A lot of Sanderson's work is closer to something like progression fantasy, or as someone mentioned above, a shonen anime. It's more obsessed with world building and magic systems and power levels, and tells stories and character arcs through those lenses.
I do think you're discounting Oathbringer, which is an in-depth character study in part of a very terrible person trying to become a less terrible person.
This is exactly why he's qualified to teach a writing course. He doesn't appear to have any of the innate understanding of writing that most authors acquire just from reading books; he had to learn it all from scratch so he could adequately show off his world stuff. So he's uniquely positioned to verbalize the basics that everyone else knows without thinking.
Or, you know, you could argue that. I still don't think I'd take his class.
Whoa, somehow missed this one in the firehose, totally agree about Mistborn! I always recommend it as a starting point for Branderson (though I always simultaneously advise my listeners against getting into Branderson at all, for it is far too much and I think he’s too pro-slavery deep down in his heart), because yeah, the first Mistborn trilogy is a perfectly interlocking machine, a masterpiece creation of dominoes, a piece of self-contained perfection. Also yes, Elantris is terrible, woe to all of us who have read it, but in the godawful proto-Sanderlanche at the end you can see him practicing for the glorious cascade he will one day perfect in Mistborn
Always appreciate a book review that exceeds its object prose quality. I'd be very interested to hear you expand these thoughts on the mechanics of narrative -- maybe with reference to that book you wrote about wizards?
I agree that the final Stormlight books lose focus, but I attribute that far more to Sanderson's long-time editor retiring. Did you really not enjoy Words of Radiance? Most consider it his finest work (outside of his novellas).
Very interesting. I haven’t read Mistborn and I think the argument could use some development/continuation. Basically, you’re saying Mistborn is normal except in the one aspect Sanderson is interested which is… what? Is it LitRPG-style stats? I’d love to know!!
Sanderson's prose is of the "the best prose is that which disappears entirely to the reader, like a pane of perfectly clear glass" school—though I can't remember if Sanderson explicitly endorses such a view or not;¹ he certainly seems to have been influenced by it, anyway, willingly or otherwise.
I liked *Way of Kings*, and *Mistborn* + sequels, but the latter have been almost entirely forgettable to me (I recall only the barest outline of the plot, and maybe two or three characters, therefrom; these latter can best be described as "Types™", maybe) & the former... the former has stuck with me a bit more—some elements therein I found genuinely affecting—but I just can't seem to get through the sequels. (People love them, I know... but for some reason, I keep sort of drifting away about 2/3 in *Words of Radiance*, or 1/3 of the way through *Oathkeeper* or whatever it's called–)
-------------
¹(I have watched his sci-fi/fantasy writing lectures on YouTube; although I found them easy listening, I did not actually get much enlightenment out of them, IIRC. "How do you create a good magic system?" –"Well, make sure you give it, like, some depth. And make sure it makes sense, that's another good one. And...")
A lot of Sanderson's work is closer to something like progression fantasy, or as someone mentioned above, a shonen anime. It's more obsessed with world building and magic systems and power levels, and tells stories and character arcs through those lenses.
I do think you're discounting Oathbringer, which is an in-depth character study in part of a very terrible person trying to become a less terrible person.
Yes but a bad one imo. Sanderson is not good at "characters".
I imagined it as anime while reading, which made it work really well, considering, as you said, it's a cartoon.
This is exactly why he's qualified to teach a writing course. He doesn't appear to have any of the innate understanding of writing that most authors acquire just from reading books; he had to learn it all from scratch so he could adequately show off his world stuff. So he's uniquely positioned to verbalize the basics that everyone else knows without thinking.
Or, you know, you could argue that. I still don't think I'd take his class.
I think there is something to this tbh
Whoa, somehow missed this one in the firehose, totally agree about Mistborn! I always recommend it as a starting point for Branderson (though I always simultaneously advise my listeners against getting into Branderson at all, for it is far too much and I think he’s too pro-slavery deep down in his heart), because yeah, the first Mistborn trilogy is a perfectly interlocking machine, a masterpiece creation of dominoes, a piece of self-contained perfection. Also yes, Elantris is terrible, woe to all of us who have read it, but in the godawful proto-Sanderlanche at the end you can see him practicing for the glorious cascade he will one day perfect in Mistborn
Pro-slavery? Say more?
What an interesting way to phrase what I’ve also experienced. Well done, very entertaining.
Always appreciate a book review that exceeds its object prose quality. I'd be very interested to hear you expand these thoughts on the mechanics of narrative -- maybe with reference to that book you wrote about wizards?
Good essay, I think it could have used a quote or two from Mistborn, to illustrate the claim.
Houllebecq says that writing doesn't even have to be good, as long as the author is *present*.
I agree that the final Stormlight books lose focus, but I attribute that far more to Sanderson's long-time editor retiring. Did you really not enjoy Words of Radiance? Most consider it his finest work (outside of his novellas).
I enjoyed it the first time I read it but on reread I couldn't get through it at all, which is not how I felt about way of kings
I see! Interesting.
Very interesting. I haven’t read Mistborn and I think the argument could use some development/continuation. Basically, you’re saying Mistborn is normal except in the one aspect Sanderson is interested which is… what? Is it LitRPG-style stats? I’d love to know!!
Sanderson's prose is of the "the best prose is that which disappears entirely to the reader, like a pane of perfectly clear glass" school—though I can't remember if Sanderson explicitly endorses such a view or not;¹ he certainly seems to have been influenced by it, anyway, willingly or otherwise.
I liked *Way of Kings*, and *Mistborn* + sequels, but the latter have been almost entirely forgettable to me (I recall only the barest outline of the plot, and maybe two or three characters, therefrom; these latter can best be described as "Types™", maybe) & the former... the former has stuck with me a bit more—some elements therein I found genuinely affecting—but I just can't seem to get through the sequels. (People love them, I know... but for some reason, I keep sort of drifting away about 2/3 in *Words of Radiance*, or 1/3 of the way through *Oathkeeper* or whatever it's called–)
-------------
¹(I have watched his sci-fi/fantasy writing lectures on YouTube; although I found them easy listening, I did not actually get much enlightenment out of them, IIRC. "How do you create a good magic system?" –"Well, make sure you give it, like, some depth. And make sure it makes sense, that's another good one. And...")