It’s clear that II views Brisingr as a terrible book. People here especially love to criticize one of two things:

1) Plot/ Storyline [and how it is essentially a mix of various other stories]
2) Characters [flat, archetypal and overly perfect]

I made a comment on SlyShy’s review of Brisingr that brought forth some of my concerns with II’s approach to Inheritance. Since Juniper’s really the only one that read it (you’re awesome, by the way) I figured I’d bring it before the II community as a whole and see what you guys think.

I’m going to be blunt here: I believe that we are criticizing Brisingr, and Inheritance in general, for the wrong reasons.

I enjoyed the storyline of Brisingr.

I didn’t really approve of the flowery prose and certain filler segments (I’m looking at the dwarves), but I was able to finish reading it fairly quickly and I found I enjoyed it. I liked the point-of-view switches between characters, I really liked Roran’s story (although I scoffed at the 200 soldiers) and I actually had to back off for a second and think when Eragon killed that soldier that was begging for his life.

I don’t find it necessary at all to relate to the characters, by the way. So long as I get a story, I’m happy. Now if I view Inheritance as having a good plot, does that mean I view it as a good book overall? The answer is no.

I think the true quality of a book can be measured and broken down as follows:

1) The degree to which the reader is interested in the plot. [check]
2) The effect the book has on the reader’s life. [x]
3) The degree to which the author’s opinions are integrated into the storyline. [x]

Where Inheritance falls apart for me is the post-reading period. Reading the book in no way influences my life. As I have done previously, I’m going to draw upon Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray and compare it to Brisingr.

In The Picture of Dorian Gray, Wilde criticizes social norms (negative views on gayness between men, as well as the class system) and throws in a bunch of his own philosophies on life (hedonistic lifestyle pros and cons, views on art and beauty). He even tackles one of my favourite questions: “What is man?” (Lear, anyone?) These questions and ideas are so perfectly integrated into the storyline that they are practically invisible on the first read-through. An average person reading Dorian Gray would extrapolate information vastly different from that of an experienced reader. Furthermore, these ideas are so tied into the storyline that to take them out would be to destroy the story.

Essentially, we can learn of Oscar Wilde’s opinions on life by simply reading his novel. Now think of Paolini’s novel and try to come up with some morals and messages he may have hid in there.

...

...

That’s what I thought. There are no genuine, important messages in Inheritance.

I know that the biggest counterargument lies with the subject of war and tyranny. One can say that “with war, there are no winners”, or “war forces moral people to commit immoral acts.” Anything along those lines, really. These arguments are invalid. Paolini has no experience with war (this time I’m sure). Therefore, any messages he has for his readers are reflective of social beliefs or are the beliefs of others.

Tolkien had experience with war that he shared through his novels. That’s why we remember his books. That’s why we can feel his loss of friends as they die in the novels. That’s why we feel his sorrow as Frodo finds that he simply cannot return to his old life.

Christopher Paolini is a normal human. He has little knowledge that you and I don’t, so he can’t teach us anything. Even if he wrote the most beautiful story we would eventually forget it.

I like his story. But it is only a story. That is the why Inheritance is weak. That is where we should be directing our criticisms.

I’m sure that there are others who disagree with me. No doubt some of you hate Inheritance all the way, from morals to storyline. Ultimately, I guess it comes down to our subjective opinions. If someone doesn’t like the story, then I guess the only real solution is to not read it.

I just thought I’d give my opinion and see if there are any others that feel the way I do.

—RandomX2

We aren’t necessarily ‘directing’ our criticisms in a strategic attack in hopes that CP will reform his writing, but its mainly a broad sweep of why Inheritance is bad

I think we all know that no matter how much we criticize CP, he won’t change. I think it would simply be a bit more refreshing to direct our criticisms elsewhere for a bit. Plus, I find psychoanalyzing much more fun than reviewing the story exclusively. But that’s just me.

I think you’re right in terms of how his inexperience has affected his writing. I’m not overly concerned with his lack of writing experience as opposed to real-life experience. Looking at the Tolkien bit I used, for example, we see that because of his experience in war he was able to properly convey the emotions he felt. Paolini has no such experience, so perhaps he can’t be as passionate in his writing.

And hey, “ultimate truth” sounds way more epic and hardcore than what I was thinking. You don’t have to change your entire philosophy on life, so long as you’ve understood something that the author felt like communicating. In the end, that’s usually why people write: to get their ideas out.

But thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it.

I’ve laughed out loud at least like 10 times today, that comment included.

What a witty/crazy community. What have I gotten myself into?

I have to say, I agree with you, RX2. Unlike a lot of people around, I don’t actually hate the Inheritance Cycle. I criticize it for its lack of depth and use of cliches, but I don’t think it was plagiarized and I don’t think it’s the worst book ever written. If anything, the only thing I truly dislike about it is the amount of praise it’s gotten simply because its author was young (at the beginning) and it had a good PR campaign. That being said, I don’t think anyone is going to find profound themes of the meaning of life and death and the nature of space and time in IC. They certainly aren’t deep, life-changing books, and they aren’t on my top 10 list of the best books of all time. They are that sort of light and fluffy thing I pick up and read in an hour when I’m recovering from Ender’s Game or something (Orson Scott Card always puts me into these deep depressing philosophical moods… it’s terribly annoying). So I will come out and say I don’t dislike them, I may even enjoy them, but that doesn’t mean they’re great books. I read smutty (werewolf) romance novels on occasion and enjoy it. Doesn’t mean I think they’re great books, though- you can enjoy something without thinking it’s very good.

And, frankly, CP did manage to grasp on a pretty attractive plot- teenager with no prospects becomes some great hero, has big prophecies, does awesome stuff, etc. etc…. it appeals to teenagers and younger kids. Cliched and poorly-implemented parts may be, it’s still a popular storyline.

I mostly agree with you, Random. I liked the general story, and I have read all three books and will read the fourth. I haven’t read Lord of the Rings (yet), so I didn’t know about PaoPao ripping it off, and I don’t really like Star Wars that much, so I didn’t know about that either. I only found out these things from the internet. I find the stories entertaining even if the characters are dull and have questionable morals. Chris could tone down his flowery, over-descriptive crap that makes the books drag on and on, so I think that criticism on that front is warranted. He does use a lot of filler (dwarves and their politics are boring, and they always will be), but a lot of it is interesting.

I don’t care about life lessons. If they’re there, fine. If not, I won’t lose any sleep over it. It is more fulfiling to read books that have deeper meanings because they can stick with you for a while, but Eragon is good just for fun. I think that it does deserve to be criticized because he does so many things wrong that it’s so hard not to. And injecting lessons into a book, especially when unexperienced, can have undesirable effects. It can sound really preachy.

@SWQ
I also prefer this to Twilight, but since I don’t much care for good romance, it makes since that I would prefer bad fantasy to bad romance. I really despise what I’ve read of Twilight, and I still plan to read all of them. I like to know things for myself.

Subplots are okay if they work well in the story. I wouldn’t even attempt Pride and Prejudice. I’ve always been under the impression that that was pure romance. I just don’t like pure romance.

And injecting lessons into a book, especially when unexperienced, can have undesirable effects. It can sound really preachy.

Ah… you are truly as wise as you are divine (/300 reference). Upon rereading, I think I explained myself poorly in my first post.

I do believe it’s possible to create an enjoyable and decent story that doesn’t reveal the author’s personal beliefs. In fact, I just read all of the third Artemis Fowl yesterday night (the dialogue is just so witty). However, to create an excellent novel that deserves to be remembered (something Brisingr is credited as being) I believe it’s a must to include some kind of take-away lesson.

Good, enjoyable story for some temporary fun = no lesson needed (Paolini’s here).
Legendary story that will one day become a classic = lesson plz.

EDIT: And now I realize that I pretty much restated what SWQ just said. D’OH! I’m still keeping the comment here >.>

No, I see what you mean. You pretty much summed it up when you said.

As an author, you don’t force that sort of thing into a story. You draw it out.