# The Belgariad-Saga



## The Proconsul (Jan 29, 2003)

Greetings!

I've just completed David Edding's Belgariad Sage (unfortunately), und I'd like to know what the general community thinks of it.

Personnaly, I think it's utter rubbish. The hero's are stupid, ignorant, have no clue (at least none that is communicated to the reader). In fact, the only people making ANY plans at all are the villains, and these are ALWAYS thwarted by coincidence.


----------



## Assenpfeffer (Jan 29, 2003)

My advice:  Chill.  It's a fantasy book.  How did you manage to get through all 5 books if it was so awful?  That's a lot of text for a non-masochist to suffer through.

My opinion:  I've read the series, oh, four or five times.  It's light, enjoyable fantasy with likeable characters.  It's not Proust, nor does it aspire to be.  Neither is it dark fantasy with heavyweight moral dilemmas and ethical gray areas.


----------



## Mortaneus (Jan 29, 2003)

The Proconsul said:
			
		

> *Personnaly, I think it's utter rubbish. The hero's are stupid, ignorant, have no clue (at least none that is communicated to the reader). In fact, the only people making ANY plans at all are the villains, and these are ALWAYS thwarted by coincidence.    *





That's because the main hero is a kid who's being led around by the nose by a couple of people who are thousands of years old.  Gandalf wasn't exactly forthcoming in LotR either.  It's a professional habit of ancient sages and sorcerers, I guess.

Read the Mallorean, where Belgarion is grown up.  They get into the reason why they did what they did quite a bit more there. They actually DID have a plan (or at least a path to follow), albeit one they didn't choose to share with a punk kid.


BTW, if you want a harder-edged hero who can actually stand up to the villain because he's a bad mofo, rather than just because the prophecy said he would, check out the Elenium and Tamuli trilogies by the Eddings.  They're a LOT better, in my opinion.  

The only problem is that too many of the characters are similar to characters in the Garion books.  Ah, well...they're still a fun read.  If nothing else, it's fun watching the heroes do some REALLY bad things to the villains.  The heroes are not nice people.  Sparhawk (the main character) is a perfect example of a LG character, maybe even a paladin, who isn't Lawful Stupid.  Mess with something he's sworn to protect, or follow someone he considers evil, and he'll END you.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 29, 2003)

They are a fine read.  I've enjoyed them on more then one occasion.  It's good to have books that can be read and reread and enjoyed each time.


----------



## The Proconsul (Jan 29, 2003)

Now, I have no problem with the hero as a kid, and I very well understand they don't explain things to him. However, I can't really accept this as an excuse not to explain things to the reader, especially if the novel is written in 3rd person (and I think it wouldn't even have taken much away from the story).

As for "likeable characters": take for example Polgara: she is supposed to bring up the future King. How does she do that? She keeps him as a kitchen boy, and away from everything. Now Belgarath (if I recall it rightly) doesn't agree with this ... but does not anything about it!

Also, I think Belgarath is portrayed as a bit too cynical, in that, for eyample not taking serious the kings of the western kingdoms altogether (I guess I miss LotR's pathos; besides, while Gandalf DID withhold information, I never felt something was not revealed to the reader in order to create artificial suspension, which I think is the primary shortcoming of the Belgariad-Saga).

And somehow, I don't like setting aside a book - it just feels wrong, and maybe it get's better


----------



## Shalimar (Jan 29, 2003)

Proconsul, read the book "Belgarath the Sorcerer".  Even just reading the second set of novels will settle most of your complaints.

SPOILERS




For example the reason he is so cynical about the Alorn kings is that he created the Alorn kingdoms.  He didn't want to go on the trip where he had to create the kingdoms, but he was forced into it by the alorns and Aldur, and while he was on it his wife, a woman he loved for many hundred years died.  If I was him I would have gone Alorn hunting at that point.  Its perfectly understandable his not respecting kings and queens he has known most if not all since their birth, not to mention their ancestors all the way back.


----------



## The Proconsul (Jan 29, 2003)

I see. Maybe I was mistaken, if you take all the spinoffs into account. Still, I think the Belgariad alone is quite poor - but I'm certainly going to believe you all taken together, it makes sense


----------



## Khorod (Jan 30, 2003)

Oddly enough, while these four (belgariad, mallorean, elenium, tamuli) are not the best out there, they are among my favorites.  I reread them every couple of years, and its always quick and fun.

There is a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes of the belgariad.  While a lot of stuff was 'added' in spinoffs, a lot of your questions were answered in brief in David Eddings' 'campaign notes'.

Bare in mind also that this was not written in the fairly formulaic ways of most modern fantasy.  David Eddings went back to the source material- late medieval chivalric romance, and reverse engineered it to create the style, flavor, and aspects of storytelling that created the Belgariad.  In this way, he is like a much less time-intensive Tolkien.

In order to tell a story of this cosmic scope, you either have to be in the Gandalf's head (boring 'cause you know so much already) or the Frodo's.  Which means clueless.  If you want to see Belgarion come into his own, check out the Mallorean.  You can tell the difference in the first chapter...

This is a line from David Eddings, and it says everything, or at least something, about how to read this series: "The use of archetypal myth in the creation of fiction is the literary equivalent of peddling dope."  

Oh, and just to add a bit on the Elenium, not only is Sparhawk LG, he has the added flavor of being part of a LG knightly order known as some of the best torturers around.  Harsh fellows.

Just avoid that new book by Eddings.  Some good ideas in there, but I could tell which 1, 2, or 3 characters made up each character in the book, guess the plotline, and not tell who was talking with nametags, since they all had the same voice and personality of speech.

I ramble on to avoid doing work.  Later,


----------



## Mark (Jan 30, 2003)

Assenpfeffer said:
			
		

> *It's light, enjoyable fantasy with likeable characters.  It's not Proust, nor does it aspire to be.  Neither is it dark fantasy with heavyweight moral dilemmas and ethical gray areas. *




I agree but would not read them again as there is far too much out there I haven't read.



			
				Mortaneus said:
			
		

> *BTW, if you want a harder-edged hero who can actually stand up to the villain because he's a bad mofo, rather than just because the prophecy said he would, check out the Elenium and Tamuli trilogies by the Eddings.  They're a LOT better, in my opinion.
> 
> The only problem is that too many of the characters are similar to characters in the Garion books.  Ah, well...they're still a fun read.  If nothing else, it's fun watching the heroes do some REALLY bad things to the villains.  The heroes are not nice people.  Sparhawk (the main character) is a perfect example of a LG character, maybe even a paladin, who isn't Lawful Stupid.  Mess with something he's sworn to protect, or follow someone he considers evil, and he'll END you. *




I agree here as well, though I have only read the Elenium and part of the first book of the Tamuli Trilogy.  I pick it up now and again when I am between other reading and want something light where I enjoy the characters.



			
				Khorod said:
			
		

> *There is a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes of the belgariad.  While a lot of stuff was 'added' in spinoffs, a lot of your questions were answered in brief in David Eddings' 'campaign notes'.*




Random House has been kind enough to put the Campaign Notes from the Riven Codex online.

http://www.randomhouse.com/delrey/sample/rivancodex_notes.html

Hope that helps!


----------



## Lurks-no-More (Jan 30, 2003)

Actually, if the only Eddings you ever read is Belgariad and "Belgarath the Sorcerer", you have the best of it. Polgara's story isn't half bad either, but Malloreon & Sparhawk books are the same stuff written over and over again.


----------



## Frostmarrow (Jan 30, 2003)

The Proconsul said:
			
		

> *Greetings!
> 
> I've just completed David Edding's Belgariad Sage (unfortunately), und I'd like to know what the general community thinks of it.
> 
> Personnaly, I think it's utter rubbish. The hero's are stupid, ignorant, have no clue (at least none that is communicated to the reader). In fact, the only people making ANY plans at all are the villains, and these are ALWAYS thwarted by coincidence.    *




I agree. I've not read any fantasy what so ever since. Put me off completely.


----------



## Claude Raines (Jan 30, 2003)

I enjoyed the Belgariad Saga even though there were some plot holes you could drive a truck through. I've read the Mallorean, Elenium and Tamuli and each series I liked less and less until I just couldn't take it anymore. The reason is that in the 3 other series he's essentially telling the exact same story over again and using the exact same characters (either literally or figuratively). Eventually all his characters sound the same and the plot is so predictable you can skip chapters and not lose anything. The only series I would recommend is the first.


----------



## Wolf72 (Jan 30, 2003)

I enjoyed them when I read them ... but then again I was a young teen-ager back then and any fantasy was good fantasy.


----------



## Mark (Jan 30, 2003)

Wolf72 said:
			
		

> *I enjoyed them when I read them ... but then again I was a young teen-ager back then and any fantasy was good fantasy. *




We should live our whole lives so unspoiled. 

Maybe not, since perhaps we appreciate some things more through intellect than blind adoration, but I must agree that I was much younger when first reading the two initial series.  Still, I find it odd that some folks are compariring Sparhawk to any character from the first two series.  How is this the case in the minds of those who have?


----------



## Wolf72 (Jan 30, 2003)

Mark said:
			
		

> *
> 
> We should live our whole lives so unspoiled.
> 
> Maybe not, since perhaps we appreciate some things more through intellect than blind adoration, but I must agree that I was much younger when first reading the two initial series.  Still, I find it odd that some folks are compariring Sparhawk to any character from the first two series.  How is this the case in the minds of those who have?  *




blind adoration? you mean like making sure everything was set up and ready to go so you and your friends could watch an all day Godzilla marathon ...

intellect ... trying to do the same thing 10yrs later and complaining/laughing at the wierdo in the rubber suit jumping up and down on top of models


----------



## Mark (Jan 30, 2003)

Wolf72 said:
			
		

> *blind adoration? you mean like making sure everything was set up and ready to go so you and your friends could watch an all day Godzilla marathon ...
> 
> intellect ... trying to do the same thing 10yrs later and complaining/laughing at the wierdo in the rubber suit jumping up and down on top of models
> 
> *




Yup.  That about sums it up!


----------



## Samnell (Jan 31, 2003)

I liked them all, but Eddings is using the same plot. The Belgarath and Polgara books are exceptions since they're written as quasi-autobiographies, but the Elenium, Tamuli, Belgariad, and Malloreon are the same plot and Eddings admits as much in those campaign notes of his they published. (Those get very tedious to read, by the way, and sometimes he gets cynical enough that it's very off-putting.)

The characters and setting of the Sparhawk books are a bit more mature (although the Belgariad setting isn't kids' stuff either) but I felt they had a lot less oomph in the conclusions. The big fight at the end of the Tamuli takes like a page. After the conclusion of Seeress of Kell taking up a third of the book, it was a big letdown. Prophecy is less emphasized in the Sparhawk books, if that's something you'd like.

I haven't read his latest, so I can't say anything about that.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 31, 2003)

I liked the Belgariad and Malloreon saga's as good light reading. The two trilogies were decent, but the gaining of the Major Artifact so soon is just... silly.

Althalus was horrible. repetitive, badly written, predicable... just bad IMO.

Losers is modern fiction, and I thought was an excellent book of Eddings also. I recommend it.


----------



## Samnell (Jan 31, 2003)

> The two trilogies were decent, but the gaining of the Major Artifact so soon is just... silly.




You mean at the end of three books into a five book series? Not what I'd call soon.


----------



## jdavis (Jan 31, 2003)

I loved the books when I was young, I would probably think they were silly and immature now. They are very good light reading with a basic plotline, stereotypical settings and a cheesy love story thrown in to boot. I think the problem is that you overanalyzed them. Once you look at them as anything resembling a literary masterwork like LOTR, they crumble, but they are very popular pulp fantasy for young people, a good easy read just for fun, but nothing to deep.

If you want something deeper and more complicated, try the Song of Fire and Ice books, by George R R Martin. But bring some note cards, it's definatly not full of shallow characters and you'll need flow charts to keep up with people's plans, which are normally thwarted by bloodshed and violence instead of coincidence.


----------



## SableWyvern (Jan 31, 2003)

I read and finished the Belgariad many years back, and considered them readable. About a dozen pages into the Mallorean I realised I wasn't enjoying myself at all, and I basically haven't touched Eddings since.

The one exception was when some friends tried to convince me his later stuff was better. I read about three pages, found them bland and boring, and that's been it.

On questioning another friend reading some Edding's work, she said she read him when she wanted something really easy that she didn't need to think about. I considered that fair enough.

Did I point out that I have very little respect for the man's work?

Just my poor opinion, of course.


----------



## Orius (Jan 31, 2003)

The Proconsul said:
			
		

> *Greetings!
> 
> I've just completed David Edding's Belgariad Sage (unfortunately), und I'd like to know what the general community thinks of it.
> 
> Personnaly, I think it's utter rubbish. The hero's are stupid, ignorant, have no clue (at least none that is communicated to the reader). In fact, the only people making ANY plans at all are the villains, and these are ALWAYS thwarted by coincidence.    *




I think Eddings started the Belgariad out well, but the last two books were fairly weak.  I think his two biggest mistakes were killing of Chamdar/Asharak the Murgo in Book Two (he was the best villian in the series), and inserting token characters from practically each and every culture in the setting.  Some of these characters didn't really accomplish anything.


----------



## Orius (Jan 31, 2003)

*Re: Re: The Belgariad-Saga*



			
				Mortaneus said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Read the Mallorean, where Belgarion is grown up.  They get into the reason why they did what they did quite a bit more there. They actually DID have a plan (or at least a path to follow), albeit one they didn't choose to share with a punk kid.*




If he didn't like the Belgariad, he'll probably HATE the Mallorean



> *
> BTW, if you want a harder-edged hero who can actually stand up to the villain because he's a bad mofo, rather than just because the prophecy said he would, check out the Elenium and Tamuli trilogies by the Eddings.  They're a LOT better, in my opinion.
> The only problem is that too many of the characters are similar to characters in the Garion books.  Ah, well...they're still a fun read.  If nothing else, it's fun watching the heroes do some REALLY bad things to the villains.  The heroes are not nice people.  Sparhawk (the main character) is a perfect example of a LG character, maybe even a paladin, who isn't Lawful Stupid.  Mess with something he's sworn to protect, or follow someone he considers evil, and he'll END you. *




The Elenium is probably Edding's best work.   The first two, maybe three books of the Belgariad were good, but it ended pretty weakly.  The Mallorean in many respects is a rehash of the Belgariad.  The Tamuli isn't too bad, but isn't quite as good as the Elenium.


----------



## Orius (Jan 31, 2003)

Shalimar said:
			
		

> *Proconsul, read the book "Belgarath the Sorcerer".  Even just reading the second set of novels will settle most of your complaints.
> 
> *




(snipped)

Also, you have to keep in mind that Belgarath is 7000 years old.  He tends to avoid making a lot of personal attachments, because he knows these people will end up dying.  He lost his daugther Beldaran, and thought he lost his wife, and neither were easy experiences for him.   He does it partially to preserve his own sanity.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Feb 1, 2003)

Samnell said:
			
		

> *
> 
> You mean at the end of three books into a five book series? Not what I'd call soon. *




They got the crystal rose in the second book of the trilogy IIRC,
Gaining an artifact that can raise mountains half way through....


----------



## Samnell (Feb 1, 2003)

> They got the crystal rose in the second book of the trilogy IIRC,
> Gaining an artifact that can raise mountains half way through....




Oh, you're talking about the Sparhawk books. This makes more sense now. 

I'd agree with you if the whole point of the books was to get the thing, but the point of the triology ended up being killing Azash. So getting the thing you need to do that in the middle isn't out of order, IMO.


----------



## Buttercup (Feb 1, 2003)

It's funny.  I'm usually a pretty critical reader.  I despise all the FR and Dragonlance novels for being formulaic dreck.  I can't stand Terry Brooks, nor Salvatore, nor even Robert Jordan.  I got pissed off at Anne McCaffrey after her 7th or so Pern book and gave up.  And Mercedes Lackey makes me want to strangle someone.

But I like the Belgariad and Mallorean.  They're formulaic.  The characters are 2-d cardboard cutouts.  The regular use of deus-ex-machina (even though it's called, 'the dry voice in his mind' or 'the prophecy') is cheesy beyond anything.  But I like them, god help me.  If someone can explain this anomaly to me, I'd be much obliged.


----------



## SableWyvern (Feb 2, 2003)

Buttercup said:
			
		

> *If someone can explain this anomaly to me, I'd be much obliged. *




As with the friend I mentioned above, it could just be that he's _really_ easy to read, and tells you a story without requiring you to commit any of your precious intellectual or emotional resources whatsoever.

Even if that's not true, you can tell yourself it is, and thus not feel so bad about this otherwise embarrassing situation.


----------



## jdavis (Feb 2, 2003)

SableWyvern said:
			
		

> *
> 
> As with the friend I mentioned above, it could just be that he's really easy to read, and tells you a story without requiring you to commit any of your precious intellectual or emotional resources whatsoever.
> 
> Even if that's not true, you can tell yourself it is, and thus not feel so bad about this otherwise embarrassing situation.   *




Sounds like a guilty pleasure type of thing, heck I own a copy of Anaconda (the movie), and that's just crap but it's fun to watch. Sometimes things just stick, even when you don't want them too, everybody has those secret little favorite books and movies that they keep hidden, you know it's bad but you just can't help yourself.


----------



## Buttercup (Feb 2, 2003)

jdavis said:
			
		

> *you know it's bad but you just can't help yourself. *




That's it!  The Belgariad = Double Stuff Oreos!  They make you faintly sick, but you can't stop consuming them!  Jdavis, you're a genius.


----------



## jdavis (Feb 2, 2003)

Buttercup said:
			
		

> *
> Jdavis, you're a genius. *




John D Davis Supra-Genius, I like the sound of that.


----------



## Mallus (Feb 3, 2003)

Buttercup said:
			
		

> *They're formulaic.  The characters are 2-d cardboard cutouts.  The regular use of deus-ex-machina (even though it's called, 'the dry voice in his mind' or 'the prophecy') is cheesy beyond anything.  But I like them, god help me.  If someone can explain this anomaly to me, I'd be much obliged. *




It's simple. They're fun. Eddings makes no bones about how derivitive his books are. In fact, they come very close to parody --like whenever Mandorallen explains Arendish concepts of honor. To me they resemble a cross between The Princess Bride and an epic mutlivolume fantasy like LotR, erring ever-so-slightly on the side of seriousness.

What fantasy reader wouldn't delight in his archetypal, yet all-so-quippy heroes? He's almost writing parody, but not quite, getting to mock all of silly conventions of fantasy fiction {don't they all make fun of Mandorallen's stuffy quasi-Elizabethan speech?} while all the while telling a big rip-roaring fantasy adventure.


----------

