They were terrible books, but I've never had any reason to dislike Chris Paolini personally. It's okay for people to like terrible books, even if they're heavily influenced by marketing. I think even Paolini has expressed embarrassment about Eragon in recent years.
It's admittedly been... uh... probably like 15 or 20 years since I read them, but I don't remember Eragon being as perniciously mean spirited and shitty as Harry Potter. It had a lot of problems, but those were mostly problems of a young, very inexperienced writer rather than anything actively or passively malicious.
IIRC that was kind of a marketting thing. He was like 15 when he started but he did the bulk of the writing when he was older (albeit still a teen, I'm pretty sure)
This is LeGuin's point though. Not that Harry Potter is un-PC or 'perniciously mean spirited and shitty' (funny thing to say about a book for children sorry), but that they are basic and derrivative, and in that Eragon was a far worse offender
I mean she did also call it that in another quote, linked upthread
good fare for its age group, but stylistically ordinary, imaginatively derivative, and ethically rather mean-spirited.
And I don't think that's a weird claim? HP does this thing where, when a character's bad, it becomes ok just say absolutely viscious things about them, usually about their weight or about how "mannish" they are
Oh yeah the movies ironed out a LOT of this stuff. Like, the entire "Hermione discovers that there are house elves enslaved at Hogwarts and gets made fun of for trying to free them" subplot was basically removed from the movies entirely, and also the fact that werewolves are explicitly an AIDS allegory and most werewolves target children. It's disgusting garbage all the way down. Hollywood did SO much to launder Rowling's reptuation
No shame in it. Back before social media destroyed my attention span, I read anything I could get my hands on and enjoyed all of it. Oh how I loved Ready Player One in middle school! I still use it for my username, the horror!
honestly though respect for the grift, if I could become a millionaire just by copypasting literally every single story beat of Star Wars with a fantasy paint-job, I wouldn't fuckin hesitate
deleted by creator
They were terrible books, but I've never had any reason to dislike Chris Paolini personally. It's okay for people to like terrible books, even if they're heavily influenced by marketing. I think even Paolini has expressed embarrassment about Eragon in recent years.
It's admittedly been... uh... probably like 15 or 20 years since I read them, but I don't remember Eragon being as perniciously mean spirited and shitty as Harry Potter. It had a lot of problems, but those were mostly problems of a young, very inexperienced writer rather than anything actively or passively malicious.
yeah he was like 15 when he wrote the first one lmao
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
IIRC that was kind of a marketting thing. He was like 15 when he started but he did the bulk of the writing when he was older (albeit still a teen, I'm pretty sure)
This is LeGuin's point though. Not that Harry Potter is un-PC or 'perniciously mean spirited and shitty' (funny thing to say about a book for children sorry), but that they are basic and derrivative, and in that Eragon was a far worse offender
I mean she did also call it that in another quote, linked upthread
And I don't think that's a weird claim? HP does this thing where, when a character's bad, it becomes ok just say absolutely viscious things about them, usually about their weight or about how "mannish" they are
Oh true yeah Crab and Goyle and all that. Pretty rotten treatment. Eragon is sooo bad though is my thing
Eragon is derivative crap, but it's not actively offensive. Like, Rita Skeeter alone as a veiled stereotype is so much worse than anything in Eragon
Who was Skeeter supposed to be a stereotype of besides British tabloid reporters? Haven't read them since I was a baby, barely remember her
She was frequently described as mannish, with large hands. And she lies about an aspect of her identity so she can spy on children.
Given what we now know about Rowling, take a guess
Oh wow yeah that got ironed out for sure in the movies
Oh yeah the movies ironed out a LOT of this stuff. Like, the entire "Hermione discovers that there are house elves enslaved at Hogwarts and gets made fun of for trying to free them" subplot was basically removed from the movies entirely, and also the fact that werewolves are explicitly an AIDS allegory and most werewolves target children. It's disgusting garbage all the way down. Hollywood did SO much to launder Rowling's reptuation
....i like eragon. i remember trying to levitate rocks and shit with those spells lol. also arya+eragon OTP.
No shame in it. Back before social media destroyed my attention span, I read anything I could get my hands on and enjoyed all of it. Oh how I loved Ready Player One in middle school! I still use it for my username, the horror!
yeah, i found RP1 enjoyable, though to be honest, i've tried to reread it a couple times and it comes off as worse each time
honestly though respect for the grift, if I could become a millionaire just by copypasting literally every single story beat of Star Wars with a fantasy paint-job, I wouldn't fuckin hesitate
Whos that and what did he do?
Just look up some of his character art