Jump to content

Talk:The Inheritance Cycle/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Letter

Dear Mr. Paolini: My son is very anxious for Eldest. I am sorry to see that it's been pushed back a year. Good luck and hurry!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.136.27.227 (talk) 14:42, 8 October 2004 (UTC)

Dear Mr.Paolini

im a fan of yours and await the 3rd books arrival eagerly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irockster (talk • contribs) 05:16, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

This is not a fan site!

This is an encyclopedia. The author may never read this, and may not even know it exists. If you wish to write letters to an author, send them to the publisher and ask that they be forwarded. Gary D Robson 22:58, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Unsorted talk

I believe that the next book of the trilogy will be called "Inheritance" because most trilogies are usually named after the last book. Therefore, the last book in the Inheritance trilogy should be named Inheritance. George Lucas

Yeah but your forgetting. The author already made it clear that the story will be spelled out like the rest of the books in this series. Six letters, and starting with E. Most likely also refering to the character whos dragon is on the cover.--Animasage 22:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


Just wondering...does this article still count as a stub, or can the stub tag be removed? Amina skywalker 15:11, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

The stub tag should probably be removed.—G.He 02:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC) (Long been taken care of...)—G.He

wow, an author borrowing ideas, how horrible!

Seriously, what the heck? Who takes their time to find as many similarities in a fantasy book with Star Wars?

God just read and enjoy the book who cares if he borrowed a few ideas!!!

  • How is this being non-neutral? Many of these critisms have been made before, and this is just a concise restating of them. Just because someone may enjoy the books doesn't mean they are not highly derivative. This section is NPOV and will be labled as such.Gnrlotto
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was don't move. —Nightstallion (?) 06:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Discussion

Add any additional comments
  • Although there is case for moving the page, I believe that it is unnecessary and irrelevant at the current time. I note that the backcover of the Eldest simply refers to the Trilogy as "Inheritance," while recognizing the sources that Mathwiz2020 has cited, but I also want to mention that the project page has a number of things needed to be addressed and that there are NO articles addressing important events in the Trilogy from annual feasts and celebrations to epic battles and so I think this is a bit of wasted effort that can be better spent. Aznph8playa2 01:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Criticism

Seriously, the critisicm section needs some overhaul. I will post it here, and post my complaints underneath.

"The plotline appears to have many similarities to Star Wars, with a few tweaks ([1]) Brom is nearly identical in characterisation to Obi-Wan Kenobi of Star Wars or Gandalf of Lord of the Rings The story of men/elves making peace and uniting with dragons to form a spiritual bond between individuals after a long time of warfare as well as the one evil dragon rider, who betrays the order, is close to the world of the video game Drakan: Order of the Flame (1999). The concept of Dragon Riders resembles that of the Dragonriders in Anne McAffrey's Pern novels. Character and place names are reminiscent of those in Lord of the Rings; for example, "Eragon" for "Aragorn", "Arya" for "Arwen", "Isenstar" for "Isengard" (see Eragon: Critical reaction). However, others have pointed out that "Arya" is an old Sanskrit word, meaning "noble", and that "Eragon" is derived from the phrase "Era gone". The Ancient Language is similar in concept and usage to that of Earthsea, especially concerning "true names" (see Magic in Earthsea). The old king of the Broddring Kingdom was called Angrenost, the old name of Isengard from the Lord of the Rings. The word Furnost, a minor city in the Empire, is similar to the word Fornost, capital of the kingdom of Arnor in the Lord of the Rings. The lake Isenstar bears resemblance to the name Isengard from Lord of The Rings. The Hadarac Desert is similar to the Harad desert in Lord of the Rings as well. The name of a town in the trilogy is called Melian, which was the name of an angelic being in the The Silmarillion by Tolkien. The name Oromis is similar to Oromë, another character from The Silmarillion. A major city in the beginning of the first novel is named Carvahall, very similar to the Norse mythological equivalent to heaven, Valhalla (this, if it indeed is inspired by the word Valhalla is not necessarily a "ripoff" as Norse mythology lies in the public domain; Tolkien himself borrowed significantly from Norse myths). The Forsworn alluded to in the book is a similar concept to the Forsaken in Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. The causation of physical fatigue by the use of magic works in a similar way to the Belgariad's magical system "

Star Wars- Needs to be something like "Many believe the plot to be plagerised from Star Wars, with a few tweaks" Brom- So? One charecter is similer to another? Gandalf and Ben arnt even simmiller themselves! Besides both bieng old mentors of course... Ok... the third one can stay if simmilarity is a crime... Dragonriders- DRAGON RIDERS ARE NOT AN ORIGINAL IDEA! Mz. McAffreys idea was not based on a stroke of brilliance, it was based on a cliche! LOTR names- There is a difference between paying homage and plagerism. The names here are homage. Not to mention Arya must be taken out, seeing as it is a Sanskrit word, not based on Arwen, which it is not anyways. Arya and Arwen are as simmiller as Travis and Trendelhiem. Eragon is also "Dragon" with an E, not "Era gone" or Aragon. Earthsea can stay.... I guess.. Place names- once again, gomage, not plagerism Melia- homage OH MY GOD! SIMMILARITY! You jerks. Vallhalla- take this out. It is not "stealing". The NORSE ARE DEAD! Or at least the Vikings are. My Lord. Or can I say that? That would be stealing from the Bible! Wheel of time... fine.... magic system- WTF. But if you have to keep it. You jerks.


Note: The insults were not to all, just those who put the comments in in the first place.

I sort of agree with the person on top of me, but I think they should've left out the swearing because Wikipedia WILL take it out. But, Christopher Paolini is not cheating. His story kind of is like Lord of the Rings but the only thing alike between Star Wars and Inheritance is the characters. They both have the same personalities. Anyway, the only things alike between the Lord of the Rings and Inheritance is characters and setting. People, you should respect Chris Paolini, because he wrote a book at age 15-19. That is pretty da r n good! Give him a break!-Lalalalad

  • Personaly, I think that something bigger then the number of cliche's in the plot is the sheer amount of things that were pretty much blatently stolen from other, better, authors. The magic system is more or less Eddings "the Will and the Word" with a clause added that the word is in the "true" language, alla the Earthsea books. The dragons could almost have flown straight from pern (with a few minor diffrences). Never mind the plot being derivative, the world feels like its a punch of cherry picked features from better authors thrown together in an attempt to make a setting. There is almost nothing original to it. Eds01 02:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Perhaps you should check, there's some simularities between Eragon and Wheel of time, specificaly if you look at the some of the simularities between Trollocs and Urgals, Fades and Shades, and finaly Aes Sedai and Elves(Specificaly the inability to lie, and the twisting of truth.) As a side note, everyone, even writers, are influenced by what they read. It's very rare for a purely unique book to exist. - GGR 18:14 11 Febuary 2007 GMT+2

So what? Nobody claims that j.k. rowling is copying off star wars because they both have an old guy with a beard that knows a supernatrual force and gets killed (Obi-wan and Dumbledore). Nobody claims that micheal crichton is copying off sir arthur collon doyle because their books have the same name and simmiller setting. Give Eragon a break!DinoBird 23:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

HEY

Someone needs to fix the article about magic. Warfwar3 00:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


I agree with the person over me. No idea is orginal; every idea has been used before. Tolkien himself used ideas from the Bible and Norse Mythology, but noone is blaming him of plagerism. What I do think about it, is that Eragon has pitiful writing style. But even this fact, can be countered with the fact that the novel was written for a certain age range and not for people who enjoy reading "War and Peace". Paolini becomes vastly better author in "Eldest" though, for he has matured by this point in age and writing. I believe that his last novel in the trilogy will be even better than Eldest.

Added eragon section back in

Yo, I added the Eragon plot summary back. I know Paolini is a terrible author who pretty much ripped off Star Wars, Jordan and Tolkien word-for-word, but it should be there. WLU 20:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Just took out the link to the force in the magic system section - it doesn't really resemble the force at all, I don't think you need speak to use the force. I left in the references to Star Wars and the Dragonriders of Pern, 'cause it has been compared to them. What do other editors think? The reviews do specifically mention the articles. Perhaps it would be better to put the links in the reviews section itself so readers can click to their pages.WLU 11:46, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Please don't ever leave such an insulting comment again. How dare you say such words! Where is your 500-600 page book huh? Not a lot of people can write that well at ages 15-19. Plus, I find J.R.R. Tolkien great author as well. How would you like it if you were him and someone wrote a comment like that about you? Gives you a new perspective, doesn't it? Please think about this, this, misjustice you have done. I am not Christopher Paolini, but I would be insulted if I were. And next time, keep your comments to yourself, HUMPH!( I won't add tildes>)-Lalalalad

I am actually WRITING a book. Three, actually. So pah! And none of my characters/places/events/etc are ANYTHING like any other work I have ever read/heard of. And if I DID, I WOULD EXPECT COMMENTS LIKE WLU'S. -Kang227

Overanalyzing

Can anyone just appreciate the book for what it is? Isn't it a wonderful piece of writing? I believe that overanalyzing a book takes away the fun of reading it, doesn't it? READ THE BOOK!!! If you don't like it, don't read it again!
This is a wikipedia article, not a place for you to be angry because people are looking objectively at what is truly NOT a wonderful piece of writing. Bad characterization, rambling prose, cliches and archetypes, laughable dialogue, deus ex machina...If we weren't supposed to analyze anything and enjoy it for what it is, why not give every book the Hugo? Every movie an Oscar? - Krim
I agree with Krim. I enjoy the books but I still notice the sheer amount of content that is derived from other stories. It cannot be helped. We must realise Paolini is young and new to this sort of thing. What matters is you enjoy the book and you know it. Who cares about what others think? What is the point of blasting and flaming another author? Its not going to make the world a better place. --InvincNerd 13:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
There is a difference between being analytical and being derogatory. Be analytical, yes, indeed! Think, compare, contrast, draw conclusions! That is productive, while tossing insults and derogatory remarks to and about the author and the book is really counter-productive. I love to analyze, but I first love to just immerse myself in enjoyment of the book. Jan 25, 2007 nabooru —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.241.227.50 (talk) 07:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC).

Star Wars

Someone put "see Star Wars" in the compressed plot of Eragon section. Yet it doesn't show in the history (the user probably marked it as minor to cover his tracks). Please find a way to revert this.--DeadGuy 00:45, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


Derivative Nature of the books

I don't believe that this section is factually correct, or appropriately NPOV. It gives too much weight to fan sites, without pointing out the fundamental flaws in some of their arguments. See also the Eragon page for further discussion. FrozenPurpleCube 16:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

What exactly are the flaws in those arguments? They seem pretty reliable to me (and likely anyone else who has turned a page of Tolkien or watched a clip of Star Wars). Just because 'fan sites' aren't professional doesn't mean that they should be heard. You're still allowed to speak the truth if you aren't a famous critic, and you hardly need to be one to make reliable arguments.
Although I do agree with the 'Dirivative' section, I also agree with you on that some 'touchee's should be made. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.89.253.231 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

Age

CP STARTED writing Eragon when he was 15. As much as many people would like, CP is human and he does get older. Novels take a long time to write - some take many years. It doesn't matter when the author started, because they've since made uncountable revisions to their first draft. For all we know 15-year-old CP's first draft was "There was a guy named Eragon. He was really cool and got a dragon. He saved the world."

The only reason CP got any recognition was because everyone thought that he wrote a novel at 15. I'm appalled that even Wikipedia - who supposedly prides itself on providing correct information and disproving falsities - has fallen for it. True, CP did start writing Inheritance when he was 15, but there seriously needs to be mention somewhere that it was not published at that time and that he's not some sort of super-genius prodigy author.

I'd add it, but I'd end up calling CP a washed-up, pathetic, sad excuse for an author who's basking in celebrity and whose books are nothing but copied-and-pasted ideas from every other fantasy series in existance.

I'll just leave it to someone more neutral.

isn't he like, 20 or some thing now? 203.214.135.82 07:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

"Resembles Viking-era Scandinavia"

The article says "It is set in the fictional land of Alagaësia, which resembles Viking-era Scandinavia." Now I haven't read the books, but the description in the main Alagaësia article as well as the (many) other articles about the geography of the Inheritance trilogy leaves me wondering just how the world resembles Viking age Scandinavia. Could somebody who has read the books expand on that, or else remove the sub-clause? Bonadea 17:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Rubbing salt in it

I've been looking into the dirivative nature and criticism of the trilogy, and I found some information on the Eragon film. Someone should mention that, in addition to copying JRR's books, they further had to rub salt in it by filming it in the same location as the LotR movies (I honestly recognize some of the backgrounds in the trailers) and by using the same CG company. Not only that, but they were originally going to cast the actor who played Gandalf as Brom. (I don't know which Inheritance article this belongs in)

I'm not sure how neutral that is, especially the phrase 'salt.' Perhaps something like "Some critics believe that the production similarities to the popular Lord of the Rings movies prove that Eragon was intended to appeal to the same audience" ? Kith 21:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Entire Series

The one person who is editing various parts of the entire series is adding ALOT of bais into the entire series. This along with words/structure inappropriate for an encyclopedia article(s) is degrading the overall quaility of the ENTIRE series. Please read various articles belonging to the Inheritance Trilology series to get a better sense of what I'm describing.

Citations

I don't know how to, but someone should add a "citation needed" to "Moreover, the language of the book is not very beneficial, and some of the words have simply been lifted from other books/series, like The Lord of the Rings, and the Earthsea cycle." Maybe other places too, I only read that part.

Beneficial?

"Moreover, the language of the book is not very beneficial..."

"Beneficial" seems an odd choice of words to me as it is used here. I can't figure out what is meant by it, other than that it is a negative criticism. I think a different adjective should be used, but I can't suggest an alternate. This is a statement of opinion, and I don't know what the author wanted to convey; and I don't have a particular opinion on the issue myself. Itzsharon 21:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Eragon's Age

Eragon is fifteen at the beginning of Eldest, but he turns 16 later on (sometime after Brom's death, when he's traveling with Murtagh, page 287) and he must turn 17 sometime in Eldest or Book 3- Daimetreya —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.210.117.39 (talk) 00:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC).

Do you have the page reference for "15"? It might be valuable for whoever rewrites those huge in-universe synopses. Thanks! Kith 21:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the site, Anti-Shurtugal (and other fan/hate websites)

I have deleted this link from the article for several reasons. However, these same reasons can be said about many fansites, as well as critical sites such as this one.

  • There are several pages that are under construction, the most important of which lie within the plagiarism section. It's kind of hard to get a feel for the site when the most important stuff isn't even up and running.
  • If you're going to add a site criticizing the books, you're going to have to add a site praising the books to avoid undue weight on a particular POV.
  • It is 100% original research which is strictly prohibited by Wikipedia. "My only gripes," "When I mention," ect. I've been reading through some of the pages and there is almost zero research, citation, or anything referenced to anyone notable. Any references I have actually been able to find were to Wikipedia (which, despite popularity, is non-notable) and one academic instructor (that had nothing to say about this particular series). They came up with all of their conclusions by themselves (and in a non-academic way), which is in direct violation of no original research.
  • Along with non-notability, the site is written by, what looks to be, a handful of bored high-school/college students with nothing better to do than critisize a few books with weak arguments (nothing is properly backed up) and no professionalism. Nobody from the site lists themselves as an academic scholar or even an expert on the subject. Their staff descriptions are trivial and joking, without a single ounce of seriousness in them, which means they should be taken just as seriously.
  • According to Alexa, the site got almost zero hits before the movie was heavily advertised and/or was released. The problem with this is that this is the article for the BOOKS, not the movie(s). While I realize that the site is about the books, it is more than obvious the site was very much non-notable (and practically non-existant) before the movie came out and created attention to the books (and the books were out a lot sooner than the movie). Even now, the site's hits have been dropping since the release of the movie.
  • The site goes against almost everything in Wikipedia's policies on reliable sources and verifiability. Not going to go in depth, if you want to see specifics, all you have to do is go to those two policy pages.
  • Last reason, I promise. According to Wikipedia:External_links, under links normally to be avoided, the site is in violation of points 1, 2, 3, 11, and 13.

Due to these and, I'm sure, others that I'm forgetting, this site has got to go and shouldn't be re-added. I'm all for adding a critical link, but it MUST be notable and it has to be paired with a notable site praising the books, otherwise it goes against NPOV-policy. The best solution is to find a notable site that covers BOTH sides equally, but that may be sufficiently difficult to do as it seems everyone is either for them or against them. Thank you. --pIrish 15:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The "derivative" section contains criticism from real reviews, and is well written and very critical of the book. It is a complete mystery to me, why anybody would need a link amateur critics of this book. --Merzul 02:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Haha...nevermind. Please ignore my previous reply. I didn't realize you were talking about this Wikipedia article and, instead, thought you were trying to somehow support the site. Again...sorry! Thank you for supporting what's already in the article and not this site, which is, as you said, very amateur. --pIrish 05:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the subsection from this article indeed. You are not the first I have confused with the clarity of my writing :P --Merzul 17:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
You know, your points might resonate better if your writing didn't seem obviously biased in FAVOR of the trilogy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.4.253.18 (talk) 03:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC).
I've actually not read the series or seen the movie so me being biased has nothing to do with it. People visit and edit Wikipedia articles for any number of reasons, please don't make the assumption that I like the series just because I think the site is non-notable (if you must know, I came to this article because of the controversy surrounding the books). I think any Wiki editor who has been around this site for a while (and not gotten into trouble) would agree with these points. They are not biased, they are accurate with regards to this site. The same points I made could be said about ANY FAN SITE as well, just replace Anti-Shur'tugal with Shur'tugal and you get the same points. The only reason I used Anti-Shur'tugal is because it's the only link that continues to be added to the article, yet no valid reason is ever given as to why. I understand the site has a hardcore following (mostly due to the forums, not the website), so do lots of others, but that doesn't mean it should be added simply based on that reason alone. Don't like the books and want a link to a critical response? It MUST be notable and this site is anything but. There are plenty of sites out there with critical reviews from notable people and essays from scholars. Why so much effort into trying to get this one site listed? --pIrish 03:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Whoever took the Shurtugal site off (an IP address), thanks for noticing that. I, obviously, didn't notice it the first time around since it was listed under interviews instead of links (those sections usually don't get linkspammed). After going to the page, they may be real questions answered by Paolini, but they don't reference any of it which means it's unreliable. Since it did manage to squeak by, I'm going to do a link search on Wiki and remove the others as well (as I'm sure there are more if one made it through). Anywho, thanks for deleting it. --pIrish 13:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Excellent points, tastefully written. Your comments do not show bias for or against the author or trilogy. I'm hoping someone might delete the whole article and start over. Jan 25, 2007 -nabooru

Created an article, List of derivative natures in the Inheritance Trilogy

List of derivative natures in the Inheritance Trilogy

I am not an Eragon fan, but I am tired of seeing people with different views flaming each other, arguing on both talk boards and the article itself, the continuing circle of flame-delete-flame-delete war going on Eragon and Eragon-related articles. So, people who would like to have their say about the (arguable) plagiarisms that exist in Inheritance trilogy, now here is a page where you can actually analyse them in a Wikipedian-like manner WITHOUT flaming on neutral articles. And for Eragon fans, here is where you can source counter-critisms and not overflow Eragon/Eldest articles there.

Remember, this is still a Wikipedia article, NOT a free chat board or place to force your opinions and flame each other about it. Remember to cite published reviews (preferably not from Eragon fan sites or anti-Eragon sites) and remain neutral and formal. That includes the talk page. Tinned Butterfly 22:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Tinned Butterfly please see the wikipedia policy pages on content forks and then go to the AfD entry for List of derivative natures in the Inheritance Trilogy and vote. (click here to go to the AfD entry but see the pages on content forking first.)
People's tendency to argue about the merits or demerits of the book won't be helped by the article, and besides, you shouldn't break guidlines to remedy people breaking guidlines. You have to deal with people's arguments by telling them not to argue, and archiving their discussions in the most egregious cases. Brentt 06:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Derivative natures in the Inheritance Trilogy is up for deletion

I nominated the Criticisms of the Inheritance Trilogy(aka Derivative natures in the Inheritance Trilogy) article for deletion. If you have time please see the article and then go to this article's AfD entry and vote. So far its 7-1 in favor of deleting.

The reason I nominated it is because it's a POV Fork and because it's a very short article that doesn't have enough new information to warrant a new section in any of the Inheritance Trilogy articles let alone a whole new article. And attempts to make it longer have persistently been OR and personal musings of editors. Even though I agree with most of the musings, and its obvious to most people that the books are derivative and not great writing (by the standards of proffesional adult fantasy writers atleast, but arguably a great achievment for a teenager), its still against [[Wikipedia:no original research]|no original research policy]] to have such musings. And all published sources pretty much repeat the same criticisms, which can easily fit into the main article. Brentt 05:52, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

i have read many books in my life but this book sticks out to you and is a great achivement for a teenager to write. i dont think it is plagerized but i do think some of it is taken from someother books. this is just my opion so you can disagree if you want or you can add on to what i am saying.

Is it true?

Is it true that Paolini has said Alsaggfdsarsf is actualy called Elino? Shadoom1 08:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

What and when?

What is the name of the third book? and when will it be releesed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 156.34.206.159 (talk) 20:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

Derivative natures in the Inheritance Trilogy is up for deletion

I nominated the Criticisms of the Inheritance Trilogy(aka Derivative natures in the Inheritance Trilogy) article for deletion. If you have time please see the article and then go to this article's AfD entry and vote. So far its 7-1 in favor of deleting.

The reason I nominated it is because it's a POV Fork and because it's a very short article that doesn't have enough new information to warrant a new section in any of the Inheritance Trilogy articles let alone a whole new article. And attempts to make it longer have persistently been OR and personal musings of editors. Even though I agree with most of the musings, and its obvious to most people that the books are derivative and not great writing (by the standards of proffesional adult fantasy writers atleast, but arguably a great achievment for a teenager), its still against [[Wikipedia:no original research]|no original research policy]] to have such musings. And all published sources pretty much repeat the same criticisms, which can easily fit into the main article. Brentt 05:52, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

i have read many books in my life but this book sticks out to you and is a great achivement for a teenager to write. i dont think it is plagerized but i do think some of it is taken from someother books. this is just my opion so you can disagree if you want or you can add on to what i am saying.

"I don't think it is plagurised but I do think some of it is taken from other books". HEY GENIUS! That's plagurism! Applause for you! -Kang227

Please remain civil and don't personally attack other users. Comment on the article and possible improvements, not the editor. Thank you. --pIrish Arr! 15:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

What and when?

What is the name of the third book? and when will it be releesed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 156.34.206.159 (talk) 20:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

He hasn't released the title yet, which means that he has finished yet and it has to go through six months of publishing, so it may not be till next year 86.147.8.166 20:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Inheritance not high fantasy!

Please stop changing the first paragraph to read "inheritance is hig fantasy. It is NOT. Read a definition, and think about it. There is no definate good or bad, such as in the wheel of time. in WOT, the evil guy is actually named the dark one. THIS is high fantasy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ringopolis (talk • contribs)

I read the definition and I thought about it. Fantasy, by itself, is way too broad of a term to describe this. High fantasy is what this is and I'm going to take this point by point straight from the high fantasy page as to why this series is high fantasy:
  • "High fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy fiction that is set in invented or parallel worlds."
Alagaesia is an invented world.
  • "These stories are generally serious in tone and often epic in scope, dealing with themes of grand struggle against supernatural, evil forces."
Eragon is struggling with his immaturity and being forced to do all of this stuff (serious in tone). There is a grand struggle between the Varden and Galbatorix, who goes so far as to employ Ra'zac and Shades (supernatural, evil forces).
  • "When the scope is less than epic, dealing with the hero's personal fight for personal stakes against evil forces, the epic fantasy may shade into sword and sorcery."
It is not sword and sorcery because Eragon isn't fighting for himself. He is fighting on behalf of the people.
  • "High fantasy is the most popular and successful subgenre of the fantasy fiction. Its fandom ranges from Tolkien to contemporary."
Just because this isn't written by Tolkien doesn't mean it's not high fantasy. Tolkien's work just sort of created the genre. It isn't in it all by itself. There are many, many books in this subgenre, from old to new. It doesn't have to be written by a certain person or be a certain age to be in it.
  • "Most high fantasy storylines are told from the viewpoint of one main hero. Often, much of the plot revolves around his heritage or mysterious nature. In many novels the hero is an orphan or unusual sibling, often with some incredible ability or abilities and skills in a particular area (usually either magic or skill with a weapon). He begins the story young, if not an actual child."
This describes Eragon, the main character, exactly. The story is told from his viewpoint, a good chunk of the main plot revolves around his heritage, he was an orphan, he has the capability of using magic, and he began this story as a child at the young age of 15.
  • "In the beginning of the storyline, the hero is threatened by the unknown force. One reason for such a threat is that, unlike the typical sword and sorcery adventurer, the hero is seldom bored stiff by ordinary life and therefore will not abandon it quickly and on any excuse."
Eragon is threatened by Galbatorix, someone he knows very little about. He is very hesitant to leave his life and help the Varden and doesn't want to because he loves his life and doesn't want to abandon it. It took a dragon and Brom to finally get him to leave.
  • "By the same token, the hero of the high fantasy adventure is capable of completing it and settling down to ordinary life again."
If I'm correct, this is mentioned in his prophecy. If he is able to finish his job, he can live a normal life afterwards. Not 100% positive about this one though because I don't remember the prophecy exactly.
  • "Typically, the hero slowly gains knowledge of his past through legend, prophecy, lost-and-found-again family members, or encounters with "mentor" characters who know more about him than he does. With that knowledge comes power and self-confidence; the hero often begins as a childlike figure, but matures rapidly, experiencing a huge gain in fighting/problem-solving abilities along the way."
Eragon gains his knowledge through legend (the legend of the dragon riders), prophecy (the one he was foretold by Angela), family members (Roran, possibly Murtagh), and his mentor (Brom). Through this knowledge, Eragon becomes powerful and confident; he matures extremely quickly while with Brom who teaches him fighting and problem solving along their journey.
  • "In many books there is a knowing, mystical teacher, often a formidable wizard or warrior, who provides the main character with advice and help."
Oromis, could even be Brom.
  • "The progress of the story leads to the character learning the nature of the unknown forces against him, that they constitute a force with great power and malevolence. Facing down this evil is the culmination of the hero's story and permits the return to normal life."
The character is learning the nature of the unknown forces against him (Galbatorix and the Empire). Facing this evil should, theoretically, permit Eragon to return to normal life.
  • "Indeed, the importance of the concepts of good and evil can be regarded as distinguishing mark between high fantasy and sword and sorcery."
This directly relates to something you said. You said there was no definite good and evil in this series (by the way, the bad guy doesn't have to have "dark" or "evil" in his name to be bad). How is that possible when it is stated over and over and over and over again in the series that Galbatorix and the Empire are bad and Eragon and the Varden are good?
  • "Saga or series"
Well, it is a trilogy.
Please do not remove high fantasy without stating exactly why it goes against all of this because, from everything I read on the high fantasy page, Eragon matches it almost perfectly. Just because it's not one of the great works like The Lord of the Rings or The Chronicles of Narnia doesn't mean it's not high fantasy. High fantasy is a genre, not a pedestal. The article itself says that most fantasy novels (broad genre) either fall into this category or sword and sorcery (but the arguments, even here, prove that is itsn't the latter). --pIrish talk, contribs 15:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

About the good/evil:

Even though it may say it in the books, if you think about it, what is so bad about the emperor? Oh no, taxes! Taxes, which, if I might add, are needed to fight the terrorist group the varden. Think about it. Every bad thing Galby ever did was to keep his empire in order. Whats so darned evil about that? In MY opinion, The Varden and the elves are the baddies, not the empire.

Besides, anything written by Paolini shouldn't have high in it. maybe low fantasy, if such exists.

BTW, if you want good high fantasy, read WoT. WAY better than Inheritance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ringopolis (talk • contribs)

Galbatorix gives orders to go out and kill entire towns and civilizations. He summons those with dark magic to do his evil bidding. He didn't just keep his Empire in order by putting out taxes, he keeps it in order by killing anyone who goes against him. If that's not evil, I really don't know what is. The Varden and the elves are trying to stop the senseless murdering. By that same standard, Sauron from The Lord of the Rings is the good guy and Gandalf, men, and elves are the bad ones. The same can be said about The Chronicles of Narnia, the White Witch and her minions are good and the children and Aslan are bad. Clearly you're biased; you don't like the series. Please contribute to this article and discussion in a productive matter. --pIrish Arr! 02:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Criticism

Look, let's 'smackdown' this discussion. I am a fan of Eragon/Eldest. I also think he took things from other books. Sue me. We need to STOP trying to undercut each other. It is BOTH PROVEN AND DEBATABLE that Paolini took names/etc from other books. It is not the FACT that he did that is argued, it is the QUANTITY. If I write a book (which I am), and it has ONE name and ONE place that sounds alot like a person/place from LOTR, no problem. If I have a DOZEN from LOTR and MORE from OTHER WORKS, I have a serious problem.

PRO-ERAGON'ers': Stop trying to remove Criticisms. You can claim that it's 'derogatory', but it's not. It's truth, and truth HURTS.

ANTI-ERAGON'ers': Add your stuff, but don't make a novel out of it. Get in, get going, get out. Keep it simple, factual.

Kang227 15:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Using caps like this makes it look like you're yelling at us. We don't like to be yelled at. Please keep a cool head when addressing issues you are passionate about. This way, your arguments can be more focused (I'm really not too sure what you're saying in that first paragraph because it's very sporadic and disjointed) and more productive (someone who doesn't use caps is more likely to make an impression than one who does). Please keep cool.
As for the actual message, nobody has really been actively trying to remove criticism for a long time now so that point is moot. The only time criticism is removed is when it was recently included without being cited with a reliable source. People are more than welcome to contribute to the criticism section as long as they have notable, reliable sources to back their claims up. Otherwise, it will be removed based on the policy for original research. --pIrish Arr! 16:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


Many viable critism sections have been created, citing their souces, and each, in turn, has been deleted by fans. Kang227 has a point.

Ringopolis —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ringopolis (talk • contribs)

Anti-Shurtugal is not a reliable source, which is what most of those users are sourcing, among others. Therefore, it gets removed. --pIrish Arr! 02:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Why isn't it a reliable source though? Is it simply because it is a collection of peoples opinions?Wild ste 20:57, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
The source itself is unreliable for a number of reasons. Please read these policy pages to get a better understanding of why it isn't reliable: reliable sources, original research, notability, and verifiability. --pIrish Arr! 21:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Agreed that Anti-Shurtugal is not a valid source to use for citation. But is there a reason there is not an Anti-Shurtugal article within wikipedia? it seems to be a rather important cultural phenomena207.69.137.35 01:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I only heard of it when I started looking at sources for articles here, and I wouldn't consider it notable enough for its own article (see WP:NOTABILITY). UnaLaguna 05:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Critical Reponse - not just derivative nature

It seems like the major point in critical response is the derivative nature, but most of those articles also list purple prose and hackneyed dialogue as serious problems. Should those just be overlooked for the sake of focusing completely on the derivative nature. To be truly encyclopedic, it would seem important to list those criticisms right up there with thieving from this or that. DeviantCharles 04:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we should break the section? Maybe to look like this:
Criticisms (main header)
Paolini's work has been considered prosey. Etc, etc, etc.
Derivative nature (subheader inside the criticisms main header)
Some criticize Paolini's work for being derivative. Etc, etc, etc.
I do agree that there are two different reasons the works get criticized. Perhaps this could split those reasons apart, but still keep it together. --pIrish Arr! 12:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm in total agreement. I think that would be the best approach. DeviantCharles 23:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Inheritance_Cycle/Archive_1&oldid=1137235712"