Talk:David Eddings

Birth Location

He grew up in Puget Sound? In the water? -- Zoe

Spelling

OK, so is it spelt "Malloreon" or "Mallorean"? Both elicit responses from Google. Best fun is that Amazon doesn't seem to be certain :-) Phil 09:11, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)

On the other hand, the scanned cover at Amazon UK shows "Malloreon", so unless anyone objects massively, I'm going to learn how to rename a page specially for this task. Phil 09:30, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)

"Malloreon" does indeed to be the spelling of the series, however in the books the name Mallorean is given to a person who lives in Mallorea. Which does raise the question, was the series name misspelt on all the books ? --Imran

I think the name is not meant to be the same as that for an inhabitant: it's more connected to the nation as a whole. A Mallorean is an inhabitant of "endless" Mallorea, the Malloreon is a "saga" (for want of a better term) focussed on the history of Mallorea. Am I making sense? Phil 11:52, Dec 5, 2003 (UTC)

(hangs head in shame) I've just discovered that this is all moot since someone has already done the move ... in May! However whoever did it failed to rename any of the links on David Eddings so I think I'll do that instead. Phil 11:55, Dec 5, 2003 (UTC)

Chiming in a bit late, but Phil had it right and did indeed make sense. "Mallorean" is the adjective of "Mallorea", a continent where much of this series' action takes place. "Malloreon" is the name of the series, in the same tradition of Classical-sounding suffixes as Eddings uses for his other series (compare "Belgariad" to "Iliad"). -- Perey 18:51, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I just wanted to apologise to all of you for bringing the A/O problem back into the fray without checking the David Eddings talk page (I checked the book talk pages and found nothing there). I am very embarrassed, and I'll be sure not to make a similar mistake again. Also, the actual books themselves use "Malloreon", but I think I must have seen "Mallorean" in my mind until I actually focused on that one letter. -- Deathphoenix 15:06, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

---

I noticed that the epic fantasy link is broken. I have changed the link (but kept its appearance) to send the user to high fantasy. I understand the possibility that some might see a difference between the two genres, but as Eddings himself is listed on the high fantasy page I see little reason to differentiate. I apologize for taking such initiative (if it is unwarranted) but I am new to wikipedia. Reediewes 01:40, May 8, 2005 (UTC) I went through and infoboxed all of the pages, based on what was on them, followed by info off of Amazon. I also cleared up some issues where links to individual books weren't being redirected to the series, i.e., the first book of the Dreamers and the first book of the Belgariad had thier own pages, without anything that wasn't on the main series page, while the rest of them redirected themselves; this has been fixed. Figured I'd write this on the main Eddings page, rather than each individual series page. PresN 19:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Some hyperlinks...?

I just thought that it would be nice if we had some hyperlinks directing to the books, that's all.

Lady Nimue of the Lake 07:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Praise/Criticism

I'd like to see a Praise/Criticism section so people can get an idea of what kind of writer Eddings is. Such as his fantastic Character Development vs. his books being all very similar in structure. only up to wikipedia standards, which i find myself unable to meet usually.Phil 11:55, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

That's not really within the scope of a Wikipedia biography page. Also, I think most pragmatic readers would agree that Edding's character development is incredibly poor. After all, what do you really know about Belgarath AS A CHARACTER at the end of the Malloreon, that you didn't know about him at the end of the Belgariad? Nothing. How has he changed? He hasn't. Some facts are revealed about him perhaps, but that is not character development. Contrast this with a fully realized character like Roland Deschain, from The Dark Tower...Mikejstevenson 11:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Personally I prefered that the Belgarath character remained a bit mysterious. The character was much more further developed in Belgarath the Sorcer. Maybe that was Edding's way of getting people to buy more of his books. If you knew everything there was to know why would you pay money for a biography?SaraJean 19:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I have to strongly disagree here. I think Eddings does a beautiful job at character development. When you can hear a characters voice while reading the words, character development has to be working. When you can laugh at the conversations and feel shock, sadness, merth in the words, there is talented character development. Everyone I know who has read the Belgarion and the Malloreon have been able to find people in their on lives that could be each and evey character in the books. The mother figure Polgara represents is found in households all across the world. Guiding, teaching and caring for all; while making it look so simple. Belgrath, is the lovable slighty seed uncle that you see now and then and when you do he always has a story to tell. You can find these characters and relate to them as easily as you breathe. In the next to series, some of the fun of reading the books, was the seach to find the remembered favorite character from the first set. Most were not direct copies of the former charcter but the character given a new traight, skill, kindness or a new deminsion, a deeper purpose. If you don't want or need to know more about the past of the major characters, don't read them. Apprently, the characters were developed well enough for you to have read the books about their pasts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.165.105.118 (talk • contribs) 11:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

What you are describing there is not character development. I don't disagree that Eddings took numerous obvious archetypes and represented them as characters - making it very easy to feel 'familar' with them (just as he recycled wholesale various historical races). But having a character that exhibits certain traits and characteristics that you can relate to does not equate to character development. I'm not having a go at Eddings here - I actually quite enjoyed the Belgariad when I read it, although my taste has matured since then. But charitably I think even he would admit he is hardly a great writer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikejstevenson (talk • contribs) 07:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC).

This is just discussing views; there's an Eddings usenet group for that (I'll fail to resist chipping in anyway by saying it would look rather unconvincing if a 7000 year old character who's been through a great deal in that time did change much over the few years of the books). Riedquat 01:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

---

Criticism Section

Its an editorial piece trashing the guy's writing, not fit for an encyclopedia. Get a source, and give a brief view of the criticisms, but most of his page is a (bad) point-by-point analysis of his books that could be easily applied to any SF/F writer.

I agree. This entry seems overly critical of his writing style. Roger 02:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Totally agree Bluap 05:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Disagree. It describes exactly what he is doing - he has stated he uses these approaches himself in the Rivan Codex, which is cited as a source. Go away and read that book, then come back and dispute the content of this article with that in mind. Until then, don't react like a petulant child just because you think your favorite author is being criticised. Also, have the guts to sign your comments. Mikejstevenson 13:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The article is an opinionated piece. One tell-tale sign of this is the references in the article are poor. An example from the article: "This has generally caused a great deal of criticism of his work, with some critics and readers labelling it as child-like and repetitive" has a reference [3] pertaining only to the second part of the sentence. Indeed, reference [3] is a list of Amazon reviews, in which "some critics and readers" express a view which coincides with the article writer's. However, this very amazon.com page shows a general rating of 4 out of 5 for the book. So not only does the reference pertain to half the article writer's statement, the reference shows that the writer is being selective in his/her observations. I am being kind by commenting on an excerpt with a reference. There are several other non-cited statements in the article that demonstrate a bias, possibly born of personal taste. The point is, anyone would struggle to find a completely negative (or positive) citation about Edding's work. So why the tone of the article? Make it more even-handed please.--Darrenyeats 13:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)