Not So Famous…

Welcome to the new Book Review feature of my blog. :) I’m hoping to make this a semi-regular feature of this blog, and I’d be interested to know what everyone thinks. :)

Now, to the review:

This review may contain mild spoilers. Read at your own risk.

Eragon is a grand first attempt at an epic fantasy story. While he may have written other works that have not been published, to the eyes and imaginations of the public, this is his first attempt, and it is a great effort. However, I feel it falls short in several aspects. I’ll cover what I think of each aspect separately.

Characters: Everyone gives a different amount of importance to characters and character development. I feel it’s pretty important. Cornelia Funke’s characters in the Thief Lord are a good example of what bad character writing can do to the interest in a story. I couldn’t bear to read more than a few chapters of the Thief Lord because she just couldn’t make me care about the characters.

Paolini writes characters that are somewhat mysterious, and this is a good technique, in my opinion. Just as revealing too much about the plot too quickly can be devastating to a book, revealing too much about characters can cause the reader to feel as though they know everything already. Like there’s nothing left to be known. Similarly, it’s important to create a sense of mystery around one’s characters as quickly as possible. Let the readers know there’s more to be known about the characters, and Paolini does this as well. Who is Eragon’s mother? Who is Brom, really? What is the deep, dark secret that keep Murtagh from wanting to go to the Varden? Who the heck ARE the Varden? These questions keep me turning the pages of this book. I want (or wanted) to know the answers to these questions. I have gotten most of them. :)

Writing: I am a proponent of people having large vocabularies. I feel our society suffers from a lack of understanding of our language. Some would call it the evolution of language, but I call it the dumbing down of our language. Despite my feelings on this topic, I find myself annoyed at Paolini’s insistence on using many different synonyms to describe one thing. I feel as though he is trying to find as many different ways to describe things as possible…as though he’s trying to prove that he can write as well as anyone. Let your story prove that for you, sir. Don’t attempt to be as loquatious as absolutely possible just to show us you can write. If I focus on the language you’re using to tell me your story, then you are failing at drawing me out of the mundane and into the fantastic. You are causing me to remember on a regular basis that I’m a dude reading a story, and not an observer to a reality that is unfolding before my very eyes.

That being said, Paolini is a great one for description. His use of adjectives, while tiring at times, helps the reader to understand what he’s trying to show them, if falling short of complete immersion. When Eragon walks into the center of the home of the dwarves, I really understood the sheer scale of the interior of the mountain. I really understood how the central city was dwarfed (pun intended) by the surrounding cavern. However, his insistence on finding as many ways to describe things as possible distracted rather than immersed me.

Plot: This is where I feel Paolini suffers the most, and I don’t know that there’s going to be much that he can do for some time.

To begin with, his story does not flow as well as other authors I have seen. Reading Robert Jordan, Melanie Rawn, and George R. R. Martin, I have become accustomed to a certain level of writing. With the aforementioned authors, their characters are developing, but there is a certain amount of continuity and congruity of thought. With these authors, you can see where the characters came from, and it’s a smooth transition to get where they end up. I liken Eragon to Mallory’s L’Morte de Arthur. The stories are wonderful in their own way, but they lack depth. It’s almost as though they were a collection of short stories rather than a large, overarching story.

I mentioned depth, and this is another way I feel that Paolini’s writing lacks. While he could work on the flow deficiencies of his writing, this is an area that he isn’t going to be able to do much about until he lives and experiences some things. An example is in order:

When I played in College Wind Symphony, our conductor, Dr. Stroud loved the music of Richard Wagner. He conducted both the Day Band (made up of younger college-age musicians) and the Night Band (made up primarily of older musicians who had day jobs) and had conducted Wagner with both bands. He said once that it was very interesting playing Wagner with both bands. The day band was made up of musicians in their prime. They were technically more proficient with their instruments. However, they lacked the emotional depth required to play Wagner really well. The Night Band, made up of musicians who had lived longer lives, and had a larger depth of experience upon which they could draw to summon the emotion needed to make Wagner’s music sound like he would have wanted it to sound.

I say the same applies to Paolini’s writing. Paolini writes Eragon very well when Eragon is stuck in his flyspeck village. Before Eragon has seen much of the world or experienced much in the way of loss or emotion. However, after Eragon experiences some of these things, Paolini appears to be at somewhat of a loss aside from writing how he thinks Eragon ought to be feeling. My wife expressed that he has probably not lost anyone close to him. I don’t know about that, but his writing definitely seems that way.

He does write Eragon’s first impressions of Arya very well. His infatuation with her physical beauty is likely something a 15 year old has experienced. He could have been writing directly from his experiences, in my opinion. However, dealing with complex issues of Eragon not knowing his parents, or losing his mentor finds young Paolini somewhat deficient.

I would like to remind my readers at this point that I am forced to compare Paolini to other authors I have read, from Robert Jordan, who writes personalities very well, to Melanie Rawn who writes the most deep love I have ever had the pleasure of reading, to George R. R. Martin, whose Song of Ice and Fire deals intimately with the loss of loved ones. Maybe Paolini makes no claim himself to be in the same league with these great writers. However, his subject matter and the widespread nature of these books place him in the line of fire, as it were, for inevitable comparison to the greats. He does fall behind them, but it must be stated that he is young. His deficiencies are due to his age and inexperience, and can be remedied with time. Having said all of this about his writing, I feel we can expect great things from Mr. Paolini in the future, once he has had a chance to mature, and once his writing deepens.

Unacknowledged Sources: Eragon and Eldest have been heavily criticized for their “borrowing” of plot elements from other fantasy and science fiction works. From Tolkien to Anne McCaffrey to George Lucas, Paolini is criticized for not being original. I disagree entirely. Tolkien himself did not create dwarves, or elves…he borrowed them from mythology and folklore. The Fair Folk have been around for hundreds of years in Celtic mythology, and have become fantasy conventions. With regards to the “stealing” or derivations of names, one could call this tribute to the greats rather than stealing from the greats. And Eragon being compared to Luke Skywalker? C’mon…avenging the death of a family member was invented by Lucas? Lucas himself borrowed heavily from mythology! Look at his work. Derivative works are commonplace in literature, and contribute to the rich tapestry of works that we can enjoy reading.

edit: I happened to notice on the author’s own site, he considers Eragon to be an “archetypal hero story”. Archetypes are, by nature, derivative. This was his intent, and to criticize him for it is somewhat unrealistic. As well say that Da Vinci should have painted a male instead of the Mona Lisa.

Conclusion: I feel that there are reasons to be critical of Paolini’s writing and weaving of story, but overall, considering that the book was written beginning at 15 years old, it’s a good book. He will continue to age and mature, and we can expect his writing to do the same.

I have been unable to verify this independently, but I have heard that Christopher Paolini has refused to take classes or acknowledge that his writing is deficient in any way. It is possible that my review of his work has been influenced by this, and if the account is true, then my respect for Paolini will go down severely. It is one thing to say that he wouldn’t change a thing about his work. An author’s work represents his skill and vision at a point in time, and there is no reason to change an already-written book. However it is quite another thing to say that there is nothing wrong with his writing, and that he does not need to improve. I am of the belief that no one should ever say that of themselves. Always continue to grow and improve. I will continue to search for another account of this, but I feel that Eragon is a good read, if not as stellar as some of the other authors and works I have mentioned.

Overall Recommendation: