Jump to content

An accurate commentary on my stance vis-a-vis Brandon Sanderson


Yagathai

Recommended Posts

Sci,

Because I, for one, am tired of reading poorly written prose.

Reading, "The ship was launched. It flew fast from the lauch pad. A laser intecepted it. It exploded". May work for some but I prefer well written poetic prose.

I'm not sure I understand how this is a reply to my last post?

Why does your preference for good prose mean there is something important about reading "better" books?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember the story that the PA guys were at a more general comics/SF convention and another guest of honour was Harlan Ellison. They didn't have any idea who he was, which pissed him off immensely, and they had a bit of a pointless slanging match about it on-stage. That was odd, although in the case, Ellison seems to have been at fault because he couldn't comprehend the idea of people not knowing who he was.

Frankly, I wouldn't expect 99% of people to know who the fuck Harlan Ellison was. Unless you are in to sci-fi specifically, and even then older sci-fi, he's a non-entity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

Yeah, that's pretty much my impression of how the Sanderson threads go.

Random Person: Sanderson's writing is pretty mediocre

Fan Person: butbutbut...worldbuildingmagicsystemwooooooo!!

I think it speaks more to the general limitations of the average fantasy fan (who values genre furniture above all else) and their opinions on books than it does to Sanderson fans in particular, though. You could easily substitute Rothfuss into that strip and still have it be valid. Or, really, any fantasy author who hasn't written something really fucked up (Bakker, Bishop) or notable in some way (Morgan, Lynch).

It's pretty dead on, even if obvious. I get the impression Tycho/Jerry just couldn't take this shit anymore. :P

My thoughts were the same as yours though. The main point of the comic is dead on in that the way people talk about how much they like Sanderson is really revealing about what they actually care about in a novel.

I don't really think Rothfuss qualifies at all here though. If nothing else, you see plenty of people praising his prose. Sanderson, otoh, pretty much skates by solely on having cool magical stuff happen in an inventive magical world, all described like you are reading a D&D Monster Manual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly, I wouldn't expect 99% of people to know who the fuck Harlan Ellison was. Unless you are in to sci-fi specifically, and even then older sci-fi, he's a non-entity.

That's what improves the comedy of the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm always amused by the snobbery of "your prefered author is shite compared to my prefered author".



i liked sanderson's mistborn trilogy well enough.


it was amusing and i did quite like the magic system.


is any of those three books a literary masterpiece the world is lucky to have? of course it's not.


on the other hand, neither is ASoIaF, LotR, dune, harry potter or whatever sf/fantasy book you have in mind.



they are stories written with varying levels of skill, storyline complexity, character development etc.


some are better than others, but truth be told very few will stick around in a century or two.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you can be Sci and be skeptical about the whole thing or you can obliquely set up some True Literature standard and bash everyone beneath it to even the field. Whatever works I guess. .



As for Sanderson, I can see why people like him, in fact, I often note that he should be perfect for me but I'm just not that interested. Starting with Elantris probably didn't help. But I don't feel superior to anyone who feels that what he's selling is important enough to stick with him. I stuck with the Star Wars Expanded Universe for quite a while because...well, Star Wars.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's with the false dichotomies here?



One doesn't have to adhere to any snobbery-based standard to point out:


- Sanderson's writing is far from the best or half-decent, even for genre if you subscribe to the idea that genre standards are lower


- this is irrelevant to most Sanderson fans since, as the comic points out, what they care about most is world-building, which Sanderson is both inventive with and heavily focused on




It's just the literary equivalent of talking about how shite Michael Bay movies are and bemoaning that they make shitloads of money anyway because much of the audience is there for titsplosionstravaganza and wouldn't know/couldn't give a shit about quality film-making.



Except Sanderson is not Michael-Bay-bad and I feel I must apologize for the comparison.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we all know Sanderson's shortcomings. His ideas are largely interesting but are normally poorly executed. For all that, I don't understand why we gets so much hate? He's a decent writer who works hard. Not everyone can be a great author, in fact, it's pretty hard to be one, that's why not many are.



P.S. that The Wise Man's Fear review was genius.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what Sci is saying is, great if it is better for you, but does it make your time better spent than the person reading Da Vinci Code just because your reading a "better" book?

Yup, pretty much this. Do any of us think hardcore gamers who disparage casual gamers have a legitimate complaint?

Why then should the literary reader be on some kind of pedestal compared to the casual one? Does society has an obligation to puff up the fragile ego of the unemployed humanities major? ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, pretty much this. Do any of us think hardcore gamers who disparage casual gamers have a legitimate complaint?

Why then should the literary reader be on some kind of pedestal compared to the casual one? Does society has an obligation to puff up the fragile ego of the unemployed humanities major? ;-)

yes it does. They are broke, miserable and need to have some sort of way not to feel like a loser. Literary elitism is he only thing they have. how could you be so cruel to take that from them
Link to comment
Share on other sites

goalposts definitely got shifted from "is sanderson good or bad at writing" to "why is literary fiction better"



pretty sure someone can prefer their genre books to have good prose without any snobbery whatsoever, or implying any type of moral superiority to reading better fiction


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with GRRM's review.

Any of those books would be worthy nominees, but none of them were the best epic fantasy I read last year. For my money, that has to be THE WISE MAN'S FEAR, by Patrick Rothfuss.

WMF is the second volume in Rothfuss's Kvothe series, and it took him nearly as long to write it as I took for A DANCE WITH DRAGONS (hey, I'm glad it did, he drew some of the fire). But it was worth the wait. I gulped it down in a day, staying up almost to dawn reading, and I am already itching for the next one. He's bloody good, this Rothfuss guy. THE WISE MAN"S FEAR should rightly contend not only for the Hugo, but also for the World Fantasy Award.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

goalposts definitely got shifted from "is sanderson good or bad at writing" to "why is literary fiction better"

pretty sure someone can prefer their genre books to have good prose without any snobbery whatsoever, or implying any type of moral superiority to reading better fiction

Fair enough. But the OP has a comic that, while I agree with its assessment, does [kinda] suggest people are doing something wrong by liking Sanderson.

If SFF has an obligation to quality, Stover would be outselling all these punks.

eta: @Jussi - I'm confident GRRM's original review was for Caine Black Knife, but hackers switched it to praise Wise Man's Fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. But the OP has a comic that, while I agree with its assessment, does [kinda] suggest people are doing something wrong by liking Sanderson.

No, it's just suggesting, as any negative review does, that he sucks.

And that the people who like him do so for reasons completely different from why the "review" is saying he sucks.

This discussion is descending to absurd "you can't call something shit" levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...