merlewhitefire (

merlewhitefire) wrote in

deleterius,
@ 2007-04-16 22:28:00

Current location:	Ohioville
Current mood:	Apologetic

Repentance
I would like to apologize. I had no idea that the only reason one could have an unpopular opinion was to deliberately cause trouble, rather than to provoke debate on the point raised.

(Post a new comment, Unfold all)

	melisus 2007-04-16 09:52 pm (local) (link)
	Did I miss something here? When did this community become about Eragon? I thought it was HP and LotR exclusive. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 09:55 pm (local) (link)
	If we're allowed to make entire posts about how much it sucks, I don't see why we can't make entire posts about how it doesn't. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	melisus 2007-04-16 09:59 pm (local) (link)
	Wow. Wank much? (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:00 pm (local) (link)
	Oh, look, the first ad hominem attack at me just for liking this guy! Or... wait. No. No it isn't. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	melisus 2007-04-16 10:02 pm (local) (link)
	Riiiiiight... I'm attacking you instead of trying to defend the view point of "Eragon sucks!" when I have not read the book or seen the movie and therefore cannot form or hold any valid opinion on the author or the series. Good on you! (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:05 pm (local) (link)
	Dude, go to the front page and look down, there's an entire post by some guy who's already decided Eragon sucks and yet is looking for somebody to tell him so anyway. An unpopular opinion isn't inherently worse. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	melisus 2007-04-16 10:07 pm (local) (link)
	And that has an impact on my opinion of this post how? (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:10 pm (local) (link)
	Sorry. Thought for a second you were somebody making a rational decision of worth rather than simply latching onto the first post and making meaningless attacks about my personal habits. Totally my bad. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	melisus 2007-04-16 10:13 pm (local) (link)
	So, by your logic, your post which is much longer, wankier, and just as much off topic as the previous post asking for someone to point them in the direction of pro-Eragon writings is somehow superior to the previous one? Oh go on. Keep trying to out-snark me. The logic you're using just is not helping you. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:15 pm (local) (link)
	I also put mine in an LJ-cut to save space, first of all. Second of all, at least I'm using logic, rather than falling back on what appears to be a derivative of WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH SO STFU. All I'm doing is presenting a counterpoint, nothing more. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

melisus
2007-04-16 10:19 pm (local) (link)

Oh Christ... how about instead of ripping into everyone in the community (most of which had squat to say on Eragon) you go back and read the post you're so rabidly against.

They were looking for links to sporks, critiques, etc. of Eragon because - oh noes! - they don't like it. Literature's a matter of taste so there's no sense in getting all upset that someone doesn't like a book you do. You didn't write it so why the need to rabidly defend it?

But I'll play your game. Please, tell me where "Growling" ripped off... hmmm... oh... let's say... Remus Lupin (since he's mentioned in the title of the previous post).

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

merlewhitefire
2007-04-16 10:21 pm (local) (link)

Please, his name is a pun on the genus and species of Wolf.

Give me a harder one than that.

You didn't write it so why the need to rabidly defend it?

First of all, as soon as all of his fans became "Morons" it became my business.

Second of all, I've already pointed out that all I'm doing is snarking and complaining, just like them. I just haven't made any jokes about setting them on fire yet, unlike they've made.

Third of all... uh... it's called having ANOTHER opinion.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

melisus
2007-04-16 10:26 pm (local) (link)

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

merlewhitefire
2007-04-16 10:32 pm (local) (link)

Dude... the genus of the wolf is "canis" not "remus". And I hardly consider that ripping off something else. Etymology is not ripping off. Lupin may share his first name with one of the mythical founders of Rome but he shares nothing in common with that character. Sorry, the point does not go to you.

Well, no, but then Canis isn't a real first name and Remus is.

I'm not going to give props to J. K. Rowling to using actual names, even if they are unpopular.

Secondly, does every little general term thrown around the internet truly offend you personally? If so then what exactly are you doing on here? Seriously?

Well, it's interesting to note that I'm "so bloody offended" by an ad hominem insult that I'm... ah... presenting a logical case as to why it's invalid.

Thirdly, having an opinion is great and all but find the proper forum to express it in. A sporking community dedicated to the sporking (and hence mockey) of Rowling and Tolkien is not the place to be posting rants about why some other fantasy is superior to others.

I've already addressed the hypocrisy of these "Off-Topic1!!" statements. That other post was up for far longer than mine, and not a single "ZOMG OT!1!!!!oneeleventy!" has been directed at it.

But by all means, keep trolling away.

Yes, because clearly defending literature is far more trollish than insulting it.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

melisus
2007-04-16 10:36 pm (local) (link)

I didn't ask you to give her props. I asked you to prove she ripped off the works of others. *shrug* But yes, your presentation of logical points... unfortunately they seem to drown in a mire of bitter and angry language.

But seriously. The other post was looking for Eragon sporkings. Seeing as how this is a sporking community whose two topics are both part of the fantasy genre I'd say that's a hell of a lot more on topic than your rant of a post.

And way to call me a troll seeing as how I haven't insulted Eragon at all!

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:39 pm (local) (link)
	And way to call me a troll seeing as how I haven't insulted Eragon at all! Erm... well, then since that was clearly a snipe at people who did insult Eragon, I guess it's possible that maybe, just maybe, it didn't apply to you. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	melisus 2007-04-16 10:42 pm (local) (link)
	Funny how it found its way into a comment to me then. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	lightpoint 2007-04-16 10:10 pm (local) (link)
	The guy who made that post was very off-topic to begin with. This just isn't what this comm is FOR. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	jadeleopard 2007-04-16 09:56 pm (local) (link)
	Right. So it's only okay to spork things you don't like. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 09:57 pm (local) (link)
	Bzuh? No, no, I'm pretty sure right there at the end I just vowed to spork one of my favorite series... (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	jadeleopard 2007-04-16 10:01 pm (local) (link)
	eyeroll Wow, did you see that blur over your head? That was my point. You totally missed it. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:03 pm (local) (link)
	No, seriously, I don't have an issue with somebody who wants to spork Eragon. I only thought it might do them some good to recieve the same treatment. What I took issue with was... you know... stuff in the other 90% of my entire friggin post. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	jadeleopard 2007-04-16 10:12 pm (local) (link)
	Right, so no one is allowed to think that the book/movie sucked, because other fantasy/sci-fi books/movies also used similar plots/devices? (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:13 pm (local) (link)
	No, nobody is allowed to say that he and anybody who like them are (Insert bland ad hominem attack here) because of it. And incidentally, I'm not doing anything they're not doing. It's just on a singular basis where the subjects of the criticism can actually hear me. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	jadeleopard 2007-04-16 10:20 pm (local) (link)
	But 90% of you rant had nothing to do with 'ad hominem' attacks. Saying a book sucked =/= to insulting an author. Saying a book is boring/bland/cliche/etc =/= to insulting an author. I'm not saying that ad hominem attacks are okay, only that saying a book sucks, is. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:23 pm (local) (link)
	Well, the ad-hominem attacks are usually related to the fact that he and anybody who doesn't despise him are "morons." The above statements are usually WHY we're "morons" (Reply to this)(Parent)

	im_is_a_zombie 2007-04-16 09:59 pm (local) (link)
	Sniffles Why the drama from both sides? Isn't this a place to kick back and have some fun? =0( (Reply to this)

	land_over_water 2007-04-16 10:00 pm (local) (link)
	yawns and waits for Fandom_Wank to pick up on this Internal strife is yummy. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	lightpoint 2007-04-16 10:11 pm (local) (link)
	smirks in Snape-like fashion It is also amusing. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	jinxeh13 2007-04-16 10:02 pm (local) (link)
	I'm kind of with you there. I read the books (though never saw the movie) and although I wasn't that impressed with them, Christopher Paolini did manage to write something that many people enjoyed...and isn't that kind of the point, in the end? (Reply to this)

lightpoint
2007-04-16 10:08 pm (local) (link)

First of all, there are only so many plots in existance anyway.

...

I think that we're going to have to agree to disagree on that one.

Also, this comm is not even dimly associated with Eragon. It is also the wrong place to critique 'Ms. Growling', coherently or otherwise. We go after HP and LotR Sues, and do not host rants. While you are entitled to your own fandom, you ought to publish such commentary in a Eragon comm (which considers ranting acceptable behavior) where it belongs.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:11 pm (local) (link)
	And once again, I notice nobody makes snarky-ass comments about how OT Eragon is when it's aimed at insulting Paolini rather than defending him. Seriously. It's only like four or five posts below mine. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	lightpoint 2007-04-16 10:17 pm (local) (link)
	Yes, but the previous post was sporking-related, which is what this comm does. I'm afraid to say that posts like your are the reason this community moderates membership. Sorry about the snark, but you need to can the capslock. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:24 pm (local) (link)
	I did. Notice that after the first line, I didn't all-caps a single word, in the post or in any of the responses, save for the occasional emphasis that would probably be better done with italics. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	lightpoint 2007-04-16 10:26 pm (local) (link)
	Which we appreciate. However, you might notice that this does nothing to alter the tone of your post. It was still a faux pas. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	quizzicalsphinx 2007-04-16 10:26 pm (local) (link)
	Pst. Darlin'. That's earth logic. We're way beyond the Klingon Empire now. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	lightpoint 2007-04-16 10:28 pm (local) (link)
	Ghod, I know. You've just got to ask if it's worth the effort to try and speak the language... (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:34 pm (local) (link)
	Ah, yes, let us all continue to quip and snipe at the "ZOMGTROLLISHNESS" of the one off-topic post everybody doesn't agree with. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	quizzicalsphinx 2007-04-16 10:35 pm (local) (link)
	GOD, you're cute. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	lightpoint 2007-04-16 10:39 pm (local) (link)
	...Do you not know what a troll is, or something? But the best part about all this is that I've been looking for the logic in the responses and it just isn't there. See? Troll! Also, people in this comm have posted about sporkings for other fandoms in the past. You, however, should check the user info. Just a friendly, neighborhood suggestion. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

merlewhitefire
2007-04-16 10:44 pm (local) (link)

Wait, wait, wait, I'm confused, why is it off-topic if you're responding to something in the community, and not if you're out to insult something completely and totally unrelated to said community?

Incidentally, I did read the user info, and have done several sporkings using the information therein, I didn't join the comm just to piss you all off. This was a single response to another post that was just as off-topic as this one

And if what you say is true, it wasn't even the first.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	lightpoint 2007-04-16 10:49 pm (local) (link)
	See User Info Rules #8 and 13. Sorry, but it was rather clearly a Vendetta Post not to mention OT as hell. Also, that previous post was, as has been already stated, way less OT than your post. And we could beat this point until we are both dead. It does not change the fact of the matter. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	mage_of_time 2007-04-16 10:21 pm (local) (link)
	Erm, I know that other people have posted things attacking Eragon in here, and I know that you want to defend your canon, but just because other people have posted such doesn't mean you should. Last time I checked, this was a Rowling/Tolkien community, not Paolini. slinks back into hiding (Reply to this)

	ebontane 2007-04-16 10:23 pm (local) (link)
	Is it just me, or is there an awful lot of Eragon stuff in this comm lately? is confused (Reply to this)(Thread)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:25 pm (local) (link)
	Is it just me, or did nobody make a single comment on how much Eragon-hate there was in the community until we saw some Eragon-acceptance (Not even Eragon-love, mind you, just Eragon-not-hate) (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	ebontane 2007-04-16 10:35 pm (local) (link)
	Oh, no, it's not that. Just that I'm relatively new here, and thought this place was about HP and LOTR only. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	mage_of_time 2007-04-16 10:35 pm (local) (link)
	It is. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	ebontane 2007-04-16 10:38 pm (local) (link)
	Thanks. Less confused now. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	melisus 2007-04-16 10:38 pm (local) (link)
	It is. merlewhitefire just missed that memo. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	mage_of_time 2007-04-16 10:35 pm (local) (link)
	Erm, it's just that your post kind of pushed it over the edge. Maybe you and your Eragon ~~friends~~ ~~enemies~~ people could go somewhere that... isn't a Harry Potter/LotR community? Because frankly, not many of us care. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	im_is_a_zombie 2007-04-16 10:35 pm (local) (link)
	Meh, isn't this a tad over the top? The person posted their eragon question and bashed whomever in their post. Can't we just keep in there instead of starting a whole new post, and confusing the fuck out of most of the other members? Rant on the person in their post instead of spreading drama to the whole community. =0/ (Reply to this)(Thread)

merlewhitefire
2007-04-16 10:38 pm (local) (link)

This was my attempt to make a rational and cohesive, if somewhat irritable, case for the defense of Eragon, and I hadn't realized that it was a faux-pas to make off-topic posts, since the only time it's ever penalized is when your opinion is the unpopular one.

Incidentally, the reason I posted it in the community instead of elsewhere is because it was a response to something in this community.

Which nobody criticized, but plenty of people agreed with.

Funny, how that works.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

im_is_a_zombie
2007-04-16 10:43 pm (local) (link)

The other one wasn't commented on as OMG!OFFTOPIC because it wasn't filled with teh rage!

I'm understanding it's in response to a post in the community...but couldn't you have kept it to the comments of that post? I mean, unless you wanted the attention that you've already received.

I hate drama, hate hate hate it and I hate getting involved in it...but this is so insanely stupid.

You're not getting ragged on because your opinion is unpopular; you're getting ragged on for being causing drama over nada.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	im_is_a_zombie 2007-04-16 10:44 pm (local) (link)
	*for causing drama over nada...cross out the being. This is why I shouldn't type at night x.o (Reply to this)(Parent)

	jadeleopard 2007-04-16 10:46 pm (local) (link)
	You're just not getting the 'sporking = OT' aspect of this are you? This is a sporking community. Talking about sporking is generally considered on-topic even when the fandoms aren't considered on-topic. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	im_is_a_zombie 2007-04-16 10:49 pm (local) (link)
	-Logix does not compute- -Error Error- dies (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	jadeleopard 2007-04-16 10:54 pm (local) (link)
	Did you see his reply to me? I give up. This guy is beyond hope. (Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

	im_is_a_zombie 2007-04-16 10:56 pm (local) (link)
	It's pretty much his reply to everyone. shakes head I could maybe understand it if there was, I dunno, a good reason for it. It just seems like attempt to stir up the community...which it has x.o (Reply to this)(Parent)

	merlewhitefire 2007-04-16 10:50 pm (local) (link)
	Actually, for somebody who's read the community info, I find it funny how you missed them pointing to the other community for generic sporkings. This is specifically Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings. Generic sporking goes in the marySues comm. And I know that because, surprise, the community info told me. (Reply to this)(Parent)

kippurbird
2007-04-16 10:44 pm (local) (link)

I think the biggest problem with Paolini is that you can tell where he gets his characters and plots from. His world is completely patchworked and you can see the seams.

Second of all, and I say this as a Star Wars fan- George Lucas ripped off his plots too. Because, again, there are only so many plots in existance.

According to Campbell there are only seven basic plots. However while every story can be be basically broken down into one of these seven plots, there are smaller plots. The way the bigger plot is dressed. You can have a Hero's Quest, for example, but there are hundreds of different ways that you can tell the story. How the quest can be satisfied. And that's where the originality comes in.

The problem with Paolini is that he uses cliches. I've been able to predict what's going to be happening in his books. I can say with fair certainty who is going to live and who is going to die. Did you know that Sirius Black was going to die in OotP? Did you know that Boromir was going to die in Fellowship? Of course not, because Tolkien and Rowling were able to tell their stories in an original manner.

He uses archetypes, yes, but that's all they are. They aren't characters. They're cardboard. You can tell who is the Hero, who is the love interest, who is, who the bad guys are. It's predictable.

And that is what is wrong with Eragon and Eldest.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

merlewhitefire
2007-04-16 10:48 pm (local) (link)

Right, you definitely can't tell who the hero is in a series named after the protagonist.

And the guy who killed his parents? Couldn't possibly be the villain, could he?

As for the love interest- well, no, because he changes girlfriends about fifteen times. She's managed to successfully capture the essence of a teen novel, but with owls and broomsticks.

Incidentally, the deaths of Sirius and Dumbleore weren't anywhere near as well done as the death of Boromir. Boromir died as a sort of redemption for falling to the ring. Sirius and Dumbledore died because Rowling wanted to shock readers.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

kippurbird
2007-04-16 11:04 pm (local) (link)

What about Snape. Is he a bad guy or a good guy? Can you tell? What about Draco?

And yes, that's the point. Paolini has a designated Love Interest. You know who his Designated Love Interest is. Where's the fun with wondering who he's going to end up with if you already know? Incidentally, Harry only had one real girlfriend. Ginny. Cho he had a crush on, and they went on one date before it all fell apart.

Actually, both Sirius and Dumbledore's deaths had a purpose and it wasn't for shock value. It was a shock because you didn't think that they would die. You couldn't tell that they would die. It was a surprise for Harry and the readers. Surprise is not a shock. And their deaths served a purpose. But it's hard to tell what the purpose is. You have to study it. Examine it.

You don't have to do that with Paolini.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

My two cents...

malganis
2007-04-16 10:49 pm (local) (link)

First up, I agree with everyone else that this is massive OT, and probably beyond the bounds of what Tviokh thinks this comm should be...but then, since I've likewise posted massively OT stuff in the past, I'm not going to throw stones. It's Tviokh's comm, she can delete if she wants to.

Although I'm no Eragon/Paolini fan, I can see the value of not making personal attacks on the author. I belong to a prominent anti-Eragon comm, and while I enjoy picking the books apart with others, because I do believe that they're shoddily written, have paper-thin characters, and ARE massively derivative, and not in a good way, from other, better authors' work, I don't hate the author. He may or may not have said some things that are arrogant, but hey, so does everyone else. I personally dislike seeing personal attacks on him, which is why I haven't hung around the anti-Eragon forum as much as I thought I might.

Beyond that, I do see some wheat kernels in the pile of chaff that is the Inheritance trilogy. I like Durza (thought he could have been cool, but instead he became the Darth Maul of Eragon, a badass that got killed off too quickly), and I like Gharzvogg, the good Urgal. I like Nasuada, and I like Arya and her ice-queen mother. I think Paolini has some interesting ideas in the second book, I think that if he had more talent and more experience as an author, he might be able to make them work very well, but as it is, they're just sort of sitting there. If you want me to detail what they are, reply and I'll try to answer as best I can.

I think Paolini's main flaw is that he just doesn't have enough experience as a writer under his belt. Or maybe that's experience at life. Probably both. Eragon reads like it was written by a young person without much life or writing experience. That's fine. I know that the stuff I wrote when I was a teenager was pretentious, artsy crap that was trying to tackle stuff I didn't have the experience or guidance to handle. But the difference is that I destroyed my old fanfic and started getting outside criticism. Paolini got his stuff published.

I don't think Eragon fans are idiots, because I'm half-one myself. And I like a lot of things that other people think are crap, like Terry Brooks and B-grade fantasy/horror films.

And hell, if this OT post can survive the mod's wrath, that means I might have a chance of getting Deleterians' opinions on my Eragon fics, after all! ;)

If you want to post something critical of Rowling, go right ahead. I happen to think she's loads better at both writing AND characterization than Paolini, but her overuse of adverbs does drive me up a wall. Editor, editor, where is thy red pen?!

(Reply to this)

	_youngblood_ 2007-04-16 10:51 pm (local) (link)
	I find it poor logic to try and defend someone's writing by saying, "Well, everybody else in the genre is doing it." (Reply to this)

karma_kalisutah
2007-04-16 11:01 pm (local) (link)

See, I get where you're coming from. Not about Eragon not being thoroughly awful (I think it is), but rather about getting bashed for making a pro-Paolini post after the anti-Paolini poster didn't recieve the same treatment.

However, this is a classic case of two wrongs not making a right. If you had a problem with omfgsriusly's post, you should have brought it to a moderator and asked that it be removed for OT-ness and wank-spawning. Now that you've gone and done the exact same thing � only worse, because you actually had the intent to stir up trouble � you look like the villain, and no one's going to take you seriously in your (technically correct) accusations.

I also understand that the alternative course of action that I suggested might have been frustrating because it would have prevented you from airing your opinions. All I can say to that is that no one is really going to be swayed by this post, because it does come off as trollish, and no one listens to trolls. Because of the way you decided to bring up your points, no one is going to seriously consider them. With that in mind, was it really worth kicking up all this dust over?

That said, I feel for you. This is exactly the sort of stupid internet shit that I used to pull all the time, and I know how thoroughly aggravating it can be to be at the center of it, even if you asked for it. I hope that you grow out of it like I did, mostly for your sake.

(Reply to this)

(Post a new comment, Unfold all)

Mini Sitemap:

melyanna