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."
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.
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
( ... )
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.
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.
Comments 24
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.
Reply
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."
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Considering it took all of Eldest off as well, here's hoping it's in the cab on the way home by now.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
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.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
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.
Reply
Leave a comment