Customer Reviews

Eragon (Inheritance, Book 1) (The Inheritance Cycle)

5 star:		(1,539)
4 star:		(477)
3 star:		(316)
2 star:		(250)
1 star:		(433)

 

 

Whatever editor green-lighted this book should never again work in the publishing industry. It was pure bloody-mindedness that allowed me to slog through this muddled excuse for a novel. I kept thinking to myself, "This has GOT to get better. It can't be as bad as it seems." I even went back and re-read the several chapters, thinking I'd somehow missed some spark of brilliance.

Fat chance. It's not there.

There isn't an original idea, a novel concept, a well-conceived plot line, or a nicely drawn character in the entire book. Lots of other reviewers have cited the author's various sources. I encourage you to read something from one of the authors Paolini ripped off and skip this miserable piece of fan fiction.

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.

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.

I was given this book as a Christmas present and decided to read it. I'm 41, by the way, and have read a few books and written a few stories in my day. I see this book has received over a thousand reviews so I'll keep mine short.

Good points:

The writing is technically sound for the most part (by that I mean at least grammatically correct) and the writer followed the classic pattern of the "epic" (hero travels around discovering secrets of him/her self and growing in power reaching a climax of killing the evil one).

Bad points:

The plot is completely cliche and "safe", woven from the fabric of all the stories the author had loved (Star Wars, Dragon Riders of Pern, Lord of the Rings, and perhaps even The Song of Albion and others) prior to writing his story. He even names the evil empire, "the Empire"! Tip of the hat or uninspired plagiarism?

His writing style reflects his age: way too many adverbs and he repeatedly violates the "show don't tell" mantra of professional writers everywhere. Don't tell me that Eragon was worried. SHOW me by telling me that Eragon's brow wrinkled or he pulled at his face with open hands or some such VISUAL clue that he was worried. His adjectives and adverbs often feel as if he'd simply pulled them from a thesaurus and he had never heard of the words until then.

There are COUNTLESS illogical situations that made me want to give up on the book long before I finished it. Eragon is traveling to the Varden along with Murtagh and the poisoned elf. They have a dragon and 2 horses and need to get there ASAP but instead of Eragon flying there via his dragon, they'd rather trot along on horses! Boy, I really felt the suspense. It simply is a reflection of the lack of reasoning skills of the author due to his age.

No real resolution is achieved by the end of the book but much is revealed along the way.

The battle scene at the end was so devoid of graphic descriptions and suspense that it seemed the author was unsure exactly who his audience should be. Out of thousands of Urgals, Dwarves and men, only one or two is described as dying.


I could go on but I won't. This book is probably worth two stars but I gave one to try and offset the hundreds of reviews by readers who are not yet to the age where they can understand exactly what "master Paolini" has accomplished. I think he could be a great writer - in time.

Summary: If you are new to epic fantasy literature, by all means, read this if you want. Otherwise, avoid it. Why waste your time on a two-star work when there are more five-star works than you could read in a lifetime?

First off, I want to say that I am slightly biased. I worship J.R.R. Tolkien and his epic, beautiful, lyrical works. I also respect other writers such as David Eddings, J.K. Rowling, and Ursula Leguin. So maybe my preferences led me to a book with a gorgeous blue dragon that looked distinctly human on the cover. When I first happened upon Eragon, I had no idea who the author was (or, shall I say, how OLD he was) and I had never heard of it before (ignorance is bliss). So when I picked it up, I read the first couple of pages, and I was a lost cause. Though there are many factors that contribute to Eragon's failings as a fantasy novel (or a novel in general), the two most blatant are writing using a photocopier and writing without the skill to do so. I admire Christopher Paolini so much because he has sufficient firmness to go on with such an epic (the task, not the result) task till the end. But the admiration ends there. I don't think that his age should excuse the pomposity and dullness of his language and overall lack of technical skill. He has a real knack for taking a whole lot of SAT level vocab, putting it together, and making it mean NOTHING AT ALL. How's this for an example... "May thee who enter here forget thine impermanence and that which is beloved"; this is an inscription on the citadel of Dras-Leona, and I still can't grasp it. There is just something so superficial and fake about CP's writing style that I know for sure his novel is popular only because of the intricate plot rather than a sublime and beautiful mastery of the English language. Though he graduated at 15, I guess he didn't take Creative Writing 101. My next pet peeve is a fairly common one, and it is that there is not one ounce of originality in Eragon. I won't bore you with all the sordid details, but don't expect anything new, and don't expect anything great from Eragon. At best, it is a mildly interesting, simplistic novel that that will deliver you from extreme boredom. At worst, it is a poor attempt by an adoring fan to emulate those who are far, far greater than he. Maybe later, CP, but for now, you aren't fit to wipe Tolkien's shoes. SHAME ON YOU!

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.

I'm currently twelve years old, and after three years of hearing all the hype surrounding Eragon and its successor (Eldest), I decided to give it a try and see if it really lived up to all the praise. I was very disappointed.

Summary: I'm sure that you've already read this in all the other reviews so I'm just going to outline the most basic and important things. Our main character here is a fifteen year old poor farm boy called Eragon, who one day just happens to find a dragon egg. From this egg hatches our other main character, Saphira the dragon. With the help of a few allies, Eragon and Saphira basically travel through the Empire where this story takes place in search of truth and vengeance for what happens to Eragons uncle.

The Bad: The main problem that I have with Eragon is that it's missing one of the essential ingredients that truly make a good book. Hm, let's see, now what's that word I'm looking for,ah................. Oh yeah! It's called ORIGINALITY! Christopher Paolini should be arrested. This book is basically Lord of the Rings with the plot of Star Wars. Once you get around to the fourth chapter or so one can easily predict what the rest of the book is going to be like. And there lies another problem,IT'S TO PREDICTABLE! All you have to do is change the setting, give them a couple of light sabers, take away the dragon, and you have the perfect clone of Episode IV A New Hope.

The Good: I can't write a review and do nothing but slam a book. That's just not fair. Despite my extreme outrage for the lack of originality, I have to admit that this has had me locked up in my room all Thanksgiving break. Even though I had a strong sense of what was going to happen, I found that I couldn't put it down. I don't know, but no matter how much you may hate it, there's something about Eragon that just won't let you put it down. Christopher Paolini really is a good author (fantastic considering how old he was when he wrote it) and if in the future he decides to break out of the mold, I truly think he's very capable of writing a book worth so much praise.

Over all I chose to give this book three stars because like I mentioned earlier, it certainly does its job of entertaining and letting one escape into another world ( even if you feel like you've already been there a hundred times in other stories). So in short, read it, but don't expect anything new or "epic".

This book is distressing in the amount of attention it is getting, when from the very first page it is apparent that the author "borrowed" massive amounts of detail, motifs, characters, names,languages, etc. from other fantasy writers, especially Tolkien. There was not an original phrase to be found. I was willing to give the book a try and was sorely disappointed. The publishers should be ashamed of themselves as they clearly chose this book as a marketing gimmick because of the author's age and have indeed made a fortune because of this.

First off, I would give this book zero stars if possible. But, as I can only give it one, I guess I'll tell you why.

First off, the plot line is ripped out from a number of books, with similarities to Dragon Riders of Pern, Lord of the Rings, and a number more.

Second, his discribing skills are... Lacking. All of his chapters (Except for the first three, he redid those ones) had set ups similar to this: Setting discription, action in setting, put characters into the setting then to add in more action.

Third, the urgals, are amazing like J. R. Tolkien's little demon things. You see, the reason why he tacked on horns and a few other things was to evade the fact that he would be sued if he didn't.

Forth, the Elves languages are nearly exactly the same to the Lord of the Rings once again, while where the elfs came from is exactly the same (they came on silver ships from the east.), and then the same with the dwarfs.

Fifth, the book's discription is terrible. There was something in there that was pretty much like this: The urgal ran towards Eragon, then froze in time so the author could explain how it looked. (Note, the last part was in the book, but it's how the urgal acted pretty much.)

Sixth, the plot is predictable. Every 'twist' there is not a surprise, but another dismal fact that it's so much like other books that if you didn't read this book, you'ld still knew what was going on.

Seventh, he literally stripped some names from Lord of the Rings and altered them slightly and/or he added these: ' and kept all the lettering order in the same order.

Other reasons, (Spoiler alert.) my sister and I were reading the books for this triligy, and I told my sister that Eragon had a brother. Instantly, my sister knew who it was and then cursed that the author, and I have a feeling that the ending will be like this: ZOMG! Eragon won! *gasp* It was so hard! But everyone knew he could! Ta-da! He didn't have to kill his brother! He still has a crush on a princess elf! But she won't love him back! ZOMG!

I think that this book go waaaay to much credit for being 'original' or 'creative'. To say it bluntly, it's not. It's pathetic and sad.

-De.

PS: Doesn't matter how big the book is, it depends on how well written and orignal it is.

This review will list and refute most of the major defenses for this mediocre book.

1. "He was only 15 years old"- Age is no excuse. If this were amateur writing on fictionpress.com, I would praise it. However, this is a published work of fiction and Paolini is a full-fledged author. His book should be held to the standards of every other fantasy writer.

2. "I bet YOU couldn't write a book when you were 15."- You don't have to be a writer to know a poor book when you see one. All you have to be is a good reader.

3. "UR just jealous."- Name-calling does nothing to defend Eragon. But maybe I am jealous. Not jealous for myself but jealous on the behalf of all those authors equal to or superior to Paolini who failed because they didn't have youth as a selling tool.

4. "Paolini didn't plagiarize classics. He was only influenced by them."- To be influenced means that he had original idea that was affected by the classics (Tolkien, Star Wars, etc.) It is quite clear that Paolini had no original idea to begin with. Instead, he combines secondhand story elements from different series while adding nothing of his own.

5. "Eragon might be cliched, but everything in the fantasy genre is cliched, so it's OK."- This is not a reason for unoriginality. It's an excuse. There are always new worlds to be explored. Also, this statement makes other inexperienced fantasy authors think that shameless ripoffs are actually acceptable, causing a decline in the quality of the fantasy genre.

6. "The critics are uptight fantasy fanatics that are too busy fussing over details instead of just enjoying the story for what it is."- You don't have to be a literature professor to know a cliche plot, disjointed writing, predictability, and overused stereotypes. These are major flaws that can keep any reader from enjoying a fantasy novel.

7. "It's a children's book. You can't compare it to the classics."- Paolini didn't mean for Eragon to be a kid's book. On his own website, he compares the "lyrical beauty" of Eragon to LOTR and Beowulf. If he's comparing his work to the classics, then why shouldn't we?