bricolage! pastiche! postmodern bollocks!

[freckles_and_doubt]

Just for your weekend: a deeply uncomplimentary review of the last novel I read. Because I have to get this off my chest, the teeth-grinding is beginning to annoy me.

Christopher Paolini's Eragon is a young adult fantasy which has been fairly successful - it was a New York Sunday Times bestseller, and they're about to make a movie version. While the movie is vaguely explicable in terms of its attempt to ride the LotR/HP wave, I am at a loss to account for the success of the novel itself. Eragon is about a boy and his dragon. The novel has elves, dwarves and orc-equivalents (more or less straight out of Tolkien, including the bigger, stronger elite orc-type), a tradition of dragon-riders (more or less straight out of Anne McCaffery) and a system of magic based on the true name for things in the original language (i.e. directly cribbed from Earthsea). The story is flat and fairly predictable, riddled with further cliché, including Evil Kings, Tortured Heirs and the self-sacrificing death of the Wise Older Mentor Figure. In short, it makes Raymond E. Feist look original. Also, while I cannot say that the writing style is particularly bad, I certainly can't say it's any good.

I am saddened, shocked and depressed to think that this particular little effort in plagiaristic postmodern meaninglessness should have been so successful. It's unbearable to think that there's a whole generation of readers who could grow up thinking that this is what fantasy is all about, or that the perpetrator of this wholesale snitch actually had an idea in his head. Woe.

Mother arrived safely yesterday, and I have actually caught up on sleep after Thursday's shockingly bad night (too much Thai food, too much wine, too much headache, 2 hours sleep). Since my mother is the courier of choice for my Amazon orders, I am pleased to report that I now possess the complete DVD collections of both Buffy and Angel and most of the Miyazaki and Studio Ghibli output. Get 'em while they're hot, people: Buffy and Angel currently under 18 pounds on Amazon, and cheaper at Amazon Jersey.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

From what I've read, Eragon was published and got all the publicity because Paolini was something like 16 when he wrote it. Possibly younger. He was homeschooled, and his parents self-published it, and then somebody in publishing got hold of it. I haven't read it, but I'm guessing that it's well written for a reasonably smart teenager (much like my first completed novel manuscript, which did get editorial praise for being well written even as they rejected it, and thank the gods they did).

Meanwhile, the clichés of fantasy that you list are strong enough that many readers still seek them out. Feist, Jordan, Dragonlance et al.... They sell well. People snap them up. And if that makes them happy, I'm all for it. There are enough books being published to make every kind of reader happy.

Have you read Sharon Shinn's Archangel books? I'm curious to know your view of the first one as compared to the first McCaffrey dragon book--despite one being about angels and the other about dragons, I found some eerie similarities. But McCaffrey provided a positive blurb for the book!

Cheers, Dayle
---
Cat Scratch Fever, Black Lace Books 2006 (as Sophie Mouette)
A Little Night Music, Cheek Books 2007 (as Sarah Dale)

[extemporanea.livejournal.com]

Good lord. Colour me illuminated. I had no idea that the author was an adolescent at the time of writing: all becomes clear. I read the novel as if it was written by an adult, and it's a lot more acceptable as an adolescent effusion than it would be from an adult writer. It does, in fact, read exactly like a teenage piece, in hindsight. As such, it's even reasonably competent.

I don't have a problem with clichéd fantasy writing, as such; I still derive a reasonable amount of pleasure from McCaffrey, or Feist, or even the first couple of Jordan's novels. What distinguishes all these authors, though, is that they've managed to add a certain personal element to their clichéd motifs: Feist's Rift, Jordan's gender-based magic, McCaffrey's half-assed sf rationalisation. Eragon simply didn't. Much popular fantasy is derivative, but a lot of it manages to be derivative but still, in some sense or another, add new elements to the mix.

Also, I was disappointed because so much contemporary young adult fantasy is actually very, very worthwhile, and manages to avoid cliché: Holly Black, Garth Nix, hell, even Lemony Snicket. They do interesting, edgy stuff. I suppose I expected something similar from Eragon, and was let down when it didn't materialise.

But now I feel bad, having dissed it so thoroughly. As a teenage work it's a lot more acceptable. Hopefully he'll retain the energy and desire to write, but actually find something to say.

I did read the Sharon Shinn a couple of years ago, and remember enjoying them, but I don't remember if I made any McCaffrey connections at the time. I'll have to dig them out again :>.

[tngr-spacecadet.livejournal.com]

there's more, the book is now the first of a trilogy and #2 is out.

actually he sounds like a typical kid, basing one character on his sister.

http://www.teenreads.com/authors/au-paolini-christopher.asp