The way of kings

[butterweedstrover]

So I went on Goodreads and this book is loved by nearly everyone there. 

It has 5 out of 5 scores from top to bottom so I made a foolish decision to buy this book. 

I've spent some time reading why the book is written this way or that, and I have decided that Sanderson means well. 

However this book is written like a D&D contest kids make up as they go, the world is just filled with random factoids and even more bizarre and ridiculous 'world building' that is made to throw out logic in favor of loud bombastic whirlwinds and story breaking magic. 

The powers are made up like Yugioh GX from gravity shifting powers to unbeatable lightening storms that I was half expecting damage points to appear over the enemies heads. 

The lore is expansive like how someone can keep coming up with hard to pronounce names and places to justify any character action they need at any moment. I have no doubt Sanderson is writing this with some logical end point but if he weren't a nicer person I would share much harsher words for his 'talent'. 

And it doesn't even enter the realm of childishness. The Secrets of Droon and Magic Tree House are children's series and even those I can follow some logical character arc or conspiracy.   

Its not about preference either. I don't like Robin Hobb's Farseer trilogy but I understand the skill and talent behind the world and characters. I just don't with this book, I don't get why anyone should like it, the characters are one dimensional tropes whose emotions are told, never shown. The dialogue is totally at odds with what we are suppose to think of these characters (some people say they have mental disabilities like aspergers but we're never told to believe such things in the book).  

I've heard why this book is liked but it makes so little sense to me that there are only two possible answers: 

1.) The copy of my book was misprinted 

2.) Nerd culture is something completely foriegn to me 

I didn't come close to finishing the book but I don't see what value people saw in seeing it through? The world building is a parody of in depth science fiction with places and names spanning thousands of years like nothing is the matter. And the fight scene with Szeth at the start was when I started to lose my disbelief in this book. 

I don't get, I don't get, I don't get it, and saying his magic is consistent and cool explains nothing to me; yet people consider this book as Sanderson's magnum opus and that he is the future of fantasy literature. 

[Poobah]

On the one hand when it comes to finding a place to bitch about Sanderson this is probably a good forum. My general feeling whenever he comes up in threads here is that he isn't a favourite of most boarders, or at least those that dislike his writing are extremely vocal about that fact and mention it at every opportunity.

On the other hand complaining that characters in a fantasy book have magical powers and the a doorstopper fantasy spends time on strange fantasy worldbuilding just seems... like maybe this isn't the genre for you. The usual (and I tend to think mostly valid if over-exaggerated) critiques tend to focus on his workmanlike prose and tendency towards strange word choices.

[polishgenius]

I don't like Sanderson much at all but (1) this is a weird place to sneer about nerd culture and (2) the accusation that his worldbuilding is illogical and random is just a straight up lie. If anything the opposite true for my tastes, too much is explained and given mechanical rules.

[butterweedstrover]

17 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

I don't like Sanderson much at all but (1) this is a weird place to sneer about nerd culture and (2) the accusation that his worldbuilding is illogical and random is just a straight up lie. If anything the opposite true for my tastes, too much is explained and given mechanical rules.

Its more that when I read it I feel like I've never really been a part of nerd culture, which is a new feeling for me. 

And I never finished the book, but my point was that the rules were arbitrary, not inconsistent. Switching gravity back and forth at will feels like it belong in a super mario galaxy game, not in a world building exercise. 

[Chaircat Meow]

Yup, Sanderson is not good. I can commend Way of Kings for its soporific qualities and little else. When I read Shallan's dialogue in her first chapter my jaw dropped (well, probably). It was so bad. And yes it is terrifying to see so much love for the series. Of course, people can like what they like, but it is just discombobulating to find that legions of fantasy readers put this fellow next to or above GrrM and you just can't fathom why.

For me this is true not just online but among the fantasy readers I know in real life. They all have the latest Sanderson book; they won't read GrrM because 'what's the point,' they say, 'we've seen the TV programme.' And when I mention Mr Bakker they're not interested at all. 

Sad.

[Rhom]

Have you not read any other Sanderson?

Most of his books are essentially smaller versions of Stormlight Archives.  Consuming him in smaller quantities is probably better.

[Jussi]

Sanderson said in January 2019 that The Way of Kings has sold over one million copies in the US alone:

Link

Quote

The Way of Kings passed a million copies sold in the US last year, which isn't even mentioning its significant sales around the world. I'm humbled and pleased to see so many people embracing this series, the one I started assuming it would be too long and too strange to ever sell.

[Chaircat Meow]

8 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

Well I imagine Bakker is kind of a tough sell. Hey you like fantasy? You should read this dense obtuse serious filled with constant rape and penis imaginary based on obscure philosophy and discredited neuro science that has no pay off!

The thread needed Bakkake.

[Werthead]

Sanderson is a modern fast-food fantasy writer in terms of prose, dialogue and pacing (outside of the Stormlight series), sort of the contemporary version of Feist or Salvatore except that his worldbuilding is light-years beyond in terms of originality. You have these incredibly interesting worlds but being described in pretty basic terms. His characterisation has improved immensely since his early books but still isn't great. At his best he produces entertaining, time-filling popcorn reads. At his worst - and Stormlight is increasingly becoming that (I hope the latest book turns it around but the signs are not good) - he can be self-indulgent, repetitive and way too reliant on filler.

He's not an offensively bad writer - I'd much rather it be him being the dominant modern fantasy seller than say Brett - but his dominance is a bit much, especially when venturing into a recommendations thread and seeing the first names mentioned being him and Rothfuss.

[Rhom]

20 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Sanderson is a modern fast-food fantasy writer in terms of prose, dialogue and pacing (outside of the Stormlight series), sort of the contemporary version of Feist or Salvatore except that his worldbuilding is light-years beyond in terms of originality. You have these incredibly interesting worlds but being described in pretty basic terms. His characterisation has improved immensely since his early books but still isn't great. At his best he produces entertaining, time-filling popcorn reads. At his worst - and Stormlight is increasingly becoming that (I hope the latest book turns it around but the signs are not good) - he can be self-indulgent, repetitive and way too reliant on filler.

He's not an offensively bad writer - I'd much rather it be him being the dominant modern fantasy seller than say Brett - but his dominance is a bit much, especially when venturing into a recommendations thread and seeing the first names mentioned being him and Rothfuss.

I think it’s instructive of the modern state of fantasy when there was a topic here not long ago asking what’s “in” currently in fantasy literature and there really was no clear answer.

We all thought that GoT going mainstream would open doors for the written worlds, but I just don’t see anything out there currently that has taken advantage of the interest.

[butterweedstrover]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

Sanderson is a modern fast-food fantasy writer in terms of prose, dialogue and pacing (outside of the Stormlight series), sort of the contemporary version of Feist or Salvatore except that his worldbuilding is light-years beyond in terms of originality. You have these incredibly interesting worlds but being described in pretty basic terms. His characterisation has improved immensely since his early books but still isn't great. At his best he produces entertaining, time-filling popcorn reads. At his worst - and Stormlight is increasingly becoming that (I hope the latest book turns it around but the signs are not good) - he can be self-indulgent, repetitive and way too reliant on filler.

He's not an offensively bad writer - I'd much rather it be him being the dominant modern fantasy seller than say Brett - but his dominance is a bit much, especially when venturing into a recommendations thread and seeing the first names mentioned being him and Rothfuss.

This is a great problem for me. 

The second book is the highest rated book on goodreads period (a site I usually trust). I find people gushing over the first book like its the greatest work of fantasy EVER. 

This is no where near saying 'I like chaotic world building that is abstract filled with one note characters and dumb fun'. 

Having grown adults who aren't autistic and have read a multitude of literature say this is the greatest book of all time is beyond unacceptable. 

I'm not being a snob, the writing is bad for an adult series and the world building is more wild than clever, things a bunch of kids could come up with playing D&D. Sanderson may take it a little further than the kids by building some rules, but that is not something I find unique to Sanderson. 

Just read this: 

Just searching up the book will lead to dozens of these comments.

[Werthead]

44 minutes ago, Rhom said:

I think it’s instructive of the modern state of fantasy when there was a topic here not long ago asking what’s “in” currently in fantasy literature and there really was no clear answer.

We all thought that GoT going mainstream would open doors for the written worlds, but I just don’t see anything out there currently that has taken advantage of the interest.

I don't see that as a negative. What's happened is that this decade we've seen interest in fantasy disseminated between a very large number of moderate-selling series, a few pretty good-selling series (like Lawrence and Jemisin's) and only one or two massive-selling ones (Sanderson and Rothfuss), with continued large sales of older legacy series (Martin, Jordan, Rowling, Tolkien, Pratchett). I think it's healthy for the genre that you have a lot of good books getting moderate sales rather than one or two dominating completely.

Both Goodreads and Reddit work on self-selecting popular bias: discussions of big-selling authors will engender a lot more engagement than discussions of obscure authors. It can be helpful in attracting attention to lower-selling authors - Josiah Bancroft's career has exploded in this way - but most of the time it results in obscure authors being ignored and everyone diving onto a mention of Sanderson or Rothfuss. It's a key weakness of those sites, and not one that is easily fixable.

[Jussi]

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

I think it’s instructive of the modern state of fantasy when there was a topic here not long ago asking what’s “in” currently in fantasy literature and there really was no clear answer.

We all thought that GoT going mainstream would open doors for the written worlds, but I just don’t see anything out there currently that has taken advantage of the interest.

There is Robin Hobb. She and Martin are "the faces of modern adult epic fantasy" here if Finland. In non-YA epic fantasy only Hobb, GRRM and Tolkien[*] have managed to hit our bestseller list in last ten years.

Only the original Mistborn Trilogy has been translated in Finnish from Sanderson, nothing more. He is substantially lesser known name in my country than Hobb. She is in completely different popularity level, together with GRRM.

[*] New Tolkien books like The Fall of Gondolin.

[Corvinus85]

58 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

This is a great problem for me. 

The second book is the highest rated book on goodreads period (a site I usually trust). I find people gushing over the first book like its the greatest work of fantasy EVER. 

This is no where near saying 'I like chaotic world building that is abstract filled with one note characters and dumb fun'. 

Having grown adults who aren't autistic and have read a multitude of literature say this is the greatest book of all time is beyond unacceptable. 

I'm not being a snob, the writing is bad for an adult series and the world building is more wild than clever, things a bunch of kids could come up with playing D&D. Sanderson may take it a little further than the kids by building some rules, but that is not something I find unique to Sanderson. 

Just read this: 

Just searching up the book will lead to dozens of these comments.

And on top of his publishing success, Sanderson teaches, or used to teach, creative writing at a university.

[Derfel Cadarn]

2 hours ago, Rhom said:

I think it’s instructive of the modern state of fantasy when there was a topic here not long ago asking what’s “in” currently in fantasy literature and there really was no clear answer.

We all thought that GoT going mainstream would open doors for the written worlds, but I just don’t see anything out there currently that has taken advantage of the interest.

As a new author, the problem is there’s so much ‘noise’ (competition, trad and self-published), its hard to stand out. My urban fantasy series has been well received but sales are very low. My action/adventure fantasy is still in double figures. Without a big publisher willing to spend money promoting it, or being lucky with organic word of mouth from readers, it’s hard to get noticed.

[polishgenius]

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

Having grown adults who aren't autistic and have read a multitude of literature say this is the greatest book of all time is beyond unacceptable. 

I'm not being a snob,

 

 

Oh fuck offf. Both with the eltitism and the snooty 'well if I think you're dumb you must be autistic' ablist bullshit.

 

I don't like Sanderson. I agree with you on that though you're still lying about his worldbuilding being chaotic. But when I do that I am being a snob and you are being far, far more of a snob with the way you're carrying on in here.

 

2 hours ago, Rhom said:

I think it’s instructive of the modern state of fantasy when there was a topic here not long ago asking what’s “in” currently in fantasy literature and there really was no clear answer.

 

In addition to what Wert said about it not being a negative, I think (and this was discussed some in the topic in question) this has less to do with fantasy not being mainstream or not having popular series and more to do with there aren't the long-running multi-part epics that generate online discussion in the same way. Even something like Abercrombie, who is about to hit the eighth  tome of his series, isn't structured in a way that creates big discussion and debate.

I suspect that's part of why Josiah Bancroft did succeed with his self-published work and broke out via online buzz- despite not being a huge series, that is written in a way which does encourage plenty of speculation between books.

[butterweedstrover]

1 hour ago, polishgenius said:

 

 

Oh fuck offf. Both with the eltitism and the snooty 'well if I think you're dumb you must be autistic' ablist bullshit.

I don't like Sanderson. I agree with you on that though you're still lying about his worldbuilding being chaotic. But when I do that I am being a snob and you are being far, far more of a snob with the way you're carrying on in here.

 

Look, I never finished the book, but much of the world building was a match for the stuff our D&D club in high school could come up with. 

The problem with creating ever more crazy world events like death storms and gravity switching magic is that human society can break down due to far smaller stresses. 

I hear people say he explains how his magic affects the world, but realistically none of the normal hierarchical, consumer, or moral laws would apply in this world. In fact determining how free welding magic or planetary events affect every parts of human society is incredibly difficult for any author, that's why it dangerous coming with ultra creative mega powerful sources but then also have traditional character tropes following the same path of family, loyalty, state governments, or even wealth/trade negotiations. 

It suspends disbelief beyond a level I'm willing to go. 

[Jerol]

6 hours ago, Werthead said:

I'd much rather it be him being the dominant modern fantasy seller than say Brett

I gotta confess, I have yet to read any of Peter Brett's stuff. Is it bad or is he yet another author who was caught waving his dick around at cons? 

[David Selig]

The cult of Sanderson is pretty embarrassing for the genre, especially on Reddit, where he is the Lord Saviour of fantasy, but what can you do, there is almost always some crap which becomes hugely popular. His books aren't even good popcorn entertainment, there are too poorly written for that. And it is so annoying when his fanboys brush off any criticism of him with "But his worldbuilding!" - he is supposed to write fiction, not a lore book for a game. When the prose and characters are horrible and the author can't write decent dialogue to save your life, even the best worldbuilding won't save the book, and Sanderson's worldbuilding isn't that great anyway.

[Caligula_K3]

Yeah, I'll take Sanderson for fun, easy-read fantasy over someone like Brett any day. That said, I really don't get the love (the writing and dialogue get... really really bad), and he's been a disappointment as a fun, easy-read author because his books have gotten more and more bloated and tedious.