So you've actually read this book and can assuredly say that the cats have no bearing on anything? No exaggeration of human traits? Nothing?
If it's a series then enough people must like it, and I think hating something because it has cats instead of people is a bit dumb. You could pick a whole host of faults with it, the plot, the structure, dialogue, anything, but you're obsessed with the talking animal part of the whole thing. Not a Disney fan then I guess. Besides, unless he's going on about it all the time, then why does it matter?
My friend is reading books about talking cats. ... THE BOOK DOESN'T EVEN NEED TO HAVE CATS. They could take out all the cats (which is pretty much everything) and change it to humans and the PLOT WOULD STILL WORK. But the whole thing the book is about (CATS) only exists to support itself, it doesn't add to anything except itself.
...Well... the same could be said about Lackadaisy [http://lackadaisycats.com/]. But somehow, I don't think it would feel quite the same if they were human rather than exaggerated cartoon cats.
Oh, the cats don't symbolize anything. Ah, now your rant has been upgraded from "nonsensical ravings" to "deep literary criticism". Imagine, a young adult fantasy series about cats not having deep symbolism. What madness is that?
So is the problem that he's reading a kid's book? Fucking seriously? Almost all of my favourite series' are kid's books, it's so damn hard to find inventive books for adults these days, kids have the best, most imaginative stuff these days.
OT: Your arguement is...let's just say the talking cats seem to have more of a point than your arguement does. You're not reading the books so why does it matter? Who cares if the cats symbolize something or not? Sometimes the author just prefers to use animals. I mean, all of a sudden we can't like bugs bunny or winnie the pooh or the Redwall series because they're talking animals and they don't symbolize anything? Not everything has to have some deep-seated meaning. Sometimes it's just about the adventure. You say you don't mind that he reads them, yet you rant and rave about it to us like it's a serious problem. I mean honestly it feels almost like you're saying "because I don't like this no one should read it because I know what's the best literature."
If the book isn't your cup of tea...don't read it. Talk to your friend about something you both like. My best friend loves Gankutsuou: Counte of Monte Cristo, I can't really get into it. We agree to disagree and start talking about Soul Eater which we both love.
Someone you know is reading a book you don't like? Does he quote it at you? Does the reading cut into your time? Does he--ugh--recommend them to you? Perhaps it is not as important as you perceive.
Besides Ayn Rand, I just cannot fathom why people would read, say, political commentator books like Limbaugh or Beck.
If this were Echo Bazaar, I'd have backhanded you into submission with a sturdy hardback by now ("and what's this he was reading? Oho!"). But my character is mean like that.
Oh yeah, I read those books in middle school. They're okay. Not amazing, but probably not worth bursting a capillary over.
As for me, I generally stop reading awful books as soon as I realize they're awful, and since I don't have the free time to waste reading awful books, I generally just pick ones that I know I will enjoy. So I don't really have anything to ***** about.
First of all, calm down, it's a book. Not one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse. There are millions of them around, good and bad. And I'm sure many have been written and published that are many times worse than that one.
Second, just tell us what the book is for crying out loud. There are a lot of books about cats, you know. This discussion would be a lot more engaging for everyone if we just knew what the hell you're talking about. You're asking us for our least favorite books, so the least you can do is offer yours---by NAME.
That's the thing: they don't have to. I've read the first three books in the Warriors series (all of them, not just skipping to the dialouge like your friend) and they are fun, with an interesting story. I grant you that they could replace the cats with humans and it would still work,(different clans at war and peace, a prophacy) but with the cats it is something DIFFERENT. That's why it is popular. It takes things we know, things we understand, and puts it in a different setting, along with showing us how the wild cats in the story view our world as well.
EDIT: Also, a series on talking dragons? I don't know what it's called, but I'm going to check it out now, because that sounds kind of cool. Which incedentaly was one of my reactions when I first heard about a series on wild warrior cats that live in a society that we humans can't see
Eragon:
-Plot stolen from Star Wars.
-World stolen from the Lord of the Rings.
-Characters stolen from WoT, LotR and Star Wars
-Beginning of the book: stolen from WoT
-Roran, stolen from WoT
-System of magic stolen from The Belgariad
-Dragon/rider link stolen from Dragonriders of Pern
-Silver mark on protagonist's hand, chapter in the first book and blue flaming sword also stolen from David Eddings' the Belgariad and the Elenium
-Ancient Language taken from A Wizard of Earthsea
And the list goes on...
The book, and the series that follow are badly written, plagiarised crap. Every time I see someone talking about them, I can't help but launch into my stock rant about it.
Eragon:
-Plot stolen from Star Wars.
-World stolen from the Lord of the Rings.
-Characters stolen from WoT, LotR and Star Wars
-Beginning of the book: stolen from WoT
-Roran, stolen from WoT
-System of magic stolen from The Belgariad
-Dragon/rider link stolen from Dragonriders of Pern
-Silver mark on protagonist's hand, chapter in the first book and blue flaming sword also stolen from David Eddings' the Belgariad and the Elenium
-Ancient Language taken from A Wizard of Earthsea
And the list goes on...
The book, and the series that follow are badly written, plagiarised crap. Every time I see someone talking about them, I can't help but launch into my stock rant about it.
Fun fact: everything has been done before. EVERYTHING. It's freakishly impossible to actually make an original setting without having comparisons being drawn to a half dozen other things. Thus, it's not about doing something new, it's about taking something that's been done before and doing it in a different way, or combining it with others to create a new feel to all the previously used factors. It's like trying to make a new recipe for dinner. No matter what you do, you can't just invent a new food. You can put one food on another piece of food, or you can cook the food in a different way, but you're not going to suddenly discover that there's a new kind of meat that comes from the inside of a tree trunk called Fabungleflips.
I think you're friend and my ex-girlfriend read the same books.
I also had an argument a while ago about twilight. my argument was the horrible characters, retarded plot, and the creepy message that self mutillation will bring back the stalker who will then marry you. her argument was that I didn't like the books because they were popular.
Eragon:
-Plot stolen from Star Wars.
-World stolen from the Lord of the Rings.
-Characters stolen from WoT, LotR and Star Wars
-Beginning of the book: stolen from WoT
-Roran, stolen from WoT
-System of magic stolen from The Belgariad
-Dragon/rider link stolen from Dragonriders of Pern
-Silver mark on protagonist's hand, chapter in the first book and blue flaming sword also stolen from David Eddings' the Belgariad and the Elenium
-Ancient Language taken from A Wizard of Earthsea
And the list goes on...
Fun fact: The plot of Star Wars was stolen from Dune.
xitel said:
Fun fact: everything has been done before. EVERYTHING. It's freakishly impossible to actually make an original setting without having comparisons being drawn to a half dozen other things. Thus, it's not about doing something new, it's about taking something that's been done before and doing it in a different way, or combining it with others to create a new feel to all the previously used factors. It's like trying to make a new recipe for dinner. No matter what you do, you can't just invent a new food. You can put one food on another piece of food, or you can cook the food in a different way, but you're not going to suddenly discover that there's a new kind of meat that comes from the inside of a tree trunk called Fabungleflips.
Aha! Someone's got it! "Originality" in fiction these days isn't about an original idea. It's all about the presentation. Was Narnia the first book about talking animals, secret worlds, or corrupt witches who want to take over the world? Hell no. But it was all combined and written in such a way that was just captivating and different from the typical fantasy novels of the time.
Oh. Just be happy that a teenager is reading a book at all. It doesn't matter what it's about, someone is READING. Gods be praised. Maybe there is hope for this generation of children, to explore at least one instance of paper-on words purely for enjoyment.
The Deptford Mice and Redwall are 2 book series about talking animals which are really very good.
In both you could replace the animals with humans and it wouldn't change much. Guess that means I have a fetish, oh noes.
Recently we took a survey at work of people's top 5 books/authors, 50% of the people surveyed didn't read for fun. That's shocking and their close-mindedness is costing them so much enjoyment.
Eragon:
-Plot stolen from Star Wars.
-World stolen from the Lord of the Rings.
-Characters stolen from WoT, LotR and Star Wars
-Beginning of the book: stolen from WoT
-Roran, stolen from WoT
-System of magic stolen from The Belgariad
-Dragon/rider link stolen from Dragonriders of Pern
-Silver mark on protagonist's hand, chapter in the first book and blue flaming sword also stolen from David Eddings' the Belgariad and the Elenium
-Ancient Language taken from A Wizard of Earthsea
And the list goes on...
The book, and the series that follow are badly written, plagiarised crap. Every time I see someone talking about them, I can't help but launch into my stock rant about it.
Fun fact: everything has been done before. EVERYTHING. It's freakishly impossible to actually make an original setting without having comparisons being drawn to a half dozen other things. Thus, it's not about doing something new, it's about taking something that's been done before and doing it in a different way, or combining it with others to create a new feel to all the previously used factors. It's like trying to make a new recipe for dinner. No matter what you do, you can't just invent a new food. You can put one food on another piece of food, or you can cook the food in a different way, but you're not going to suddenly discover that there's a new kind of meat that comes from the inside of a tree trunk called Fabungleflips.
See, this excuse always leaves me cold. Most of the time it's reasonably valid - pretty much the whole of the fantasy genre consists of variations on Tolkien's work - but Eragon actually goes so far as to take very specific things from different series. He's pilfered through the genre and taken everything that he's liked, to the point that it's not just a lack of originality, but utter plagiarism.
[HEADING=3]Wheel of Time[/HEADING]
Roran is a badly written Perrin - no two ways about it. Both are connected to the protagonist in some way, and are forced to take charge of the defence of the protagonist's town - their own - after he rises to power. Both struggle with their newfound responsibility, and both use at first an axe, then a hammer in battle. In Perrin's case, this is because he is deeply conflicted, and the axe is symbolic to him of violence and murder. In Roran's case, I honestly wasn't interested enough to have remembered why.
Also: WoT has thirteen Forsaken, servants of the dark lord. Eragon features thirteen Forsworn, the servants of a dark lord.
There are a couple of other links, but they're relatively minor, so we'll just move on.
[HEADING=3]Star Wars[/HEADING]
A blogger covered this one pretty well, so I'll just show you what she's pointed out:
Palpatine, an evil Sith Lord, has overthrown the galactic Republic and become emperor of the new Empire.
The Jedi Knights, an ancient peacekeeping order, have been eradicated.
Galbatorix, an evil Dragon Rider has overthrown Algaesia and become King of the new Empire.
The Dragon Riders, an ancient peacekeeping order, have been eradicated.
Princess Leia Organa is a member of the Rebel Alliance, a group fighting to defeat the Empire. She's on a mission involving Obi Wan Kenobi, an exiled Jedi living on Tatooine. The mission fails when her spaceship falls under attack by an Imperial star cruiser.
Princess Arya is an elf aiding the Rebelling Varden, a group fighting to defeat the Empire. She's on a mission involving Brom, an exiled Rider living in Carvahal. The mission fails when her horse falls under attack by a group of Urgals.
Leia hides stolen schematics of the Empire's Death Star, and transports it to Tatooine.
Arya hides the stolen egg of the dragons and transports it to Carvahal.
The two droids make their way to Luke Skywalker. He decides to go to Obi Wan. After meeting him, Luke rushes home only to find his aunt and uncle murdered by Imperial storm troopers searching for the droids.
The egg makes it's way to Eragon. He decides to go to Brom. After meeting him, Eragon rushes home only to find his uncle fatally wounded by the Ra'zac searching for the egg.
Meanwhile, Princess Leia is held captive. Darth Vader demands the location of the rebel base, but Leia resists....
Meanwhile, Princess Arya is held captive. Galbatorix demands the location of the rebel base, but Arya resists...
As much as you might want to argue that these are common themes throughout all of fantasy, you can essentially just change the names here, and one becomes the other.
Also: Glowing, coloured rider swords? Really?
[HEADING=3]the Lord of the Rings[/HEADING]
Because everyone's stealing ideas from Tolkien, I won't criticise Paolini for using totally unoriginal depictions of elves, dwarves and orcs. Sorry, not orcs, urgals. Right.
Anyway, there area couple of names and places in Eragon that seem somewhat familiar. Can't think why though...
Elessari (Elessar)
Beor (Beorn)
Morgothal (Morgoth)
Isenstar (Isengard)
Imiladris (Imladris)
Hadarac Desert (Harad Desert)
Mithrim (Mithril)
Eridor (Eriador)
Furnost (Fornost)
In fact, Paolini didn't even bother changing some of these things. He just left them right as they were.
Melian... Melian
Angrenost... Angrenost
The Lonely Mountain... The Lonely Mountain
Valinor... Valinor
The Grey Folk... The Grey Folk
Not to mention that Arya is essentially Arwen - even the wording of their descriptions is remarkably similar - and Eragon is Aragorn.
Still, if people want to say that borrowing Tolkien's ideas doesn't count, then I guess we can just move on from everything here.
[HEADING=3]David Eddings[/HEADING]
Christopher Paolini is a big fan of David Eddings, it would seem. So big, in fact, that he's pilfered most of his works, taking ideas left and right, not to mention an entire scene, at one point.
Eragon's blue flaming sword - remarkably similar to Garion's blue flaming sword, actually.
The silver mark on Eragon's palm - I can't think why, but this reminds me of the silver mark on Garion's palm.
System of magic - this is about the most creative that Christopher Paolini has ever been: he actually combines the system of magic in the Belgariad with the magic of the Wizard of Earthsea, to make something entirely ne- copied from two different sources, instead. The system of magic in the Belgariad is all about only being able to work magic with the strength of your body, and dying if you commit yourself to too much. Similarly, this pops up in Eragon.
Oh, and there's this bit in the first book where an entire scene is stolen off David Eddings.
Eragon:
The Anora River flowed between them and the town, spanned by a stout bridge. As they approached it, a greasy man stepped (out) from behind a bush and barred their way. His shirt was too short and his dirty stomach spilled over a rope belt. Behind his cracked lips, his teeth looked like crumbling tombstones.
?You c?n stop right there. This?s my bridge. Gotta pay t? get over.?
?How much?? asked Brom in a resigned voice. He pulled out a pouch and the bridge keeper brightened.
?Five crowns? he said, pulling his lips into a broad smile.
Eragon?s temper flared at the exorbitant price, and he started to complain hotly, but Brom silenced him with a quick look. The coins were wordlessly handed over. The man put them into a sack hanging from his belt.
?Thank?ee much? he said in a mocking tone and stood out of the way.
As Brom stepped forward, he stumbled and caught the bridge keeper?s arm to support himself.
?Watch y?re step? snarled the grimy man sidling away.
?Sorry? apologised Brom, and continued over the bridge with Eragon.
?Why didn?t you haggle? He skinned you alive!? exclaimed Eragon. ?He probably doesn?t even own the bridge.?
?Probably? agreed Brom.
?Then why pay him??
?Because you can?t argue with all the fools in the world. It?s easier to let them have their way, then trick them when they?re not paying attention.? Brom opened his hand, and a pile of coins glinted in the sun.
?You cut his purse!? said Eragon incredulously. Brom pocketed the money with a wink. There was a sudden howl of anguish from the other side of the river. ?I?d say our friend has just discovered his loss.?
As opposed to a scene in the Ruby Knight, the second book of the Elenium:
Beside the ford stood a small hut. The man who owned it was a sharp eyed fellow in a green tunic who demanded a toll to cross. Rather than argue with him, Sparhawk paid what he asked. ?Tell me neighbour,? he asked when the transaction was completed ?how far is the Pelosian border??
?About five leagues? the sharp eyed man replied. ?If you move along, you should reach it by afternoon.?
They splashed on across the ford. When they reached the other side, Talen rode up to Sparhawk. Here?s your money back,? the young boy said, handing over several coins.
Sparhawk gave him a startled look.
?I don?t object to paying a toll to cross a bridge? Talen sniffed. ?After all, someone had to go to the expense of building it. That fellow was just taking advantage of a natural shallow place in the river. It didn?t cost him anything, so why should he make a profit from it?
?You cut his purse, then??
?Naturally.?
?And there was more in it than just my coins??
?A bit. Let?s call it my fee for recovering your money. After all, I deserve a profit too, don?t I??
?You?re incorrigible.?
?I needed the practice.?
From the other side of the river came a howl of anguish.
?I?d say he just discovered his loss? observed Sparhawk.
?It does sort of sound that way, doesn?t it?
Galbatorix dies a remarkably similar death to Ctuchik, the villain of the first book of the Belgariad. They both shout "Be not", and are themselves destroyed.
[HEADING=3]A Wizard of Earthsea, and the Dragonriders of Pern[/HEADING]
Just quickly here, but the Ancient Language of Eragon is taken from Ursula Le Guin's Wizard of Earthsea, in which all things have a true name. The telepathic link between riders and dragons, however, is taken from Anne McCaffrey's Dragonriders of Pern. You can kind of see why I've mentioned this book, just going by the title.
And on top of all that, Eragon is a complete Mary Sue.
I don't write these rants because I hate Eragon and everything about them, but because it really irritates me that while Christopher Paolini gets enormous amounts of recognition and popularity, these (better) authors are relatively unknown outside of the genre. I don't hate Eragon - I've read them all, so that probably says something - but it's important that people understand that it is plagiarised, and not just lacking in originality.
See, this excuse always leaves me cold. Most of the time it's reasonably valid - pretty much the whole of the fantasy genre consists of variations on Tolkien's work - but Eragon actually goes so far as to take very specific things from different series. He's pilfered through the genre and taken everything that he's liked, to the point that it's not just a lack of originality, but utter plagiarism.
Again, I think you should look at the synopses of Star Wars and Dune and tell me Star Wars wasn't a copy/paste of Dune, AND that it wasn't one of the most significant films to come out in the last 50 years. Just because something's been done before doesn't mean it can't be a good story. Hell, it doesn't even make a difference to those who have never seen the story or concepts before. And it can give the inducted a new way of looking at things. That is a big part of what art is--taking something you know and making you see it in a different way.
And please don't try to make this into me defending Eragon, or anything else that is just inexcusably bad for reasons other than their unoriginality. That's not what I'm talking about at all. I'm talking about the concept of using things that have been seen before in general.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
