against the crude toilet humor of "Barry Trotter," the wackiness of "Snow Crash" or the clumsy writing of "Star Trek: Voyager," I don't crusade to change their minds. I just accept that the thing I love isn't Shakespeare, and it's inevitable that a number of people will hate it, and move on.
"Seriously, to really hate this series you must either not like traditional fantasy at all, or not have very good intuition to see all the questions and points, Paolini weaves through his writing." Woah there, buddy. Woah, there. Did you seriously just tell me that I better read this book and not hate it, or I'm stupid? Um, excuse me? I haven't read this book myself, but if I hate this book, then I hate it, If I just don't like this book, then I just don't like it. If I like this book, then yay! We agree. Taste is subjective, and I am not stupid simply because I don't like what you like.
And reading boring books hailed by everyone when you're seven and ten does not make you an expert at anything!
I've never read Anne of Green Gables, but I enjoyed To Kill a Mockingbird. For what it's worth, I thought Eragon was crap.
It was bad because it was boring and took too long on details. As a writer AND reader, he did what writers try NOT to do, write too much about pointless things.I will include a description of something and a general idea of something if important it will have more, character designs, have to have more. I have this one story that is of a person that kills others, now the comparison is the detail it needs more detail because of the torture devices.
However, I put enough to give the general idea AND gave more to this item that will be important-it will give some info on something later on, it took a while but I had give a feeling to the reader of the scene (didn't take long, already did that in the first half) it is dark and mysterious the vibe, had to show how the character felt and his dying moments (yeah he died, and it was gruesome), it was necessary for more detail but with simple words that Paolini DID NOT do.
Later showed the person that did the whole torture device thing on the other person do some stuff with the items the other person had which was to escape, it was to show they are smart and it was detailed.
One-showed how the character was like
Two-Showed they are a planner and have depth
Three-Showed that they are level headed but when angered will yell and say some things to the person
Four-They have a plan and intend to carry on (hinted at with phrases, more stately said)
Five-They must be rather influential or at least posh and with money based on the design and the moment he has the suit and all that
Six-The mysterious woman portait shows that there might be more to it than meets the eye
This was one chapter by the way, long? Yes but for good reason, it had simple words with a few posher ones and that was it. Paolini probably didn't have much thought to it while I had to have a lot to know thee general way it will go and the character.
Also, yes, every popular book gets hate, but you have to consider that in proportion to the love it gets as well. Harry Potter may have haters, but for each critic there are hundreds of thousands of fans. Eragon... not so much so. You'll see all the top comments, the ones most agreed upon, are critical of the book. No one likes to criticize or praise someone based on their age. As for plagiarism, I could write pages and pages on it, but I have better things to do.
P.S. If you want to tell someone that you read Shakespeare when you were five months old, find a nice pebble. It'll be the only thing that cares.