Most Helpful Customer Reviews
35 of 41 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Age doesn't matter...it's a bad book!, June 23, 2005
A Kid's Review
Before I begin...to all those reviewers who are snapping at others for giving this five stars, everyone's entitled to their opinion, and if they think it merits five stars, that's up to them. I don't think "Eragon" merits five stars. In fact I don't think it merits ONE star. For the following reasons... 1) The entire book is a blatant rip-off. The plot is ripped from the first Star Wars film and set in a Middle Earth style realm. Many names have also clearly been stolen from the Lord of the Rings books. Before reading this book I had thought that "Shadowmancer" was the biggest rip-off I had ever read. But at least that book had some original ideas, and the author did try to hide anything he'd ripped off. Christopher Paolini hasn't put a single idea into this book, and hasn't made so much as a token attempt to hide the bits he's stolen. 2) Paolini is clearly one of those grade school students whose English teachers have convinced him that the use of the word "said" is a criminal offence in the world of writing. In this book there isn't a single use of the word "said"...Paolini uses every alternate word he can come up with, and when he can't come up with one he says "stated." In some places this isn't too bad, but in others it's plain unnecessary (such as in the infamous line "'I'm sorry,' apologised Brom"). 3) A lot of the words Paolini uses are out of place. It gives the impression that he had a thesaurus next to him while he was writing this book and he used the fanciest words he could without bothering to check their proper meaning. 4) The description is very here and there. Paolini doesn't even bother to describe Eragon's appearance to us, but he gives us so much unnecessary description that it makes the book slow and plodding. He also tacks unnecessary adverbs at the end of nearly every line a character speaks. 5) Eragon has got to be one of the most unlikeable heroes in literary history. He seems to be incapable of doing anything wrong, and can master any ability in a few months (making me wonder if Paolini based Eragon on the person he thinks he himself is). He's also grumpy, arrogant and stuck-up, and is totally ungrateful for the help of his friends. 6) Half the chapters end with Eragon getting knocked unconscious or falling asleep. 7) Paolini clearly doesn't know a thing about sword-fighting. You can't become an expert at it in a few months, and as another reviewer pointed out, you can't combine different sword moves. 8) The characters are bland and one-dimensional. You don't care what happens to the heroes, and you don't feel angry towards the villains. 9) The ending is awful. I've read a synopsis for this book's sequel, "Eldest," and it looks set to be a clear rip-off of "The Empire Strikes Back" (and there are various hints in this book that Galbatorix will turn out to be Eragon's father). As I said in my review for "Shadowmancer," you can tell if a book is going to be bad when the author becomes proud and pompous about it. On Paolini's website he calls his book "a lyrical beauty" on the same level as Tolkien. I should have steered clear of this book when I read that, but I gave it a chance anyway, and it let me down. It still hasn't displaced "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time" as the worst book I've ever read, though. One final note...to all those who are saying it's remarkable that Paolini got this published at such a young age, the reason for that is because his parents own a publishing house, and as they think anything he writes is flawless they would publish this without a question. If only they hadn't... Also, just because Paolini is fifteen doesn't make this a good book by any means.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
121 of 151 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Laughably bad, August 27, 2005
Ah, Eragon. The book I love to make fun of. After reading this book and dismissing it as a terribly written, if amusing, book, you can understand my puzzlement at the number of devoted fans there are. And now with the next book coming out, I fear that more people will fall into the same trap of "Ooh, shiny dragon cover!" After that, they have no chance. So, you might ask, what's so bad about Eragon? And why am I being so hard on the author, when he was only fifteen? Doesn't he deserve a little credit? Paolini does deserve credit, but not for what most people give him. He has clearly read an impressive number of classic fantasy novels. What is not so impressive is how he blatantly rips off every one of them. Yes, the stereotypical images of elves, orcs, and dwarves are a part of the fantasy genre. And I'm not saying, for example, that McCaffrey invented Dragons. But Paolini uses ALL the mechanics of her dragons in his book-- down to the smallest details like how potential riders stand in front of the dragon eggs, how the dragon chooses its own rider and name, the trauma associated with losing one's dragon, telepathic communication, everything. Try as I might, I could not find a single original idea that Paolini invented himself. And it's not like I've read every fantasy book in existance-- I'm only sixteen. But when I was reading Eragon, I recognized every idea and concept immediately. People having True Names and a language in which you can't lie? Wow, that sounds just like LeGuin's "A Wizard of Earthsea!" And I've heard people praise the originality of Paolini's werecat-- a talking cat that sometimes transforms into a boy. Well, it's odd, then, that I read about one of those just the other day in Garth Nix's "Sabriel." I'm not saying that he intentionally copied all these ideas (though, his characters would undoubtedly be more interesting and multi-dimensional if he had), or that these authors were the first to ever think of them. It's just that I've seen it all done before, by better writers, in my opinion, and Paolini didn't bother to change or add to it in any way. So, while it is a bit impressive for one of Paolini's age to have such a knowledge of fantasy concepts, any fifteen-year-old with half a brain could have stuck them all together and put their name on it. And actually, he didn't even do a good job at that. The plot itself can be summarized by "Star Wars plus damsel in distress plus many, many inconsistencies." One example of the plot just not making sense happens about three-fifths of the way through the book. Arya is slowly dying of slow-acting poison and they need to get her to the Varden as soon as possible. Eragon suggests that he and Arya fly there on Saphira, thus getting there much faster than they would be able to on horseback. The only problem would be they'd have to leave Murtagh behind. But then-- get this-- Murtagh throws a tantrum because he doesn't want to go to the Varden. How does that make sense at ALL!? It completely ruined the whole "exciting chase scene" because the entire time they were slowly riding there I was thinking, "Why is Murtagh still with you!? Just fly there, already!" And, indeed, Murtagh complains the entire time because he wants to leave. Paolini gives no reason for him not to-- he simply doesn't, because it would ruin the big chase scene. Awful. Then when they finally get there, Paolini conveniently forgets about his ancient language (you can't lie, remember?) and makes a huge deal about how the Varden don't trust Murtagh and how he has to get his mind probed. All the other plot elements and events are similarly contrived. When they have to cross an enormous expanse of desert, for example, Eragon makes a big fuss about how they can only carry enough water to last them one day, and it will take them two days to cross. This didn't make sense to me because they'd never had this problem with carrying water before. Paolini just creates a conflict where there logically should be none so Eragon can cleverly solve it with magic. And yet in other cases, when faced with a real problem, he solves it with unrealistic ease. In one scene, Eragon and Murtagh must break out of jail. Eragon spends more than a day trying find a way out of his cell. He finally manages it with magic. And the very second he breaks free, there's Murtagh, who conveniently happened to get out at the exact same second, without using magic, in time to shoot the guards! Whenever Eragon gets into any real trouble, he is conveniently knocked unconscious and the problem is solved for him by the time he wakes up. I just wish it worked like that in real life-- then I could have simply knocked myself out cold instead of having to finish reading the book. Even with all these badly written scenes to choose from, there is one that really stands above the rest. The battle at the end of the book has got to be the absolute worst "big climactic battle scene" I have ever read. Paolini describes many Urgals (his version of orcs) dying. He describes Eragon and Saphira flying around blasting stuff. But not once does he describe-- or even mention-- anyone on the "good side" dying. You assume that everything is going well for them. But then halfway through he tells us that the battle is "going badly," and afterward, that "there were many casualties." Huh? Because of this, the scene was lacking any sense of excitement or concern for the heroes that it should have had. Still, I might have been able to forgive most of these flaws, or at least gotten some small enjoyment out of the book, if it had other redeeming qualities. But here, too, Eragon fails in every respect. The characters are flat and lack realistic personalities. The only character who gets more than a line or two is Arya, the elf princess, and she is (of course) the embodiment of perfection. Paolini surrounds every mention of her with description of how shiny, perfect, and beautiful she is. After about the fifth description of how her eyebrows slant, it becomes quite irritating. All the characters speak in the exact same way, from uneducated farm boy Eragon, who can't even read, to old scholarly Brom. And don't even get me started on his "creative elven language." Taking a bunch of english, latin and greek words, adding extra consonants and accent marks and putting an "R" or "A" at the end of each one is not the same thing as creating a language. Example: "knife" becomes "knífr." "Their" becomes "theirra." And no, I don't expect him to be able to create a realistic language at the age of fifteen, but he seems to be given credit for having done so. If you must read this book, read it for what it is-- something that should be parodied rather than taken seriously. This way, when you come across things like fifteen-year-old Eragon wielding a five-foot-long sword with ease and then storing it away in his pack, you will be as amused by it as I was. In that way, this book is priceless.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1,773 of 2,275 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
impressive for a 17-yr-old, clearly written by a 17-yr-old, November 14, 2003
What you almost always hear first about this book is "wow, it was written by a 17-yr-old". And the author is fully deserving of the respect and admiration he gets--it is indeed an impressive book for a 17-year-old to have written. What he probably should not have gotten was a publishing contract, since while it is impressive for a 17-yr-old, it is less than impressive for a published work of fiction. If an adult had written and published this, I would have been disgusted (as I was with the Sword of Shannara) with the clear calculation that had gone into the work: "ok, I'll take a lot of Tolkien, a lot of McCaffery, a good amount of Leguin, some Dragonlance, some Star Wars, etc. It will be a can't miss book." Since it's the product not of an adult but of a teenager, it comes across much more positively--as a work of fiction by someone who has read lots and absorbed lots of fantasy and simply didn't have the experience (or the good editor) to take out all of his favorite parts of other works. How can I dislike or be too critical of someone who so obviously loved some of my own favorite authors, loved them so much that they simply took over his book through I'm guessing no fault of his own. And that in a nutshell is the problem with Eragon. The story is cliched, formulaic and barely passable as are the characters and the language is simply what you would expect from a somewhat precocious teen fan of adult fantasy. If you have any experience in the field of fantasy at all, reading Eragon will feel like a visit to Las Vegas (though not so tacky)--sure you can see New York and Paris and Italy, but they are mere shadows of the real thing. So McCaffery's telepathic link between dragon and rider is here, but not the powerful emotionality of her (especially earlier) works. LeGuin's idea of one true name and one true language forming the backbone of magic is here, but not her masterful sense of order and balance and restraint, not to mention the sparse beauty of her language. And of course, the graceful, bow-carrying elves, the gruff and secretive mentor with magical powers, the withdrawn dwarves, etc. all show up in their correct place and time. As a high school English teacher, the story and characters are exactly what I would expect to see if I picked up one of my fantasy fan's personal notebooks off of their desks and began reading. Even the people and place names are far too imitative (as opposed to inspired by). To be perfectly honest, it was so much like my students' writings I had to struggle to continue past the first ten pages. Does that mean nobody could enjoy this book? A quick look at the reviews clearly shows that many have (most of them young I'm sure). If you have read Tolkien, McCaffery, LeGuin, Jordan, Lewis, Pullman, Donaldson, etc., then I'd strongly suggest skipping Eragon. You'll not only be heavily disappointed by the weaknesses in plot, character development, and language, but you'll probably be annoyed at how often your favorite authors appear in borrowed and poorer clothing. If you have little experience in fantasy and so won't be bothered by the obviously derivative nature of this book, you'll probably enjoy it but there are far better works to begin a lifetime of fantasy reading with and even if you start with Eragon, I hope you quickly move onto them, beginning with the above list and adding for younger readers people like Lloyd Alexander, E. Nesbit, Robin McKinley, and many, many others. I'd like to see what this young author comes up with in another five-ten years, but for now he's still retelling the stories he liked himself, rather than writing down his own.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
