- Jan 14, 2010
Joan of Arc doesn't relate directly to a 15 year old relating to a book, she relates to how irrelevant the number of an age really is.JambalayaBob said:Fine, I'll give you my thoughts on your other 2 examples. Music is a completely different art than storytelling, which makes your example of Leann Rimes only a bit less redundant than Mozart. Joan of Arc wasn't an artist, and she did NOT die at 15, she died at 19 years old. Yes, she is an important historical figure, but she led an army, and in her time, it was very common for men her age to be fighting in wars. I kinda see the point you're trying to make here, but I still fail to see how she really relates at all to a 15 year old writing a book.spartan231490 said:How do you know how much writing he did before this. You don't have any idea how many fan-fics/short stories/poor novels/writing exercise he wrote before he wrote Eragon.JambalayaBob said:You're gonna say that because something's popular it's good? Well let's just take a quick peek at Twilight and see if you feel the same way. And it's less his age and far more the FACT, mind you, that he had written practically NOTHING before Eragon. The only reason I even write the word practically is because obviously he wrote for school assignments. Anyways, do you know any 15 year olds with enough life experience to craft compelling and thought provoking stories? I'd sure like to meet these people if you do.spartan231490 said:That's your opinion. The best-seller's list and national success would seem to work against you. As for being too young. Mozart wrote one of the worlds most praised compositions at what: 7? obviously, 15 is not too young for artistic achievement. Leann Rimes was a remarkably successful musician at 15. I'm sure I could find more examples if I tried, but I feel no desire to. Achievement has nothing to do with age. Joan of Arc died when she was 15 years old.JambalayaBob said:No offense, but the Eragon series kinda . . . sucks. I read the first one, started the second, then I stopped because I had to question why I was even reading it. I was in middle school when I read the first one btw, and I'm sure the majority of his fans were in middle school when they last read the books. I was in high school by the time I tried the 2nd one, which I'm sure is why I stopped. Point is, nostalgia doesn't make things good. Plus I got really pissed off at the map of the world because of its ridiculous inconsistencies, but that doesn't really matter too much.
Also, "Eragon is the first book in the Inheritance Cycle by Christopher Paolini, who began writing the book at the age of 15." This sentence pisses me right the fuck off. Nobody should start writing full fledged novels at the age of 15. I tried to write a novel when I was 16, and there was a reason I didn't finish it. I didn't get burned out or anything, I just looked at it after I was quite a few thousand words in, and I humbly said to myself, "Started out okay, but this is shit," and truly, it was.
Christopher Paolini's story should be a humbling, cautionary tale for any aspiring authors. Look before you leap, but before you even look, make sure you actually know what the fuck you're doing. I think this dude really doesn't know what he's doing, especially since he was appalled at the lack of "quality writing" in fantasy when his dialogue is about as rich and nuanced as a horny 14 year old's FF7 fanfic (albeit markedly less disturbing).
TLDR: Eragon isn't good because its author is way too ambitious, and the sheer fact that this series is the only thing he's really written proves it on so many levels.
Using someone like Mozart as an example does nothing to further your argument, instead it's a poor attempt to bring Mozart down to Paolini's level. Saying that they are even remotely close to each other is a crime. Reading Paolini's books would make me feel nothing outside of sheer boredom, whereas listening to Mozart can bring out emotions in me that I might have never experienced otherwise. Mozart was a genius, Paolini's just some dude who got lucky.
I'll list reasons why Paolini's writing is mediocre at best (and horrific at worst) if you really want me to, but for now I'll just leave it at that. You can find plenty of criticisms of him online if you spend 5 seconds of your time anyways.
Yes I do know many 15 year olds with the life experience to create a compelling story. I know a great many, especially considering how little life experience it actually takes to craft a compelling story.
Congrats, so Paolini isn't for you. Some of us are notably more effected emotionally by Paolini than by Mozart. I like his writing. I think it's good. So do all my friends who love reading. We have each read a quite literally insane number of books and fantasy books in particular, so I value our opinion more than yours.
If I look, I can find critisims of tolkein, or Mozart, or raising the debt ceiling if I look. That doesn't mean that those criticisms are accurate, or at all diminish the effectiveness and artistic merit of his work. I really don't care about your opinion anymore. You're saying that Mozart is an irrelevant example, and just plain ignoring the other two examples, is an evasion with no merit in a debate. an obvious and intentional evasion in a discussion speaks volumes about a persons character.
Now, onto the meat of this. First of all, stop acting like I'M the one who started this argument. You're trying to make it look like I'm pestering you or something when I'm really not. And how do I know he hadn't written a lot before this? I looked into it, I couldn't find his acknowledgement of writing anything before Eragon, or anything else in any bibliography I found. I would like you to find proof, because that way I would maybe have an ounce of respect for him, but right now, I really really don't.
You say it takes very little life experience to craft a compelling story, huh? So you're saying that people don't have to have much social interaction to create 3-dimensional characters? They don't have to know how a number of the vast amount of types of people work on a psychological level? This is the equivalent of saying that you don't need to have seen a mountain in order to paint it. The only way to create characters that don't feel like cardboard cut outs is to have met people similar in some way to the characters you want to create.
Okay, so you're ready to say that you and your group of friends have a superior opinion to mine, even though you know jack shit about me? Sounds to me like you're just trying to not even listen to someone with an opinion different to yours. I respect your opinion, I think you're wrong, but I'm not actively trying to stop you from liking anything, I'm only responding to your arguments against my opinion.
Yes, you can find criticisms to pretty much everything, and you're also right in the fact that it doesn't diminish the value of the things you enjoy. But it's at least worth listening to reasons why people think he's a bad author. If you don't at least listen to dissenting opinions, you're just blindly marching in lockstep with people who already have the same opinions as you, instead of trying to challenge yourself to gain more perspective on something.
Now, here I was gonna list all the reasons why Paolini's writing pretty much flat out sucks, but I decided against it because it would take too long, and it's really not worth the energy. Plus, I know you aren't really interested. The last reply you sent had an air of condescension that I had previously sensed in you. In conclusion, you duuuuuuumb, boy! That is all
If I am confusing you with one of the other people I was talking to, then I am sorry, but If you are who I think you are then I originally quoted your post that had about 2 lines about how Paolini was an awful author. This is mostly a thread for fans of Paolini, so I consider coming here and making a short post with no evidence about how crappy he is to be starting an argument.
As to finding proof about him writing b4, I don't feel any desire to. You were the one who claimed he didn't. I believe burden of proof goes to the person who makes the statement. I also don't think it's that relevant. Honestly, there are a great number of people who write compelling books at 20 without going to Africa with the peace corps. I don't see any reason why a 15 year old home-schooled kid couldn't.
As to me not believing it takes life experience to write compelling stories: I believe that Paolini is a compelling author, so therefore I intrinsically believe that he has enough life experience to be one. He doesn't have that much. Ergo, a whole lot isn't required.
I know nothing about you. exactly why I don't have a great deal of respect for your opinion. forgive me if that makes me a jackass, but I don't grant respect except to people who have proven to me that the deserve it. However, I have a great deal of respect for my friends, especially when it comes to fantasy books, as we are all very avid fantasy readers, and very intelligent. One of us is an english major focused in creative writing. We all think that Paolini is a good author. Certainly not the best we've read, but good. Now, i have a great deal of respect for 6 people who agree on this. Honestly, nothing you can say is going to make me respect your opinion more than ours combined, although your arguments have already elevated you above pretty much everyone I have yet argued with on the internet, for whatever that is worth. It is important to note here, that I mean your opinion, not the arguments behind it. Arguments and debates fascinate me, and I have yet to here a single one that was entirely without merit. However, I also haven't seen any facts or arguments from you that change my opinion.
I have actually listened to everything you have said. I just don't agree with it. I am sorry if I sounded condescending. I am frustrated, it's almost 3am here and I never had a huge deal of patience to begin with. Being honest, most of that frustration is generic, as I don't usually see well reasoned arguments on this topic, just idiot parrots who say it's crap because it's crap. And that last reply was condescending. Evasions in debates really do piss me off. I know they are usually unintentional, but that's the way I am. It's one of the reasons I despise politicians with an unusual venom . I am sorry for that, whatever that's worth.