I have this fascination with badly written books, which is perpetuated by said books being stupidly popular (thus spawning lots of snark from anti fans). And the two obvious books (well, series) to crown this fascination are Twilight and Eragon. And yet, for some reason I still try to give these books a fighting chance to convince me they don't deserve my mockery (it usually doesn't work out. You may remember my rant on Twilight), and while I've read Eldest recently enough to recognize that yes, I do really hate it, I didn't start thinking Eragon was the Worst Book Ever until after reading other writers' opinions of it, after I had first read it. Years of following antishurtugal have formed my opinions without necessarily forming them myself. I was young when I read it! I didn't know how to be critical of what I read!

And that is why I set out to reread Eragon. Now that I am older and more knowledgeable of what makes good writing, I thought I would be better equipped to form more accurate opinions of this book.

But let's be fair. I do remember a few uninfluenced opinions I had of the book after my first reading. As mentioned, I didn't think it was particularly bad, though I remember being convinced Paolini thought he was Tolkien (please note this opinion hasn't changed). You have inexplicable glossaries and language guides at the end of the book: why is this necessary? Also, I remember keeping all the made up races straight by thinking of them as their LotR counterparts. The fact that for the most part they lined up pretty well should have been a warning sign that something wasn't quite right. In fact I think I was a bit miffed over this, especially with regards to the indexes in the back (I think I would feel the same if an author who wasn't Prachett started using footnotes. In other words, only Tolkien is allowed to be Tolkien), but whatever, right?

But enough of that. What did I think this time? How badly does this book deserve my eternal mockery?

Well, okay, I wasn't appalled. Eldest was much worse in that, in Eldest, absolutely nothing happens, and in Eragon, some things do happen. They're not terribly original or exciting things, but they more or less happen. I'll try to go into detail on the basics things, but I haven't prepared any sort of outline, so I'm writing on the fly here and may forget something.

I'll start with plot, since I've already mentioned it. It's your standard procedure farmboy-saves-the-world-from-evil-tyrant shtick, which inherently has its issues since it's been done. A million times. But then, a story like Cinderella has also been done a million times, and people are still remaking it and will continue to remake it forever and ever. And I won't go into my philosophy concerning this, but I don't necessarily have a problem with it. I'm a fan of Carl Jung and I'm a believer of archetypes. Archetypes are reused because they work, and this is about the time where you'll get the argument there is nothing new under the sun, blah blah blah, but let's return to my point. In the case of the farmboy-saves-the-world-from-evil-tyrant routine, I think a better question to determine its quality is what else is it? In the case of Eragon, it isn't anything else. It's as standard as standard procedure gets, and that's what I have a problem with. It's like... I have this aversion to what I call "generic fantasy": books, like Eragon, that take place in made up medieval based world (whose maps can be found within the first few pages); that contain races like humans, elves, dwarves, dragons, and one or more invented beings; that contain some kind of magic system; that features sword fighting as a major form of combat; that may or may not contain farmboys usurping evil tyrants and prose that tries desperately to imitate Tolkien. The specifics may vary and any one or two of those points may be avoided entirely, but I've discovered it's the reason that I paradoxically call myself a fantasy reader and yet am in no hurry to read things by Anne McCaffery, Mercedes Lackey, Robert Jordan, David Eddings... They all look the same. I can't tell what else they are beyond "generic fantasy" just by hearing about them or looking at the books. I much prefer quirky fantasy: Terry Prachett or Diana Wynne Jones, but I've gone on quite a tangent here. Eragon falls too completely under the generic umbrella for me to find it spectacular. I think that's what I was getting at anyway.

Also concerning plot, a common complaint for Eragon (and the whole of Inheritance really) is that it follows the plot of Star Wars, point for point, nearly identically. I'll admit I hadn't noticed this on my own; it's not something that stuck out in either of my readings. Perhaps I'm just not overly familiar with Star Wars, which is entirely possible. But it is sad that Inheritance can be so accurately described as "Star Wars in Middle Earth," though to be perfectly honest, there are worse things to rip off. But let's be clear and say that plagiarism is still bad, kids; I don't approve of it. It is possible to be original, something which I recognized Eragon was not, regardless of my familiarity with Star Wars.

No, I did not think Eragon was original (shocker!), what with it being so "generic." And yet... it was not painful to read (unlike Eldest or Twilight). Even during the parts where I'm thinking to myself, "This is boring," it was reasonably easy to keep going. I have no explanation for this, though it's probably part of its appeal to so many young readers-- it's an easy read, except that it's overly long. And that overly long thing did become a problem, especially toward the end. For the last 100 pages or so, I was too busy marveling at how completely void Eragon the character is of a personality, and most of my other thoughts consisted of:
-Why are they still talking about this?
-What is the point of this scene?
-What is the point of this chapter?
-We're supposed to be getting near the end. Shouldn't it be more exciting rather than less exciting?

Ah, the ending. To start citing specific parts, as soon as Eragon and co reached the Varden, you could hear the flow of the story come to a screeching halt. Too many new characters were introduced too late in the story, and too much politics was dealt with, which didn't really fit the rest of the book. There were whole parts that, as I've noted, didn't seem to add anything important and certainly didn't add suspense, and when I finally got to the battle at the end, it felt sort of tacked on, like, "Oh yeah, and there's this army of bad guys who're about to attack us." Another thing that I think got in the way of story flow was character motivation. Eragon's original motivation in setting out was to get revenge on the creatures who burned down his house in classic fantasy cliche style, but beyond that, he doesn't know. I consider this a problem, especially since motivation is your driving force and therefore one of the most important things to establish in a novel. Eragon's motivation is a flimsy one that failed to really drive the novel. For most of the book I followed along well enough as Eragon chased shorter term goals: go where Wise Old Mentor says to go, track down records that will tell you where your enemies are, rescue Designated Love Interest and run to the Varden before she dies. Okay, now we're at the Varden-- wait, what was the central conflict again? Not working for me, especially since that killing the Shade thing is accomplished at the end, which leaves Eragon's motivations open to be decided by others rather than himself (namely go train in Mary Suetopia like a good little Dragon Rider, but that's the next book).

And did I mention that ending battle was just badly written? And did I mention the parts before the ending battle were also badly written?

Quality writing, people. Most people do not fully grasp this at age fifteen, and I have confidence in saying Paolini is no exception. I noted several violations of infodumping, stupid dialogue, stupider dialogue tags (including the infamous "Sorry," apologized Brom), bizarre, out of place word choices, and lots and lots of telling where you should be showing. That last bit is key. I am told dragons are more than fancy steeds to their Riders. I am told Ergy and Saphira develop an intimate bond while she's growing up. I am told Ergy and Murtagh have lots in common and develop a great friendship, but I believe none of this because someone skipped over the character development necessary for me to care, and then the things that are shown tell me the exact opposite: Saphira being a plot convenience wherever needed; Eragon and Saphira not telling each other things; Eragon and Murtagh fighting and being petty. The writing overall seems to lack a certain emotional quality (which stands out especially in that ending battle, where there should have been the most emotional involvement). I don't know how to explain it. It probably connects to the whole plot driven versus character driven stories in some way and how character driven stories are supposed to have more in terms of character development and internal motivation or something, but I have no idea what I'm talking about so I'll just stop.

On that note of character related things, let's talk about the characters and how all of them fail to be interesting.

Eragon: The main character and, as stated, has a disturbing ability to survive entire books without developing anything resembling a personality. There are theories in the anti community that he's really a sociopath when you start analyzing him, but I won't comment on that. In fact I have difficulty coming up with anything about him to comment on because of his utter lack of personality. Likely cause: obvious self insert.

Saphira: Main character's dragon, and also fails to become anything beyond main character's dragon. Note how I'm defining her by her relationship to Eragon, because that's really all she is. As a rule I find fault with this in someone who's supposed to be a major character. Saphira fades pretty well into the background when she's not needed, popping up now and then when she is needed, sealing her role as a plot convenience and absolutely nothing else. I actually found it difficult remembering when Saphira is in a scene because she makes such a great piece of scenery. And then there's that annoying thing that she ages like a hundred times faster than what is realistic. What's worse is that she then claims to be oh so wise and calls Eragon "little one." Why do I find this so annoying?

Arya: Token all beautiful, all powerful elf and "Designated Love Interest," despite the fact she spends most of the novel comatose, having to be shipped around by the dragon plot convenience. Because of this there is not much to say on her actual character. You know, I might have shared Eragon's urgency to save her before the poison killed her off, but I know from reading the second book that she's a self-righteous bitch and I hate her, so these feelings are quickly dispelled. Plus she wears black leather. Why?

Brom: Token "Wise Old Mentor" and so obviously an ex Dragon Rider that Eragon should be smacked for never suspecting it before Brom told him. Let's go through the Wise Old Mentor checklist, shall we?
-Is a seemingly normal presence in Boy Hero's life who ends up having a mysterious, unexplored past: check.
-This past is intricately connected to Boy Hero's future: check.
-Starts Boy Hero on his quest, teaching him valuable skills along the way: check.
-Becomes father figure to Boy Hero: check.
-Withholds plot-important information for no real reason: check, with huge, glowing red marks.
-Dies halfway through: check.
A walking cliche if I ever saw one. I'm done here.

Murtagh: Ah, Murtagh. He was easily my favorite character first time through, and often a favorite among the anti fans as well. I've got a soft spot for antiheroes with mysterious pasts, and one of the reasons I even survived reading Eldest was the promise that Murtagh would finally show up again. This time around, though... not the same. He came off as flat and underdeveloped, much like everyone else. Plus he loses points for allegedly being friends with Eragon, whom I feel comfortable calling a moron.

Angela: Herbalist and fortune teller, reportedly based on Paolini's sister. I'm including her because she's also relatively liked among anti fans. As for me, I never quite got what was terribly interesting about her. Sure, she has an... unusual way of thinking, and I can tell there was an attempt at a personality here, but it just didn't quite work for me.

Galbatorix: I shouldn't even include him since he never actually appears anywhere, but I'm told he's the big bad here, the king of an empire (however that works), who is pure evil for absolutely no reason at all. Plus there was that bit where he kicks someone "in the fork of the legs," at which I admit to laughing uncontrollably. All around I just don't see how I'm supposed to take this guy seriously.

Now, I don't know about you, but I'm getting quite tired of writing this review, so I'll say a few more things and wrap this up. I wanted to mention names. Yes, the names, particularly those of places, are littered with random umlauts and other accent marks whose names I don't even know. Yes, this generally achieves making them unpronounceable (and if you need a pronunciation guide in your back-of-the-book indexes, you're doing it wrong). Most character names, thankfully, are pretty decent, with some exceptions. I'm still half convinced Solumnbum is a bad joke, and Nasuada looks and sounds way too much like nauseated for me to take her seriously either. Plus that's just not a good concept you want associated with your book.

I also wanted to mention Durza. I actually thought it was interesting when Eragon forced himself into his mind and started seeing bits of Durza's past... Evil characters can have backstory and explanations as to why they're evil! Maybe he's just misguided! This is promising! This can be developed! This is-- okay he's dead now. Never mind. It was nice to imagine while it lasted.

There, see, now I've rambled so long I've forgotten what my original point was. Did I hate it? I don't know, I think I hate it more writing about it than I did reading it, an unexpected development, but I was going to say that while it was bad, it wasn't so spectacularly bad to incite my everlasting hatred. See, I survived this entire rant without once using caps lock of doom. Though, if you want caps lock of doom, ask me to review Eldest. I've sworn never to read it again, but if you really want me to, I can scream about the elves in a way that'll give me problems with my blood pressure for weeks. I can only surmise what'll happen when I finally get my hands on Brsgnr Brisnigr Brisingnerd the yellow brick.

And that, my friends, was way longer than I expected.