So what goes on in Chris's head?
Jul. 17th, 2008 05:48 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kippurbirdOh Christopher Paolini, you never cease to amuse.
There's an interview up on Shur'turgal.com with Paolini answering some questions about Brisnger and other things. Obviously, this requires mockery.
Because this is what I do.
Yes, I know, I have no life. =D
Questions & Answers:
If a person makes a vow in the ancient language, what are the possible ways to break it? Can the person they vowed to give them permission to break the vow?
A reasonable question, I think. Here's Paolini's answer:
If you make a vow in the ancient language, the power of the language will compel you to fulfill your oath, whatever it might be, which is one reason elves and spellcasters must choose their words with such care. That’s not to say some flexibility isn’t allowed, however. If Arya said in the ancient language, “I hate Durza,” it would simply be a statement of fact, and if her feelings changed, she could then say, “I do not hate Durza.” Even if she said, “I will always hate Durza,” at a later time, she could still say, “I do not hate Durza,” since both statements would be true from her point of view at the moment when she uttered them, which is all that matters when speaking the ancient language. But... if she swore that she would always hate Durza, then her oath would bind her forevermore. Once someone formally gives their word in the ancient language, they cannot go back on their promise so long as who they are still exists.
I just had an image of someone going "The Powers of Language Compels You!" In any case, Paolini isn't specific as to what exactly constitutes swearing an oath or vow. One could say that "I will always hate Durza" could be a vow or an oath, because your promising to do something. Therefor you aren't allowed to change your feelings, the language won't let you. Even the "I hate Durza" could be considered a vow, because while you are stating a fact, you are saying that it's true and therefor, once again, the language won't let you change your mind. You hate Durza so you can't change your feelings to him.
The idea of formally having to swear something in the ancient language seems to go back on the idea that everything you say in the ancient language is true and binding which is what appears to have been insinuated before.
If the oath you swear is to another person—such as Murtagh’s oaths to Galbatorix—that person can release you from their obligations if they so wish. Brisingr contains more information about how one can or cannot free themselves from a promise in the ancient language.
That makes sense, actually.
If one believes something is true, but it actually is not true, can they still voice it in the ancient language?
Yes, if you believe something is true, then you can say it in the ancient language. It’s entirely possible to write things you know are false in Elvish, but no one will be able to read them out loud.
Is Elvish the same as the ancient language? I think so. Then he shouldn't really be switching them out like that.
I'm not really sure why speaking and writing would be different. It's like the Jim Carrey movie Liar Liar where Carrey's character is made to be not be able to lie. He can't write lies and he can't speak them no matter how hard he tries. Which is a bugger when he was a lawyer. (One of my favorite scenes is when he tries to write "this pen is red" with a blue pen.) If the language you use compels you to always speak the truth then writing it should be no different because writing is just another form of speaking.
The next couple of questions are trivial, dealing with colors of dragons, how strong is Eragon (as strong as any elf) and which characters would Paolini like to have dinner with (Eragon, Arya, Saphira, Brom, and Nasuada).
Of all the trials and tribulations Eragon and Saphira have encountered so far, which would you suppose is the most significant in the course of their destiny?
An interesting question again. And a total fail on the answer.
All were necessary for them to become who they needed to become. From Eragon’s point of view, the most important event was the moment he chose to take Saphira’s egg home with him, as everything else in the Inheritance cycle has transpired from this.
Taking an egg isn't a trial or tribulation. There was curiosity but no real needing to choose. Sure it changed his fate, but it was more an accidental change. He never had to think, "If I take this stone what will happen to me?". Trials and tribulations are choices you make knowing that it'll effect your destiny. A quick example from my own work, when Alec chose to defy the king of the Fey who could very easily turn him into a poodle, that was a trial. He choose to do something, despite knowing that something bad could happen by his decision.
For Eragon, I would have to say a trial would be choosing to trust Murtagh or rescuing Arya. Saphira on the other hand hasn't any because she just follows around like a talking dog.
Is there a storyline in Brisingr following Murtagh's point of view, or is his story all seen from Eragon's POV?
I’ll leave that for readers to discover. However, I will say that you’ll have the opportunity to experience Saphira’s point of view on several occasions in Brisingr. It was challenging to depict scenes from the standpoint of a dragon, but I had a blast doing it. Saphira really is a wonderful character to write; she has so many interesting thoughts and opinions.
The problem with these sort of answers is that by not saying no, it sort of indicates yes. At least in my opinion. By saying yes doesn't spoil anything because we don't know exactly what happens in his POV. I am however curious as to see what he considers to be Saphira's POV. Because so far she hasn't done anything particularly dragonish in her thoughts, beyond the one time in Eldest where she said she wasn't going to stop eating meat.
She flirted like a human... which now that I think about it, Glaedr reacted rather wrong to Saphira's advances. In the wild it's the female who says when they have sex and since Saphira was indicating a desire to mate, Glaedr should have been up and ready. Especially when it would help continue the species. Apparently it was doing the dragons a favor by killing them off because they seem to be too stupid to live.
Is there a possibility that Selena is still alive, and could she possible be welling within the Spine...where dragons might exist?
No comment.
No body, then alive. We learned this in Eldest in regards to Murtagh and the Twins. And I think if there were dragons alive in the Spine Galby would have done something about this by now.
Does Shruikan feel bonded to Galbatorix, does he want to escape?
Galbatorix and Shruikan do not share the traditional dragon–Rider bond. Galbatorix forced Shruikan to serve him through various spells and mental tricks. Their relationship is a mockery of the one Eragon and Saphira share. What Shruikan may or may not feel about his lot in life, however, has yet to be discussed within the series.
Galby is EVVVVIIIIILLLL. I think it would have been more interesting if Shruikan got corrupted as Galby did. But apparently Paolini has difficulty with the idea of there being evil dragons. I have the feeling that like Darth Vader, Shruikan will turn on Galby at the final battle before dying.
Is Isidar Mithrim more important than it currently seems?
Possibly
The what? I don't remember what that was. But I'm going with possibly meaning yes. We'll see if I'm right or not.
Are the grey folk still in existence? Will they intervene in the story?
They no longer exist, although their descendants may. Other than that, no comment.
The grey folk are the ones who killed themselves to create the ancient language. There are a lot of suicidal species in this series. I'm guessing that elves are the descendants as we don't know where they come from (beyond over there from somewhere in the west but it's not Valor, honestly)and they speak the ancient language as their normal language.
Prior to contact with elves, did dwarves have any significant magic powers, or did they at least know about its existence?
Dwarves did know about magic before the elves came to Alagaësia—magic is a fundamental property of the world of Alagaësia, just like heat or electricity—although their grasp of it has never been as sophisticated as the elves’, partly because the elves use the ancient language as their native tongue, which no other race does.
Because elves are Just That Special. Electricity? There's electricity in Alagaësia? The way he says it implies that it's like our use of electricity, something that has been "tamed" and used in every dayish life. And how is heat a fundamental property? Gravity is a fundamental property. Heat is not. In regards to the dwarves ability with magic, why can't they have a separate but just as functional way to use magic? They have a different culture so their way of doing magic should be just as different. Dinner varies from culture to culture in how it's defined and when it's done, so why shouldn't magic?
But that would make the elves less speshul.
If you had known when you started the process of writing your story that it would be four books instead of three, would you have changed anything in Eragon or Eldest?
No. I’ve always told the story the way I wanted to. The size of the plot in this last book just turned out to be larger than I anticipated.
Size of the plot really shouldn't have anything to do with how big a book is. Plots are really very small or short. Hamlet is: A prince comes home because his father has died and his uncle has married his mother. He tries to figure out what happens, discovering that his uncle killed his father, which causes a series of events that eventually leads to everyone's deaths. Hamlet is COMPLEX but it's plot is rather simple. Good plots are simple. The Inheritance's Cycle is rather simple as well. Farm boy discovers that he's part of an ancient and extinct race of warriors and joins the rebel forces to defeat the evil empire. So far the Cycle hasn't shown to be very complex, it doesn't deal with moral issues or shades of gray. It's very straight forward.
The outline might be "long" but that doesn't mean that the story is too long for a book. God knows if I were to ever write out an outline for my books it would be at least twelve pages long and yet it all fits into one book. And I'm sure this is true for the rest of you reading this who also write.
Did the dragons have a language that they spoke before they knew how to speak in the ancient language?
Dragons never developed a language of their own, which is one reason the elves had such difficulty communicating with them when the two races first encountered each other. The dragons spoke to each other using a series of interconnected impressions—images, feelings, sounds, smells. An example of this is when, in Eldest, Glaedr conveys to Eragon and Saphira the unpronounceable name of the dragon who helped form the bond between the elves and dragons.
Nooo... Dragons had no spoken language. You just said that the "dragons spoke to each other using a series of interconnected impressions—images, feelings, sounds, smells". That's the point of language, to communicate things. And when you say spoke, they obviously were able to confer ideas. Even in your books you mention that the dragons have a culture and sentience when you said that they desired revenge. They just didn't have the same language as the elves. And the fact that they were able to learn how to communicate with the elves shows that they're a lot smarter than the elves.
Are there such things as good Shades?
No. The only spirits who would seek to seize control of a human body would be those who were so enraged at being summoned, they wanted nothing more than to wreak havoc on the material world.
This is why we have a circle of protection. That's really all I have to say. If you're stupid enough not to take precautions, you deserve it.
Does it make it harder to write when you know that so many people know the story, as compared to when you were only writing for yourself?
Every book is difficult to write in its own way. I’m certainly aware of the large readership the series has acquired, but all I try to do is tell the story as best as I can. I probably spend more time than I did before on all the little details, trying to make sure they’re consistent, but other than that, I really haven’t changed my approach to writing.
Well, there goes any hope that he's gotten better. :D
Why didn’t Eragon drain energy from his enemies during the last battle? That could refresh him once he was tired and also kill them, as that was his objective.
1. Many of the soldiers were protected by wards that prevented Eragon or any other spellcaster from killing them all with a single spell. This is one reason Eragon spent a large part of the Battle of the Burning Plains hunting Galbatorix’s magicians, who were protecting the soldiers.
So kill the ones that weren't. But that is a good point. Also, wasn't the draining of enemies considered one of the big no-noes?
2. Unless Eragon takes great care, it’s very easy for him to draw energy from all of the living beings around him, including those he would not want to harm, such as friends, family, allies, etc. He has to make a conscious effort to restrict his efforts to a specific target, which is difficult to do amid the confusion of battle. (Keep in mind, this is also a new skill for Eragon. He’s yet to really master it.)
Again, reasonable. Watch that he quickly masters it and will use it easily in the next book. Betcha cookies.
3. The spell is an inefficient way to kill large numbers of enemies. It takes a relatively large amount of time to drain a person of energy compared with just lopping off their head or, if they’re unshielded by magic, casting a death spell.
Or if you have a dragon doing sweeps of fire over the enemy lines. And also wasn't death spells also a no-no? Though, still, a reasonable point.
4. Eragon has yet to really encounter this limitation in the series, but his body can only absorb a certain amount of energy before his flesh becomes saturated. At most, Eragon could probably assimilate the energy from between five and ten warriors, depending on their state of exhaustion. Even if Eragon channeled the excess energy into Saphira or into the gems in his belt and the pommel of Zar’roc (since this was before Murtagh stole his sword) he still would not have been able to store all of the energy from the hundreds of soldiers he and Saphira killed on the Burning Plains.
Eragon has yet to encounter many limitations. Why can't he channel the excess energy back into the field of battle to smitey people. Kinda like what Bishiop can do. But other than that... not bad either.
The Ra'zac are a truly impressive work of evil, what inspired them?
Thank you. Beetles and crickets.
Dunno about impressive work of evil. All they did was threaten people, kill Garrow and kidnap Katrina. That's pretty standard evil. That's minion evil really. You hire thugs to do that. Real evil... well that's when you go beyond standard raping and pillaging. When you do things so reprehensible that people would be shocked to learn what it was that you did. That someone who is normally against the death penalty would say "kill them for what they did". It's when you twist what is there into something wrong and unnatural. Be it landscape or people's souls. That's evil.
Will we get to meet King Galbatorix in person in Brisingr?
No comment.
My guess is at the end of the book. For a cliff-hanger. He'll show up kill someone or something and then vanish again, giving Eragon a chance to go "NOOOOOOOOOO" like Darth Vader.
What is the Dwarven name for the Beor Mountains?
They don’t tell outsiders, so I couldn’t say.
IE I don't know.
Because really, he made up the language (in theory) he's not a dwarf nor do any dwarves now exist. It's only a writing gimmick that he's using to pretend like the world he's writing about is real. So, there's no reason not to hold it back. I vaguely, though I could be wrong, remember Tolkien saying that the reason why we never hear any of the dwarves' language in the books is because they don't speak it around outsiders, nor do they speak about their homes. But the language does exist and Tolkien, I think, had an extant way of using it much like his other languages.
There's an interview up on Shur'turgal.com with Paolini answering some questions about Brisnger and other things. Obviously, this requires mockery.
Because this is what I do.
Yes, I know, I have no life. =D
Questions & Answers:
If a person makes a vow in the ancient language, what are the possible ways to break it? Can the person they vowed to give them permission to break the vow?
A reasonable question, I think. Here's Paolini's answer:
If you make a vow in the ancient language, the power of the language will compel you to fulfill your oath, whatever it might be, which is one reason elves and spellcasters must choose their words with such care. That’s not to say some flexibility isn’t allowed, however. If Arya said in the ancient language, “I hate Durza,” it would simply be a statement of fact, and if her feelings changed, she could then say, “I do not hate Durza.” Even if she said, “I will always hate Durza,” at a later time, she could still say, “I do not hate Durza,” since both statements would be true from her point of view at the moment when she uttered them, which is all that matters when speaking the ancient language. But... if she swore that she would always hate Durza, then her oath would bind her forevermore. Once someone formally gives their word in the ancient language, they cannot go back on their promise so long as who they are still exists.
I just had an image of someone going "The Powers of Language Compels You!" In any case, Paolini isn't specific as to what exactly constitutes swearing an oath or vow. One could say that "I will always hate Durza" could be a vow or an oath, because your promising to do something. Therefor you aren't allowed to change your feelings, the language won't let you. Even the "I hate Durza" could be considered a vow, because while you are stating a fact, you are saying that it's true and therefor, once again, the language won't let you change your mind. You hate Durza so you can't change your feelings to him.
The idea of formally having to swear something in the ancient language seems to go back on the idea that everything you say in the ancient language is true and binding which is what appears to have been insinuated before.
If the oath you swear is to another person—such as Murtagh’s oaths to Galbatorix—that person can release you from their obligations if they so wish. Brisingr contains more information about how one can or cannot free themselves from a promise in the ancient language.
That makes sense, actually.
If one believes something is true, but it actually is not true, can they still voice it in the ancient language?
Yes, if you believe something is true, then you can say it in the ancient language. It’s entirely possible to write things you know are false in Elvish, but no one will be able to read them out loud.
Is Elvish the same as the ancient language? I think so. Then he shouldn't really be switching them out like that.
I'm not really sure why speaking and writing would be different. It's like the Jim Carrey movie Liar Liar where Carrey's character is made to be not be able to lie. He can't write lies and he can't speak them no matter how hard he tries. Which is a bugger when he was a lawyer. (One of my favorite scenes is when he tries to write "this pen is red" with a blue pen.) If the language you use compels you to always speak the truth then writing it should be no different because writing is just another form of speaking.
The next couple of questions are trivial, dealing with colors of dragons, how strong is Eragon (as strong as any elf) and which characters would Paolini like to have dinner with (Eragon, Arya, Saphira, Brom, and Nasuada).
Of all the trials and tribulations Eragon and Saphira have encountered so far, which would you suppose is the most significant in the course of their destiny?
An interesting question again. And a total fail on the answer.
All were necessary for them to become who they needed to become. From Eragon’s point of view, the most important event was the moment he chose to take Saphira’s egg home with him, as everything else in the Inheritance cycle has transpired from this.
Taking an egg isn't a trial or tribulation. There was curiosity but no real needing to choose. Sure it changed his fate, but it was more an accidental change. He never had to think, "If I take this stone what will happen to me?". Trials and tribulations are choices you make knowing that it'll effect your destiny. A quick example from my own work, when Alec chose to defy the king of the Fey who could very easily turn him into a poodle, that was a trial. He choose to do something, despite knowing that something bad could happen by his decision.
For Eragon, I would have to say a trial would be choosing to trust Murtagh or rescuing Arya. Saphira on the other hand hasn't any because she just follows around like a talking dog.
Is there a storyline in Brisingr following Murtagh's point of view, or is his story all seen from Eragon's POV?
I’ll leave that for readers to discover. However, I will say that you’ll have the opportunity to experience Saphira’s point of view on several occasions in Brisingr. It was challenging to depict scenes from the standpoint of a dragon, but I had a blast doing it. Saphira really is a wonderful character to write; she has so many interesting thoughts and opinions.
The problem with these sort of answers is that by not saying no, it sort of indicates yes. At least in my opinion. By saying yes doesn't spoil anything because we don't know exactly what happens in his POV. I am however curious as to see what he considers to be Saphira's POV. Because so far she hasn't done anything particularly dragonish in her thoughts, beyond the one time in Eldest where she said she wasn't going to stop eating meat.
She flirted like a human... which now that I think about it, Glaedr reacted rather wrong to Saphira's advances. In the wild it's the female who says when they have sex and since Saphira was indicating a desire to mate, Glaedr should have been up and ready. Especially when it would help continue the species. Apparently it was doing the dragons a favor by killing them off because they seem to be too stupid to live.
Is there a possibility that Selena is still alive, and could she possible be welling within the Spine...where dragons might exist?
No comment.
No body, then alive. We learned this in Eldest in regards to Murtagh and the Twins. And I think if there were dragons alive in the Spine Galby would have done something about this by now.
Does Shruikan feel bonded to Galbatorix, does he want to escape?
Galbatorix and Shruikan do not share the traditional dragon–Rider bond. Galbatorix forced Shruikan to serve him through various spells and mental tricks. Their relationship is a mockery of the one Eragon and Saphira share. What Shruikan may or may not feel about his lot in life, however, has yet to be discussed within the series.
Galby is EVVVVIIIIILLLL. I think it would have been more interesting if Shruikan got corrupted as Galby did. But apparently Paolini has difficulty with the idea of there being evil dragons. I have the feeling that like Darth Vader, Shruikan will turn on Galby at the final battle before dying.
Is Isidar Mithrim more important than it currently seems?
Possibly
The what? I don't remember what that was. But I'm going with possibly meaning yes. We'll see if I'm right or not.
Are the grey folk still in existence? Will they intervene in the story?
They no longer exist, although their descendants may. Other than that, no comment.
The grey folk are the ones who killed themselves to create the ancient language. There are a lot of suicidal species in this series. I'm guessing that elves are the descendants as we don't know where they come from (beyond over there from somewhere in the west but it's not Valor, honestly)and they speak the ancient language as their normal language.
Prior to contact with elves, did dwarves have any significant magic powers, or did they at least know about its existence?
Dwarves did know about magic before the elves came to Alagaësia—magic is a fundamental property of the world of Alagaësia, just like heat or electricity—although their grasp of it has never been as sophisticated as the elves’, partly because the elves use the ancient language as their native tongue, which no other race does.
Because elves are Just That Special. Electricity? There's electricity in Alagaësia? The way he says it implies that it's like our use of electricity, something that has been "tamed" and used in every dayish life. And how is heat a fundamental property? Gravity is a fundamental property. Heat is not. In regards to the dwarves ability with magic, why can't they have a separate but just as functional way to use magic? They have a different culture so their way of doing magic should be just as different. Dinner varies from culture to culture in how it's defined and when it's done, so why shouldn't magic?
But that would make the elves less speshul.
If you had known when you started the process of writing your story that it would be four books instead of three, would you have changed anything in Eragon or Eldest?
No. I’ve always told the story the way I wanted to. The size of the plot in this last book just turned out to be larger than I anticipated.
Size of the plot really shouldn't have anything to do with how big a book is. Plots are really very small or short. Hamlet is: A prince comes home because his father has died and his uncle has married his mother. He tries to figure out what happens, discovering that his uncle killed his father, which causes a series of events that eventually leads to everyone's deaths. Hamlet is COMPLEX but it's plot is rather simple. Good plots are simple. The Inheritance's Cycle is rather simple as well. Farm boy discovers that he's part of an ancient and extinct race of warriors and joins the rebel forces to defeat the evil empire. So far the Cycle hasn't shown to be very complex, it doesn't deal with moral issues or shades of gray. It's very straight forward.
The outline might be "long" but that doesn't mean that the story is too long for a book. God knows if I were to ever write out an outline for my books it would be at least twelve pages long and yet it all fits into one book. And I'm sure this is true for the rest of you reading this who also write.
Did the dragons have a language that they spoke before they knew how to speak in the ancient language?
Dragons never developed a language of their own, which is one reason the elves had such difficulty communicating with them when the two races first encountered each other. The dragons spoke to each other using a series of interconnected impressions—images, feelings, sounds, smells. An example of this is when, in Eldest, Glaedr conveys to Eragon and Saphira the unpronounceable name of the dragon who helped form the bond between the elves and dragons.
Nooo... Dragons had no spoken language. You just said that the "dragons spoke to each other using a series of interconnected impressions—images, feelings, sounds, smells". That's the point of language, to communicate things. And when you say spoke, they obviously were able to confer ideas. Even in your books you mention that the dragons have a culture and sentience when you said that they desired revenge. They just didn't have the same language as the elves. And the fact that they were able to learn how to communicate with the elves shows that they're a lot smarter than the elves.
Are there such things as good Shades?
No. The only spirits who would seek to seize control of a human body would be those who were so enraged at being summoned, they wanted nothing more than to wreak havoc on the material world.
This is why we have a circle of protection. That's really all I have to say. If you're stupid enough not to take precautions, you deserve it.
Does it make it harder to write when you know that so many people know the story, as compared to when you were only writing for yourself?
Every book is difficult to write in its own way. I’m certainly aware of the large readership the series has acquired, but all I try to do is tell the story as best as I can. I probably spend more time than I did before on all the little details, trying to make sure they’re consistent, but other than that, I really haven’t changed my approach to writing.
Well, there goes any hope that he's gotten better. :D
Why didn’t Eragon drain energy from his enemies during the last battle? That could refresh him once he was tired and also kill them, as that was his objective.
1. Many of the soldiers were protected by wards that prevented Eragon or any other spellcaster from killing them all with a single spell. This is one reason Eragon spent a large part of the Battle of the Burning Plains hunting Galbatorix’s magicians, who were protecting the soldiers.
So kill the ones that weren't. But that is a good point. Also, wasn't the draining of enemies considered one of the big no-noes?
2. Unless Eragon takes great care, it’s very easy for him to draw energy from all of the living beings around him, including those he would not want to harm, such as friends, family, allies, etc. He has to make a conscious effort to restrict his efforts to a specific target, which is difficult to do amid the confusion of battle. (Keep in mind, this is also a new skill for Eragon. He’s yet to really master it.)
Again, reasonable. Watch that he quickly masters it and will use it easily in the next book. Betcha cookies.
3. The spell is an inefficient way to kill large numbers of enemies. It takes a relatively large amount of time to drain a person of energy compared with just lopping off their head or, if they’re unshielded by magic, casting a death spell.
Or if you have a dragon doing sweeps of fire over the enemy lines. And also wasn't death spells also a no-no? Though, still, a reasonable point.
4. Eragon has yet to really encounter this limitation in the series, but his body can only absorb a certain amount of energy before his flesh becomes saturated. At most, Eragon could probably assimilate the energy from between five and ten warriors, depending on their state of exhaustion. Even if Eragon channeled the excess energy into Saphira or into the gems in his belt and the pommel of Zar’roc (since this was before Murtagh stole his sword) he still would not have been able to store all of the energy from the hundreds of soldiers he and Saphira killed on the Burning Plains.
Eragon has yet to encounter many limitations. Why can't he channel the excess energy back into the field of battle to smitey people. Kinda like what Bishiop can do. But other than that... not bad either.
The Ra'zac are a truly impressive work of evil, what inspired them?
Thank you. Beetles and crickets.
Dunno about impressive work of evil. All they did was threaten people, kill Garrow and kidnap Katrina. That's pretty standard evil. That's minion evil really. You hire thugs to do that. Real evil... well that's when you go beyond standard raping and pillaging. When you do things so reprehensible that people would be shocked to learn what it was that you did. That someone who is normally against the death penalty would say "kill them for what they did". It's when you twist what is there into something wrong and unnatural. Be it landscape or people's souls. That's evil.
Will we get to meet King Galbatorix in person in Brisingr?
No comment.
My guess is at the end of the book. For a cliff-hanger. He'll show up kill someone or something and then vanish again, giving Eragon a chance to go "NOOOOOOOOOO" like Darth Vader.
What is the Dwarven name for the Beor Mountains?
They don’t tell outsiders, so I couldn’t say.
IE I don't know.
Because really, he made up the language (in theory) he's not a dwarf nor do any dwarves now exist. It's only a writing gimmick that he's using to pretend like the world he's writing about is real. So, there's no reason not to hold it back. I vaguely, though I could be wrong, remember Tolkien saying that the reason why we never hear any of the dwarves' language in the books is because they don't speak it around outsiders, nor do they speak about their homes. But the language does exist and Tolkien, I think, had an extant way of using it much like his other languages.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 01:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 01:40 am (UTC)If you're still hanging around, I'm going to be doing Brsingr when it comes out.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 03:16 am (UTC)No. The only spirits who would seek to seize control of a human body would be those who were so enraged at being summoned, they wanted nothing more than to wreak havoc on the material world.
What about those who wanted power? Or were just sadistic?
If you make a vow in the ancient language, the power of the language will compel you to fulfill your oath, whatever it might be, which is one reason elves and spellcasters must choose their words with such care. That’s not to say some flexibility isn’t allowed, however. If Arya said in the ancient language, “I hate Durza,” it would simply be a statement of fact, and if her feelings changed, she could then say, “I do not hate Durza.” Even if she said, “I will always hate Durza,” at a later time, she could still say, “I do not hate Durza,” since both statements would be true from her point of view at the moment when she uttered them, which is all that matters when speaking the ancient language. But... if she swore that she would always hate Durza, then her oath would bind her forevermore. Once someone formally gives their word in the ancient language, they cannot go back on their promise so long as who they are still exists.
I would think "I will always hate Durza" is an oath, since it talks about future actions.
Thank you. Beetles and crickets.
Why do I have the horrible feeling he said this deadpan?
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 03:39 am (UTC)I'm sorry? But they can't have more than one motivation in Paolini land.
Why do I have the horrible feeling he said this deadpan?
I think he meant it.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 03:51 am (UTC)Hunh? Isn't that contradictory? If I wrote "Eragon is a hero" in the ancient language, and someone who read that actually did believe that Eragon was heroic then he should be able to say it!
In the wild it's the female who says when they have sex and since Saphira was indicating a desire to mate, Glaedr should have been up and ready.
Well, assuming that Glaedr was sexually mature anyways.
There are some animals where the female seeks mates, and the male chooses. However, those are species where the male takes on most of the childrearing duties. And I somehow doubt that Paolini would have the dragon fathers being the stay-at-home (nest?) parents, and the mothers flying off.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 05:21 am (UTC)You know, independently from the whole speaking/writing issue, what about stories? Are they considered "true" ? What's the influence of this on the Elves's myths and legends - which they should have because every culture has them ?
I think PaoPao probably thought when he was 15 that a language where you couldn't say anything but the truth was cool, but he obviously didn't think it through. (Starting with : what's the truth?)
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 05:53 am (UTC)also known as the "Star Sapphire" or the "Star Rose," is a very large sapphire mined by the dwarves suspended atop Tronjheim. It was hand carved by the dwarves to appear like a huge rose. It is sixty feet thick and 100 feet wide, and it is also the floor of the dragonhold. In Eragon, it is shattered by Saphira and Arya in order to distract Durza while he fought Eragon. In Eldest, Saphira promises Hrothgar that she will fix it, but all the pieces must be present for her to do so.
I don't know what the point of fixing a broken sapphire is, so I guess it's important.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 07:02 am (UTC)Well, assuming that Glaedr was sexually mature anyways
Seeing as how he's several thousand years old, I would certainly hope so. XD
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 07:11 am (UTC)If you believe that it could be true, it can be written, I think is what someone told Eragon when he wanted to write a story in the ancient language, even though no one had done it before.
Myths and legends are stuff that require religion and therefor gods. The elves don't believe in that so, that solves that.
The language thing is from the Earthsea series. But done better.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 07:20 am (UTC)A good author could probably pull off a "truth language" if that language was only used for spell casting. I'm not sure anyone could pull it off as an actual language without running into insurmountable problems.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 07:32 am (UTC)Dwarven language = Hebrew.
Or so I've been told anyway.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 07:35 am (UTC)Never mind what cultural effect a complete lack of fiction would have. And never mind the whole "always hating Durza" thing and all the questions and issues that raises.
There are so many issues with that kind of language (say Person A says that Person B is an idiot, because A really believes that. Does it make B an idiot for real? If not, where's the truth in A's statement? In the eyes of the beholder?) and it seems that PaoPao doesn't even realize it.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 07:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 10:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-19 12:03 am (UTC)Gee, a Sapphire Rose... where've I heard that before...
Also, WHY would dwarves carve it in the shape of a _rose_? They've shown no sign of being much for gardening, and Tronjheim is inside a mountain... not the best environment for plants.
Urge to smack Paolini rising...
no subject
Date: 2008-07-19 03:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-19 03:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-19 04:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-20 10:05 am (UTC)(don't hit me don't hit me don't hit me)
no subject
Date: 2008-07-21 01:39 am (UTC)Do you think he remembers all the names he creates? They are all so random.