LOTR vs. Other Fantasy

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Cailín

I have never read Eragon, but from what I've heard it's a huge rip-off of both Star Wars and Lord of the Rings - but what else can we expect from such a young author? I personally rather read something less well written with an interesting, new idea than a book which might have been a good read if it had not been written before.

- Cailín

I don't hate you but I couldn't disagree with you more on this. Basically as far as ideas go "there is nothing new under the sun" - you can reduce all stories to a combination of certain elements. Everything has been done before. Shakespeare was not original in his stories, Tolkien was not original in his stories but they are far more read than Kalevala and Holinshed. The writing is everything - how they structure the plot, how they handle character, dialogue and so forth. Their use of language. So I would rather read something derivative (and what isn't?) and well written than something allegedly original and poorly written. I have got to the stage in life where I won't waste any of it reading stuff that is badly written. Good writing gives more pleasure each time you read it not less.

Take Austen - her stories are fairly similar and are about the simplest in the world - as Maupassant says "with love there is one story - always the same". But her books are so beautifully written I could happily have them as my desert island choice and although (like probably every englishwoman of my age) very good memories of the BBC adaptation of Pride and Prejudice, I will go to the new film to see HOW they have treated it.

I am not putting Paolini in Austen's league ar near it ... but I think he is a good writer and will be interested to see how he matures. And I think it might be fairer to actually read the book rather than criticise it on hearsay as a general principle.