kippurbird | (no subject)

He's totally retconning the Star Wars thing. If he had always planned for Brom to be his dad, then there would have been no point whatsoever in revealing that Morzan was his father before. Plus because of the obvious way he just inserted that chapter--it had no business in the larger plot of the story (even if that's already in tatters) and seems obviously forced in and random.

As for plot... well, let's see. What's happened so far? I believe Roran and Eragon both killed the Ra'zac or whatever the hell they're called. Then Roran fought some battles and Eragon hung out with the dwarves.

So the plot is... uh... Roran and Eragon doing... stuff. Stuff that doesn't even have their own plots, just events Happening, and none of them seem to serve the larger purpose of preparation for their inevitable Epic Battle against Galby.

"You see that octopus too, right? With the hat? the hat will be mine"

I believe most of the third book to be retconning and backpedaling in order to fend off his critics, because there was so much he wanted to try to say "Nah uh, and here's why!". And came off as trying way to hard, to late, to be original.

Brisingr has no plot, not one worth mentioning. This is why I don't think of the last book as the "Fourth Book", to me it will always be "Book Three, Part Two". And that's what it is, Paolini only increased the book count to four because he said "there was simply too much to condense into a final third novel, so I expanded the Cycle."

First one: almost certainly a retcon, though some people claimed they found enough foreshadowing in books one and two to call that particular plot twist ahead of time, so you never know. The Morzan thing was probably just there for angst purposes if that's the case.

Second one: the book seems to be more concerned with exploring "his" world and developing his "characters", and wrapping up various subplots. The main plot arc, meanwhile, is presumeably off having a few beers.

The main plot arc, meanwhile, is presumeably off having a few beers.

Considering it took all of Eldest off as well, here's hoping it's in the cab on the way home by now.

Unfortunately, no. Halfway through Eldest it decided to drive home drunk, and crashed into a telephone pole.

It shall be missed.

But only by those with bad aim.

I'm not sure, actually. Usually I'd say that it's just a retcon, but Paolini seems pretty damn keen on the idea of "If your parents are bad eggs, you must be bad! It's in the blood. It's that little set of double helixes that look like a scowling face."

Which, if it's true, possibly means that he always intended Brom to turn out to be the real dad - or, perhaps more likely, intended Morzan to be and then had a crisis because Morzan is bad, and Eragon isn't bad, but if Morzan is bad then Eragon must be bad. What to do?! Oh, Brom, Brom's good, he can be the father instead.

On another note: Paolini, Jeremy Kyle called. He has words for you.

I dunno, because Eragon is JUST SO SPESHUL that he WOULD be the one to break the whole evil parents = evil kids rule.

Alas a llama's right about the whole inheriting goodness or evilness thing. Brom was always Eragon's father. The series is titled Inheritance because Murtagh and Eragon have inherited their fathers' positions, Murtagh being Galby's right hand man and Eragon essentially leading the Varden. It's also why Saphira is named after Brom's dragon. It's also the reason Brom was hanging out in a small village instead of doing something useful for all those years. The whole Morzan thing was just to give Eragon something else to angst about at the most inopportune time, and to make the "big reveal" so much more "emotional". Epic fail.

That being said, it's probably the only thing in Brisingr that Paolini planned from the beginning. Which is why the rest of the book has no plot. The rest of Brisingr is about trying to force Orik, Eragon, Narasuda, and Roran to do what they're supposed to. Because, in the previous volumes, they haven't really shown much in the way of leadership skills. But they're supposed to be leaders... So in Brisingr, Paolini's trying to prove to the reader that his characters are Awesome. So Awesome that people will do whatever they say. *headdesk*

Put it that way and it does make sense that he planned it. But I agree that the book has no plot. Or if it does, it's cleverly hidden because nothing comes to mind.

Yeah, good points.

That.... actually makes sense. Which scares me because it's actually giving Paolini some credit.

Except I have to take that shiny credit away from him because the Morzan red herring was stupid and pointless. I say cut out the middle man and be done with it--it's stupid to fiddle faddle around with the whole "OMG WHO'S HIS DAD" thing.

And also it's a pretty messed up theme; even though Eragon and Murtagh both didn't have real father-son relationships with their fathers, they still end up walking in their footsteps. A load of antiquated predestination BS that doesn't have much business with a modern audience who should know better, especially when it's all so literal. But honestly, it might just be there for the Rule of Cool--a sort of tacky parallelism mixed with a more refined version of Sue parents, where Sue characters have Sue children that are cloned versions of themselves. Probably more the former than the latter, but still, I still think Paolini's more of a fanboy than a philosopher.

Frankly, I think the issue is still down to Paolini's homeschooling. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are plenty of homeschoolers that turn out intelligent, well educated, and well adjusted.

I just don't think Paolini's really one of them.

Considering that the character from the first book that most people gave any credit to seems to be the one he based on his sister... yeah, I just don't think he gets out much.

I've met really sheltered kids before; none of them have that skewed of a world view. Having some awkward social skills =/= having wacked out, unsupported theories philosophies on the nature of man. Even if you don't get out and meet people that often, you still have the internet, the news and all forms of media to learn how people work. I honestly don't think Paolini believes that your destiny = your parent's destiny, I just think he doesn't realize that having a story revolving around that concept reflects back onto his own views.

It's sort of how like I don't believe Stephenie Meyer would actually like being stalked and manhandled by a sexist asshole; she just has no idea what the hell she's writing, or she hand-waves it because it's her own personal fantasy world and she believes it doesn't reflect back onto her and the real world.

I always saw the inheritance angle as dealing with Eragon having the same name as the first dragonrider, gaining the last "free" dragon as so many years, the whole "you inherited this destiny from the moment Saphira choose you" thing. Which is why everything comes so annoyingly easy to Eragon, he doesn't need to earn it, simply "inherit" it.

Agreed. I think he inherited both Brom's and the first Eragon's destinies. Perhaps something from his mother, too, like his "terrific personality." Which might explain his murderous tendencies if a better author was writing it. Essentially, Eragon's too Special to just inherit one destiny. He inherited the destiny and abilities of every "hero" in Eragon-land.

I don't actually think he planned it from the beginning, and I do think it was a retcon, but I don't think it makes it any less Star Wars that the line was changed to "Luke, I am your brother."

Oh, no, not at all. Retcons still don't take away the words.

I'd put money on it being a retcon. You don't have to be a good writer to know that you don't go with an identical Big Reveal at the end of consecutive books, unless you're walking something back, all the while whistling a little nothing-to-see-here-folks tune. I can't think of another story in any media that does that identical reveal. It just doesn't make any sense from a story construction standpoint. If it were planned from the beginning it seems unlikely he'd have gone with the Morzan reveal first. Law of diminishing returns and all that.

As to WHY the retcon... I'm less convinced that it was a takethat. It might have been that but it's also possible that Paolini simply changed his mind, as with the atheism and vegetarianism filibusters. It's possible he just thought it would cooler, upon further reflection.

Regarding the plot: the book seems to think it is about Eragon fulfilling promises and debts that he incurred throughout the first two of the series. If you remove all the infodumps and flabby scenes of people sitting about in comfortable locales chatting amiably and that bizarre surprise party chapter in the middle, this might indeed have made a plot with a few more rewrites.

Maybe... or the plot could be Eragon and Roran Doing Things and Being Cool.

My initial thought was retcon. It seemed like the sort of thing he would do, especially to escape the Star Wars critics.

Now, I'm not so sure. There have been some good points made about Brom, such as why he was in the village, why he took an interest in Eragon in particular, and so on. I may be giving Paolini too much credit by suggesting any of that was intentional.

Thing is though, retcon or planned, the thing has the same stink of stupid that the Murtaugh reveal had. "I'll make it ORJNIL by swapping Han and Leia around... so the princess isn't his sister, she's his lover! And the cocky rogue is actually his brother! And Darth Vader isn't really his father, it's Obi Wan!"

In Book One, before the Morzan reveal (dammit, I keep thinking Morbazon, and he is WAY too cool a character to be confused for Morzan. Little Morbazon would eat Morzan's soul for breakfast), the 'who's your daddy' thing could have gone either way.

.... yeah, I'm leaning towards the Morzan reveal being a dead and rotted red herring.

Question one: Probably, but I don't think it matters. What matters is that it was a bad writing move, because it added nothing and took away something that made Eragon marginally interesting or could have become a plot or character arc point.

Question two: Ergy runs around a lot and does flashy things.

Definitely a retcon that managed to fill in plotholes (like Brom sitting around in Carvahall etc). I can't remember how Murtagh knew Eragon was his brother, anyhow.

The second question? It's a plot about the Dragonballs, which Eragon needs for his wish. DRAGONBALL Z RIP OFF PLOT PEWPEW.

True! I mean it's not like Eragon dropped his mother's name casually in conversation, did he? If Eragon was Teh Sekreit Kid, how would his own brother know?

Personally, I always thought Brom was Eragon's father. (I also thought Doe Person from Harry Potter was a mercenary opportunist bastard, so it could be my theory engine is broken. You decide.)