I NEED A HERO. I'M HOLDING OUT FOR A HERO TO COME SUPPORT ME ON PATREON patreon.com/hellofutureme Thank you so much to all the new people who joined up to patreon and the discord (seriously, we had to get new mods to support the growing community)! You guys make this more in-depth, longer form content possible. Re: ON SAPHIRA'S EMPATHY BOND - yes, I'll admit I somewhat purposefully overlooked that to make the point on word choice. I should have at least acknowledged it, but the point still stands. ~ Tim
I suppose that is fair to say about Saphira from the inheritance cycle but I would argue that her personality changed over time mainly because she never really had any other dragon to talk to or interact with except for Glaedr who keep in mind was her teacher on top of that he was not a wild dragon he was bonded and also lived for a very long time not only talking to just dragons but other riders. We don't exactly know if the dragons back then spoke and acted like dragons, or developed/learned to speak and act like humans or elves. As a side note I would not find it unreasonable to think that the same happened for the human and elf riders to develop dragon like mannerisms in return.
So following this I do not find it unreasonable to think that she would develop human like speaking. As to why she would be talking the way she was in the first book, as an educated guess I would say that she was trying to be different off of instinct because she knows that she is not human, so in her mind why should she talk like them.
I disagree. While Saphira has difficulty interacting with Glaedr, it doesn't feel like it's a result of her bonding with Eragon and become more 'human', it feels like a result of her being young and horny and Glaedr doesn't want to deal with her shit because he's old. The book *tries* to make it sound like Saphira just doesn't know how to dragon properly by having Glaedr take her out on private lessons while Eragon is with Oromis, but even though Saphira comes back all excited about them we're never shown how it impacts her or how she realizes how disconnected from her own culture (so to speak) she ever was. We're never even explicitly shown how she's been humanized... nor how this would even make her different from Glaedr, who was bonded to elves and raised in a society composed entirely of other dragons that were also bonded to elves. This is further exacerbated by the fact that, frankly, Paolini didn't actually think about this. It's mentioned that dragons actually have some kind of ancestral memory, so Saphira just *knows* a ton of things just by being a dragon-- one would think this would include dragon instincts and learned behaviors in the process, and in fact Saphira not having been raised among dragons is *never* a point of contention again. Additionally, when we start getting Saphira-centric chapters in Brisingr, Paolini makes an attempt to distinguish her as inhuman by having her refer to various things in staccato, hyphenated descriptions-- I can't remember the specific ones but a lot of nouns are replaced with things like hoofed-beast-good-eating or similar compound words, playing at being something bestial despite, previously and subsequently, just using the word 'cow'. It really comes off as less of an intended exploration and more that the characterization was being written 'as needed' in a very surface-level attempt at addressing particular bits of criticism (Saphira's human-ness was actually something the Inheritance criticism community called out between both Eragon and Eldest) without fully understanding the criticism and, consequently, how to address it.
never needed anything more, exept maybe the communist dragons Wait... What if we COMBINED THEM.... THE RISE OF THE COMMUNIST SAXAPHONE DRAGONS HAS BEGUN
I agree with the inheritance cycle being derivative, but Saphira's humanness is a specific plot point. As most of the time they don't meet any other dragons, and as far as they know she's the only remaining female. The dragons bonded to humans who live among humans would become more like those humans. Her actions in front of older or wilder dragons are difficult because of this. Eragon also becomes slightly more draconic, although that is less well explored
I have not read the book but from your description it seems very similar to how Toothless in How to Train Your Dragon behaves. Many of his actions seem very human-like in nature as there is no other of his kind to show him how to be a Night Fury. This is shown in the trailers for The Hidden world where toothless meets the Light Fury, the two are completely different in nature. You mention they don’t meet other dragons “most of the time” implying they do occasionally. Making Saphira’s behaviour seem completely alien to wild dragons she encounters and their behaviour seeming strange to her could be a really good way to emphasise how she has become more human and less like a dragon.
@@liammorris9372 she doesn't meet other dragons until she is atleast adolescent, if not adult (although this only takes a few years if I remember- it's probably been 5 years since I've read any of them)
I can't say much for Toothless as I thoroughly enjoyed the books and have no will to ruin that memory by watching films which seem to butcher a key plot point, though I'm more than willing to allow others to enjoy them.
@@cass2239 I enjoyed the how to train your dragon books and the films, as long as you pretend it's an entirely different ip, they're fun in their own way
I can’t believe you didn’t call them Prodragonists and Andragonists. Also, i can’t believe you only skimmed over wings of fire during the Dragons as Protagonists section.
I actually would argue that Toothless doesn't belong in the beast category. He clearly understands everything that Hiccup says and is able to respond with it. The examples you used of Hiccup Dragon-Splaining... if you hit mute, you would still clearly understand what Toothless was doing by his actions and facial expressions. A mute character does not mean they can't communicate. If anything, you could say that Toothless may be smarter because he understands Hiccup's language, but Hiccup can't understand dragon speak. And it's not like a dog remembering a few previously taught commands. They are actually communicating. Look at the begining of the second movie after Toothless saves Hiccup from crashing into the rocks. Hiccup slyly is saying that Toothless needs to work on his turns. Toothless side-eyes him and throws a stone at him. That was a nuanced conversation, not a command. And Toothless understood that.
There’s a reason for this! In the actual books for How to Train you Dragon, they actually CAN speak. They are much more similar to the western thinker type, and Hiccup not only can ride the dragons, but speak in more than commands such as “go” or something- the dragons are actually written as sassy, showing that the speech isn’t just some kind of compulsion such as “dracarys,” they have personality, and overcoming their selfish nature is a huge part of the character arc!
MavenCree It isn't about dragons, but a good example/comparison would be from the movie "Spirit Stallion of the Cimmaron" You don't understand the horses but you get a sense of communication. The narrator of course fills in some gaps but its mostly silence, stares, neighs, etc
@@couragew6260 Absolutely! The relative absence of real voices for the horses is what makes _Spirit_ so artistic. It's also similar to the robots from _WALL-E._ All they say is their names and a few lines relating to EVE's programming, but you still get a sense of them as characters just as much as if they'd had dialogue.
I think you kinda missed the point of Saphira humanness. She becames more and more like a human because of her bond with a human, just as Eragon becomes less and less human-like as the series progresses. In the forth book, they have a brief talk with a wild dragon, and he is much different. He doesnt have language, and he spends most of his time immerse in a state of meditation. (I forgot his name) Ps: keep up with the good work!
That was going through my head, too. As you spend a lot of time with someone, you start to emulate them. Kids that spend a lot of time at home act like their parents/siblings because of all the exposure and mutual genetics (both nature and nurture). Saphira has no one but humans to interact with and even shares a mental bond with one. The old golden dragon (can't remember his name) probably acted a lot like an elf because for a very long time they were his only company. His situation is most likely different because Saphira's developmental time was spent only around 1-3 humans because of the genocide and secrecy, while the older dragon probably knew other dragons and was able to live openly, widening his exposure.
@That one friend that genuinely enjoys Rick Astley And I haven't read them since Inheritance came out, which was 8 years ago. 8 years of High School, College, and all the drama that comes with it, not to mention too many fictional stories to remember, let alone count. I also probably thought of them the same way I think if the Harry Potter series: Good reading the first time as a kid, not so good as I get older, though I wasn't nearly as invested in the Cycle as HP.
@@bluesbest1 I do not agree, I read the Cycle at least once a year since it came out and I still enjoy the story very much. The 1st book is very clearly written by a 15 year old, BUT the more you read the 1st book you'll see there is a lot of underlying thought in the story.
Have you ever read fablehaven? The dragons in that are amazing. “Dragons see us the same way we see mice, we aren’t very tasty and they’ll kill us just to keep the area tidy.”
There’s a similar comparison in Wings of Fire with humans (or “scavengers” as the dragons call them) being viewed very similarly to mice. Tiny, annoying, everywhere, they steal things and eat food.
If I remember correctly, Eragon discussed with Saphira how her behaviour was interpreted by humans and how it made her seem more monsterous. I'm not too sure about this but there were civilians that found Saphira to be scary and dumb due to her dragon like reactions and behaviour. I believe they were both educated on more acceptable ways to react and Saphira was taught humans customs in respect so she would not offend anyone and so she knew how she could shoe her respect. I haven't read the series for a while tho
She was actually taught things like that, when she and Eragon became basically generals in the Varden's army. They needed her to be a symbol of hope, facing the terror of Thorn (Murtagh's Dragon) and Shurikan (Galbatorix's "stolen" dragon). So she was taught the social graces to make her less frightening to the humans they freed from Galbatorix's control. At the same time, in her personal chapters (she did have PoV chapters when she was away from Eragon in Eldest and Brisingr), it still showed she viewed the world differently, had more descriptive words for the different "Two-legs" races, for the shadow form of Eragon the Elven mages sent to look after them used, etc.
Paolini: *Writes a book with a major plot-point being that a dragon doesn't feel connected to her ancestors because she feels too human. She's only ever been around humans(because they're nearly extinct) so has disproportionate human characteristics than any other dragon in the story's universe* Tim: I don't like it, she's too human feeling. Paolini: Am I a joke to you?
I always saw her early language as that of a child. Children often use incorrect but in their minds correct language, and even understandable to us in most occasions their meaning. Children at funerals often have strange ways of trying to help and sometimes it's beautiful how their minds work. However they change more to social norms as they age.
Let me pose a question in regard to Saphira and her lack of dragon-ness; consider, for a second, that dragons in the inheritance cycle are immensely intelligent, cultural creatures, which they are. By anthropological standards, the dragons absolutely have their own culture separate from that of elves and humans, and we discover more of this in the later books when the characters encounter an eldunari of one of the wild dragons, and this culture of theirs is thoroughly different than the other humanoid cultures. Let's compare this to existing human cultures so that we have a frame of reference; Native American cultures, for example, are vastly alien in comparison to many western European cultures. Now consider this; would a child born to two Cherokee parents (I'm using a singular tribe, just for specificity), yet raised from infancy to adulthood by Spaniards in Spain, having little to no exposure to his or her "original" culture know much, if anything about Cherokee language, practices, or idioms? No, the child wouldn't. So would a dragon, raised for a majority of her life by humans, having only met another of her kind recently and for a brief time, know much of her "native" culture? Most likely, no, which is why Saphira is more likely to use human idioms, and this goes doubly so when you take into account her empathy link with Eragon. She has literally been sharing thoughts with a human since birth-- I mean, hatching. Therefor, I say Paolini is absolutely justified in making her thoughts and actions appear human, since, culturally speaking, she is absolutely human. Notice also that Glaedr acts far less human than Saphira, and we can attribute this to his time spent with other dragons when their culture was still preserved, a luxury Saphira never had. Glaedr thinks a lot more in images and sensory impressions, rather than words, and the wild dragon they met in book 4 doesn't use words at all. Saphira isn't so much a product of her blood, so much that she's a product of her environment, which happens to be all dirty, stupid humans all the time. This would probably even be different had Eragon been an elf, and Saphira raised on the outskirts of their domain. Since culture is defined as learned behavior that persists over generations, it makes sense that Saphira would act more human than the rest of her kind.
You might have been right, except Paolini stated in the first book that dragons have a shared racial memory, and that Sapphira was aware within her egg.
@@epsilon3569 that's partial though, she remembers some dragon culture, which is why she doesn't act in ways that are not quite human, but was raised in human culture and exposed in her egg to elven culture, thus mostly human with inhuman undertones
If a dolphin, cat or dog living with human intelligence while growing up and living with humans all their lives does not simply make them act or think like humans. They are still limited by their bodies and inconveniences that are usually made for real humans. For example, an intelligent dog does not see or relate to a human sitting on a chair using a fork and spoon the same way as themselves do despite them having the same intelligence as humans or living up with humans.
I pretty distinctly remember in the Inheritence books that it stated a dragon taking on more human mental traits over time due to the link with their Rider just as the Rider took on the long lives of a dragon as part of that bond. Two becoming one. Glaedr and Umaroth both pretty blatantly alluded to that point on various occasions.
Your critique of word choice with Saphira intrigues me, but I'm not quite convinced it's Paolini growing lazy or apathetic. Given the attention to detail he initially showed, I could see this drift towards more human language being a result of her spending most of her time socializing or interacting with humans. There are very few dragon riders in her lifetime, so I could see her being more "human" than most dragons on average simply due to a lack of dragons to interact with and either learn dragon behavior and idioms from, or even simply keep them in use. It makes sense to me that, with few (if any) friendly dragons available for her to interact with at any given time, her mannerisms would slowly drift more towards human customs and conventions--as much as they can, at least, given her being a death-lizard.
If a dolphin, cat or dog living with human intelligence while growing up and living with humans all their lives does not simply make them act or think like humans. They are still limited by their bodies and inconveniences that are usually made for real humans. For example, an intelligent dog does not see or relate to a human sitting on a chair using a fork and spoon the same way as themselves do, despite them having the same intelligence as humans or living up with humans.
There would be an inherent difference just by virtue of dragons being massive powerful flying beings. Giving them human intelligence puts them at a point where there's literally no reason for them to see human-like races as equal to them (or rather, for it to feel natural for human-like races to see THEM as equals) if they do it'd be interpreted as them being a powerful benevolent figure as opposed to just another human-like race. Otherwise you can literally make them human like in stature and power and you basically just have lizard-men.
@@hiimchrisj That sounds like TES: Skyrim dragons. All humanoid races nearly ended up as slaves to the dragons. Only saved by a few brave men and a dragon that changed sides.
Spoilers for Wings of Fire, up till book 9 at least. Well Wings of Fire could have been used more for examples of dragon protagonists and showing differences between the dragon culture and our own human culture :The role of Queens as leaders of their race, with there never being a King as leader; The development of Aquatic as a language used by Seawings; The fact that dragonets become soldiers as soon as they've grown to a certain extent, and will be capable of fighting a full-grown dragon. It also has examples of dragons as antagonists: The role Queen Scarlet plays as an antagonist for much of the books and is manipulative in everything she does, as well as Morrowseer and the Nightwings; The legend of Darkstalker and the power he holds as an age-old animus dragon; The role of Blister and Burn in the first prophecy books and how they threaten the dragonet prophecy before the dragonets are even born. Wings of Fire has a lot of potential examples for writing Western Thinkers, even in how each dragon varies (Nightwing, Skywing, Mudwing, Seawing, Sandwing, Rainwing and Animus dragons).
Most intresting dragons that iv come across in books (and loved) is the ones from the 'The Rain Wild Chronicles' by Robin Hobb. Dragons who hatch out first as serpants and live inthe sea before going through a metamorphosis to become winged dragons. Dragons that spit acid/venom not fire, a trait from their serpant part of the life cycle. intresting to me at least. And thats not going into the 'live' ships made from the 'wood' of serpant cocoons that are aware
Inheritance Cycle: Saphira and other dragons/eldunari that had bonded with a rider could articulate words and expressions like people because from the moment they left the egg THEY WERE IMPRINTED ON "HUMAN" THOUGHT PATTERNS. Shockingly enough their psyche were affected by this. When Eragon "speaks" to the eldunari of wild/unbonded dragons, he had a great deal of difficulty understanding their thoughts because they had no basis of language he could relate to other than the impressions of physical sensations. The series had flaws like any other series does, but don't leave out contradictions because their inconvenient to your point. Love the video, cant wait for more! Give Naomi Novick's books a try, the Temeraire series specifically.
I don't wanna bug, but I borrowed the Temeraire series from someone years ago, and I wanted to read them again.... do you know somewhere I can buy/borrow them?
I really like the rhythm of speak on Tolkien's dragons as well, it gives them a certain charm. When I write dragons I try to give the such fluidity as well. “ Such is his ignorance that remains inert in the face of the suffering of his people, puppet and silent, without his own voice. Stuck in the lines of the superb nobility that usurps the right to live of the less fortunate. So please enlighten me, with what virtue you dare to enter my territory and address me?’’ The silence in the forest was deafening, I could no longer hear the birds singing or the humming of cicadas, everything was stopped in time where not even the wind dared to break its charm, whenever the being in front of me spoke the whole forest was silent and listened. The words eluded me and my knees struggled to stay upright, the sweat on my hand made the rings I wore slippery and my eyes were no longer able to hold his gaze, lowering my head to watch one of his supporting legs on a rock, it cracked before its weight moaning every time it re-positioned its claws. I took a deep breath, the air burning in my throat and opened my mouth, but no words formed and for a few seconds I repeated the movement, like a fish out of water, during the act the dragon remained silent watching with curiosity my lack of words. “ From what I observe, he is not even able to formulate a simple sentence. Becoming appalled by a simple question and has the courage to call himself king. It is nothing but a scoundrel, so much of your bravado in coming to the home of another to command him. I must advise, you do not exercise any command here, especially on me. I am detached from any human conflict or any other being, I am not interested in your culture, your wars, your beliefs and alliances. If you dare to come to my home to try to subdue me, you will not be the first or even the last. Dating back even before the outbreak of your race, many others tried, though, without a triumphant finish.’’
"There are dozens of you" *as names scroll up at one per frame for about a minute* That's 60 x 24 names (about) which means there are about 2880 names. That's 120 dozens, Tim.
@@bluesbest1 If they're outcasts, they're not really part of the society, are they? Manual labour is a decent enough explanation, provided that the western beasts are weaker or less numerous than their counterparts. It'd fit with the idea of dragons being naturally dominant.
@@ginge641 So, keeping them as pets, lowest caste, or otherwise "sub-us"? Kings of old tended to have tamed beasts in their throne rooms to show off or be semi-bodyguards, so keeping the lessers as thugs or something?
Hey! Thank you for that video. I am myself a GM in a lot of RP PBF games and for a past few months I had some problems with my own-created species. Your video allowed me to realize that with time I've lost "beast" side of my characters for the sake of human side. And you - dear author - showed me again, that this is that one problem that I need to fix! Thank you!
14:45 it amuses me more than is polite that a paragraph touting the importance of word choice has a scripting error (Drastically different characterisation...)
In the later books, my impression was the increasingly humanlike saphira was her learning how humans think after being bentally stuck to one for several years. The younger dragons in the later books support this idea as they also think as young Saphira did.
I love the Temeraire books. I think Naomi did a good job of writing talking dragons who stay consistent with their non-human nature, even as they understand how things work in human society.
This was really helpful! I have a story about an immortal dragon that is arrogant, pompous and self absorbed because of his power. He sees not only mortal dragons but humans and all mortals and specks of dust. While he is not an antagonist he's more of a semi protagonist dipping in and out of the main character's journey as he pleases. The thing is he can speak and this was really helpful in that category, thank you so much, Tim! ❤️
22:25 lol, Saphira is specifically prone to suggest just murdering obstacles and has at many times considered feasting on humans, at one time remarking that they tase just as well as boar or deer, only not doing so because she knows how much it would upset Eragon. And because their "steel shells" are annoying to pry open. XD
@@HelloFutureMe No problem Tim we will always watch all of your videos. Although it does beg the question now that we have dragons how would we interpret other mythical creatures granted you can always create your own although with everyone posting there art in the internet that has become a bit difficult these days. Also I was rewatching your "Speed Stingers did fly" video and your voice was kinda different back then.
@@fang609 has it really become more difficult to come up with original fantasy creatures because of how much fantasy art gets posted online? Or is that more of a convenient excuse to avoid it because its harder? 🤔 If you're worried about not standing out, then the less preconceived beast templates you use the better. From my own perspective, I dont care about trolls, elves, fairies, dragons or any of that stuff because I've seen that many interpretations of them and I also know I've seen probably the closest to "my favourite" of each of those interpretations that ill ever see, so for me specifically I almost want to say there is _no_ dragon story that I'd want to actually read more about, but obviously a good enough writer could change my mind. Its up to you, but if it were me id look up some "how to create fantasy creatures" guides. If nothing else they'll all tell you to take inspiration from nature, consider their evolution, environment, diet, predators, prey, are they nocturnal or something different etc etc. Its really not so hard once you practice a bit.
I love your video! This actually really helped me with how I plan on incorporating Dragons into my D&D adventure 😁 but if I can be nitpicky, mind if I point out that Alduin doesn't have any control over time. The only association between him and time is that he is the first born of Akatosh and that the Ancient Nord heros cast him adrift through time using an Elderscroll. Other then that Alduin is actually an ordinary Dragon other then the fact that he can't actually be slain.
Well Alduin does seemingly reverse time when he raises dragons from their mounds as well. The shout he uses (Slen-Tiid-Vo) means Flesh-Time-Reverse, implying that he reverses time to return dragons to their flesh forms. Take that as you will.
On the topic of how Paolini wrote dragons, I do want to address that there was a clear distinction between dragons raised by humans, such as Saphira and Thorn, who slowly acted less on impulse and more on human thought (which makes sense given the nature of their raising), and dragons who were either raised in the wild or in the traditional way of the dragon riders. The former were raised by a young human, and thus they way they acted is largely impacted by that fact. The older dragons communicate in non-verbal and vague ways, and the imagery used for them is much more mystical and non-human. If anything, I think the writing of Saphira as a more human-acting character only added to the depth of her characterization
Saphira having more human-like dialogue and actions as the story progresses is due to her spending more time around humans and being mentally linked to Eragon for a longer period of time. At a later point in the story, dragons that chose to remain isolated from elves and humans are discussed. They do not think in words and are much more animalistic. I cannot remember the exact wording, unfortunately. Your points are entirely valid and I agree with them, but I disagree that the example given fits said points completely. I do still love this video.
It's not the fact that the inheritance cycle got children into fantasy that should be praised. It was so popular because it focused on characters and attaching us to said characters rather than getting bogged down in world building and over explaining that like most, even acclaimed, fantasy series do, thus driving away readers, because there is no compelling central protagonist with a relatable goal that we attach to. There's just some super thought-out world building, which means nothing without a compelling story to pair with it.
While I can agree to an extent with you on the derivative nature of the dragon riders in Paolini's series (as well as the derivative nature of it having the usual elves, dwarves, etc), what keeps me interested in that series is how he uses those basic building blocks to build a fantasy world that, while familiar, has a certain uniqueness to it. My favorite parts of the Inheritance Cycle are honestly when it didn't focus on Eragon and Saphira. When it focused on Roran having to save his village from great danger, rescue his wife and lead armies to victory. When it focused on the political pressures Nasuada faced being the head of the Varden, trying to gather allies and outsmart enemies. When it delved into the history of the races, how they lived, their societal structures, their architecture. Like I mentioned above: familiar, yet unique. The dragon on the cover of Eragon is what drew me to the series, but it's FAR from the reason I stayed :)
One of the things I like about Paarthurnax from Skyrim is specifically about how he speaks. All the dragons can speak, but Paarthurnax has a unique characteristic where he tends to ramble, to indulge in speech. He mixes certain words from the dragon tongue into his speech more often than others, such as Krosis, a sort of apology. He still feels like a dragon despite speaking the player language.
One thing you are missing about the 4th book of the inheritance cycle is that at that point both Eragon and Saphira were speaking in the ancient language to each other, which, spoiler, us humans can't read. So he had to translate it into english.
I feel like much of this video could apply more generally to just writing non-human characters in general. Just replace "Dragon" with "Alien" and boom you've gone from fantasy to sci-fi.
In the third book in the Inheritance cycle Brisingr there is an entire chapter that shows that much of her humanness is do to Eragon's perspective translating her Dragonness
A dragon story written from the perspective of the dragons, where the humans are weird creatures, fearful at first, but end up climbing over the dragon and chittering happily, like playful pets.
I'm gonna contest what you mentioned about Eragon by positing this - As he grew older and less human Eragon himself distanced from the bright eyed farm boy he was. I think the same way the constant connection with her (as well as other things) made him less human and more magic, her being connected to him made her more and more people-like. Also I very fondly remember the few chapters in the latter books where she (finally!) has the PoV. Maybe it's more merit of the translators than the unfiltered author, but the word choice and the way she described the world around her seemed very odd. I liked it quite a lot... I can't say Eragon is my favorite story - not even my favorite story with dragons; It had lots of problems, specially the last book. But it had a lot of great, memorable things as well.
An interesting book I read is Robert Bakker’s “Raptor Red”, which describes a year in the life of a female Utahraptor from her point of view. There’s no dialogue, obviously, and Bakker gives us only such thoughts as such an animal would have, such as finding food, the health of her children, and realising a potential mate is unfit because he’s diseased, albeit rendered in English. It’s a really fascinating book, and Tim mentioning how Paolini gave Saphira too human dialogue and mannerisms made me feel think of it. BTW Glaurung beats Smaug as an antagonist.
Though it completely overlooked a blaring part of the story, Saphira being the last if her kind and has to figure out how to be a dragon in a world of humans. The only thing guiding her is her (SPOILER; until Glaedr) is natural instinct and incomplete memories of ancestors. Paolini also says very clear that over time eragon becomes more like a dragon and Saphiras more bulky and beastly features will smoothen.
Because of you, I picked up Temeraire. That's 2nd book series I've convinced to check out by a RUclipsr. The first was Issac Arthur who recommended the Uplift saga. I now a sequel series set during WWI or the American Civil War. Imagine the kind of scorched Earth in Georgia Sherman could have done with a dragon
I randomly found you and I did not regret it. Currently, am in a writing project myself and both your videos on dragons helped me a lot and send me right now in a frenzy on overworking the ones in my project. Thank you for the good work.
You could argue that the reason Saphira seems more human in later books is because she spent her entire life bonded with a human. What would have made this effect more apearant would be for Eragon to start talking and thinking more like a dragon, so that the pair of them move move their thinking and speaking to a mid-position between dragon and human due to their deep connecting influencing their thoughts, speach, and behaviour.
Two considerations that contradict each other, are:- (1) Real-world people reading books or watching movies, want excitement and spectacle and an exciting story,. not day-to-day humdrum stuff. (2) But the dragons and their riders would exist in the times between battles, and they would have to be found routine less-exciting jobs to keep them in training, such as routine patrolling over main roads looking for unwelcome wandering gangs of aggressive beggars / bandits / robbers. In the Eragon movie, there is mentioned a prospect of Eragon and Safira being found a job of patrolling along the edge of a nearby desert looking for gangs of nomads who are marauding into cultivated land.
I wrote an 8 page fantasy novella called “Oblivion” where the antagonist is an ancient dragon named “Egan” who inhabits an underground cave system resting on top of bones he collects from the bodies of devoured villagers every day he flies over to the town. I used influences from Norse, Hindu and Chinese mythology. Egan is somewhat an archetypal dragon.
Tim, have you read the Deltora Quest series by Emily Rhoda? It is a children's series, but I think there are many world building elements from it which I think might appeal to you, including dragons in the third series
There is one example of dragons that I noticed you didn't mention at all in either video, and I think it's relevant to mention: Dungeons and Dragons, and the 10 subspecies of dragons present within its rules. Their widely different personalities based on the color of their scales, along with the conflict between the chromatics and metallics, as well as the gods that rule them, is absolutely fascinating, and one that is frequently used in DnD worldbuilding and character creation.
By far the best thing about Paolini's writing in Inheritence was the entire arc regarding Roran. This guy in way over his head in a world of dragons and magic but he manages to rise above the challenges anyway. It does a great job of asking the narrative question of how, in a world of dragons and elves and dragon riders, does someone who is not any of those achieve greatness? While I can admit Eragon's story became less interesting by the end of the series, Roran was always extremely fun to read.
I really don't get why Eragon has such a rabid fanbase. There's not much abysmally bad about the series (except how the books handle Eragon's feelings toward Arya despite her having no interest in him at all), but there's also not a lot of good things, either. And it certainly has no deeper meaning or lessons for the readers.
Probably for the same reason a lot of not-actually-that-good stories/games/movies have rabid fanbases. They experienced it when they were young and that feeling they had just sticks. At least that is the case for me, Eragon will certainly always have some place in my heart.. although I am afraid of rereading it because I don't believe it will hold up to my nostalgia at all. Also, the entire way the series ended was a disappointment in my eyes, even back then.
@@metaruSaifa It was as I was finishing Eldest that I realized just how much Inheritance conformed to the fantasy genre's tropes. I remember as a twelve year old thinking, "wait, this plot is Star Wars. Let me guess, Oromis will die in book three after Eragon returns to him."
@@metaruSaifa It's still pretty good. I think if you really want to look deeper you could find a lot of problems, however it's remains a fun read overall. A series doesn't need to avoid tropes or be unpredictable to be good.
Loved your video. It was extremely interesting. Have you read The Fork, The Witch, & The Worm? It is Paolini’s new book and is a collection of three short stories that take place in the inheritance cycle world. The third story was really interesting. It was a Urgal Legend of a wild dragon that terrorized a village when it decided to live on the mountain top. It was played a lot more like the earlier scenes in the series. There are a few scene were the young Urgal stares at the dragon’s eye and realizes that it doesn’t even notice her. She was beneath its notice. It was easily my favorite of the three short stories. It seemed like something you might be interested in if these videos are any indication.
This has been pretty good watching. I'm currently writing up a character for a DnD campaign who is a young Bronze Dragon(Fifty years old) stuck in the form of a lowly and weak humanoid as a punishment for a wild night out on the town... Literally. So now she is on a quest to regain her lost power while having to try and integrate into a band of "small things" far from her coastal home. Should be a bit of a fun ride.
What about those weird dragons in "Disneys American Dragon"? Awesome Video! Could you do this with other fantasy creatures (Werewolves, Fairies, Vampires, ect.)?
I really like how the game Dragon's Dogma handles its dragon, the Grigori. He only appears maybe 3 times in the story. The first time when he chooses the players character as the new Arisen, by eating their heart. The second, at the great wall encampment, when the player confronts the Elysion and his cult. And the final time when the player confronts him in the not-so-final battle. Throughout the rest of the game we only know that the dragon is an existential threat to the dutchy and is definitely more than just a giant flying lizard. But it's not until the end of the game that the player understands what the dragon really is and its true reason for existing.
Wait, since when could Alduin control time? He was begotten (maybe sort of) from the god of time. His main gimmick was that he was destined to "eat" the world at the end of its cycle so that the new one could come and that when that time comes, defeating him is impossible (you could only win in the game because it wasn't that time yet). If he could control time, then the plot of the game kind of gets nonsensical.
That part got me confused as well. Unless Bethesda reckoned and made him have the ability to control time (which I can kinda see them doing. Bethesda is quite infamous for not having any consistent lore).
You're correct. Alduin does not control time. What makes Alduin interesting to me is he is a divine immortal figure who was corrupted by greed. This led Alduin to forsake his purpose of continuing the world's cycle. It wouldn't make since for Alduin to control time since, he was initially defeated during the dragon rebellion by using an elder scroll to send him through time. If Alduin could control time, he would simply travel back to when the elder scroll was used. Tim might have contributed some of Akotosh's powers to Alduin.
My understanding is that Alduin and Akatosh is the same creature. Akatosh is credited as one of the first creatures to live and is worshipped as one out of eight divines (Gods). Alduin however is Akatosh under a different name after he got corrupted by greed and an agenda to enslave all mortar races. Akatosh can control time and is eternal. The Elder Scrolls doesn't simply moves Alduin to a different time but banishes him to an existence outside of time (and when he returns he does that at the same location he was banished).
@@johan.ohgren yeah Auriel, Akatosh, and Alduin are all the same being. They have a cycle they go through. Auriel creates the world Akatosh maintains the world Alduin ends the world and turns into Auriel at the end. Then again, Elder Scrolls lore is so screwed up that it's hard to have any concrete answers
Alduin is time itself given form. In the cycle he is the end of all time fated to devour everything so the cycle can repeat and he can evolve into his other form which later becomes akatosh and after turns into alduin again. He does not control time but rather is time itself
Hey there, recommendation for another perspective on dragons: Daniel Abraham's Dagger and Coin series (it's 5 books). The dragons here created the races to serve them, and though civil war pretty much wiped them out, you see their impact on the world: old cities have large, towering platforms that the dragons used to roost upon, the inter-city routes were carved out by dragons and easy to travel on so on one ever bothers to stray from them, and all the ancient structures are built to scale for giant death lizards. The main focus of the series is the rise of a new evil, and economics plays a rather prominent role in the war against it (hence the title). All in all, a pretty interesting read.
On the subject of western beasts as protagonists, there's a novel called Raptor Red by Robert Bakker that does this with a velociraptor during the Cretaceous. Communication is done through body movements and scent, and Red interprets things entirely animalistically. I recommend it as a starting point to anyone wanting to tackle a beast-like point of view.
I remember Eragon was the book that first got me into reading, but now I can't seem to get back into its series the same way I did when I was younger. It is great introductory material, but doesn't have much to set it apart.
One series that actually does a great job with dragon world building is, surprisingly, My Little Pony. Let me explain. The dragons of MLP are shown to usually be classic Western dragons. Solitary, live in caves and mountains, hoard treasure, that whole deal. The only times they really gather together are for the Great Dragon Migration, or when called by the current Dragon Lord. This has led to a dragon culture that values strength and competition. They are aggressive to those they view as weak, especially other races. This is especially interesting because one of the main characters, Spike, was a dragon raised by the extremely friendly and community-minded ponies. Every episode where Spike interacts with others of his race makes a point of showing how different he is to the other dragons because of his upbringing, and leads to some interesting stories as a result.
"You don't need a dragon that can shoot saxaphones out of it's mouth!" Yes you do. It should also play the banjo. My favorite Dragons as Protagonists was probably Rachel Hartman's dragons in "Seraphina" and "Shadow Scale". The dragons have an interesting ability that make the whole story possible.
The series _Wolf Brother_ does a great job of expressing the thoughts of a simple-minded animal that does not think in language through language, I feel.
10:54 the main reason I often like to write stories about non-humans as songs -- ideally, elements of the music convey the non-verbal elements of the story.
I realy love the dragons in Walter Moers Zarmonia books. His books feature alot of creatures with human like intelligence and often body, but whenever he writes a book from the perspective of one of these creatures you can feel the difference in their culture. Some of his books are fairytales from his fantasy world, as if they were written by a dragon. My favourite book by him is Rumo, written in the perspective of a wolpertinger, a doglike creature. The first chapers are him beeing a pup, with the intelligence of a dog, but when he grows older and learns to understand language, the books writing becomes more complex. It goes from simply explaining what Rumo sees to describing his feelings, inner workings and desires.
Question: must a dragon have an otherworldly quality to itself? What if I wanted to create a story where dragons are very much like humans or perhaps through Evolution in a world where dragons and humans existed there became a hybrid species? Or what if there was a dragon society that became intertwined with a human society that by merging the two cultures wouldn't it mean that dragons would have some human characteristics and mannerisms overtime as they lived among the humans in peace? I am asking this because why must dragons be otherworldly why can't they be on the level of humans or humans to be on the level of dragons?
Our customs as humans are immensely influenced by the simple fact that if a human in the Stone Age wanted to fight another human, the fight that would be entailed would be mutually destructive or be ineffective by virtue of our hands not being all that efficient at being knives, and thus the fighting of humans (as well as the short lifespan of humans) would rely on forming communities of people to collectively kill our enemies very quickly and have large enough families to not be eliminated entirely. From these Stone Age cultures came the coordination necessary to create food faster, and thus have more ability to let other members of society invest in making technology, and from that, our modern world Dragons start from entirely different first principles, even if they are created with the ability to communicate with each other with a language capable of philosophy. The first dragon fights would necessarily be rather quick battles where advantages quickly stack up for the dragon currently winning, leading to a rather quick death for weaker dragons. Once knowledge of this feature of individual dragons in dragon society being capable of Subduing many dragons on their own, the ordering of society would never be in the form of mutually beneficial cooperation so much as it would be an extremely long lasting absolute monarchy-type hierarchy, made especially long lasting via the first monarchs being able to outlast the existence of their thrones, rebuilding the kingdoms they themselves built several times over millennia. Once these dragons discover the technology of humans, this will form the basis of factions of dragons who know they cannot defeat the original dragon monarchs even with 100 such lesser dragons, but who can easily buy the favor of humans to use their technology and armies to defeat the prior thrones. Of course, this is all based on dragons being more like the Tolkien mythology of dragons as having a pretty clear reduction in power going from older dragons (who live indefinitely) and younger dragons (with a slight transformation in that I am allowing these dragons to reproduce (albeit slowly) and not necessarily requiring dragons to be evil (the story I gave above is more about the realpolitik that must form the basis of dragon culture, as per CGP Grey’s 0th rule for rulers: “without power, you can do nothing.”))
@@evannibbe9375 that is a fairly in depth response and I love it! That is most certainly NOT a perspective I would've thought of. However, as you stated "Of course, this is all based on dragons being more like the Tolkien mythology of dragons" and my whole argument was based on the idea that you would have dragons that were NOT based on Tolkien dragons. In fact there are as many ways to portray dragons as there are cultures and peoples and in several of those portrayals there has gotta be plenty examples where Dragons as just as normal as the baker down the street. I almost wanna point to the Dragonborn race from DnD as a prime example. So yeah, all I was trying to say was that dragons don't have to be grand or epic or mysterious, they don't even have to be large in size, they can go all Mushu and be tiny! I hope I am making sense. Thanks for the reply!
These have been so incredibly helpful! I've been struggling with making my dragon story unique. I can't wait for the On Writing book; I'll definitely be purchasing! I'd totally support you on Patreon too but I'm too young :') (no credit card yet). You're the best; all hail Mishka!
I'd love to see you talk more about video game world building, but I know that's a huge time investment. When I think of interesting JRPGs with dragons tied into the world building, I think of stuff like the Breath of Fire series (especially 3 and 4), the Lunar series, and even stuff like Legend of Mana (or just the mana series in general). But that's just me, and your work is great and I really appreciate these insights, as they're helping me with my writing projects (and why I bought your book in the first place).
I have several dragon stories, one uses them like horses that are a little more intelligent, can fly, and spit fire. They are plot important at times, such as the part of the story where the MC is struggling to make a bond with his dragon because of her rightful mistrust of humans, but the main plot is about finding out what happened to the MC's brother, and finding him. In that world dragons and some other mythical creatures are little more than just useful animals that can be dangerous if not tamed.
There is a Manhua called Noblesse that calls into question a very interesting piece of philosophy. Usually when someone has great power the moral imperative would be to not "abuse" it, but to keep the balance and order. What Noblesse does is that it calls this moral imperative into question through the antagonists. Their reasoning being "Well they are my powers, why should MY usage of MY powers be oppressed?", they think of less powerful races as lesser creatures due to the power difference. Why it is a "moral imperative" is answered through us seeing the concequences of those that choose to abuse their powers.
An interesting take on dragons is the way they're used in the Iron Kingdoms universe (Warmachine and Hordes, Table Top games by Privateer Press). Toruk the Dragonfather is the master of the Nightmare Empire of Cryx, his very presence is so alien to the world around him he mutates everything around him, humans and nature become warped facsimiles of their former selves. His son Everblight does something similar, except he turns people and animals into Xenomorphs.
I am glad to have read Temeraire series, but the most unique book related to dragon as subject would be A Natural History of Dragons and its sequel. The series' subject of dragon is put in perspective of a Naturalist (Biologist). I loved them both so much that I never tire of rereading them.
Are there dragons that are just nature's apex predators like wolves? Like, their existence is nothing special or extraordinary. They will eat deer, moose, elk, tolerate other predators and humans. It's a top predator, they have no reason to be aggressive towards everyone.
![On Worldbuilding: Dragons [ The Last Airbender l Smaug l Game of Thrones ] PART ONE](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JwGiJpS4IME/mqdefault.jpg)
![On Worldbuilding: Dragons [ The Last Airbender l Smaug l Game of Thrones ] PART ONE](/img/tr.png)
![On Writing: Prologues [ Game of Thrones l Harry Potter l John Green ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Qv9qcTbwAiw/mqdefault.jpg)
![On Worldbuilding: How an Empire Falls? [ Game of Thrones l Avatar l Byzantine ]](/img/1.gif)
I NEED A HERO. I'M HOLDING OUT FOR A HERO TO COME SUPPORT ME ON PATREON patreon.com/hellofutureme Thank you so much to all the new people who joined up to patreon and the discord (seriously, we had to get new mods to support the growing community)! You guys make this more in-depth, longer form content possible. Re: ON SAPHIRA'S EMPATHY BOND - yes, I'll admit I somewhat purposefully overlooked that to make the point on word choice. I should have at least acknowledged it, but the point still stands.
~ Tim
Will u make a video about The Dragon Prince Netflex series?!
If u see this can you do another video on the connection between skrills and night furys and include something from https 3
Hello Future Me YASS
Or maybe make a video about the special forces operators from real life influence the fictional ones such as the Tom Clancy's universe?
I suppose that is fair to say about Saphira from the inheritance cycle but I would argue that her personality changed over time mainly because she never really had any other dragon to talk to or interact with except for Glaedr who keep in mind was her teacher on top of that he was not a wild dragon he was bonded and also lived for a very long time not only talking to just dragons but other riders. We don't exactly know if the dragons back then spoke and acted like dragons, or developed/learned to speak and act like humans or elves. As a side note I would not find it unreasonable to think that the same happened for the human and elf riders to develop dragon like mannerisms in return.
So following this I do not find it unreasonable to think that she would develop human like speaking. As to why she would be talking the way she was in the first book, as an educated guess I would say that she was trying to be different off of instinct because she knows that she is not human, so in her mind why should she talk like them.
I don’t NEED a dragon that can shoot saxophones out of its face, but I do want one now
I recall hearing about one that shoots drills...
LOL 😂 😂😂 😂
Thanks to furries theres probably even weirder dragons
Coobk165[GER] I have ,on fur-affinity, come across a dragon that eats love and has cupids arrow‘s breath. So yeah you’re right.
@@alexanderglass2057 well i dont want to know what you can find on e621 then
No Tim, I *do* need a dragon that shoots saxophones out of it's face.
Louis from The Princess and the Frog?
I mean, he's a crocodile, but close enough.
I disagree. While Saphira has difficulty interacting with Glaedr, it doesn't feel like it's a result of her bonding with Eragon and become more 'human', it feels like a result of her being young and horny and Glaedr doesn't want to deal with her shit because he's old. The book *tries* to make it sound like Saphira just doesn't know how to dragon properly by having Glaedr take her out on private lessons while Eragon is with Oromis, but even though Saphira comes back all excited about them we're never shown how it impacts her or how she realizes how disconnected from her own culture (so to speak) she ever was. We're never even explicitly shown how she's been humanized... nor how this would even make her different from Glaedr, who was bonded to elves and raised in a society composed entirely of other dragons that were also bonded to elves.
This is further exacerbated by the fact that, frankly, Paolini didn't actually think about this. It's mentioned that dragons actually have some kind of ancestral memory, so Saphira just *knows* a ton of things just by being a dragon-- one would think this would include dragon instincts and learned behaviors in the process, and in fact Saphira not having been raised among dragons is *never* a point of contention again. Additionally, when we start getting Saphira-centric chapters in Brisingr, Paolini makes an attempt to distinguish her as inhuman by having her refer to various things in staccato, hyphenated descriptions-- I can't remember the specific ones but a lot of nouns are replaced with things like hoofed-beast-good-eating or similar compound words, playing at being something bestial despite, previously and subsequently, just using the word 'cow'.
It really comes off as less of an intended exploration and more that the characterization was being written 'as needed' in a very surface-level attempt at addressing particular bits of criticism (Saphira's human-ness was actually something the Inheritance criticism community called out between both Eragon and Eldest) without fully understanding the criticism and, consequently, how to address it.
never needed anything more, exept maybe the communist dragons
Wait... What if we COMBINED THEM....
THE RISE OF THE COMMUNIST SAXAPHONE DRAGONS HAS BEGUN
I agree with the inheritance cycle being derivative, but Saphira's humanness is a specific plot point. As most of the time they don't meet any other dragons, and as far as they know she's the only remaining female. The dragons bonded to humans who live among humans would become more like those humans. Her actions in front of older or wilder dragons are difficult because of this. Eragon also becomes slightly more draconic, although that is less well explored
This is what I was going to say. I'd argue it's MORE interesting how her use of language changes because it emphasises her connection with Eragon
I have not read the book but from your description it seems very similar to how Toothless in How to Train Your Dragon behaves. Many of his actions seem very human-like in nature as there is no other of his kind to show him how to be a Night Fury. This is shown in the trailers for The Hidden world where toothless meets the Light Fury, the two are completely different in nature. You mention they don’t meet other dragons “most of the time” implying they do occasionally. Making Saphira’s behaviour seem completely alien to wild dragons she encounters and their behaviour seeming strange to her could be a really good way to emphasise how she has become more human and less like a dragon.
@@liammorris9372 she doesn't meet other dragons until she is atleast adolescent, if not adult (although this only takes a few years if I remember- it's probably been 5 years since I've read any of them)
I can't say much for Toothless as I thoroughly enjoyed the books and have no will to ruin that memory by watching films which seem to butcher a key plot point, though I'm more than willing to allow others to enjoy them.
@@cass2239 I enjoyed the how to train your dragon books and the films, as long as you pretend it's an entirely different ip, they're fun in their own way
I can’t believe you didn’t call them Prodragonists and Andragonists.
Also, i can’t believe you only skimmed over wings of fire during the Dragons as Protagonists section.
Wings of Fire in my opinion has the best written dragons in fiction, and I'm really disappointed he didn't mention it more
@@williamsledge3151 WOOOO MORE WOF FANS!!!
I know right!!!! MORE WOF PLEASE
@@tacticaldroid9189 ayyy WoF gang
yooo more fanwings
Maybe YOU don't need a saxaphone dragon.
I've never needed anything more!
syaondri yes yes Yes YEEEESSSSSSS
I NEED THAT IN MY LIFE NOW. I ACCIDENTALLY KEPT CAPS LOCK ON I DON’T FEEL LIKE TURNING IT OFF.
The great beast opens its giant maw, Careless Whisper bellowing forth and echoing across the land. Sexy times were had by all.
I gotchu fam
i.imgur.com/EZddKi3.jpg
I would like, but I can’t change 420
I actually would argue that Toothless doesn't belong in the beast category. He clearly understands everything that Hiccup says and is able to respond with it. The examples you used of Hiccup Dragon-Splaining... if you hit mute, you would still clearly understand what Toothless was doing by his actions and facial expressions. A mute character does not mean they can't communicate. If anything, you could say that Toothless may be smarter because he understands Hiccup's language, but Hiccup can't understand dragon speak. And it's not like a dog remembering a few previously taught commands. They are actually communicating. Look at the begining of the second movie after Toothless saves Hiccup from crashing into the rocks. Hiccup slyly is saying that Toothless needs to work on his turns. Toothless side-eyes him and throws a stone at him. That was a nuanced conversation, not a command. And Toothless understood that.
I applaud you
There’s a reason for this! In the actual books for How to Train you Dragon, they actually CAN speak. They are much more similar to the western thinker type, and Hiccup not only can ride the dragons, but speak in more than commands such as “go” or something- the dragons are actually written as sassy, showing that the speech isn’t just some kind of compulsion such as “dracarys,” they have personality, and overcoming their selfish nature is a huge part of the character arc!
MavenCree
It isn't about dragons, but a good example/comparison would be from the movie "Spirit Stallion of the Cimmaron"
You don't understand the horses but you get a sense of communication. The narrator of course fills in some gaps but its mostly silence, stares, neighs, etc
@@couragew6260 Absolutely! The relative absence of real voices for the horses is what makes _Spirit_ so artistic. It's also similar to the robots from _WALL-E._ All they say is their names and a few lines relating to EVE's programming, but you still get a sense of them as characters just as much as if they'd had dialogue.
Yeah!!
I think you kinda missed the point of Saphira humanness. She becames more and more like a human because of her bond with a human, just as Eragon becomes less and less human-like as the series progresses. In the forth book, they have a brief talk with a wild dragon, and he is much different. He doesnt have language, and he spends most of his time immerse in a state of meditation. (I forgot his name)
Ps: keep up with the good work!
His name was Valdr
.
That was going through my head, too. As you spend a lot of time with someone, you start to emulate them. Kids that spend a lot of time at home act like their parents/siblings because of all the exposure and mutual genetics (both nature and nurture). Saphira has no one but humans to interact with and even shares a mental bond with one. The old golden dragon (can't remember his name) probably acted a lot like an elf because for a very long time they were his only company. His situation is most likely different because Saphira's developmental time was spent only around 1-3 humans because of the genocide and secrecy, while the older dragon probably knew other dragons and was able to live openly, widening his exposure.
@That one friend that genuinely enjoys Rick Astley And I haven't read them since Inheritance came out, which was 8 years ago. 8 years of High School, College, and all the drama that comes with it, not to mention too many fictional stories to remember, let alone count. I also probably thought of them the same way I think if the Harry Potter series: Good reading the first time as a kid, not so good as I get older, though I wasn't nearly as invested in the Cycle as HP.
Gabriel Rodrigues exactly!
@@bluesbest1 I do not agree, I read the Cycle at least once a year since it came out and I still enjoy the story very much. The 1st book is very clearly written by a 15 year old, BUT the more you read the 1st book you'll see there is a lot of underlying thought in the story.
Have you ever read fablehaven? The dragons in that are amazing. “Dragons see us the same way we see mice, we aren’t very tasty and they’ll kill us just to keep the area tidy.”
Several dragons say they enjoy the taste of humans, but that they are too bony and don't have much meat.
There’s a similar comparison in Wings of Fire with humans (or “scavengers” as the dragons call them) being viewed very similarly to mice. Tiny, annoying, everywhere, they steal things and eat food.
I'm so glad you mentioned Wings of Fire, it's possibly my favorite depiction of Dragons in fiction
If I remember correctly, Eragon discussed with Saphira how her behaviour was interpreted by humans and how it made her seem more monsterous. I'm not too sure about this but there were civilians that found Saphira to be scary and dumb due to her dragon like reactions and behaviour. I believe they were both educated on more acceptable ways to react and Saphira was taught humans customs in respect so she would not offend anyone and so she knew how she could shoe her respect. I haven't read the series for a while tho
She was actually taught things like that, when she and Eragon became basically generals in the Varden's army. They needed her to be a symbol of hope, facing the terror of Thorn (Murtagh's Dragon) and Shurikan (Galbatorix's "stolen" dragon). So she was taught the social graces to make her less frightening to the humans they freed from Galbatorix's control. At the same time, in her personal chapters (she did have PoV chapters when she was away from Eragon in Eldest and Brisingr), it still showed she viewed the world differently, had more descriptive words for the different "Two-legs" races, for the shadow form of Eragon the Elven mages sent to look after them used, etc.
Paolini: *Writes a book with a major plot-point being that a dragon doesn't feel connected to her ancestors because she feels too human. She's only ever been around humans(because they're nearly extinct) so has disproportionate human characteristics than any other dragon in the story's universe*
Tim: I don't like it, she's too human feeling.
Paolini: Am I a joke to you?
Came to the comments to point this out. Thanks for letting me write less words lol
Eragon Silvr context matters. Seeing this comment made me be like “oh. That makes sense.”
So much agree
Yeah I agree thanks for pointing this out. It's proof of true dragon domestication. Not being overly heavy with her human prose.
I always saw her early language as that of a child. Children often use incorrect but in their minds correct language, and even understandable to us in most occasions their meaning. Children at funerals often have strange ways of trying to help and sometimes it's beautiful how their minds work. However they change more to social norms as they age.
Hello Future Me: "They kill children"
Me: "children plural? They killed ONE child, talk about prejudice"
Let me pose a question in regard to Saphira and her lack of dragon-ness; consider, for a second, that dragons in the inheritance cycle are immensely intelligent, cultural creatures, which they are. By anthropological standards, the dragons absolutely have their own culture separate from that of elves and humans, and we discover more of this in the later books when the characters encounter an eldunari of one of the wild dragons, and this culture of theirs is thoroughly different than the other humanoid cultures.
Let's compare this to existing human cultures so that we have a frame of reference; Native American cultures, for example, are vastly alien in comparison to many western European cultures. Now consider this; would a child born to two Cherokee parents (I'm using a singular tribe, just for specificity), yet raised from infancy to adulthood by Spaniards in Spain, having little to no exposure to his or her "original" culture know much, if anything about Cherokee language, practices, or idioms? No, the child wouldn't. So would a dragon, raised for a majority of her life by humans, having only met another of her kind recently and for a brief time, know much of her "native" culture? Most likely, no, which is why Saphira is more likely to use human idioms, and this goes doubly so when you take into account her empathy link with Eragon. She has literally been sharing thoughts with a human since birth-- I mean, hatching. Therefor, I say Paolini is absolutely justified in making her thoughts and actions appear human, since, culturally speaking, she is absolutely human.
Notice also that Glaedr acts far less human than Saphira, and we can attribute this to his time spent with other dragons when their culture was still preserved, a luxury Saphira never had. Glaedr thinks a lot more in images and sensory impressions, rather than words, and the wild dragon they met in book 4 doesn't use words at all. Saphira isn't so much a product of her blood, so much that she's a product of her environment, which happens to be all dirty, stupid humans all the time. This would probably even be different had Eragon been an elf, and Saphira raised on the outskirts of their domain. Since culture is defined as learned behavior that persists over generations, it makes sense that Saphira would act more human than the rest of her kind.
You might have been right, except Paolini stated in the first book that dragons have a shared racial memory, and that Sapphira was aware within her egg.
@@epsilon3569 that's partial though, she remembers some dragon culture, which is why she doesn't act in ways that are not quite human, but was raised in human culture and exposed in her egg to elven culture, thus mostly human with inhuman undertones
If a dolphin, cat or dog living with human intelligence while growing up and living with humans all their lives does not simply make them act or think like humans.
They are still limited by their bodies and inconveniences that are usually made for real humans. For example, an intelligent dog does not see or relate to a human sitting on a chair using a fork and spoon the same way as themselves do despite them having the same intelligence as humans or living up with humans.
I pretty distinctly remember in the Inheritence books that it stated a dragon taking on more human mental traits over time due to the link with their Rider just as the Rider took on the long lives of a dragon as part of that bond. Two becoming one. Glaedr and Umaroth both pretty blatantly alluded to that point on various occasions.
How could you get bored of dragons? They're so friggin cool
Your critique of word choice with Saphira intrigues me, but I'm not quite convinced it's Paolini growing lazy or apathetic. Given the attention to detail he initially showed, I could see this drift towards more human language being a result of her spending most of her time socializing or interacting with humans. There are very few dragon riders in her lifetime, so I could see her being more "human" than most dragons on average simply due to a lack of dragons to interact with and either learn dragon behavior and idioms from, or even simply keep them in use. It makes sense to me that, with few (if any) friendly dragons available for her to interact with at any given time, her mannerisms would slowly drift more towards human customs and conventions--as much as they can, at least, given her being a death-lizard.
If a dolphin, cat or dog living with human intelligence while growing up and living with humans all their lives does not simply make them act or think like humans.
They are still limited by their bodies and inconveniences that are usually made for real humans. For example, an intelligent dog does not see or relate to a human sitting on a chair using a fork and spoon the same way as themselves do, despite them having the same intelligence as humans or living up with humans.
How would it work if dragons were perceived as just another race like Elves, humans or dwarves by the people in a world
Check out E.E. Knight's Dragon Champion.
saphara? isn't it sa-fear-a (actual pronunciation guide)
There would be an inherent difference just by virtue of dragons being massive powerful flying beings.
Giving them human intelligence puts them at a point where there's literally no reason for them to see human-like races as equal to them (or rather, for it to feel natural for human-like races to see THEM as equals) if they do it'd be interpreted as them being a powerful benevolent figure as opposed to just another human-like race.
Otherwise you can literally make them human like in stature and power and you basically just have lizard-men.
@@potentpotassium5776 I believe so
@@hiimchrisj That sounds like TES: Skyrim dragons. All humanoid races nearly ended up as slaves to the dragons. Only saved by a few brave men and a dragon that changed sides.
I love how we can tell what toothless is thinking without him even saying a word.
Spoilers for Wings of Fire, up till book 9 at least.
Well Wings of Fire could have been used more for examples of dragon protagonists and showing differences between the dragon culture and our own human culture :The role of Queens as leaders of their race, with there never being a King as leader; The development of Aquatic as a language used by Seawings; The fact that dragonets become soldiers as soon as they've grown to a certain extent, and will be capable of fighting a full-grown dragon. It also has examples of dragons as antagonists: The role Queen Scarlet plays as an antagonist for much of the books and is manipulative in everything she does, as well as Morrowseer and the Nightwings; The legend of Darkstalker and the power he holds as an age-old animus dragon; The role of Blister and Burn in the first prophecy books and how they threaten the dragonet prophecy before the dragonets are even born. Wings of Fire has a lot of potential examples for writing Western Thinkers, even in how each dragon varies (Nightwing, Skywing, Mudwing, Seawing, Sandwing, Rainwing and Animus dragons).
Absolutely. Wings Of Fire is absolutely fantastic. In a bajillion ways.
Most intresting dragons that iv come across in books (and loved) is the ones from the 'The Rain Wild Chronicles' by Robin Hobb. Dragons who hatch out first as serpants and live inthe sea before going through a metamorphosis to become winged dragons. Dragons that spit acid/venom not fire, a trait from their serpant part of the life cycle. intresting to me at least. And thats not going into the 'live' ships made from the 'wood' of serpant cocoons that are aware
Inheritance Cycle: Saphira and other dragons/eldunari that had bonded with a rider could articulate words and expressions like people because from the moment they left the egg THEY WERE IMPRINTED ON "HUMAN" THOUGHT PATTERNS. Shockingly enough their psyche were affected by this. When Eragon "speaks" to the eldunari of wild/unbonded dragons, he had a great deal of difficulty understanding their thoughts because they had no basis of language he could relate to other than the impressions of physical sensations. The series had flaws like any other series does, but don't leave out contradictions because their inconvenient to your point. Love the video, cant wait for more! Give Naomi Novick's books a try, the Temeraire series specifically.
I don't wanna bug, but I borrowed the Temeraire series from someone years ago, and I wanted to read them again.... do you know somewhere I can buy/borrow them?
I really like the rhythm of speak on Tolkien's dragons as well, it gives them a certain charm. When I write dragons I try to give the such fluidity as well.
“ Such is his ignorance that remains inert in the face of the suffering of his people, puppet and silent, without his own voice. Stuck in the lines of the superb nobility that usurps the right to live of the less fortunate. So please enlighten me, with what virtue you dare to enter my territory and address me?’’
The silence in the forest was deafening, I could no longer hear the birds singing or the humming of cicadas, everything was stopped in time where not even the wind dared to break its charm, whenever the being in front of me spoke the whole forest was silent and listened. The words eluded me and my knees struggled to stay upright, the sweat on my hand made the rings I wore slippery and my eyes were no longer able to hold his gaze, lowering my head to watch one of his supporting legs on a rock, it cracked before its weight moaning every time it re-positioned its claws. I took a deep breath, the air burning in my throat and opened my mouth, but no words formed and for a few seconds I repeated the movement, like a fish out of water, during the act the dragon remained silent watching with curiosity my lack of words.
“ From what I observe, he is not even able to formulate a simple sentence. Becoming appalled by a simple question and has the courage to call himself king. It is nothing but a scoundrel, so much of your bravado in coming to the home of another to command him. I must advise, you do not exercise any command here, especially on me. I am detached from any human conflict or any other being, I am not interested in your culture, your wars, your beliefs and alliances. If you dare to come to my home to try to subdue me, you will not be the first or even the last. Dating back even before the outbreak of your race, many others tried, though, without a triumphant finish.’’
Now that's some delicious dialogue there.
"There are dozens of you"
*as names scroll up at one per frame for about a minute*
That's 60 x 24 names (about)
which means there are about 2880 names.
That's 120 dozens, Tim.
How about a dragon society with the 3 dragon stereotypes or combinations can exist in their life cycles.
I'd go with the latter, unless you can come up with an explanation for why a society would allow members of said society to be primal beasts.
Ooh, I actually love that idea.
@@bluesbest1 If they're outcasts, they're not really part of the society, are they? Manual labour is a decent enough explanation, provided that the western beasts are weaker or less numerous than their counterparts. It'd fit with the idea of dragons being naturally dominant.
@@ginge641 So, keeping them as pets, lowest caste, or otherwise "sub-us"? Kings of old tended to have tamed beasts in their throne rooms to show off or be semi-bodyguards, so keeping the lessers as thugs or something?
@@ginge641 the primal beast are their version of delinquent youth watched over by their elders, but manage to slip by and terrorised villages.
Thank you. I have a dragon protagonist in my book that I'm writing, and this'll help a lot with writing him.
Hey!
Thank you for that video. I am myself a GM in a lot of RP PBF games and for a past few months I had some problems with my own-created species. Your video allowed me to realize that with time I've lost "beast" side of my characters for the sake of human side. And you - dear author - showed me again, that this is that one problem that I need to fix!
Thank you!
14:45 it amuses me more than is polite that a paragraph touting the importance of word choice has a scripting error
(Drastically different characterisation...)
Oh my gosh - this has been bugging me. What's the scripting error?
~ Tim
In the later books, my impression was the increasingly humanlike saphira was her learning how humans think after being bentally stuck to one for several years. The younger dragons in the later books support this idea as they also think as young Saphira did.
I love the Temeraire books. I think Naomi did a good job of writing talking dragons who stay consistent with their non-human nature, even as they understand how things work in human society.
This was really helpful! I have a story about an immortal dragon that is arrogant, pompous and self absorbed because of his power. He sees not only mortal dragons but humans and all mortals and specks of dust. While he is not an antagonist he's more of a semi protagonist dipping in and out of the main character's journey as he pleases. The thing is he can speak and this was really helpful in that category, thank you so much, Tim! ❤️
Enormous Immortal space pirate pterodactyl dragon cyborg that will tear you to shreds
That’s Ridley
22:25 lol, Saphira is specifically prone to suggest just murdering obstacles and has at many times considered feasting on humans, at one time remarking that they tase just as well as boar or deer, only not doing so because she knows how much it would upset Eragon. And because their "steel shells" are annoying to pry open. XD
Thanks for teaching us Tim now we can write our own draconic story's.
Thank you for watching!
~ Tim
@@HelloFutureMe No problem Tim we will always watch all of your videos. Although it does beg the question now that we have dragons how would we interpret other mythical creatures granted you can always create your own although with everyone posting there art in the internet that has become a bit difficult these days. Also I was rewatching your "Speed Stingers did fly" video and your voice was kinda different back then.
@@fang609 has it really become more difficult to come up with original fantasy creatures because of how much fantasy art gets posted online? Or is that more of a convenient excuse to avoid it because its harder? 🤔
If you're worried about not standing out, then the less preconceived beast templates you use the better.
From my own perspective, I dont care about trolls, elves, fairies, dragons or any of that stuff because I've seen that many interpretations of them and I also know I've seen probably the closest to "my favourite" of each of those interpretations that ill ever see, so for me specifically I almost want to say there is _no_ dragon story that I'd want to actually read more about, but obviously a good enough writer could change my mind.
Its up to you, but if it were me id look up some "how to create fantasy creatures" guides. If nothing else they'll all tell you to take inspiration from nature, consider their evolution, environment, diet, predators, prey, are they nocturnal or something different etc etc. Its really not so hard once you practice a bit.
I love your video! This actually really helped me with how I plan on incorporating Dragons into my D&D adventure 😁 but if I can be nitpicky, mind if I point out that Alduin doesn't have any control over time. The only association between him and time is that he is the first born of Akatosh and that the Ancient Nord heros cast him adrift through time using an Elderscroll. Other then that Alduin is actually an ordinary Dragon other then the fact that he can't actually be slain.
Well Alduin does seemingly reverse time when he raises dragons from their mounds as well. The shout he uses (Slen-Tiid-Vo) means Flesh-Time-Reverse, implying that he reverses time to return dragons to their flesh forms. Take that as you will.
There were so many opportunities to put in wings of fire
Rob Lopezcepero yeah SPAM HIM WITH WINGS OF FIRE
He at least put it in once, I’m mean he can’t add everything.
I agree. It's an excellent example of dragons in fiction
he NEEDS to make a whole video about it PLEASE
If I did have a dragon that breaths saxophones
Made my day
"You don't need dragons who can shoot saxophones out of their face"
But what if I do?
On the topic of how Paolini wrote dragons, I do want to address that there was a clear distinction between dragons raised by humans, such as Saphira and Thorn, who slowly acted less on impulse and more on human thought (which makes sense given the nature of their raising), and dragons who were either raised in the wild or in the traditional way of the dragon riders. The former were raised by a young human, and thus they way they acted is largely impacted by that fact. The older dragons communicate in non-verbal and vague ways, and the imagery used for them is much more mystical and non-human. If anything, I think the writing of Saphira as a more human-acting character only added to the depth of her characterization
You mentioned Guild Wars 2 AND Wings of Fire... My life is complete. Also, you pulled up the best book in the series that inspired my writing.
Saphira having more human-like dialogue and actions as the story progresses is due to her spending more time around humans and being mentally linked to Eragon for a longer period of time.
At a later point in the story, dragons that chose to remain isolated from elves and humans are discussed. They do not think in words and are much more animalistic. I cannot remember the exact wording, unfortunately.
Your points are entirely valid and I agree with them, but I disagree that the example given fits said points completely.
I do still love this video.
It's not the fact that the inheritance cycle got children into fantasy that should be praised. It was so popular because it focused on characters and attaching us to said characters rather than getting bogged down in world building and over explaining that like most, even acclaimed, fantasy series do, thus driving away readers, because there is no compelling central protagonist with a relatable goal that we attach to. There's just some super thought-out world building, which means nothing without a compelling story to pair with it.
When you finish with this series on writing dragons would you do a series on writing speech patterns, rhythms, and languages.
While I can agree to an extent with you on the derivative nature of the dragon riders in Paolini's series (as well as the derivative nature of it having the usual elves, dwarves, etc), what keeps me interested in that series is how he uses those basic building blocks to build a fantasy world that, while familiar, has a certain uniqueness to it. My favorite parts of the Inheritance Cycle are honestly when it didn't focus on Eragon and Saphira. When it focused on Roran having to save his village from great danger, rescue his wife and lead armies to victory. When it focused on the political pressures Nasuada faced being the head of the Varden, trying to gather allies and outsmart enemies. When it delved into the history of the races, how they lived, their societal structures, their architecture. Like I mentioned above: familiar, yet unique. The dragon on the cover of Eragon is what drew me to the series, but it's FAR from the reason I stayed :)
Toothless looks really cute when hiccup bring him back from the power of the bewilderbeast
One of the things I like about Paarthurnax from Skyrim is specifically about how he speaks. All the dragons can speak, but Paarthurnax has a unique characteristic where he tends to ramble, to indulge in speech. He mixes certain words from the dragon tongue into his speech more often than others, such as Krosis, a sort of apology. He still feels like a dragon despite speaking the player language.
One thing you are missing about the 4th book of the inheritance cycle is that at that point both Eragon and Saphira were speaking in the ancient language to each other, which, spoiler, us humans can't read. So he had to translate it into english.
I feel like much of this video could apply more generally to just writing non-human characters in general. Just replace "Dragon" with "Alien" and boom you've gone from fantasy to sci-fi.
In the third book in the Inheritance cycle Brisingr there is an entire chapter that shows that much of her humanness is do to Eragon's perspective translating her Dragonness
You are doing the Nerd God's work.
A dragon story written from the perspective of the dragons, where the humans are weird creatures, fearful at first, but end up climbing over the dragon and chittering happily, like playful pets.
Your videos are always fun to watch thanks for all the hard work you do for us
Daniel Simmons nice stalinstache btw
Thanks comrade its a stick on mustache
Eragon and the Inheritance Cycle is one of my favorite books of all time. I read it so many times as a kid.
I FUCKING LOVE DRAGON!!!! So, continue this little serie. The video is really a great job.
I'm gonna contest what you mentioned about Eragon by positing this - As he grew older and less human Eragon himself distanced from the bright eyed farm boy he was. I think the same way the constant connection with her (as well as other things) made him less human and more magic, her being connected to him made her more and more people-like.
Also I very fondly remember the few chapters in the latter books where she (finally!) has the PoV. Maybe it's more merit of the translators than the unfiltered author, but the word choice and the way she described the world around her seemed very odd. I liked it quite a lot...
I can't say Eragon is my favorite story - not even my favorite story with dragons; It had lots of problems, specially the last book. But it had a lot of great, memorable things as well.
No Temeraire series? I'd love to see video on those.
An interesting book I read is Robert Bakker’s “Raptor Red”, which describes a year in the life of a female Utahraptor from her point of view. There’s no dialogue, obviously, and Bakker gives us only such thoughts as such an animal would have, such as finding food, the health of her children, and realising a potential mate is unfit because he’s diseased, albeit rendered in English. It’s a really fascinating book, and Tim mentioning how Paolini gave Saphira too human dialogue and mannerisms made me feel think of it.
BTW Glaurung beats Smaug as an antagonist.
I love your videos keep up the good work go crazy 🔥🔥
Ikr!!! They are super informal and awesome!!! :)
This channel really helps me with my writing instantly subscribed
HOW DARE YOU CRITICIZE THE INHERITANCE CYCLE WITH AN UNBIASED AND WELL-REASONED ARGUMENT AS PART OF A VERY WELL DONE VIDEO!
This made me laugh a lot.
~ Tim
Hello Future Me Glad to hear it. Love your stuff man, keep up the great work ❤️
Though it completely overlooked a blaring part of the story, Saphira being the last if her kind and has to figure out how to be a dragon in a world of humans. The only thing guiding her is her (SPOILER; until Glaedr) is natural instinct and incomplete memories of ancestors. Paolini also says very clear that over time eragon becomes more like a dragon and Saphiras more bulky and beastly features will smoothen.
Because of you, I picked up Temeraire. That's 2nd book series I've convinced to check out by a RUclipsr. The first was Issac Arthur who recommended the Uplift saga. I now a sequel series set during WWI or the American Civil War. Imagine the kind of scorched Earth in Georgia Sherman could have done with a dragon
Just when I thought I was done getting saxaphoned
I randomly found you and I did not regret it. Currently, am in a writing project myself and both your videos on dragons helped me a lot and send me right now in a frenzy on overworking the ones in my project. Thank you for the good work.
You could argue that the reason Saphira seems more human in later books is because she spent her entire life bonded with a human. What would have made this effect more apearant would be for Eragon to start talking and thinking more like a dragon, so that the pair of them move move their thinking and speaking to a mid-position between dragon and human due to their deep connecting influencing their thoughts, speach, and behaviour.
Two considerations that contradict each other, are:-
(1) Real-world people reading books or watching movies, want excitement and spectacle and an exciting story,. not day-to-day humdrum stuff.
(2) But the dragons and their riders would exist in the times between battles, and they would have to be found routine less-exciting jobs to keep them in training, such as routine patrolling over main roads looking for unwelcome wandering gangs of aggressive beggars / bandits / robbers. In the Eragon movie, there is mentioned a prospect of Eragon and Safira being found a job of patrolling along the edge of a nearby desert looking for gangs of nomads who are marauding into cultivated land.
I wrote an 8 page fantasy novella called “Oblivion” where the antagonist is an ancient dragon named “Egan” who inhabits an underground cave system resting on top of bones he collects from the bodies of devoured villagers every day he flies over to the town. I used influences from Norse, Hindu and Chinese mythology. Egan is somewhat an archetypal dragon.
Tim, have you read the Deltora Quest series by Emily Rhoda? It is a children's series, but I think there are many world building elements from it which I think might appeal to you, including dragons in the third series
There is one example of dragons that I noticed you didn't mention at all in either video, and I think it's relevant to mention: Dungeons and Dragons, and the 10 subspecies of dragons present within its rules. Their widely different personalities based on the color of their scales, along with the conflict between the chromatics and metallics, as well as the gods that rule them, is absolutely fascinating, and one that is frequently used in DnD worldbuilding and character creation.
By far the best thing about Paolini's writing in Inheritence was the entire arc regarding Roran. This guy in way over his head in a world of dragons and magic but he manages to rise above the challenges anyway. It does a great job of asking the narrative question of how, in a world of dragons and elves and dragon riders, does someone who is not any of those achieve greatness? While I can admit Eragon's story became less interesting by the end of the series, Roran was always extremely fun to read.
I really don't get why Eragon has such a rabid fanbase. There's not much abysmally bad about the series (except how the books handle Eragon's feelings toward Arya despite her having no interest in him at all), but there's also not a lot of good things, either.
And it certainly has no deeper meaning or lessons for the readers.
Probably for the same reason a lot of not-actually-that-good stories/games/movies have rabid fanbases. They experienced it when they were young and that feeling they had just sticks. At least that is the case for me, Eragon will certainly always have some place in my heart.. although I am afraid of rereading it because I don't believe it will hold up to my nostalgia at all. Also, the entire way the series ended was a disappointment in my eyes, even back then.
@@metaruSaifa It was as I was finishing Eldest that I realized just how much Inheritance conformed to the fantasy genre's tropes. I remember as a twelve year old thinking, "wait, this plot is Star Wars. Let me guess, Oromis will die in book three after Eragon returns to him."
It felt unfinished
@@metaruSaifa It's still pretty good. I think if you really want to look deeper you could find a lot of problems, however it's remains a fun read overall. A series doesn't need to avoid tropes or be unpredictable to be good.
Loved your video. It was extremely interesting. Have you read The Fork, The Witch, & The Worm? It is Paolini’s new book and is a collection of three short stories that take place in the inheritance cycle world. The third story was really interesting. It was a Urgal Legend of a wild dragon that terrorized a village when it decided to live on the mountain top. It was played a lot more like the earlier scenes in the series. There are a few scene were the young Urgal stares at the dragon’s eye and realizes that it doesn’t even notice her. She was beneath its notice. It was easily my favorite of the three short stories. It seemed like something you might be interested in if these videos are any indication.
This has been pretty good watching. I'm currently writing up a character for a DnD campaign who is a young Bronze Dragon(Fifty years old) stuck in the form of a lowly and weak humanoid as a punishment for a wild night out on the town... Literally. So now she is on a quest to regain her lost power while having to try and integrate into a band of "small things" far from her coastal home. Should be a bit of a fun ride.
What about those weird dragons in "Disneys American Dragon"?
Awesome Video! Could you do this with other fantasy creatures (Werewolves, Fairies, Vampires, ect.)?
I really like how the game Dragon's Dogma handles its dragon, the Grigori. He only appears maybe 3 times in the story. The first time when he chooses the players character as the new Arisen, by eating their heart. The second, at the great wall encampment, when the player confronts the Elysion and his cult. And the final time when the player confronts him in the not-so-final battle. Throughout the rest of the game we only know that the dragon is an existential threat to the dutchy and is definitely more than just a giant flying lizard. But it's not until the end of the game that the player understands what the dragon really is and its true reason for existing.
Wait, since when could Alduin control time? He was begotten (maybe sort of) from the god of time. His main gimmick was that he was destined to "eat" the world at the end of its cycle so that the new one could come and that when that time comes, defeating him is impossible (you could only win in the game because it wasn't that time yet).
If he could control time, then the plot of the game kind of gets nonsensical.
That part got me confused as well. Unless Bethesda reckoned and made him have the ability to control time (which I can kinda see them doing. Bethesda is quite infamous for not having any consistent lore).
You're correct. Alduin does not control time. What makes Alduin interesting to me is he is a divine immortal figure who was corrupted by greed. This led Alduin to forsake his purpose of continuing the world's cycle. It wouldn't make since for Alduin to control time since, he was initially defeated during the dragon rebellion by using an elder scroll to send him through time. If Alduin could control time, he would simply travel back to when the elder scroll was used. Tim might have contributed some of Akotosh's powers to Alduin.
My understanding is that Alduin and Akatosh is the same creature. Akatosh is credited as one of the first creatures to live and is worshipped as one out of eight divines (Gods). Alduin however is Akatosh under a different name after he got corrupted by greed and an agenda to enslave all mortar races.
Akatosh can control time and is eternal. The Elder Scrolls doesn't simply moves Alduin to a different time but banishes him to an existence outside of time (and when he returns he does that at the same location he was banished).
@@johan.ohgren yeah Auriel, Akatosh, and Alduin are all the same being. They have a cycle they go through.
Auriel creates the world
Akatosh maintains the world
Alduin ends the world and turns into Auriel at the end.
Then again, Elder Scrolls lore is so screwed up that it's hard to have any concrete answers
Alduin is time itself given form. In the cycle he is the end of all time fated to devour everything so the cycle can repeat and he can evolve into his other form which later becomes akatosh and after turns into alduin again. He does not control time but rather is time itself
I'll probably never write anything myself but I just love understanding what makes stories good.
Best thing ever again
Hey there, recommendation for another perspective on dragons: Daniel Abraham's Dagger and Coin series (it's 5 books). The dragons here created the races to serve them, and though civil war pretty much wiped them out, you see their impact on the world: old cities have large, towering platforms that the dragons used to roost upon, the inter-city routes were carved out by dragons and easy to travel on so on one ever bothers to stray from them, and all the ancient structures are built to scale for giant death lizards. The main focus of the series is the rise of a new evil, and economics plays a rather prominent role in the war against it (hence the title). All in all, a pretty interesting read.
Still hoping for at least a mention of dragon maids
Scenes from that anime were shown in these videos in certain summary backgrounds.
On the subject of western beasts as protagonists, there's a novel called Raptor Red by Robert Bakker that does this with a velociraptor during the Cretaceous. Communication is done through body movements and scent, and Red interprets things entirely animalistically. I recommend it as a starting point to anyone wanting to tackle a beast-like point of view.
What about the dragons in Wings of fire?.
Nevermind
Red X Yeah I reeeealllly wants him to mention him
I remember Eragon was the book that first got me into reading, but now I can't seem to get back into its series the same way I did when I was younger. It is great introductory material, but doesn't have much to set it apart.
I’d love to see a whole video about wings of fire. I think it’s a very interesting dragon role. And I think the magic system is very unique.
YEs!!!!! PLEASE!!! That would be the best video of all time!!!
One series that actually does a great job with dragon world building is, surprisingly, My Little Pony. Let me explain.
The dragons of MLP are shown to usually be classic Western dragons. Solitary, live in caves and mountains, hoard treasure, that whole deal. The only times they really gather together are for the Great Dragon Migration, or when called by the current Dragon Lord. This has led to a dragon culture that values strength and competition. They are aggressive to those they view as weak, especially other races. This is especially interesting because one of the main characters, Spike, was a dragon raised by the extremely friendly and community-minded ponies. Every episode where Spike interacts with others of his race makes a point of showing how different he is to the other dragons because of his upbringing, and leads to some interesting stories as a result.
The way you describe dragons actually reminds me of the Lion Turtle on The Last Airbender.
"You don't need a dragon that can shoot saxaphones out of it's mouth!"
Yes you do. It should also play the banjo.
My favorite Dragons as Protagonists was probably Rachel Hartman's dragons in "Seraphina" and "Shadow Scale". The dragons have an interesting ability that make the whole story possible.
Ooooh yes that book was fascinating!!! Great point!!!!
The series _Wolf Brother_ does a great job of expressing the thoughts of a simple-minded animal that does not think in language through language, I feel.
What is your opinion about the Temerair series, on this topic?
10:54 the main reason I often like to write stories about non-humans as songs -- ideally, elements of the music convey the non-verbal elements of the story.
Temeraire had the best dragons.
I realy love the dragons in Walter Moers Zarmonia books. His books feature alot of creatures with human like intelligence and often body, but whenever he writes a book from the perspective of one of these creatures you can feel the difference in their culture. Some of his books are fairytales from his fantasy world, as if they were written by a dragon. My favourite book by him is Rumo, written in the perspective of a wolpertinger, a doglike creature. The first chapers are him beeing a pup, with the intelligence of a dog, but when he grows older and learns to understand language, the books writing becomes more complex. It goes from simply explaining what Rumo sees to describing his feelings, inner workings and desires.
I mostly watch these videos to think more deeply about my favorite series right now wings of fire
Yes.
Question: must a dragon have an otherworldly quality to itself? What if I wanted to create a story where dragons are very much like humans or perhaps through Evolution in a world where dragons and humans existed there became a hybrid species? Or what if there was a dragon society that became intertwined with a human society that by merging the two cultures wouldn't it mean that dragons would have some human characteristics and mannerisms overtime as they lived among the humans in peace? I am asking this because why must dragons be otherworldly why can't they be on the level of humans or humans to be on the level of dragons?
Our customs as humans are immensely influenced by the simple fact that if a human in the Stone Age wanted to fight another human, the fight that would be entailed would be mutually destructive or be ineffective by virtue of our hands not being all that efficient at being knives, and thus the fighting of humans (as well as the short lifespan of humans) would rely on forming communities of people to collectively kill our enemies very quickly and have large enough families to not be eliminated entirely. From these Stone Age cultures came the coordination necessary to create food faster, and thus have more ability to let other members of society invest in making technology, and from that, our modern world
Dragons start from entirely different first principles, even if they are created with the ability to communicate with each other with a language capable of philosophy. The first dragon fights would necessarily be rather quick battles where advantages quickly stack up for the dragon currently winning, leading to a rather quick death for weaker dragons. Once knowledge of this feature of individual dragons in dragon society being capable of Subduing many dragons on their own, the ordering of society would never be in the form of mutually beneficial cooperation so much as it would be an extremely long lasting absolute monarchy-type hierarchy, made especially long lasting via the first monarchs being able to outlast the existence of their thrones, rebuilding the kingdoms they themselves built several times over millennia.
Once these dragons discover the technology of humans, this will form the basis of factions of dragons who know they cannot defeat the original dragon monarchs even with 100 such lesser dragons, but who can easily buy the favor of humans to use their technology and armies to defeat the prior thrones.
Of course, this is all based on dragons being more like the Tolkien mythology of dragons as having a pretty clear reduction in power going from older dragons (who live indefinitely) and younger dragons (with a slight transformation in that I am allowing these dragons to reproduce (albeit slowly) and not necessarily requiring dragons to be evil (the story I gave above is more about the realpolitik that must form the basis of dragon culture, as per CGP Grey’s 0th rule for rulers: “without power, you can do nothing.”))
@@evannibbe9375 that is a fairly in depth response and I love it! That is most certainly NOT a perspective I would've thought of.
However, as you stated "Of course, this is all based on dragons being more like the Tolkien mythology of dragons" and my whole argument was based on the idea that you would have dragons that were NOT based on Tolkien dragons. In fact there are as many ways to portray dragons as there are cultures and peoples and in several of those portrayals there has gotta be plenty examples where Dragons as just as normal as the baker down the street. I almost wanna point to the Dragonborn race from DnD as a prime example. So yeah, all I was trying to say was that dragons don't have to be grand or epic or mysterious, they don't even have to be large in size, they can go all Mushu and be tiny!
I hope I am making sense. Thanks for the reply!
These have been so incredibly helpful! I've been struggling with making my dragon story unique. I can't wait for the On Writing book; I'll definitely be purchasing! I'd totally support you on Patreon too but I'm too young :') (no credit card yet). You're the best; all hail Mishka!
I'd love to see you talk more about video game world building, but I know that's a huge time investment. When I think of interesting JRPGs with dragons tied into the world building, I think of stuff like the Breath of Fire series (especially 3 and 4), the Lunar series, and even stuff like Legend of Mana (or just the mana series in general).
But that's just me, and your work is great and I really appreciate these insights, as they're helping me with my writing projects (and why I bought your book in the first place).
I have several dragon stories, one uses them like horses that are a little more intelligent, can fly, and spit fire. They are plot important at times, such as the part of the story where the MC is struggling to make a bond with his dragon because of her rightful mistrust of humans, but the main plot is about finding out what happened to the MC's brother, and finding him. In that world dragons and some other mythical creatures are little more than just useful animals that can be dangerous if not tamed.
There is a Manhua called Noblesse that calls into question a very interesting piece of philosophy. Usually when someone has great power the moral imperative would be to not "abuse" it, but to keep the balance and order. What Noblesse does is that it calls this moral imperative into question through the antagonists. Their reasoning being "Well they are my powers, why should MY usage of MY powers be oppressed?", they think of less powerful races as lesser creatures due to the power difference. Why it is a "moral imperative" is answered through us seeing the concequences of those that choose to abuse their powers.
another work with VERY interesting dragon lore is Realm of the Elderlings, super recommend that one.
An interesting take on dragons is the way they're used in the Iron Kingdoms universe (Warmachine and Hordes, Table Top games by Privateer Press). Toruk the Dragonfather is the master of the Nightmare Empire of Cryx, his very presence is so alien to the world around him he mutates everything around him, humans and nature become warped facsimiles of their former selves. His son Everblight does something similar, except he turns people and animals into Xenomorphs.
I am glad to have read Temeraire series, but the most unique book related to dragon as subject would be A Natural History of Dragons and its sequel. The series' subject of dragon is put in perspective of a Naturalist (Biologist). I loved them both so much that I never tire of rereading them.
Are there dragons that are just nature's apex predators like wolves? Like, their existence is nothing special or extraordinary. They will eat deer, moose, elk, tolerate other predators and humans. It's a top predator, they have no reason to be aggressive towards everyone.
Triple Catnip wyverns