Worst books

[paleonaps]

I just lost all respect for you.

[kjhsscioly]

Harry Potter is an incredibly weak protagonist who cannot transcend the death of his parents, whom he has no real memories of, he can scarcely use any spell past expelliarmus and isn't willing to SAVE everyone by using a more powerful spell, though he undoubtedly knows more. Enough said?

On the other hand, Eragon can actually dispatch his enemies, and the people he saves actually know he is doing so, contrary to the general muggle oblivion.

But that is just an opinion, and there is really no rational reason as to why certain books are better than others, so arguing is pointless. I do know that at my school, it would be very harmful to mention anything negative about HP, because there are always fans around... listening... ready to pounce...

[Kokonilly]

Harry Potter is an incredibly weak protagonist who cannot transcend the death of his parents, whom he has no real memories of, he can scarcely use any spell past expelliarmus and isn't willing to SAVE everyone by using a more powerful spell, though he undoubtedly knows more. Enough said?

On the other hand, Eragon can actually dispatch his enemies, and the people he saves actually know he is doing so, contrary to the general muggle oblivion.

But that is just an opinion, and there is really no rational reason as to why certain books are better than others, so arguing is pointless. I do know that at my school, it would be very harmful to mention anything negative about HP, because there are always fans around... listening... ready to pounce...

Haha. I do admit that Harry is a bit of a weenie (see A Very Potter Musical for a wonderful affectionate parody), but Eragon is just - no. No. The problem with him is that he's too good. It's not realistic for someone to learn magic in a week, or swordfighting in three days. He's a Gary Sue, and it gets irritating. I like Harry Potter because it seems real. Everybody can die, whether they're good or bad, and it's really - what's the word? - gritty (I hate that word).

[kjhsscioly]

yeah, but Eragon doesn't learn swordfighting in a day - he is still pretty bad at the end of the first book, hence his injury. I have to agree it progresses slightly faster than reality, but time is also difficult to judge. There are places where a month is covered in a chapter, and others where and hour takes the same space. I feel like Harry just has too many flaws, he is just not the heroic protagonist type, but rather someone who was in the right place at the right time (or wrong place, depending on how you look at it), I mean, he gets overshadowed by his sidekicks way too much. ...cough... Hermione...cough

[paleonaps]

Harry is willing to use Unforgivable Curses in the last book, and I agree with Kokonilly on something- the character can't be perfect. That doesn't mean that he can't have good qualities, but he has to have flaws- Harry is very prone to hold grudges and Dumbledore is much more Machiavellian than he seems. Ron has an inferiority complex, and Snape is a very angry, bitter person. From what other people have said, all of the characters in Eragon are wholly good or evil, without a gray area. I never read it, so I won't criticize it, but I will defend Harry. With my life.

[kjhsscioly]

I would have to disagree. All the characters are not good vs. evil, they all have their flaws. For Eragon, it is his preoccupation with Arya, and murtagh is very conflicted because he was good, and is forced to be evil. Even Galbatorix puts out an argument for his "change of ways". Imperfection of character is in no way indicative of a good book, there are old classics with "perfect" heroes.

[paleonaps]

I will admit that I based my statement on RandomPerson, so take it up with him.

[James Clift]

Read Ender's Game.
It's my favorite book ever. It's amazing.

I agree--wouldn't that be a totally epic thing to have your own armies and stuff and get to fight in zero gravity

DUDE!!!
I this book! VERY excellently written book. MUST READ!

[Kokonilly]

Okay, perfection argument refuted (see: Eragon's curse). I think another problem with Eragon is that it is a complete ripoff of Star Wars in the first 2 books, and then in Brisinger Paolini seems to realize his mistake and do a one-eighty.

SPOILERS: This is the summary of the beginning part of Eragon/Star Wars.
A boy (Luke Skywalker/Eragon) living with his uncle (Owen/Garrow) after his parents mysteriously die/vanish (death and going off to be a bad guy - I'm aware this changes with Brisinger, but bear with me) goes to do something ordinary (buy a droid/out hunting) but discovers something fantastic ("Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi"/egg). One thing leads to another and the boy finds an old man (Obi-Wan/Brom) who somehow knows a lot about the fantastic thing (Jedi/Dragon Rider). A bit later, while the boy is out learning about the fantastic world he has just found out about (Jedi/dragons), his uncle is killed and his house is burned down. With nowhere else to go, he leaves town with the old man to avoid hurting others and to save himself.
And it goes on and on. I think I've proven my point, but as an avid fan of Harry Potter, Star Wars, and Lord of the Rings, Eragon seems like a mishmash of the three.

NB: I know that most fantasy novels have this sort of plot, but I think in Eragon it's so overblown (Morzan Eragon's father? Really? YES I know it changes, but see my comment earlier about Brisinger).

[kjhsscioly]

Actually, it was supposedly more a ripoff of lord of the rings, but that aside, Eragon does have it's unique aspects. While HP was not the first magic related book, eragon was the precursor to a multitude of dragon themed novels.