The Paolini Explained

Immediately upon the release of Eragon, two camps formed in the fantasy reading community, mostly separated by age. One side, the younger, loved the character Eragon, his dragon Saphira, and the Hero's Journey-type adventure they were on; the other side, the older, found Eragon to be filled with overused farm boy cliches, dragons similar to that found in Pern, and oddly enough plot point after plot point taken from Star Wars: A New Hope. The two sides have been at odds ever since, arguing over the importance or lack thereof of The Inheritance Cycle.

But as seen in this deeply divisional political season, the truth really exists in the middle.

It is true if one reads Eragon with a close eye the plot point similarities to Star Wars: A New Hope are undeniable. Those plot points George Lucas laid out in 1977 can be found in Paolini's book, mirroring one another. Was this a conscious effort by the 15 year old writer? Or was it happenstance? I like to think the latter as most people at that age are impressionable and absorb so much around them. Does that let him off the hook? No, I don't think it it does. But no matter which it is, the comparison is there nevertheless, and many adult readers balk at it.

So why do younger people read this series in the millions?

Although they have a voracious appetite for reading at that age, younger readers lack an extensive reading history. I am not belittling that group; they merely haven't read enough to compare what has come before. They witness a fun and magical journey by a character they identify with. And is there something wrong with that? No, not at all. The coming of age story has its strongest impact during the formative early teenage years and Paolini found a way to reach them, embrace them, and give them something to enjoy.

So who is right? Who is wrong? Neither, says I.

Here's the rub, and why I sit right in the middle of this argument:

Despite the adult resentment I see online surrounding Paolini, I find it fascinating many of those older readers have lost touch with their own reading roots during those formative years—forgotten what it is like to be that age. I would wager most adult readers at some point identified with that same story and probably think back on it with nostalgia—for me it is The Sword of Shannara by Terry Brooks. At one point they had a Paolini-type "coming of age" story of their own the loved and probably still love, one that mimicked other stories that had come before it, the foundation upon which their whole reading history is built.

Does that make these people hypocritical? A bit. Does it make them wrong? I don't think so. Does it make them amnesiac? Perhaps. What do you think?

Could the development of the two very different sides be something else?

I was talking to a New York Times bestselling writer a few weeks ago who shall remain nameless. He has been placed in a similar situation as Paolini, with a rabid readership angry at him for his work while another side of his readership fully embraces him. The two sides are polar opposites. This writer said he had a hard time reconciling the angst surrounding his work and the only way he could rationalize it was by saying to me, "Shawn, sometimes people like to tear down the king. It is human nature that makes it so."

Then I heard Steven Erikson read a passage concerning an emperor in his newest work, Toll the Hounds:

Is that going on here with Paolini? Is it jealousy that sees the adult group wanting to tear down Paolini merely because he has been scarily successful?

I'm not sure about that either, but I do think there is a kernal of truth hidden in there about human nature and that need that surfaces in each of us to be hypercritical of those who succeed where we have not.

So, what does it all mean? I don't know. But I do think it is wise to have a discussion about this:

In spite of these adult accusations mingling among the adoration of millions of young readers, what does Christopher Paolini bring to the breadth of the genre?

At the very least, I think David Anthony Durham hit the proverbial nail on its head in his article and it is simple for all fantasy readers—adult and young alike—to celebrate what Paolini has done:

Christopher Paolini has brought a whole new readership into the fantasy genre. Many of these young fans will continue reading in the genre we all love so much, visiting new worlds, new characters, new stories written by other authors. Older writers will have a new generation reading their work; new writers will emerge breathing continual new life into the genre. All of that could not happen without a YA writer like Christopher Paolini coming along every 10 years or so.

If there is one thing I hope Christopher is proud of, it's this:

He has encouraged millions of young people to put down the game consoles, crack open a book, and read!

That means more to me than any argument out there.