The Biggest Plot-Hole in Inheritance, Really, its like...really big...

This plot hole if examined undermines Inheritance all together. This makes everything else meaningless. And I mean everything...Galby, Riders, Brom, Bloodoath, Eragon I, everything!
Ready for it? Drum Role pease!
Dum-Dum-Dum-Dum

If elves are nature loving/worshiping vegeterian-pacifists who hate violence, love animals and get sad when plants die, why would an Elf "Hunt down a dragon, as he would a stag and kill* it"? (Eragon pg.49-50) Right before this the book stated that elves viewed dragons as "mere animals."

First of all why would a Elf hunt a dragon down?(They're nature loving/worshiping vegeterian-pacifists who hate violence, love animals and get sad when plants die, for christ's sake!) the book tries to explain off by saying that they saw them as animals but this still doesnt make since....they're nature loving/worshiping vegeterian-pacifists who hate violence, love animals and get sad when plants die. Please highlight mentally the "love animals" part.

And for those of you who don't know what I'm talking about or where I'm going with this, I'll elaborate: This event sparked the conflict that lead to Dragon-Elf war which led to almost genocide of the elves, which led to Eragon I and him raising a dragon which led to the end of the war, which led to BloodOath Pact ( Or w/e its called), which led to Riders which led to, Galby and his insanity, which led to Forsworn which led to the killing of all dragon riders which led to Galby's Empire which led to Brom Making/fathering Varden and Eragon, which led to Ergon joining the varden, which led to Eragon v. Galby.

So using simple logic, this event that doesn't even make sense leads to everything else.

... All I have to say is What the ****. I bet CP is manically laughing that none of his fans notice this.



-----Side Notes-----

Yes I do realize that my elaboration-paragraph was just one long sentence.

About the Deer/Stag: Its an animal why would they hunt one. For meat? For its Hide? No. They're vegeterians/vegans.

This post was actually supposed to be only a paragraph long...it got big w/o me even noticing.

*Book actually uses killed here. I cut the "ed" 'cuz it wouldn't have made sense grammatically.

------

-Nokiro Isilrá

This post has been edited by Nokiro on May 10 2009, 02:43 AM

I think it was mentioned that the elves weren't always the hippy vegans we see today. Somehow forming a psychic bond with a species of enormous carnivores made them like that. And that just raises further questions...

Yeah, this is true. After they bonded with dragons, they became hippies. Their old personalities were just magicked away.

Which is a shame, since there are a ton of cooler explanations for why they changed that don't involve arbitrary magic. This is just another example of convience worldbuilding on Paolini's part.

This post has been edited by TheLurker on May 10 2009, 07:15 PM

Supreme convenience. They started off as being hunters who inexplicably went after dragons and sparked a war which, once finished, resulted in them bonding with the giant, carnivorous lizards and becoming supreconscious hippie-vegans with a 'respect' for all things in nature.

Because soul-bonding with massive, carnivorous beasts will make you go vegan instantly.

Apparently.

*Feels embarrassed for not realizing this*

*Feels embarrassed for not realizing this*

Maybe they got attacked so bad that it mentally shocked all the elves into going hippies. That the war caused too much terror since they never had to worry about getting their asses kicked hard.

Even though they won the war, I think. I'm sure it must've been tense enough to cause a lot of damage on the elves part. Or perhaps elves+dragons=hippie-vegans.

Huh. Who knew.

*Feels embarrassed for not realizing this*

Don't feel bad. It still doesn't make much sense.

As other users have pointed out, how does bonding with dragons turn an entire race into veggie hippies? It should be noted that CP states that the dragons became more 'civilized' from their association from the elves, gaining elven traits...shouldn't the elves recieve some more dragon-like characteristics?

It'll be funny if, as a result of the bonding magical whoozit, the elves start picking on the dwarves too. Oh wait, they already do that, because they were already uptight racists to begin with anyway, hence the exclusion of dwarves, urgals and to some extent, humans from joining their elite lizard-riding club. And even after the humans joined, we are given endless paragraphs about how the elves resented it greatly.

I, for one, still don't get why bonding to large carnivorous animals would make you turn all vegan and hippie. It defies both logic and belief...

This post has been edited by Elves_rulez on May 20 2009, 06:06 AM

On the veganism to the carnivore bonds:
Perhaps it's a yin-yang thing?

You mean like the explanation that since the dragons ate so much meat, to balance nature the elves had to refrain from meat?

I dunno, did Paolini ever give a clear explanation for all of the changes in the elf-dragon bondage? Emphasis on the word "clear".

None, nada, zilch. We were left wondering what the heck happened in their magical thingamajig that made such drastic changes to both elves and dragons, but mostly the elves.

This is the most plausible explanation for such a change. We all got told in our Science classes at least once that Nature itself loves balance and equilibrium. Too bad Paolini never learned that. It would actually fill this gaping plot-hole quite nicely.

This post has been edited by Elves_rulez on May 21 2009, 02:08 AM

Not to mention put the Elves as more Buddhist in practices than atheist. Or even Wiccan, for that matter. You know, the old Wiccan morality statement, 'If it harms none, do what you will'? Probably pretty anti-abortion, now that I think about it, but all the same, the Elves would have a better all-around theology implied with their culture than with Arya's atheist rants. That actually brings me to another plothole/solution.

Arya's seen some pretty terrible things, had bad things happen to her, et cetera. Without some form of divine retribution to believe in, how's she not even more emo and mopey? Strikes me that she's either in denial about her own beliefs and Elven culture in general seems to do some ancestor-worship enough to keep them from full-on atheism, or she personally has different views than her culture, which were cultivated after she left her homeland and begun seeing atrocities committed for goals that claimed to be pure. Meaning she personally is atheist and all the other elves do some sort of Buddhism/ancestor worship that we haven't gotten to see much of.

This should probably be in the Arya thread, but I feel that this has too much to do with the Elven culture in general, since that's the topic of this thread.

I did kinda wonder about that. I remember a telling of the history, something about a few elves wanted prestige of being a Dragon Killer POed the dragons, and after a while the horror of the war the elves started to be shocked by the horror they started going hippie, and when the "bond" was formed the elves got the long life and superior reflexes and connection with magic, and the dragon could then communicate with actual language and were tamer. Wasn't there another old elf, Rhunon (I think), that said she remembered when the elves weren't a bunch of hippies and liked it better that way? I dunno its been a while since I read it. Though I do enjoy the elf being racist idea, seems to suit them. It appears they aren't so perfect after all. Its all so confuzzling.

I don't think this is likely, considering that Oromis is also atheist, and he and Arya both present their beliefs as though they are the uniform belief of the elf population. Since both he and Arya are at different points repsonsible for teaching Eragon the ways of the elves, if there actually is some sort of ancestor-worship tradition that most elves practice but he and Arya don't let on, they have been horribly remiss in their duties to him. It would be like an Egyptian Buddist describing Buddism as the main belief system in his country.

It would work, if it were actually presented as a bad thing. But the only time the elves' prejudices are presented as bad is when Vanir is a jerk to Eragon because he's human. (And Vanir only accepts Eragon after he becomes elfified in the Deus ex Machina ceremony.) Any other example of anti-human (or even anti-dwarf) feeling is presented as entirely justified on the elves part, even when a rational, third-person perspective would seem to show that it is not.

Aye to that. Plus, if the rest of Paolini's rather abysmal foreplanning is anything to go by, the whole 'racism' things was probably an accident anyway. He wanted the elves to be perfect, consequently saw them as such, and decided, with the help of a massive sugar high (okay, that's probably not fair) that this justified racism on their part. Reminds me of someone...

Right now I'm beginning to wonder if you're all just being deliberately thickheaded, just so you all can have more nails to crucify Paolini, or if you genuinely don't seem to understand.

There is a more logical explanation than "yin-yang" or "Paolini's just did it because he iz dumb, lulz", and that is, at first they thought dragons were mere animals and they hunted them, than the dragons turned out to be just as intelligent and aware as they were (they started a war with them for God's sake). Ever since than, the Elves have been vegetarian (there is a difference between vegan's and vegetarians, and from what I remember the elves were vegetarians) because if the dragons had feelings and thoughts, who's to say that the other animals they were hunting don't have the same feelings and thoughts.

It's still a pretty sketchy explanation, but it's an explanation, and it does make sense.

You're all beginning to get a bit too personal, and you're all toeing the line between criticizing Inheritence, and attacking Paolini on a personal level.

I'm pretty sure that even Paolini's poorly-carried-out version of atheism is less ridiculous than Wicca.

Please clarify, because it seems like you're trying to say that without belief in some god or an afterlife, life has no hope.

Eh. It's plausible, but that really sounds like the explaination the elves should have given when the issue of their vegetarianism first came up. I tell you, if it's the explaination Paolini ultimatley offers, it's really going to come across as a tacked-on afterthought.

I think he's just saying that it really makes more sense for someone like Arya, who's been through the likes of torture and rape (not that it seems to bother her much) to turn to divinity for consolation, especially in such an overtly spiritual world as this one.

First of all, it makes little sense for anyone in a pseudo-medevil world to be an atheist. I think we can all agree on that. However, there are plenty of people who have experienced trauma and have not been forced to turn to religion to deal with it. Saying that someone with such strongly atheistic beleifs as Arya should become religious because she was traumatized seems just as tacked on and clumsy as making elves vegetarian because they bonded with giant carnivorous lizards.

Any explanation Paolini gives will seem tacked on, because the elves gave no explanation as to why bonding with dragons made them vegetarians.

Woah, woah , woah, woah, woah! Arya has not been through rape. At least not confirmed to be, and thus far according to her (and by extension Paolini, given how he writes her to be his preachy mouthpiece) She used her "magic" to avoid that catastrophe.

And as for torture. One would think that she would be prepared for that eventuality anyway as her courier job had that danger...Although why the Elves felt they needed to send their royalty back and forth on such a task is beyond me.

This post has been edited by The Black Manga on Sep 6 2009, 05:56 PM

I'll have to give Paolini at least some credit for this one. He does make it pretty clear that Arya takes the mission against Izlandi's wishes, and that Izlandi's disapproval is because she is the heir.

Why Arya doesn't consider that she has a duty to her people to keep herself alive and able to lead if something should happen to her mother...I don't know...but that's more an issue of her particularly as a character, and not of the elves as a society.

Please clarify, because it seems like you're trying to say that without belief in some god or an afterlife, life has no hope.

Pardon for the difficult wording. Anyways, yeah, that's a really simplified version of my own personal beliefs, but I meant to say specifically that someone who didn't believe in divine retribution to either cause vengeance on her captors or bring her fortue in the future- which, as I see it, partially happened when Eragon slew the shade, (yes, yes, a pun with wordplay,) she would be either in a depressive state further than what she is, since she was tortured and beaten and her lover of several years was murdered before her eyes, and- Sorry Blackmanga, but I'm of the firm belief that Arya's been in denial about facts during her captivation, and I personally believe she was raped. Anyways, I'm not saying she should become religious simply because she's been dealt terrible cards in her life, what I'm saying is, it seems that she's extremely different from her kinsmen because of it, and it seems that she lost some sort of faith.

As for the counterargument of Oramis seeing the same views; He's been through quite a bit of trauma himself. On the whole, the rest of the elves have been sheltered for some time, and only the eldest of them have any sort of differing beliefs than what we've been shown.

And yes, I made my wording pretty complicated. A thousand apologies.

On a side note, quite female am I, young n00 peeps.

Your point reminds me of the core concept of logotherapy, in which the most powerful drive for a person is to find meaning in life. Basically, it's easier to accept and survive suffering when one has something to live for; it doesn't have to be spiritual or faith-based, however. For example, a widower overwhelmed by his grief suddenly finds it easier to bear once his therapist points out that, by outliving his wife, he's saved her from experiencing the pain of losing your spouse. His grief has meaning now and so he's able to live with it.

To get back to the point, with this in mind, I can see how Arya wouldn't need faith to move past her trauma. As Starry-eyed pointed out, she believed in the Varden's cause enough to cross her mother's wishes, so I'd say she definitely has something to live for: overthrowing Galbatorix. That's her meaning in life now.

It'd be interesting to see what happens to her after Galbatorix is dethroned and Alagaesia gets its happy ending, whether the sudden loss of her life goal shakes her up or what. I doubt it, considering Paolini can't depict PTSD worth a damn.

Could it be arguable that her motive wasn't to overthrow Galbatorix, but to be with her lover without scrutiny from her mother? Although, it WOULD cause her to want Galby to go down if she wanted vengeance... And now I should find another way to get back onto the topic. Am I safe to say that the core topic has revolved around Arya in the first place?

That would be interesting. Perhaps mother didn't approve of Arya's choice in boyfriends. It would be nice to see Arya doing something completely selfish and unrelated to any 'greater good.' All we see of Arya is some great sacrificing saint who can do no wrong. Giving her a more selfish motive for becoming the elf envoy would make her more real.

Well that's saying something different. It's alright to say you personally believe she was raped. Viewing the quote, it just came across like you were stating that in a matter of fact manner. However I have to ask, will you still think she was raped when the series is done and no admittance or further evidence has come to light?

Personally I think that Arya being raped doesn't match Paolini's profile as an author. He is Eragon, and Arya is made for Eragon, therefore himself. Writing Arya getting raped, by that logic, would be as unnatural to him as writing his real life girlfriend getting that treatment from another man.

However that's Paolini's Arya. You get into the question of whether his view of Arya superseeds yours, which is a whole nother topic, so I'll just say that Arya needing religion would make her terribly imperfect to Paolini, he would begin to see her as an irrational idiot, and lose interest in writing her.

As for the wider topic, I'm just surprised that depowered mortal Elves were even capable of hurting hill sized super dragons, much less hunting them.

Well say what you like, but you can't have the Elves bond with carnivorous dragons and have them then veg it up. If you do , then it reduces the dragons from being a legitimate race to just being free superpowers that attatch themselves to the Elves to make them more awesome. It really hurts suspension of disbelief, and I don't know what real difference it would have made to the Elves to make them more carnivourous as a race and not less. It would only require Paolini to stop using his Elves as paragons of what he views as the perferct ideal all the time.

This post has been edited by The Black Manga on Sep 15 2009, 01:17 PM

I think the elves turned vegetarian out of respect. The dragons seemed to kill for only the food they need, and since elves do not require meat to survive, they probably had no need to kill animals to obtain their nutrition. However dragons love to kill enemies, something the elves have no problem with. I think it says that Arya's mind had just enough power to give the would-be rapists ED. Mcan be caught sleeping, and killed that way. Remember Saphira could be hurt by way of her wings? They could be sliced, and hurt her ability to fly. Maybe the elves did the same thing, take the flying out of it, maybe the dragon would hurt or kill itself trying to land,a nd they could still fire arrows while harrasing it with lances.

Actually, the plot hole still works but in a different view

Why would any living creature try to hun a 100ton near unnestopable flying killing machine? Yes, it was a curb, but still...

According to CP, the elves where living for some time in Alagäesia before the hunt, meaning they must have seeing the habits of the dragons beforehand and at least one occasion should have arised to excemplife what happens when their curbs are in danger.

I mean, for a incredible inteligent (average inteligent in fact) thinking humanoid it should be just common sense. I mean, even the urgals knew that attacking the dragons or hunting them like a dear (because, as you know, to the averagre user a dragon and a dear a very similar, like only 2 vocals away) was just plain stupid. They haved relationships with the darwfs for non-existent vegan god sake, the almost prefered diet for a dragon since 3000 B.G, they most have learned something.

I would like to give an analogy but I dont think there has ever being a case where that level of idiocy has happened in human history... against animals, I mean.

And this is the enligthened people.

Actually, if this is the normal IQ of the residents of Eragon Verse, it would explains so many things.

It mus have been in the water . After all, It just logic that the bonding of a egomaniac, super magical killing machine gets to the creation of a peaceful loving, vegan society of ubermench who was destroyed by 13 underlings and a ragtag of soldiers in a year flat.

I wonder if the elves will end up being at all humbled for having their superior obnoxious sanctimonious attitudes? Since PaoPao is the author and he obviously so dearly loves the elves, probably not, but they are so over-the-top I have to wonder if it's not setting them up for something later on.