Eragon by Christopher Paolini

School has started again so my reading time has been drastically diminished.  I am also going to try to set this post up a bit differently than the last one.  I did more griping than I meant to but I don't think that will happen as much with this book.

I wanted to reread Eragon and the other two books in this series because I have a feeling that the 4th and final book will be coming out soonish.  Nothing has been announced or posted on the release as far as I know but it will be nice to pick up this story line again.

This book has all the elements I love:  elves, dragons, magic, combat, good, evil.  :)  Plus the story is soo interesting and Paolini adds some new elements, like the werecats, which takes the book to another level of entertaining.  There are many parts in the book that are clearly inspired by some of the great fantasy series but Paolini does create his own little world and story without cutting and pasting from the classics.  I first read this story many years ago and have since read the second and third books of the series, so many of my original comments no longer apply.  I will not try to act like I have not read the book; I would indubitably fail miserably so why waste the words?

Summary:  Set in Alagaesia the main human population is part of the Empire ruled by the last rider, Galbatorix.  Elves, dwarves, and dragons have not been seen for generations; essentially since Galbatorix turned on the other Riders and hunted them down.

Places to know:  The Spine, Carvahall, Therinsford, Yazuac, Daret, Teirm, Dras-Leona, Helgrind, Gil'ead, Hadarac Desert, Beor mountains, Farthen Dur, Ellesmera.

People to know:  Eragon, Saphira, Uncle Garrow, Roran, Katrina, Horst, Elain, Sloan and other villagers, Brom (the story teller), Ra'zac, Morzan (Forsworn), Selena, Vrael, Galbatorix, Eragon (namesake), Snowfire, Cadoc, Jeod, Angela, Solembaum, Murtagh, Durza, Arya, Varden (in general), Surda and King Orrin, Orik, The Twins (hate them), Ajihad, Nasuada, Hrothgar, Mourning Sage, Urgals, and Kull.

Okay so I have put this off for far too long.  To be fair, I did write a whole post but it was just too long.  I am still playing around with what I want to remember about the books and what needs to be put in here. 

The story starts with Durza attacking Arya and 2 other elves, trying to steal back the dragon egg (we find out it was originally stolen from Galbatorix in the hopes that new riders would appear to fight him).  Arya sends the egg to Brom but it only makes it to the Spine and lands in front of Eragon.  So Eragon takes it back home and tries to sell it (not knowing what it was of course).  No one will buy it and eventually it hatches and a blue dragon emerges.  While the dragon grows (they grow fast so they can survive so she is quite large 4-5 months down the road) Eragon starts to ask Brom questions about dragons.  I was always curious as to why no one seemed suspicious of Brom.  He was the town storyteller but he seemed to know stories as ancient as the legends and intimate details about the Riders.  As it had been 100 years since the fall of the Riders, there is a disconnect with how Brom knew so much and that no one really thought to question him.  Anyway, Eragon and his dragon (named Saphira) are discovered and have to run for it.  Brom tags along and offers to train Eragon on how to fight and take care of Saphira.  Surprise, surprise, Brom is familiar with dragons (and seems to have a special attachment to the name Saphira).  I already started to guess that must be connected with the Riders previously and now I am sure of it and wonder if he was once a Rider himself.  So on their journey they fight many battles but the one in Yazuac stands out the most.  It is their first battle and they are taken sort of by surprise.  Brom gets distracted and Eragon becomes cornered by an Urgal.  Eragon attacks with his bow and arrow and for some strange reason, utters the word "Brisingr" as it flies.  The arrow begins to flame and the urgal explodes, deader than a doorknob.  He had heard it once from Brom and it turned out to be magic.  Hmmm who senses a tie to future books??  I do!  So remember Brisingr, it is likely important.  Also rather fun to say.  Not to mention that it is pretty cool that Eragon was able to do that in such a situation?!  But I suppose that is how all the rockstars figure it out.  Anyway the make it to Teirm (they are chasing the Ra'Zac) and meet up with Jeod, Angela, and Solembaum.  I love Solembaum!  He has the exact personality of a cat and is a cat that can see into the future, which makes him all the more snarky and uppity.  Jeod is an old friend of Brom's and it is probably good to note that he now possesses a copy of Domia ar Wyrda or Dominance of Fate.  A book about the history of Alagaesia and very hard to come by.  Interestingly it was written while the Empire was intact so one wonders just how accurate it is, but Brom does think highly of it so it must be pretty good.  We do not get to read any of it in this book but maybe we will see more of it later?

Solembaum is important (got sidetracked) because he deigns to give Eragon these words of advice:  "Listen closely and I will tell you two things.  When the time comes and you need a weapon, look under the roots of the Menoa tree.  Then, when all seems lost and your power is insufficient, go to the rock of Kuthian and speak your name to open the Vault of Souls."  I have always wanted to have this page marked so I can go back to it.  Another teaser for future books.  Angela also reads his fortune but meh, it is sort of standard except that he is in charge of his own destiny.  Which makes sense as a free Rider; he gets to choose who he wants to assist or collaborate with.  He does not have to choose the Varden (rebels).  Okay so they find the Ra'Zac are in Dras Leona after some clever logic on Eragon's part and head out.  Brom is killed by the Ra'Zac but Eragon is saved by Murtagh.  He is an interesting and troubled person.  I like how similar he seems to be to Eragon.  There is definitely some connection there.  They rescue Arya from Durza and run to the Varden crossing a desert, slavers, and an army of Kull (really, REALLY big urgals) and finally find some safety.  Well sort of; out of the frying pan and into the fire.  Turns out Murtagh is the son of Morzan last of the Forsworn (he was THE Rider that turned on the other Riders and helped Galbatorix destroy them), so the Varden aren't really pleased to see him.  Eragon and Saphira kick some Twin butt, recuperate, and bless a child, while Murtagh sits comfortably in confinement.  They make some new friends (Orik, Hrothgar, Arya - once she is recovered, Nasuada, and Ajihad).  All is well until the Kull attack.  Oh right, the Varden are hiding with the dwarves under the Beor mountains in a city called Farthen Dur.  These tunnels are basically impossible to find by anyone not a dwarf, so they are lucky to get 14 hours notice before the Kull start streaming in.  The shade (Durza) is with them, and there is an epic battle in which the Twins disappear (they are sort of shady regardless) and leave Eragon unprotected after calling him into the middle of the city (I smell a rat or two).  Durza then breaks through the ground and attacks Eragon.  He gets a good slash across the back (funny how it matches Murtagh's scar from his father) but he manages to kill Durza when Saphira and Arya break Isidar Mithrim (Star Sapphire).  Eragon is lost because the spirits in Durza invade him when released (so interesting and reminiscent of Howl's in a way) but he is saved by the Mourning Sage.  I think that is weird since this Mourning Sage could enter his mind and shield him but Saphira could not.  Saphira is a dragon and so stronger and more magical than any other creature on the planet (except other dragons) so who could this be?  Has to be an elf since they are using magic but so weird.  We will likely find out more in the next book.  One other thing to mention that is a bit strange:  in the beginning of the book I swear I read that 3 shades had been killed but later there is a reference to only 2 having been killed in which the slayers survived.  I am guessing this means that one of the shades' deaths ended with the death of its slayer as well but perhaps there is just a mistake in the book?  Or the author got a bit ahead of himself in the beginning and Eragon is the third shade slayer that survives?  Who knows, I am too tired to go back and find it.

Going back to the discussion, the similarities between Murtagh and Eragon are sort of crazy and Murtagh is a few years older than Eragon so they could be family.  All we know about Eragon is that his mother's name is Selena and she was Garrow's sister.  She came to Carvahall to give birth and name him after the first Rider (yes the very first Rider - the one that helped forge the treaty between elves and dragons) and then she left and went back to where ever she was before.  Murtagh only ever talks about his father, Morzan, so we don't know who his mother is. 

Overall a very good book.  Lots of points for discussion and contemplation about where the series is headed.  I love the bond between Saphira and Eragon and I like that they are both very adept at everything.  I also like how Paolini portrays all the animals, so that they all have personalities and are intelligent.  There are some issues with flow and that seems in large part due to problems with pacing.  I could tell where it got off and caused some of the chapters to end a little weirdly but overall not a bad way to start of a career as an author.

Little Women by Louisa May Alcott

First post!  And it had to be Little Women...  This is not the first book I have ever read, nor is it the genre I normally read.  It was recommended by a friend as a book everyone should read at some point in their life.  After finishing the book I have to agree with her but considering my age (early twenties) and era that we find ourselves in, I should have read this book years ago.
The story was decent and the characters unique and interesting but that is pretty much all I liked about it.  This was extremely hard to read simply because I did not want to read the next sentence.  I am generally a fast reader and it still took me over 2 weeks to finish this story.  The main characters are four sisters:  Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy.  They start out between the ages of 12 and 16 and as the book progresses you follow them as they grow up.  The story is set late nineteenth century in America in a lower class American family.  How the book was set up is probably what bothered me the most: each chapter has a definite moral to it that one or all of the sisters must learn/figure out before the chapter comes to a close.  Now I have no problem with morals and life lessons in books.  This is how I learned a lot of what I know about living in this world.  The problem with this book is that the morals are SO OBVIOUS.  There is no hint at what you might be learning, it is just stated for you.  Now that is taking all the fun out of it.  What is the point of the lesson if you don't get a chance to think about it and figure it out for yourself?  After stating each lesson, one or all of the girls goes and cries to their mother about how "selfish" or "naughty" or "proud", etc, etc, they have been, beg to be forgiven, pray for forgiveness, and then off they go so proud that they learned that delightful little lesson.  I'm sorry, but that is not really how life works. While annoying, this could have been forgiven if the morals were not so obviously stated.  If I had been reading this when I was younger, I might have liked it better but at my current age, I like to have to think a bit to figure out what the authors are trying to convey. 
Another problem I had with the book is why Beth had to die.  I simply do not understand why.  The book seemed to chalk it up to allowing Jo's character to grow, but I think that is silly.  Jo would have gotten there eventually, especially with Professor Bhaer's help, and as he liked her before Beth died there is no point in her death.  Poor Beth, she was the nicest and most naturally content of the sisters and yet Alcott killed her off - just because she didn't have dreams of adventures or marriage when she was 13.  Not all people do.  Some people are late bloomers.  Now maybe I am missing something here.  I understood the reason she got sick, but to have her die?  Just a bit uncalled for.  It was touching to add the poetry from Jo and see how much a sister is loved, but I do not think it was necessary.  Anyone who read the book would know how much they all cared about each other.  This led to Amy's daughter, also called Beth, so of course she is sickly as well.  Now that is adding insult to injury in my mind.  So not only did Beth have to die but the poor child named after her is also likely to die at an early age.  Shouldn't Beth have had a healthy baby named after her to live the life she was denied?  It also seemed like the author added it to make Amy's life seem less charmed, to sort of even out the sisters at the end.  Another cruel and unnecessary stab, in my mind at least.  Some people do seem to "walk in the light".  Why should the author curse poor little Beth, just to teach Amy a lesson?  Although it could be argued that Daisy will be the new Beth and she is healthy and happy, but I really think she will just be the new Meg.  Regardless, I think Beth had the worst deal in the book and was treated most cruelly by the author. 
Jo is another character who does not have the easiest time.  She is most at odds with fitting into this male dominated society and is constantly getting into trouble or looked down on for her boyish qualities.  She is an independent little girl who is not a fan of frills.  I rather liked her.  She does have a sharp tongue and is properly reprimanded when she is not asked to go abroad by their Aunt Carol.  She starts to mellow out after that, but then the author kills Beth, and she becomes more mellow and more "womanly" and she sits and knits or sews all day or cleans the house, and [insert stereotypical woman's job].  Needless to say I am very glad we have entered the 21st century and women are no longer expected to do that all day.  Jo has grand ideas about adventure and fun and loves to write.  She makes good money from her stories, some more smutty than others.  She is more of a late bloomer and learns to love later in life but ends up with a wonderful husband who suits her perfectly and two little boys of her own, along with a whole school of "lads" that she can care for.  Now if that is not a heroine I do not know what is.  The author does not seem to think so and this quote pretty much sums up why I do not like this book "Now, if she [Jo] had been the heroine of a moral storybook, she ought at this period of her life to have become quite saintly, renounced the world, and gone about doing good in a mortified bonnet, with tracts in her pocket.  But, you see, Jo wasn't a heroine, she was only a struggling human girl like hundreds of others, and she just acted out her nature, being sad, cross, listless, or energetic, as the mood suggested."  Okay, maybe it is because I do not like the moral storybook model but what is so heroic of becoming saintly or renouncing the world???  Nothing as far as I can see.  And why can't a heroine be a struggling human girl?  So what if there are hundreds of them?  Each is unique and I think they can all be a heroine of a story.  In fact, they tend to be the more interesting heroes and heroines as they have had a hard time growing up or overcoming some difficulty and it gives them character and humanity. At least Jo does get part of her Castle in the Sky that she envisioned as a little girl.  I don't see why she should not get to go abroad and at least visit.  Professor Bhaer is likely to want to go visit the motherland at some point and surely Jo would get to go with him, right?  I will just think that she does eventually get some of the adventures she planned, just at an older age than she had imagined and the author simply forgot to mention it.  While I am at it, I should also imagine that little Beth gets better and becomes quite the healthy child, living the life that sister Beth did not get to have.
So to summarize that soapbox of a blogpost, I did not like Little Women and will not be reading it again.  I might recommend it but only in very special circumstances and with considerable disclaimers.  The characters were decent and the storyline was okay (although a little archaic - being forgiven for that since it was set during that time period).  The delivery was terrible due to the "moral storybook" template.  Neither the characters nor the plot could make up for this.