I love David Eddings

[Stonehelm]

Whilst I despise Eddings as one of the least talented authors being published today, regardless of genre, I must admit I'd never have really called him racist ('stupid', certainly, 'ignorant' possilbly).

I cant despise Eddings, even though I would agree that he is putting out some of the worst novels I have ever seen right now. He may never have been truly original or the stories may never have been that deep....but when I first read those first books of his I loved the guy. Granted I was young, but those books were easy to read and they were fun. I read those books fast the first time through. This is why it breaks my heart that he sucks so bad now. I may never have liked him if I was older when I first read him... I guess I am trying to say that he wasnt always one of the least talented authors out there. I guess it gets back to the whole nostalgia thing.

Oh, and I never thought that he was racist in his writing, perhaps a bit anti-semitic, but not really racist.

[williamjm]

Oh, and I never thought that he was racist in his writing, perhaps a bit anti-semitic, but not really racist.

Why anti-semitic?

[Derfel Cadarn]

I wouldn't say anti-semitic. The Ulgos are his equivelent of the Jews/Hebrews and they are generally portrayed in a positive light.

I think the Murgos resemble the Mongolians, the pictures of Mongolian warriors tend to have the eyes conveying a cruelness and pride. David Gemmel did something similar with his Nadir. The Melcenes also have slanted eyes and they are portrayed as being very urbane and civilised.

[HimOfTwoFaces]

The story of both the Belgariad and the Mallorean is better for young adults

If you define "young adults" as twelve and under, I'd agree, based on what people here have posted. Keep in mind, though, that I was somewhere between 13 and 15 when I read them, and thought them cheesy, simplistic, and poorly written even then. (13-15 year olds usually qualify as "young adults," unless I'm mistaken.)

and I remember enjoying the series immensely mainly because I knew what to expect from different people based on their nationality.

Yet the belief that you can predict a stranger's intelligence, talent, personality, or role in the universe based on his perceived race or ethnicity is at the heart of racism.

Besides, who's to say that people in a medieval type society didn't conform to certain racial traits. When you haven't seen the world and a certain way of being is all you know................................................................

In all cultures exists variation between its people. It's in human nature, though, to perceive your own culture, race, etc. as being more diverse than others.

My problem with Eddings is that he attributes "racial" characteristics to racial blood. He depicts culture as almost a side effect of a people's innate tendencies.

Whilst I despise Eddings as one of the least talented authors being published today, regardless of genre, I must admit I'd never have really called him racist ('stupid', certainly, 'ignorant' possilbly). But then I did once read L. Ron Hubbard's Mission Earth dekology and managed not to kill myself in disgust. If you want to see an author being not just outrageously racist, but also homophobic, sexist, elitist and relentlessly sick, then look no further (shudder).

I still feel soiled.

I never claimed that Eddings was actively promoting some white supremacy agenda or anything. This whole side discussion started when I asked if nobody else found the series "a bit racist." A few people asked me to state my reasons, and I did. My intention wasn't to compare him to Hitler or anybody like that. However, I do find some of the ideas in his books "a bit racist," though likely unintentionally so. You all know that by now, though.

[The Wolf Maid]

I loved David Eddings, read them when I was younger, and wasn't quite as well read in fantasy. He was the first one I've ever...read that was fantasy.

But he was such a prude! And I agree with the racist thing. And Polgara is too meddling (there were times I just wanted to strangle her). Silk and Belgarath were the only ones I really liked. Ahahahaha.

[felice]

I enjoyed the Belgariad and Elenium, and to a lesser extent the Mallorean, when I was a kid. More recently, a friend recommended Althalus to me. I don't know if the quality of the writing has gone down hill, or if it's just a matter of my standards getting higher in the intervening years, but I couldn't believe how appallingly bad it was. I can't think of any book I've been less impressed by, of the top of my head.

[danyboy]

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet but.. Did no one else find his books to be incredibly anti woman? I read B/M and the first few sparhawk books before giving up in disgust.

Every female character in those books was a sex crazed maniac, and the only thoughts male characters had on the subject was when they were led by the nose by female characters. There's not one positive female role model in the books, the rest are all idiots.

Of course there are obvious exceptions, polgara etc, but she was just a man without a penis, thinking in exactly the same way as all the male characters.

I read his "instructions on how to write a fantasy novel" and it was spelt out there, hero needs male companions, warriors and friends, they all need women, for no real purpose other than to flesh out the male characters and have their kids at the end of the books.

I went on a crazy feminist all men are bastards phase for months after reading those books, and nearly gave up on fantasy, it wasn't til discovering wot and its female characters (annoying but capable of intelligent thought) that I recovered.

I hate eddings more than goodkind.

also, hes racist and homophobic.

EDIT- just to add a bit of evidence, theres a few incidences in the books of old daddy wizard saying to young witchy, "oh polgara, what a son you'd have been!" or "oh Polgara, if only you'd been born a son!"

Nice. Wish he was my dad.

[williamjm]

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet but.. Did no one else find his books to be incredibly anti woman?

No, not really. In fact, the male characters are often portrayed as being foolish compared to the female characters, for example in the Elenium where Sephrenia is clearly the most intelligent character, especially compared to the surrounding male Church Knights with their "Kill anyone who gets in the way" approach to problem-solving. She's hardly a sex-crazed maniac, either. There are plenty of other strong female characters in the books - Ehlana, Beldaran, Poledra, Velvet, Xanetia, Porren etc. Of course, there isn't much equality in most of the societies in Eddings' books, and none of the female characters get to be warriors, but that sadly isn't too surprising in a traditional medieval setting.

Of course, there are female characters in the books who aren't portrayed positively, but equally there are plenty of male characters who aren't portrayed positively. There are plenty of criticisms you can make of Eddings' world-building and characterisation but I don't think he's particularly sexist.

[Gregor Clegane Has a Posse]

As bad as Redemption of Althalus was, it's still better than Lord Foul's Bane, the first book that I ever flung away in pure disgust.

On another note, am I the only one that ever picked up quasi-racist vibes from the Belgariad/Mallorean series? With the Alorns/Aryans pulling together all the other "western races" to unite against their common dark-skinned foe.

[Errant Bard]

I sure felt like Eddings made some differences stand out a lot, but I didn't think of it as racism.

After all, the characterization is quite simplistic, so he just makes the good guys camp look like his target audience, while creating different races so he can build a good rpg-like group, then he makes the bad guys look different and evil.

In truth, I loved the belgariad and Mallorean the first time I read them. Even if they seemed more like a collection of random scenes not really linked logically.

Now, though, I cannot go past a few chapters. The level of cheese associated with the lack of dimension of everything is too much to bear. Why, I think I might have some books of the Mallorean used as doorstops. I don't want to hate it so I don't reread it.

I still like Belgarion for being the most marie-sue-ish, overpowered hero to ever have graced my readings. And C'nedra for being such a one-dimensional quasi-insult to womanhood. But maybe I don't read enough fantasy...

[felice]

I didn't think of it as racism.

he just makes the good guys camp look like his target audience...then he makes the bad guys look different and evil.

Um... that is racism. "People who look different to us are evil/untrustworthy/inferior". It might be subconcious, but that doesn't make it any less so.

[Ahimsa]

Um... that is racism. "People who look different to us are evil/untrustworthy/inferior". It might be subconcious, but that doesn't make it any less so.

I disagree.

First of all, it's not our world it's a fantasy one and our biases don't need to be loaded into reading it.

Secondly, unless fantasy was all about identical clones fighting, there will be differences between the combatants. It's not racist to have all the baddies have blue eyes, just descriptive.

Now if the author said "I wanted the blue-eyed baddies to stand for (insert racial perjorative here)" then yes that would be racist. But otherwise they're just differences, inevitable differences at that.

[Baeraad]

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet but.. Did no one else find his books to be incredibly anti woman?

Sort of, but only in the Robert Jordan way - which is to say, the male characters get to have quirks and problems and personalities, the female characters are just walking stereotypes.

As bad as Redemption of Althalus was, it's still better than Lord Foul's Bane, the first book that I ever flung away in pure disgust.

Heh, to each his own, but I like LFB better the older I get? Fantasy has so many superhuman protagonists. It's nice to have one protagonist whose guts you can cheerfully hate.

[The Wolf Maid]

Hm, on the racist question, Polgara did mention racism more than once in her book (i.e. Chereks being the most racist of Alorns)

And according to Wikipedia, this is what racism means:

Racism refers to various belief systems maintaining that humans can be separated into various groups based on physical attributes and that these groupings determine or influence cultural or individual achievement or the essential value of human beings.

[werewolfv2]

As bad as Redemption of Althalus was, it's still better than Lord Foul's Bane, the first book that I ever flung away in pure disgust.

true, LFB was a horrid pile

[Stonehelm]

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet but.. Did no one else find his books to be incredibly anti woman?

I read his "instructions on how to write a fantasy novel" and it was spelt out there, hero needs male companions, warriors and friends, they all need women, for no real purpose other than to flesh out the male characters and have their kids at the end of the books.

Wow, this is an old thread.

Anyways, yes I did find Eddings books to be....well, not "anti-woman" but rather he portrays women in the light of old stereotypes. The whole thing about "behind every great man there is a great woman". There certainly isnt any good female role models in any of Eddings books, but that doesnt make it anti-women (does it?).

Haha...that is funny that you mentioned that all the women do is to "flesh out the male characters and have their kids at the end to the books". I always thought that was funny that the women would all get pregnant at the end of the story. Eddings you stereotyping, sexist/racist bastard...who do you think you are? I still love ya though, but only because you were my gateway into Fantasy. But your still a bastard!

[Vagrancy]

Anyways, yes I did find Eddings books to be....well, not "anti-woman" but rather he portrays women in the light of old stereotypes. The whole thing about "behind every great man there is a great woman". There certainly isnt any good female role models in any of Eddings books, but that doesnt make it anti-women (does it?).

Nah, that wouldn't make him anti-woman...it'd just make him pretty chauvanistic, I'd say. And you're completely right; it's not so much prejudice or hatred towards women that you see, but rather old, ingrained sterotypes. Same for the races, I'd say; almost like Eddings has this subconscious way of viewing the world that not even he's aware of (but let's not get into psychoanalysing him, please? I'm really tired. ).

[Galactus]

I still love ya though, but only because you were my gateway into Fantasy. But your still a bastard!

Sums up my feelings exactly

[Ser Barry]

Just saw the tagline on the latest Eddings paperback out in the UK;

'There is Myth, there is Legend and then there is Eddings.'

[Ten Minute Timer]

Just saw the tagline on the latest Eddings paperback out in the UK;

'There is Myth, there is Legend and then there is Eddings.'

You think that's funny ? Try replacing 'Eddings' with 'Peter Crouch'.

Eddings is great. Alas it's great in the same way the assorted adventures of Noddy is.