Timewaster's Guide Archive
Local Authors => Brandon Sanderson => Topic started by: Parker on September 07, 2005, 11:39:03 PM
-
Hi all--saw this review on Amazon, and I'm still scratching my head. I really didn't see the connection between Eddings and EUOL. Now, maybe if EUOL goes on to write 24 versions of Elantris, doing a simple "find and replace" on the characters and place names, then I could see it, but even then . . . Here's the review.
Shows promise, but badly flawed, September 4, 2005
Reviewer: William Sugarman "nprfan1" (Great Neck, NY USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
Brandon Sanderson has read some of David Eddings' series; the similarities are far too obvious to be ignored. But he doesn't have Eddings' style or flair - in fact, he's downright dull in spots.
And his first novel has one far more serious flaw - he doesn't explain the history or the culture behind his book. For example, it took me close to a hundred pages to find out what a Seon was, even though they're mentioned in the first few pages of the story.
Sanderson is definitely a good writer, but he needs more lessons in his craft.
Anyway--Just wondered what the rest of you thought on this. Too bad we can't write up reviews of reviewers.
-
I think that if it really took the reviewer 100 pages to figure out what a Seon was that's more a reflection of the reviewer's intelligence than the quality of the book.
-
That's just good worldbuilding and writing, IMO--he shouldn't be explaining every little bit about the sociocultural history, he should be showing it. So it takes you a little while to figure out what a Seon is (shouldn't take 100 pages...)--but you're immersed in the world.
-
Well, if you haven't reviewed yet, you should be able to submit your own review contradicting it.
Yeah. Eddings? Sure, Brandon's read Eddings. Who hasn't? (Well, I hadn't ever read him until I did the books on tape a couple months ago.) But Elantris is so far from Eddings that it's not even...okay, it is funny.
Elantris doesn't have any prophecies! Eddings is all about prophecies. Elantris doesn't have any wizards...or coming-of-ageness...or long journeys...or horses...
-
I agree with Ookla. Eddings hasn't really written anything like Elantris that I know of. The review might have been referring to similarities in writing style but I think it was simply someone who considers all fatasy novels to be the same. Anyways the review compaing Elantris to Eddings' works is obviously not very credible.
-
The idea that Elantris is ripped off of Eddings just seems dumb to me. I can understand where the reviewer got their opinion from, the fact that there's lots of politics and sceming around with governments in each. But it's just stupid to assume the only way he could have thought of it was if he ripped it all off Eddings, if EUOL hadn't ever read the Belgariad, it'd still be the same book.
-
In the belegriad, governments are generally embodied by one guy - usually the King. Scheming is very limited. In the sparhawk books it's more but the scheming results in the characters going on quests, rather than the scheming being an end of itself that it is in Elantris.
-
In the Belgariad...
The main character was a farmboy, who was fifteen, with a white/silver scar on his palm, who went on a long journey with an old man who at first appeared to be a simple bard...
Ummm...no wait, that was in Eragon.
-
I'm trying to see a connection there.
-
I think her point is that there's not a whole lot original about Eddings. Though I wouldn't know--I've never read him.
-
Eragon (Paolini) is a rip off of Eddings. Much more so than Elantris. All those things I mentioned occur in each book, but the Belgariad was written 25 years before Eragon.
-
And written better :o
-
Eragon is certainly less confusing than Eddings' Belgariad, which I thought had way too many people and countries to keep track of. But Eragon is definitely YA, it's less sophisticated than Eddings. Which makes sense, considering how it was written by a kid.
-
Uh, beregiad wasn't complicated at all. It's very YA. If keeping track of 20 very archetypical and pronounced characters who all represent their nation is hard then I guess i'm a genius. The nations are also extremely simple - 'viking place', 'clever guys with peat and pikes', 'evil dudes who are stupid', 'evil dudes who are nasty'.
-
I'm gonna have to agree with Entropy here. I thoroughly enjoyed the Belgariad and the Mallorean by Eddings. But, IMO, it certainly could not be described as overly complicated.
-
It took me until the beginning of book 5 to get them all straight. That's wayyyy too long. Sure they were all different and distinct, but it was still too many different and distinct countries/people.
But then, being a tech writer, I'm the kind of person who likes to oversimplify. Too many superfluous details gets me all mixed up.
-
*shakes head* They were very simple to keep track of, to me. And i'm someone who has trouble following how his own local government works. (It's friggin byzantine I tell you - the wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_government_in_the_United_Kingdom) nearly killed me). I have much more trouble when there is a few, very similar in appearance (for webcomics) or outlook/name (for novels) characters. I usually have a hell of a time when a webcomic first starts keeping the female cast members apart - for some reason they tend to be drawn very similar.
-
When i first read the review i couldn't understand why he didn't know what a Seon was. The way EUOL wrote the book you have to think of what it looks like or what it is until i tell you what it is. Than if you put 2 and 2 together i think they are on the cover.